Taxonomies of the Cognitive Domain

Blooms Taxonomy 1956 Anderson and Krathwohls Taxonomy

 2001

1. Knowledge: Remembering or 1. Remembering:

retrieving previously learned
material. Examples of verbs that Recognizing or recalling knowledge
relate to this function are: from memory. Remembering is when
memory is used to produce or retrieve
definitions, facts, or lists, or to recite
know define record previously learned information.
identify recall name
relate memorize recognize
list repeat acquire

2. Comprehension: The ability 2. Understanding:

to grasp or construct meaning
from material. Examples of Constructing meaning from different
verbs that relate to this function types of functions be they written or
are: graphic messages or activities like
interpreting, exemplifying, classifying,
summarizing, inferring, comparing, or
restate identify illustrate explaining.
locate discuss interpret
report describe draw
recogniz discuss represent
e explain review infer differentiate
express conclude

3. Application: The ability to 3. Applying:

use learned material, or to
implement material in new and Carrying out or using a procedure
concrete situations. Examples of through executing, or
verbs that relate to this function implementing. Applying relates to or
refers to situations where learned
are:
material is used through products like
models, presentations, interviews or
apply organize practice simulations.
relate employ calculate
develop restructure show
 translat interpret exhibit
e use demonstrate dramatize
operate illustrate

4. Analysis: The ability to break 4. Analyzing:

down or distinguish the parts of
material into its components so Breaking materials or concepts into
that its organizational structure parts, determining how the parts
may be better relate to one another or how they
interrelate, or how the parts relate to
understood. Examples of verbs
an overall structure or purpose.
that relate to this function are:
Mental actions included in this
function are differentiating,
analyze differentiate experiment organizing, and attributing, as well
compar contrast scrutinize as being able to distinguish between the
e probe investigate discover components or parts. When one is
inquire detect inspect analyzing, he/she can illustrate this
examin survey dissect mental function by creating
e classify discriminate spreadsheets, surveys, charts, or
contrast deduce separate diagrams, or graphic representations.
categori
ze

5. Synthesis: The ability to put

parts together to form a
coherent or unique new whole.
Examples of verbs that relate to
this function are:

compose plan invent propose

produce formulate develop
design collect set arrange
assembl up construct
e create generalize organize
prepare document originate
predict combine derive write
modify relate
 tell propose

6. Evaluation: The ability to 6. Creating:

judge, check, and even critique
the value of material for a given Putting elements together to form a
purpose. Examples of verbs that coherent or functional whole;
relate to this function are: reorganizing elements into a new
pattern or structure through
generating, planning, or
judge argue validate producing. Creating requires users to
assess decide consider put parts together in a new way, or
compare choose rate appraise synthesize parts into something new
evaluate select value and different creating a new form or
conclude estimate criticize product. This process is the most
measure infer difficult mental function in the new
deduce taxonomy.

Table 1.1 Bloom vs. Anderson/Krathwohl

______________________________________________________________________
________

http://thesecondprinciple.com/teaching-essentials/beyond-bloom-cognitive-
taxonomy-revised/
SPEAKING
Distinguished | Superior | Advanced | Intermediate | Novice

PREFACE
The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines 2012Speaking describe five major levels of
proficiency: Distinguished, Superior, Advanced, Intermediate, and Novice. The
description of each major level is representative of a specific range of abilities. Together
these levels form a hierarchy in which each level subsumes all lower levels. The major
levels Advanced, Intermediate, and Novice are divided into High, Mid, and Low
sublevels.

The Guidelines describe the tasks that speakers can handle at each level, as well as
the content, context, accuracy, and discourse types associated with tasks at each level.
They also present the limits that speakers encounter when attempting to function at the
next higher major level.

These Guidelines can be used to evaluate speech that is either Interpersonal

(interactive, two-way communication) or Presentational (one-way, non-interactive).

The written descriptions of speaking proficiency are accompanied online by speech

samples illustrating the features of each major level.

The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines 2012Speaking may be used for non-profit,

educational purposes only, provided that they are reproduced in their entirety, with no
alterations, and with credit to ACTFL.

DISTINGUISHED
Speakers at the Distinguished level are able to use language skillfully, and with
accuracy, efficiency, and effectiveness. They are educated and articulate users of the
language. They can reflect on a wide range of global issues and highly abstract
concepts in a culturally appropriate manner. Distinguished-level speakers can use
persuasive and hypothetical discourse for representational purposes, allowing them to
advocate a point of view that is not necessarily their own. They can tailor language to a
variety of audiences by adapting their speech and register in ways that are culturally
authentic.

