韓寶成教授《歐洲語言共同參考框架》對我國大學英語教學的啟示

1、歐洲語言共同參考框架對我國大學英語教學的啟示北京外國語大學外國語言研究所中國外語教育研究中心韓寶成39個語種版本歐洲語言共同參考框架：學習、教學、評估Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching and Assessment (CEFR)研討會主題形勢 目標 能力 策略發(fā)言提綱歐框出臺背景歐框的內(nèi)容及其使用歐框的啟示一、歐洲理事會及其語言教育政策EU28 member statesCreated in 1950CoE47 member statesCreated in 1949BrusselsS

2、trasbourg European Union Council of EuropeCouncil of Europe (CoE)Political international organisationMain bodies: Committee of Ministers, Parliamentary Assembly, Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe and European Court of Human Rights.Goal: democracy, human rights and rule of law. In

3、pursuit of that goal it promotes awareness of a European identity that is based on shared values.Council of Europe ApproachStandards - DiversityCoE Language Education Policies aim to promote:plurilingualismlinguistic diversitymutual understandingdemocratic citizenshipsocial cohesionGuiding principle

4、s for language learningLanguage learning is for allLanguage learning is for the learnerLanguage learning is for intercultural communicationLanguage learning is for lifeGuiding principles for language teachingLanguage teaching is co-ordinatedLanguage teaching is coherent and transparentLanguage learn

5、ing and teaching are dynamic lifelong processesA plurilingual person has:a repertoire of languages and language varietiescompetences of different kinds and levels within the repertoirePlurilingual education promotes:An awareness of why and how one learns the language one has chosenAn awareness of an

6、d the ability to use transferable skills in language learningA respect for the plurilingualism of others and the value of languages and varieties irrespective of their perceived status in societyA respect for the cultures embodied in languages and the cultural identities of othersAn ability to perce

7、ive and mediate the relationships which exist among languages and culturesA global integrated approach to language education in the curriculumPlurilingual education promotes:Recommendations to the member states:Encourage all Europeans to achieve a degree of communicative ability in a number of langu

8、agesDiversify the languages on offer and set objectives appropriate to each languageEncourage teaching programmes at all levels that use flexible approach and give them appropriate recognition in national qualification systemsEncourage the use of foreign languages in the teaching of non-linguistic s

9、ubjectsSupport the application of communication and information technologies to disseminate teaching and learning materials for all European national and regional languagesRecommendations to the member states:Support the development of links and exchanges with institutions and persons at all levels

10、of education to offer the possibility of authentic experience of the language and culture of othersFacilitate lifelong learning of languagesRecommendations to the member states:InstitutionsLanguage Policy Unit (LPU) Strasbourg, FranceEuropean Centre for Modern Languages (ECML) Graz, AustriaLanguage

11、Policy UnitDevelopment of policies to promote linguistic diversity and plurilingualismAssistance to member states with policy analysis and planningCommon reference instruments for European standards and qualityLanguage education policyEuropean Centre for Modern LanguagesSupport for the implementatio

12、n of language education policiesPromotion of innovative approaches to the learning and teaching of languagesProfessionalism and professional status of language educatorsThe notional-functional syllabus (Wilkins, 1970s)Threshold Level (Niveau Seuil, Kontaktschwelle, etc., etc.) Trim and Van Ek, 1970s

13、Vantage and Waystage Levels (1990)Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR, 1996)LPU: Policy instruments and initiativesLPU: Policy instruments and initiativesEuropean Language Portfolio (ELP)Reference Level Descriptions for national / regional languages Manual for Relating Languag

14、e Examinations to the CEFRGuide for the Development of Language Education PoliciesLanguage Education Policy ProfilesLanguage Policies for Democratic Citizenship and Social Cohesion (2006-9) (new initiatives)A framework of reference for language(s) of school educationLanguage testing and migration a

15、framework of referenceCurriculum reference framework for Romani二、歐框(CEFR) Versions 1996, 1998, 2001 (CUP)The CEFRThe Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) was developed to support Council of Europe policy by providing “a common basis for the elaboration of language syllabuses,

