Assessment in EFL Classes Based on The CEFR Principles

Abstract

Just upon its publication, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Teaching, Learning Assessment (CEFR) has become a frequently referred document in foreign language education practices globally, including teaching, testing and assessment. In order to find out information about the assessment procedures in the classes of English as a foreign language (EFL) based on the CEFR principles, this study aimed to find out the most common types of assessment and their effects on the academic achievement of the learners. In this study, a meta-analysis design was adopted comprising 75 articles published in the journal of Language Assessment Quarterly between the years of 2010-2019 on the fields of Language Education and Literature. The articles were searched in the electronic database, Taylor and Francis, using the keyword “The Common European Framework of References for Languages”. The data were analysed quantitatively via the SPSS software version 20.0 with particular themes coded by the researcher. The findings revealed that the most common types of assessment based on the CEFR principles were the proficiency assessment followed by the performance assessment. It was also found out that there was a linear relationship between the academic achievement and the CEFR oriented assessment procedures.

Keywords

• The Common European Framework of References for Languages (CEFR),English Language Assessment,Types of Assessment,Principles of the CEFR,English as a Foreign Language (EFL),EFL Classes

References

1. Afip, L. A., Hamid, M. O., & Renshaw, P. (2019). Common European framework of reference for languages (CEFR): insights into global policy borrowing in Malaysian higher education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 17(3), 378-393.
2. Agenziascuola. (2013). Evaluation and self-assessment: key concepts, descriptors and examples from the European language portfolio. Retrieved from Forum Indire: http://forum.indire.it/repository_cms/working/export/attachments/5507/textual/5507_ver_1.pdf
3. Araújo, L., & Costa, P. D. (2013). The European survey on language competences: School-internal and external factors in language learning. Luxembourg: European Comission Joint Research Center Scientific and Policy Reports.
4. Araújo, L., & Costa, P. D. (2013). The European Survey on Language Competences: School-internal and External Factors in Language Learning. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
5. Avcı, H. (2019). Assessing writing in accordance with the descriptors of the common European framework of reference for languages. Ankara: Hacettepe University Institute of Educational Sciences.
6. Babaii, E., & Asadnia, F. (2019). A long walk to language assessment literacy: EFL teachers’ reflection on language assessment research and practice. Reflective Practice International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 1-16.
7. Baldwin, R., & Apelgren, B. M. (2018). Can do and cannot do: CEFR inspired examination and assessment in a Swedish higher education context. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies, 12(2), 19-35.
8. Bohn, H., & Hansen, T. (2017). Assessing pronunciation in an EFL context: Teachers’ orientations towards nativeness and intelligibility. Language Assessment Quarterly, 14(1), 54-68.