Speakers at the Distinguished level produce highly sophisticated and tightly organized
extended discourse. At the same time, they can speak succinctly, often using cultural
and historical references to allow them to say less and mean more. At this level, oral
discourse typically resembles written discourse.

A non-native accent, a lack of a native-like economy of expression, a limited control of

deeply embedded cultural references, and/or an occasional isolated language error may
still be present at this level.

VIEW SAMPLE

SUPERIOR
Speakers at the Superior level are able to communicate with accuracy and fluency in
order to participate fully and effectively in conversations on a variety of topics in formal
and informal settings from both concrete and abstract perspectives. They discuss their
interests and special fields of competence, explain complex matters in detail, and
provide lengthy and coherent narrations, all with ease, fluency, and accuracy. They
present their opinions on a number of issues of interest to them, such as social and
political issues, and provide structured arguments to support these opinions. They are
able to construct and develop hypotheses to explore alternative possibilities.

When appropriate, these speakers use extended discourse without unnaturally lengthy
hesitation to make their point, even when engaged in abstract elaborations. Such
discourse, while coherent, may still be influenced by language patterns other than those
of the target language. Superior-level speakers employ a variety of interactive and
discourse strategies, such as turn-taking and separating main ideas from supporting
information through the use of syntactic, lexical, and phonetic devices.

Speakers at the Superior level demonstrate no pattern of error in the use of basic
structures, although they may make sporadic errors, particularly in low-frequency
structures and in complex high-frequency structures. Such errors, if they do occur, do
not distract the native interlocutor or interfere with communication.

VIEW SAMPLES

ADVANCED
Speakers at the Advanced level engage in conversation in a clearly participatory
manner in order to communicate information on autobiographical topics, as well as
topics of community, national, or international interest. The topics are handled
concretely by means of narration and description in the major time frames of past,
present, and future. These speakers can also deal with a social situation with an
unexpected complication. The language of Advanced-level speakers is abundant, the
oral paragraph being the measure of Advanced-level length and discourse. Advanced-
level speakers have sufficient control of basic structures and generic vocabulary to be
understood by native speakers of the language, including those unaccustomed to non-
native speech.

VIEW SAMPLES

ADVANCED HIGH
Speakers at the Advanced High sublevel perform all Advanced-level tasks with linguistic ease,
confidence, and competence. They are consistently able to explain in detail and narrate fully
and accurately in all time frames. In addition, Advanced High speakers handle the tasks
pertaining to the Superior level but cannot sustain performance at that level across a variety of
topics. They may provide a structured argument to support their opinions, and they may
construct hypotheses, but patterns of error appear. They can discuss some topics abstractly,
especially those relating to their particular interests and special fields of expertise, but in
general, they are more comfortable discussing a variety of topics concretely.

Advanced High speakers may demonstrate a well-developed ability to compensate for an

imperfect grasp of some forms or for limitations in vocabulary by the confident use of
communicative strategies, such as paraphrasing, circumlocution, and illustration. They use
precise vocabulary and intonation to express meaning and often show great fluency and ease of
speech. However, when called on to perform the complex tasks associated with the Superior
level over a variety of topics, their language will at times break down or prove inadequate, or
they may avoid the task altogether, for example, by resorting to simplification through the use
of description or narration in place of argument or hypothesis.

ADVANCED MID
Speakers at the Advanced Mid sublevel are able to handle with ease and confidence a large
number of communicative tasks. They participate actively in most informal and some formal
exchanges on a variety of concrete topics relating to work, school, home, and leisure activities,
as well as topics relating to events of current, public, and personal interest or individual
relevance.

Advanced Mid speakers demonstrate the ability to narrate and describe in the major time
frames of past, present, and future by providing a full account, with good control of aspect.
Narration and description tend to be combined and interwoven to relate relevant and supporting
facts in connected, paragraph-length discourse.

Advanced Mid speakers can handle successfully and with relative ease the linguistic challenges
presented by a complication or unexpected turn of events that occurs within the context of a
routine situation or communicative task with which they are otherwise familiar.
Communicative strategies such as circumlocution or rephrasing are often employed for this
purpose. The speech of Advanced Mid speakers performing Advanced-level tasks is marked by
substantial flow. Their vocabulary is fairly extensive although primarily generic in nature,
except in the case of a particular area of specialization or interest. Their discourse may still
reflect the oral paragraph structure of their own language rather than that of the target language.