16、curriculum guidelines, examinations, textbooks, etc. across Europe” (CEFR, p.1)The CEFRA Descriptive Scheme (approach)Common Reference LevelsIllustrative scales of descriptorsApproaches to learning, teaching and assessmnetDescriptive Scheme: An action-oriented approach “Language use, embracing langu

17、age learning, comprises actions performed by a social agent who, as an individual, has at his or her disposal and develops a range of general competences and in particular communicative language competence. He or she draws on these competences in different kinds of language activities in order to pr

18、ocess text (receptively or productively) in relation to specific domains, activating those strategies which seem most appropriate for carrying out the tasks to be accomplished”.Scales in Descriptive SchemeCommunicative language competenceLinguistic, Pragmatic, Socio-linguisticCommunicative language

19、activitiesReception, Interaction, Production, (Mediation)Use of StrategiesReception, Interaction, ProductionCEFR Scales: C.L. CompetencesLinguistic CompetenceGeneral Linguistic RangeVocabulary RangeGrammatical AccuracyVocabulary ControlPhonological ControlOrthographic ControlSociolinguistic Competen

20、ceSociolinguistic AppropriatenessPragmatic CompetenceFlexibilityTurntakingThematic DevelopmentCohesion and CoherencePropositional PrecisionSpoken FluencyCEFR Scales: C.L. Activities.RECEPTIONOverall Listening ComprehensionUnderstanding conversation between native-speakersListening as a member of an

21、audienceListening to announcements and instructionsListening to audio media and recordingsWatching TV and filmOverall Reading ComprehensionReading correspondenceReading for orientationReading for information and argumentReading instructionsCEFR Scales: C.L. ActivitiesINTERACTIONOverall Spoken Intera

22、ctionUnderstanding a native-speaker interlocutorConversationInformal discussionFormal discussion and meetingsGoal-oriented co-operationTransactions to obtain goods and servicesInformation exchangeInterviewing and being interviewedOverall Written InteractionCorrespondenceNotes, messages and formsCEFR

23、 Scales: C.L. ActivitiesPRODUCTIONOverall Spoken ProductionSustained monologue: Describing experienceSustained monologue: Putting a case (e.g. in debate)Public announcementsAddressing AudiencesOverall Written ProductionCreative WritingReports and EssaysCEFR Scales: C.L. ActivitiesHANDLING TEXTNote-t

24、akingProcessing TextCEFR Scales: C.L. StrategiesReception StrategiesIdentifying cues/ inferringInteraction StrategiesTurntakingCooperatingAsking for clarificationProduction StrategiesPlanningCompensatingMonitoring and RepairCommon Reference LevelsA1 BreakthroughA2 WaystageB1 Threshold B2 VantageC1 E

25、ffective Operational ProficiencyC2 MasteryCommon Reference LevelsCommon Reference LevelsTable 1 Global ScaleTable 2 Self-assessment Grid (Listening, Reading, Spoken Interaction, Spoken Production, Writing)Table 3 Assessor Grid (Range, Accuracy, Fluency, Interaction, Coherence)50 Individual Scales fo

26、r PROFILING Table 1 + Table 2 + Table 3 +50 = 53 TablesProficientUserC2Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read. Can summarise information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation. Can express him/herself spontaneo

27、usly, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades of meaning even in more complex situations.C1Can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and recognise implicit meaning. Can express him/herself fluently and spontaneously without much obvious searching for expressions. Can

28、use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes. Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use of organisational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices.Independ-entUserB2Can understand the main ideas of complex t

29、ext on both concrete and abstract topics, including technical discussions in his/her field of specialisation. Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party. Can produce clear, detailed text on

30、a wide range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue giving the advantages and disadvantages of various options.B1Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. Can deal with most situations likely to ari

31、se whilst travelling in an area where the language is spoken. Can produce simple connected text on topics which are familiar or of personal interest. Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes & ambitions and briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions and plans.BasicUserA2Can underst

32、and sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local geography, employment). Can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routi

33、ne matters. Can describe in simple terms aspects of his/her background, immediate environment and matters in areas of immediate need.A1Can understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type. Can introduce him/herself and othe