9. Broek, S., & Ende, I. (2013). The Implementation of the Common European Framework for Languages in European Education Systems. Strasbourg: European Parliment.
10. Charvade, M. R., Jahandar, S., & Khodabandehlou, M. (2012). The impact of portfolio assessment on EFL learners’ reading comprehension ability. Canadian Center of Science and Education, 5(7), 129-139.
11. CoE. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching and Assessment. Strasbourg: Cambridge University Press.
12. CoE. (2019). Principles, guidelines and the CEFR. Retrieved from Council of Europe Portal: https://www.coe.int/en/web/portfolio/principles-and-guidelines-and-cefr
13. CoE. (2019, October 11). Relating language curricula, tests and examinations to the common European framework of reference. Retrieved from RELANG: https://www.ecml.at/TrainingConsultancy/RelatingLanguageExaminationstotheCEFR/tabid/1726/language/en-GB/Default.aspx
14. Deygers, B., Carlsen, C. H., Saville, N., & Gorp, K. V. (2018). The use of the CEFR in higher education: A brief introduction to this special issue. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 1-2.
15. Deygers, B., Zeidler, B., Vilcu, D., & Carlsen, C. H. (2018). One framework to unite them all? Use of the CEFR in European university entrance policies. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 3-15.
16. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
17. Examinations, U. o. (2011, October). Using the CEFR: Principles of good practice. Retrieved from Cambridge English: https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/Images/126011-using-cefr-principles-of-good-practice.pdf
18. Fastré, G. M., Klink, M. R., & Mer, J. J. (2010). The effects of performance-based assessment criteria on student performance and self-assessment skills. Advances in Health Sciences Education Theory Practice, 15(4), 517-532.
19. Fleckenstein, J., Leucht, M., & Köller, O. (2018). Teachers’ judgement accuracy concerning CEFR levels of prospective university students. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 90-101.
20. Fulcher, G. (2010). The reification of the common European framework of reference and effect driven testing. Advances in Research on Language Acquisition and Teaching, 15-26.
21. Fulcher, G., & Davidson, F. (2012). The Routledge Handbook of Language Testing. New York: Routledge.
22. Genç, Z. S. (2011). EFL in higher education: Designing a flexible content based curriculum at university level. Asian EFL Journal, 85-114.
23. Green, A. (2018). Linking tests of English for academic purposes to the CEFR: The score user’s perspective. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 59-74.
24. Green, A. C. (2015). Approaches to mixed methods dissemination and implementation research: Methods, strengths, caveats, and opportunities. Adm Policy Ment Health, 42(5), 508-523.
25. Gultom, E. (2016). Assessment and Evaluation in EFL Teaching and Learning. ISELT-4 (pp. 190-198). Pekanbaru: Proceedings of the Fourth International Seminar onEnglish Language and Teaching.
26. Hai, L. T., & Nhung, P. T. (2018). Implementing the CEFR at a Vietnamese university: General English language teachers’ perceptions. CEFR Journal: Research and Practice, 41-55.
27. Haidich, A. B. (2010). Meta-analysis in medical research. Hippokratia, 4(1), 29-37.
28. Lai, E. R. (2011). Performance-based assessment: Some new thoughts on an old idea. Pearson Education(20), 1-4.
29. Learning, W. (2019, August 13). Formative vs summative assessment: Which is better? Retrieved from Wabisabi Learning: https://www.wabisabilearning.com/blog/formative-vs-summative-assessment
30. Lowiea, W. M., Haines, K. B., & Jansma, P. N. (2010). Embedding the CEFR in the academic domain: Assessment of language tasks. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 152-161.
31. Nagai, N., & O’Dwyer, F. (2011). The actual and potential impacts of the CEFR on language education in Japan. Synergies Europe(6), 141-155.
32. Nakatani, Y. (2012). Exploring the implementation of the CEFR in Asian contexts: Focus on communication strategies. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences , 46, 771-775.
33. Naved, Z. (2015, July 12). The importance of the English language in todays' world. Retrieved from Owlcation: https://owlcation.com/humanities/importanceofenglishlanguages
34. Ouahiani, A. B. (2016). Assessment in the EFL university classroom: between tradition and innovation. Revue des Etudes Humaines et Sociales(15), 3-10.
35. Önalan, O., & Karagül, A. E. (2018). A study on Turkish EFL teachers’ beliefs about assessment and its different uses in teaching English. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(3), 190-201. Piccardo, E. (2012). Multidimensionality of assessment in the common European framework of reference for languages. Cahiers deL’Ilob , 4, 37-54.
36. Piccardo, E., Berchoud, M., Cignatta, T., Mentz, O., & Pamula, M. (2011). Pathways through assessing, learning and teaching in the CEFR. Austria: Council of Europe.
37. Press, C. U. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching and Assessment. Strasbourg: Cambridge University Press.
38. Putri, N. S., Pratolo, B. W., & Setiani, F. (2019). The alternative assessment of EFL students’ oral competence: Practices and constraints. Ethical Lingua Journal of Language Teaching and Literature, 6(2), 72-75.
39. Runnels, J., & Runnels, V. (2018). Impact of the common European framework of reference—A bibliometric analysis of research from 1990-2017. CEFR Journal Research and Practice, 18-32.
40. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research methods for business students (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education.
41. Shaarawy, H. Y., & Lotfy, N. E. (2013). Teaching writing within the common European framework of reference (CEFR): A supplement asynchronous blended learning approach in an EFL undergraduate course in Egypt. Canadian Center of Science and Education, 3(1), 123-135.
42. Tavassoli, K., & Farhady, H. (2018). Assessment knowledge needs of EFL teachers. Teaching English Language, 12(2), 44-65.
43. Teachers, C. A. (2013). Assessment, the CEFR and the role of international exams. Retrieved from CASLT: https://www.caslt.org/files/pedagogical-resources/cefr/cefr-elp-assessment-cefr-en-2013.pdf
44. Uri, N. F., & Aziz, M. S. (n.d.). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and the challenges. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 168-183.
45. Vajjala, S., & Löo, K. (2014). Automatic CEFR level prediction for Estonian learner text. Proceedings of the third workshop on NLP for computer-assisted language learning (pp. 113-127). NEALT Proceedings Series 22 Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings.
46. Wang, H. P., Kuo, B. C., Tsai, Y. H., & Liao, C. H. (2012). A CEFR based computerized adaptive testing system for Chinese proficiency. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4), 1-12.