Advanced Mid speakers contribute to conversations on a variety of familiar topics, dealt with
concretely, with much accuracy, clarity and precision, and they convey their intended message
without misrepresentation or confusion. They are readily understood by native speakers
unaccustomed to dealing with non-natives. When called on to perform functions or handle
topics associated with the Superior level, the quality and/or quantity of their speech will
generally decline.
ADVANCED LOW
Speakers at the Advanced Low sublevel are able to handle a variety of communicative tasks.
They are able to participate in most informal and some formal conversations on topics related
to school, home, and leisure activities. They can also speak about some topics related to
employment, current events, and matters of public and community interest.

Advanced Low speakers demonstrate the ability to narrate and describe in the major time
frames of past, present, and future in paragraph-length discourse with some control of aspect.
In these narrations and descriptions, Advanced Low speakers combine and link sentences into
connected discourse of paragraph length, although these narrations and descriptions tend to be
handled separately rather than interwoven. They can handle appropriately the essential
linguistic challenges presented by a complication or an unexpected turn of events.

Responses produced by Advanced Low speakers are typically not longer than a single
paragraph. The speakers dominant language may be evident in the use of false cognates, literal
translations, or the oral paragraph structure of that language. At times their discourse may be
minimal for the level, marked by an irregular flow, and containing noticeable self-correction.
More generally, the performance of Advanced Low speakers tends to be uneven.

Advanced Low speech is typically marked by a certain grammatical roughness (e.g.,

inconsistent control of verb endings), but the overall performance of the Advanced-level tasks
is sustained, albeit minimally. The vocabulary of Advanced Low speakers often lacks
specificity. Nevertheless, Advanced Low speakers are able to use communicative strategies
such as rephrasing and circumlocution.

Advanced Low speakers contribute to the conversation with sufficient accuracy, clarity, and
precision to convey their intended message without misrepresentation or confusion. Their
speech can be understood by native speakers unaccustomed to dealing with non-natives, even
though this may require some repetition or restatement. When attempting to perform functions
or handle topics associated with the Superior level, the linguistic quality and quantity of their
speech will deteriorate significantly.

INTERMEDIATE
Speakers at the Intermediate level are distinguished primarily by their ability to create
with the language when talking about familiar topics related to their daily life. They are
able to recombine learned material in order to express personal meaning. Intermediate-
level speakers can ask simple questions and can handle a straightforward survival
situation. They produce sentence-level language, ranging from discrete sentences to
strings of sentences, typically in present time. Intermediate-level speakers are
understood by interlocutors who are accustomed to dealing with non-native learners of
the language.

VIEW SAMPLES

INTERMEDIATE HIGH
Intermediate High speakers are able to converse with ease and confidence when dealing with the
routine tasks and social situations of the Intermediate level. They are able to handle successfully
uncomplicated tasks and social situations requiring an exchange of basic information related to
their work, school, recreation, particular interests, and areas of competence.

Intermediate High speakers can handle a substantial number of tasks associated with the
Advanced level, but they are unable to sustain performance of all of these tasks all of the time.
Intermediate High speakers can narrate and describe in all major time frames using connected
discourse of paragraph length, but not all the time. Typically, when Intermediate High speakers
attempt to perform Advanced-level tasks, their speech exhibits one or more features of
breakdown, such as the failure to carry out fully the narration or description in the appropriate
major time frame, an inability to maintain paragraph-length discourse, or a reduction in breadth
and appropriateness of vocabulary.

Intermediate High speakers can generally be understood by native speakers unaccustomed to

dealing with non-natives, although interference from another language may be evident (e.g., use
of code-switching, false cognates, literal translations), and a pattern of gaps in communication
may occur.
INTERMEDIATE MID
Speakers at the Intermediate Mid sublevel are able to handle successfully a variety of
uncomplicated communicative tasks in straightforward social situations. Conversation is
generally limited to those predictable and concrete exchanges necessary for survival in the target
culture. These include personal information related to self, family, home, daily activities,
interests and personal preferences, as well as physical and social needs, such as food, shopping,
travel, and lodging.