34、rs and can ask and answer questions about personal details such as where he/she lives, people he/she knows and things he/she has. Can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and clearly and is prepared to help.Common Reference Levels: Global“Can Do Statements”“Can Do Statemen

35、ts”Common Reference LevelsWhere do the CEFR Levels come from?How were the descriptors developed and scaled?How were the “cut-points” between levels set?How coherent is the scaling of content?How stable are the scale values?Common Reference Levels1913 Cambridge Proficiency C2 1990-91 Cambridge Advanc

36、ed; DALF C11938 Cambridge First Certificate B21975 The Threshold Level B1 1978? Waystage A2 A1Common Reference LevelsWilkins 1978Ambilingual ProficiencyComprehensive Operational ProficiencyAdequate Operational ProficiencyLimited Operational ProficiencyBasic Operational Proficiency (Threshold Level)S

37、urvival ProficiencyFormulaic ProficiencyUCLES 1992ProficiencyCAEFCE VantagePET ThresholdKET WaystageCoE 1992-6MasteryEffective Operational Proficiency VantageThresholdWaystageBreakthroughDeveloping the CEFR Levels Swiss Research Project 1993-7 to develop:scaled descriptor bank for the CEFR levels ov

38、erview of language learning achievement in Swiss educational sectorsprototype European Language Portfolio. Proficiency Scales before CEFRWording tended to be relative. The descriptors were seldom stand-alone criteria one could rate “Yes” or “No” Situation of descriptors at a particular level was arb

39、itrary - following convention/clich Wording often created semantic appearance of a scale, without actually describing anything Lower levels tended to be worded negativelySwiss Research Project 1993-7Intuitive Phase:Creating a pool of classified, edited descriptorsQualitative Phase:Analysis of teache

40、rs discussing proficiency32 teacher workshops sorting descriptorsQuantitative Phase:Teacher assessment of learners on questionnaires Assessment (by all) of videos of some learnersInterpretation Phase:Setting “cut-points” for common reference levelsSwiss Research Project 1993-72,800 learners, 500 cla

41、sses, 300 teachersLower & upper secondary, vocational, adultDeveloping the CEFR Descriptor ScalesFull account: North, B. (2000). The development of a common framework scale of language proficiency. New York, Peter Lang. More Technical: North, B. and Schneider, G. (1998). Scaling descriptors for lang

42、uage proficiency scales. Language Testing 15, 2, 217262. Less Technical: North, B. (2002a). Developing descriptor scales of language proficiency for the CEF common reference levels. In Alderson, J.C.A. (ed.) Case Studies in applying the Common European Framework, Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 87-10

43、5.Problems with the CEFR Scales Terminology problems: synonymy or not?GapsInconsistenciesLack of definitionTerminology problems: synonymy or not?Operations at A2UnderstandTake GetFollowIdentify Infer Operations at B2UnderstandScanMonitorObtainSelectEvaluateLocateIdentifySynonyms?“I can understand fa

44、miliar names, words and very simple sentences, for example on notices and posters or in catalogues” (page 26)“Can recognise familiar names, words and very basic phrases on simple notices in the most common everyday situations” (page 70)Synonyms?Can identify the main conclusions in clearly signalled

45、argumentative texts. Can recognise the line of argument in the treatment of the issue presented, though not necessarily in detail.” Gaps in the CEFRA description of the operations that comprehension consists of and a theory of how comprehension develops.A specification of micro-skills or subskills o

46、f comprehension. Concepts introduced in the text but not incorporated in the scales or related to the six levels in any way. Gaps in the CEFRcompetence, general competence, communicative language competence activities, processes, text, domain, strategy, taskcontextludic and aesthetic uses of languag

47、etextstext to text activities socio-cultural knowledgestudy skills tasks, including description, performance (conditions, competences, linguistic factors), strategies, difficultyInconsistenciesOperation recognise only mentioned at the levels A1, B1 and C1 and not at the other levelsThe use of a dictionary only mentioned at B2 and C1Clear, slow and carefully articulated speech (A1)Clear, slow and articulated speech (A2)Clear, standard speech, familiar accent (B1)Normal speed, standard lang