A quality approach to CEFR implementation
- 1. A Quality Approach to CEFR Implementation: the QualiCEFR project Enrica Piccardo & Brian North ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 1
- 2. A Quality Approach to CEFR Implementation • What the CEFR is about • Impact of the CEFR DISCUSSION TASK 1 • The planned research • A QA template (“The Quality Guide”) DISCUSSION TASK 2 ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 2
- 3. What the CEFR is about • Levels • National standards, exams, textbooks, courses • Can Dos for curriculum • Eaquals schools & some national curricula • Action-oriented approach • Not noticed much • Competence- based teaching • Not noticed at all ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 3
- 4. Can-do Descriptors Potential: • Relate objectives to real needs • Provide “signposting” to learners, parents, sponsors • Give a framework to action-oriented learning • Relate assessment criteria to CEFR descriptors Impact: • Radical improvement in quality of descriptors produced • Curriculum design from descriptors (mainly Eaquals) • Teacher reporting & self-assessment
- 5. Action-oriented approach • Learner as social agent: descriptors used for needs analysis • Learner experience at centre; personally meaningful; teaching unplugged • Real-world scenarios as basis for language work • Varied connections between language input and communicative language use • Steps towards self-direction (e.g. ELP) ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 5
- 6. Competence-based • Linguistic (range of resources as well as just accuracy) • Pragmatic (discourse competences, genres, scenario schemata as well as just functional) • Sociolinguistic (register and conversational schemata as well as just politeness) • Intercultural (attitudes and behaviour as well as cultural facts) ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 6
- 7. A Quality Approach to CEFR Implementation • What the CEFR is about • Impact of the CEFR DISCUSSION TASK 1 • The planned research • A QA template (“The Quality Guide”) DISCUSSION TASK 2 ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 7
- 8. Impact of CEFR 2005 survey of 111 institutions • Levels and descriptor scales most useful • Most useful to exam providers (2.88 / 3.00) • Mostly used by teachers, teacher trainers, test developers, materials writers BUT • Needs drastic simplification for teachers; next generation will find it easier • Lack of awareness of richness – reduction to levels ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 8
- 9. Impact of CEFR 2006 survey of 46 member states • Used in action plans, curricula, assessment guidelines, initial & in service teacher training, course books, for residence/citizenship, civil servant requirements • Perceived as neutral, well known in institutions and quite well accepted by teachers BUT • Not yet relevant to teaching profession at a school level ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 9
- 10. Impact of CEFR 2013 EU study of 6 member states (2) • majority implemented the CEFR in tests or examinations and display learning outcomes as CEFR levels. BUT • Lack of empirical evidence provided by research studies for the link between the CEFR and learning outcomes, objectives of curricula, examinations … a main obstacle for implementation of the CEFR. ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 10
- 11. Impact of CEFR 2011 ECEP project: • more freedom in relation to curriculum (plan in terms of tasks, guided by the descriptors) • new vision of error, expressed best by a teacher in France as erreur constructible • value of providing profiled grades, rather than a single mark, which could be demotivating • effectiveness of awareness-raising use of criteria and sharing of responsibility • appreciation of assessment as a support to learning BUT • Teachers felt lost faced with the complexity of the CEFR if not accompanied by effective guidance 11
- 12. Discussion Task 1 Brainstorm in pairs • What support would help teachers and academic managers engage effectively with the methodological implications of the CEFR? ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 12
- 13. A Quality Approach to CEFR Implementation • What the CEFR is about • Impact of the CEFR DISCUSSION TASK 1 • The planned research • A QA template (“The Quality Guide”) DISCUSSION TASK 2 ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 13
- 14. QualiCEFR Research • Analyse CEFR-related projects in Switzerland and Canada • State of the arts (documentary search), Interviews with key players, Questionnaires • Identify techniques that make a difference in quality of CEFR implementation • Present the techniques with a QA template ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 14
- 15. QualiCEFR Research Identify techniques that make a difference in the quality of CEFR implementation at three operational levels: • Innovation • Academic management • Classroom teaching ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 15
- 16. A Quality Approach to CEFR Implementation • What the CEFR is about • Impact of the CEFR DISCUSSION TASK 1 • The planned research • A QA template (“The Quality Guide”) DISCUSSION TASK 2 ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 16
- 17. QA Template: Stages • Design The process of analysing and planning to provide for needs in context • Implementation The process of providing a positive learning environment and of adapting planned provision flexibly and appropriately to circumstances • Outcomes The process of assessing gains in context in relation to resources and of ensuring satisfaction ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 17
- 19. Principles of Quality • Relevance • Transparency • Reliability • Attractiveness • Flexibility • Generativeness • Participation • Efficiency • Socialisation ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 19
- 20. Discussion Task 2 • What technique(s) can you think of for your stage (Design or Implementation or Outcomes) that makes a real difference to the quality of teaching and learning? • Identify the operational level of your technique (innovation or academic management or teaching) • List the principles (and sub-principles) you think your technique relates to. ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 20
- 21. Discussion Task 2 Example (Design) Ontario Achievement Chart: 4 grades: ... limited … / … some … / … considerable … excellent or outstanding • Replace or supplement with transparent CEFR-based descriptors ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 21
- 22. Discussion Task 2 Examples (Implementation) There is a transparent CEFR-based assessment grid • Sharing tasks for teaching/assessment INNOV • Regular standardisation discussions MANAGE • Team teaching/assessing MANAGE • Observation with grid during end of “module” tasks TEACHING ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 22
- 23. Discussion Task 2 Example (Outcomes) A transparent CEFR-based assessment grid is used regularly • descriptors to explain grades to parents • descriptors to report strengths / weaknesses to students • data to inform teaching ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 23
- 24. Discussion Task 2 Example (Outcomes) A transparent CEFR-based assessment grid is used regularly • descriptors to explain grades to parents MANAGE • descriptors to report strengths / weaknesses to students TEACHING • data to inform teaching INNOV ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 24
- 25. Discussion Task 2 • What technique(s) can you think of for your stage (Design or Implementation or Outcomes) that makes a real difference to the quality of teaching and learning? • Identify the operational level of your technique (innovation or academic management or teaching) • List the principles (and sub-principles) you think your technique relates to. ©Eaquals 06/08/2014 25