Intermediate Mid speakers tend to function reactively, for example, by responding to direct
questions or requests for information. However, they are capable of asking a variety of questions
when necessary to obtain simple information to satisfy basic needs, such as directions, prices,
and services. When called on to perform functions or handle topics at the Advanced level, they
provide some information but have difficulty linking ideas, manipulating time and aspect, and
using communicative strategies, such as circumlocution.

Intermediate Mid speakers are able to express personal meaning by creating with the language,
in part by combining and recombining known elements and conversational input to produce
responses typically consisting of sentences and strings of sentences. Their speech may contain
pauses, reformulations, and self-corrections as they search for adequate vocabulary and
appropriate language forms to express themselves. In spite of the limitations in their vocabulary
and/or pronunciation and/or grammar and/or syntax, Intermediate Mid speakers are generally
understood by sympathetic interlocutors accustomed to dealing with non-natives.

Overall, Intermediate Mid speakers are at ease when performing Intermediate-level tasks and do
so with significant quantity and quality of Intermediate-level language.
INTERMEDIATE LOW
Speakers at the Intermediate Low sublevel are able to handle successfully a limited number of
uncomplicated communicative tasks by creating with the language in straightforward social
situations. Conversation is restricted to some of the concrete exchanges and predictable topics
necessary for survival in the target-language culture. These topics relate to basic personal
information; for example, self and family, some daily activities and personal preferences, and
some immediate needs, such as ordering food and making simple purchases. At the Intermediate
Low sublevel, speakers are primarily reactive and struggle to answer direct questions or requests
for information. They are also able to ask a few appropriate questions. Intermediate Low
speakers manage to sustain the functions of the Intermediate level, although just barely.

Intermediate Low speakers express personal meaning by combining and recombining what they
know and what they hear from their interlocutors into short statements and discrete sentences.
Their responses are often filled with hesitancy and inaccuracies as they search for appropriate
linguistic forms and vocabulary while attempting to give form to the message. Their speech is
characterized by frequent pauses, ineffective reformulations and self-corrections. Their
pronunciation, vocabulary and syntax are strongly influenced by their first language. In spite of
frequent misunderstandings that may require repetition or rephrasing, Intermediate Low
speakers can generally be understood by sympathetic interlocutors, particularly by those
accustomed to dealing with non-natives.

NOVICE
Novice-level speakers can communicate short messages on highly predictable,
everyday topics that affect them directly. They do so primarily through the use of
isolated words and phrases that have been encountered, memorized, and recalled.
Novice-level speakers may be difficult to understand even by the most sympathetic
interlocutors accustomed to non-native speech.

VIEW SAMPLES

NOVICE HIGH
Speakers at the Novice High sublevel are able to handle a variety of tasks pertaining to the
Intermediate level, but are unable to sustain performance at that level. They are able to
manage successfully a number of uncomplicated communicative tasks in straightforward
social situations. Conversation is restricted to a few of the predict able topics necessary for
survival in the target language culture, such as basic personal information, basic objects, and
a limited number of activities, preferences, and immediate needs. Novice High speakers
respond to simple, direct questions or requests for information. They are also able to ask a
few formulaic questions.

Novice High speakers are able to express personal meaning by relying heavily on learned
phrases or recombinations of these and what they hear from their interlocutor. Their language
consists primarily of short and some times incomplete sentences in the present, and may be
hesitant or inaccurate. On the other hand, since their language often consists of expansions of
learned material and stock phrases, they may sometimes sound surprisingly fluent and
accurate. Pronunciation, vocabulary, and syntax may be strongly influenced by the first
language. Frequent misunderstandings may arise but, with repetition or rephrasing, Novice
High speakers can generally be understood by sympathetic interlocutors used to non-natives.
When called on to handle a variety of topics and perform functions pertaining to the
Intermediate level, a Novice High speaker can sometimes respond in intelligible sentences,
but will not be able to sustain sentence-level discourse.
NOVICE MID
Speakers at the Novice Mid sublevel communicate minimally by using a number of isolated
words and memorized phrases limited by the particular context in which the language has
been learned. When responding to direct questions, they may say only two or three words at a
time or give an occasional stock answer. They pause frequently as they search for simple
vocabulary or attempt to recycle their own and their interlocutors words. Novice Mid
speakers may be understood with difficulty even by sympathetic interlocutors accustomed to
dealing with non-natives. When called on to handle topics and perform functions associated
with the Intermediate level, they frequently resort to repetition, words from their native
language, or silence.

