The Common European Framework in its political and educational context What is the Common European Framework?

Proficiency
Scale
Exam ‘Y’ Grades
Examination
‘Y’
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
5
(DISTINCTION)
4
(CREDIT)
3
(PASS)
2
(FAIL)
1
Figure 7

---

It is possible to establish the relationship between examination grades and proficiency
levels in this way because examinations have, by definition, a standard and a group of
trained assessors capable of interpreting that standard. It is necessary to make the
common standards explicit and transparent, provide examples which operationalise the
standards, and then scale them.
Assessment of achievement in schools in many countries is through achievement
grades (notes, Noten), sometimes 1–6, with 4 as the Pass, norm or ‘satisfactory’ grade. What
is meant by the various grades is internalised by the teachers in the context concerned,
but rarely defined. The nature of the relationship between teacher assessment grades
and proficiency levels is in principle the same as that between examination grades and
proficiency levels. But the issue is further complicated by the fact that there will be a
myriad of standards involved. This is because, apart from the question of the form of
assessment used and degree of common interpretation of grades by teachers in any one
context, each school year in each type of school in each educationally distinct region will
naturally constitute a different standard. A ‘4’ at the end of the fourth year obviously
does not mean the same as a ‘4’ at the end of the third year in the same secondary school.
Nor will a ‘4’ for the end of the fourth year mean the same thing in two different kinds
of school.
Nevertheless, it is possible to establish an approximate relationship between the range
of standards in use in a particular sector and proficiency levels. This can be achieved
through a cumulative process employing such techniques as the following. Standard defi-
nitions can be provided for different grades of achievement of the same objective.
Teachers can be asked to profile average achievement onto an existing proficiency scale
or grid such as Table 1 and Table 2. Representative samples of performance can be col-
lected and calibrated to a scale in joint rating sessions. Teachers can be asked to rate pre-
viously standardised videos with the grades they normally give their students.
Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:
•
to what extent their concern relates to the establishment of a set of profiling levels to
record progress in proficiency within their system as a whole
•
to what extent their concern relates to the provision of transparent criteria for the award
of grades of achievement in the objectives set for a particular proficiency level, perhaps
operationalised by an examination, perhaps assessed by teachers
•
to what extent their concern relates to the development of a common framework to
establish coherent relationships between a range of educational sectors, proficiency levels,
and assessment types within their system.
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment
42

---