IRL Ratings and Proficiency
Module 5:
It is truly interesting reading how this book breaks-down how language classes from beginner to advanced should essentially operate. Especially as I reflect back on my own language learning experience, which on paper reached the "advanced" level of learning. After reading the chapter, under the advanced section the book writes, "we will focus here on what the ACTFL Guidelines describe as 'advanced,' what CEFR labels a B2 or 'independent' user, and what IELTS class 'competent' to 'good' user (levels 6-7)." Some decoding of acronyms later and their corresponding scales, it seems to be the case that any "advanced" student has reached a level of high competency and personalized independence within the language. At this level the book reveals that students usually takes charge of their learning experience and only needs nudges as well as organization from their teachers. IELTS defines advanced (between 6-7) as learners having operational and effective command over the language, and can understand complex situations and detailed reasoning. Paralleling the IELTS with ILR ratings would place a typical advanced student around (3, 3+) as being able to speak the language with sufficient structural accuracy, and participate in wide range of conversations and satisfy more sophisticated or demanding tasks.
As I have pointed out in my other blog posts, I have been a L2 student in Chinese for right around four years. Within that time, I have experienced many successes in my L2 ability in and outside of the classroom. However, after reading this chapter and correlating my own experience in the classroom with what the book articulates. As well as determining my level of proficiency on the IELTS/IRL charts. It came to my surprise that my own level is pretty low. And even more revealing was my "advanced class" in Chinese acted more similarly to an intermediate, or even a high-beginners course in some cases. Now I want to reassure my readers, this is not a bad thing nor am I feeling discouraged. Simply, it becomes intriguing to reflect on the range of proficiency the students had in our classroom. For instance, most students who were not particularly engaged in the advanced class sat around a (0+, 1) ILR, while myself and few other students ranged between (1+, 2+). With this in mind, I think it is important to consider how different situations for learning language should be viewed within their own contexts and be gauged accordingly to their specific goals. An intensive learning program designed to pass an IELTS exam will be very different from a university curriculum, or more casual programs. Essentially, each goes at their own pace that is targeted towards a certain demographic of L2 learners. Therefore, with this new information to scale one's proficiency, I feel can not only demonstrate a teacher/student performances in the classroom, but also reveals to me (as a future teacher) where to situate my expectations and style for the classroom.
It is truly interesting reading how this book breaks-down how language classes from beginner to advanced should essentially operate. Especially as I reflect back on my own language learning experience, which on paper reached the "advanced" level of learning. After reading the chapter, under the advanced section the book writes, "we will focus here on what the ACTFL Guidelines describe as 'advanced,' what CEFR labels a B2 or 'independent' user, and what IELTS class 'competent' to 'good' user (levels 6-7)." Some decoding of acronyms later and their corresponding scales, it seems to be the case that any "advanced" student has reached a level of high competency and personalized independence within the language. At this level the book reveals that students usually takes charge of their learning experience and only needs nudges as well as organization from their teachers. IELTS defines advanced (between 6-7) as learners having operational and effective command over the language, and can understand complex situations and detailed reasoning. Paralleling the IELTS with ILR ratings would place a typical advanced student around (3, 3+) as being able to speak the language with sufficient structural accuracy, and participate in wide range of conversations and satisfy more sophisticated or demanding tasks.
As I have pointed out in my other blog posts, I have been a L2 student in Chinese for right around four years. Within that time, I have experienced many successes in my L2 ability in and outside of the classroom. However, after reading this chapter and correlating my own experience in the classroom with what the book articulates. As well as determining my level of proficiency on the IELTS/IRL charts. It came to my surprise that my own level is pretty low. And even more revealing was my "advanced class" in Chinese acted more similarly to an intermediate, or even a high-beginners course in some cases. Now I want to reassure my readers, this is not a bad thing nor am I feeling discouraged. Simply, it becomes intriguing to reflect on the range of proficiency the students had in our classroom. For instance, most students who were not particularly engaged in the advanced class sat around a (0+, 1) ILR, while myself and few other students ranged between (1+, 2+). With this in mind, I think it is important to consider how different situations for learning language should be viewed within their own contexts and be gauged accordingly to their specific goals. An intensive learning program designed to pass an IELTS exam will be very different from a university curriculum, or more casual programs. Essentially, each goes at their own pace that is targeted towards a certain demographic of L2 learners. Therefore, with this new information to scale one's proficiency, I feel can not only demonstrate a teacher/student performances in the classroom, but also reveals to me (as a future teacher) where to situate my expectations and style for the classroom.
What you describe it the situational dependency of language standards. When we think of an IELTS or TOEFL exam (or the various other internationally recognized exams), we're thinking of scales that show a given standard that can be understood internationally and cross-organizationally. An IELTS 6 is an IELTS 6 wherever a person goes. When it comes to individual institutions, levels are generally based on curriculum, which changes from institution to institution.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting example might be student I once had here at SILC. The young man transferred from another school in a different state. At that school he had completed their highest level. At our school, he became a level 3 student, and his writing was absolutely atrocious. (For reference, we have a basic level and then levels 1-6.)
You're absolutely correct about how goals factor in. I once tutored a prospective pilot in China. His flight training was going to take place in Texas, and he wanted to improve his English. The majority of our lessons focus on pilot specific English. Could he have done well on a TOEFL exam? Definitely not. Yet his instructors commended his English after he arrived in the U.S., and he passed his training with flying colors (pun absolutely intended).