NOVICE LOW
Speakers at the Novice Low sublevel have no real functional ability and, because of their
pronunciation, may be unintelligible. Given adequate time and familiar cues, they may be
able to exchange greetings, give their identity, and name a number of familiar objects from
their immediate environment. They are unable to perform functions or handle topics
pertaining to the Intermediate level, and cannot therefore participate in a true conversational
exchange.

https://www.actfl.org/publications/guidelines-and-manuals/actfl-proficiency-
guidelines-2012/english/speaking
 ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines
by American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages

Originally published as: American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
1983. ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. Revised 1985. Hastings-on-Hudson, NY: ACTFL
Materials Center.
In the public domain.

Complete Table of Contents

Summary

This book contains descriptions of different levels of language proficiency

identified by the American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages,
based on the five levels originally defined by the US Foreign Service Institute.
ACTFL provides a detailed description of the kinds of communication
functions, range of vocabulary, degree of accuracy and flexibility that learners
of a language are able to control at different levels in each of the four major
language skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing). These descriptions
can be helpful in setting language learning goals, in planning learning activities
and in evaluating proficiency.

The ACTFL guidelines

ACTFL guidelines: Listening

ACTFL guidelines: Listening--Novice

ACTFL guidelines: Listening--Intermediate
ACTFL guidelines: Listening--Advanced
ACTFL guidelines: Listening--Superior
ACTFL guidelines: Listening--Distinguished

ACTFL guidelines: Speaking

ACTFL guidelines: Speaking--Novice

 ACTFL guidelines: Speaking--Intermediate
ACTFL guidelines: Speaking--Advanced
ACTFL guidelines: Speaking--Superior

ACTFL guidelines: Reading

ACTFL guidelines: Reading--Novice

ACTFL guidelines: Reading--Intermediate
ACTFL guidelines: Reading--Advanced
ACTFL guidelines: Reading--Superior
ACTFL guidelines: Reading--Distinguished

ACTFL guidelines: Writing

ACTFL guidelines: Writing--Novice

ACTFL guidelines: Writing--Intermediate
ACTFL guidelines: Writing--Advanced
ACTFL guidelines: Writing--Superior

http://www-
01.sil.org/lingualinks/LANGUAGELEARNING/OtherResources/ACTFLProficiency
Guidelines/contents.htm
 SPEAKING PROFICIENCY GUIDELINES

"Generic Characteristics of Each Level." As indicated above, the Guidelines define four
main levels of language proficiency: Novice, Intermediate, Advanced, and Superior. The
characteristics of each level for speaking are as follows.

* Novice-The Novice level is characterized by the ability to communicate minimally in

highly predictable common daily situations with previously learned words and phrases.
The Novice level speaker has difficulty communicating with even those accustomed to
interacting with nonnative speakers.

* Intermediate-The Intermediate level is characterized by the ability to combine learned

elements of language creatively, though primarily in a reactive mode. The Intermediate
level speaker can initiate, minimally sustain, and close basic communicative tasks. The
speaker can ask and answer questions and can speak in discrete sentences and strings
of sentences on topics that are either autobiographical or related primarily to his or her
immediate environment.

* Advanced-The Advanced level is characterized by the ability to converse fluently and

in a clearly participatory fashion. The speaker can accomplish a wide variety of
communicative tasks and can describe and narrate events in the present, past, and
future, organizing thoughts, when appropriate, into paragraph-like discourse. At this
level, the speaker can discuss concrete and factual topic s of personal and public
interest in most informal and formal conversations and can be easily understood by
listeners unaccustomed to nonnative speakers.

* Superior-The Superior level is characterized by the ability to participate effectively in

most formal and informal conversations on practical, social, professional, and abstract
topics. Using extended discourse, the speaker can explain in detail, hypothesize on
concrete and abstract topics, and support or defend opinions on controversial matters.

"High Levels." When a learner fulfills most but not all of the basic characteristics of a
given level, he or she is assigned a rating immediately below the level in question, but
with the designation "High." Thus, a person who fulfills most but not all the requirements
of the Superior level is rated as Advanced High. Similarly, a person who exhibits most
but not all of the basic characteristics of the Advanced level may be rated as
Intermediate High, and a person who exhibits most but not all of the characteristics of
the Intermediate level may be rated Novice High. The Government scale refers to these
levels as "Plus" levels, and, by analogy, the l986 ACTFL Guidelines listed an Advanced
Plus level. However, in l989, the name of this level was changed to Advanced High in
order to be consistent with the High designation that can be obtained at the Novice and
Intermediate levels.
https://www.ericdigests.org/1992-2/actfl.htm

ACTFL
Proficien
cy
Guidelin
es -
Speaking
The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines-Speaking (2012) have gained widespread
application as a metric against which to measure learners' functional
competency; that is, their ability to accomplish linguistic tasks representing
a variety of levels. Based on years of experience with oral testing in
governmental institutions and on the descriptions of language proficiency
used by Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR), the ACTFL Guidelines were
an adaptation intended for use in academia (college and university levels
particularly) in the United States. For this reason, the authors of
the Provisional Guidelines (1982) conflated the top levels (ILR 3-5),
expanded the descriptions of the lower levels (ILR 0-1), and defined
sublevels of competency according to the experience of language instructors
and researchers accustomed to beginning learners. Their efforts were
further modified and refined in the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines published in
1986.

After additional years of oral testing and of interpretation of the Guidelines,

as well as numerous research projects, scholarly articles, and debates, the
time has come to reevaluate and refine the Guidelines, initially those for
Speaking, followed by those for the other skills. The purposes of this
revision of the Proficiency Guidelines-Speaking are to make the document
more accessible to those who have not received recent training in ACTFL oral
proficiency testing, to clarify the issues that have divided testers and
teachers, and to provide a corrective to what the committee perceived to
have been possible misinterpretations of the descriptions provided in earlier
versions of the Guidelines.

An important example is the treatment of the Superior level. The ILR

descriptions postulate a spectrum of proficiency abilities from 0 which
signifies no functional competence, to 5 which is competence equivalent to
that of a well-educated native speaker. Due to the language levels most
often attained by adult learners, the ACTFL Guidelines do not include
descriptions of the highest ILR levels. The ACTFL Superior level, roughly
equivalent to the ILR 3 range, is thus to be seen as a baseline level; that is,
it describes a particular set of functional abilities essential to that level, but
not necessarily the whole range of linguistic activities that an educated
speaker with years of experience in the target language and culture might
attain. Keeping this distinction in mind reduces the tendency to expect the
Superior speaker to demonstrate abilities defined at higher ILR levels.

For this reason, among others, the committee has broken with tradition by
presenting this version of the Speaking Guidelines in descending rather
than ascending order. This top-down approach has two advantages. First, it
emphasizes that the High levels are more closely related to the level above
than to the one below, and represents a considerable step towards
accomplishing the functions at the level above, not just excellence in the
functions of the level itself. Second, it allows for fewer negatives and less
redundancy in the descriptions when they refer, as they must, to the
inability of a speaker to function consistently at a higher level.

Another significant change to the 1986 version of the Guidelines is found in

the division of the Advanced level into the High, Mid, and Low sublevels. This
decision reflects the growing need in both the academic and commercial
communities to more finely delineate a speaker's progress through the
Advanced level of proficiency. The new descriptors for Advanced Mid and
Advanced Low are based on hundreds of Advanced-level language samples
from OPI testing across a variety of languages.

The committee has also taken a slightly different approach to the

presentation of these Guidelines from previous versions. The full prose
descriptions of each level (and, when applicable, its sub-levels) are
preceded by clearly delineated thumb-nail sketches that are intended to
alert the reader to the major features of the levels and to serve as a quick
reference, but not in any way to replace the full picture presented in the
descriptions themselves. Indeed, at the lower levels they refer to the Mid
rather than to the baseline proficiency, since they would otherwise describe
a very limited profile and misrepresent the general expectations for the
level.

This revision of the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines-Speaking is presented as

an additional step toward more adequately describing speaking proficiency.
Whereas this effort reflects a broad spectrum of experience in characterizing
speaker abilities and includes a wide range of insights as a result of on-going
discussions and research within the language teaching profession, the
revision committee is aware that there remain a number of issues requiring
further clarification and specification. It is the hope of the committee that
this revision will enhance the Guidelines' utility to the language teaching and
testing community in the years to come.

Acknowledgments

ACTFL is indebted to the following individuals who contributed to the

original ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines Project of 1986: Heidi Byrnes, James
Child, Nina Patrizio, Pardee Lowe, Jr., Seiichi Makino, Irene Thompson, and
A. Ronald Walton. Their work was the foundation for this revision project.

We would also like to thank the following committee members and reviewers
who generously gave of their time and expertise during the current revision
process: Lucia Caycedo Garner, Helen Hamlyn, Judith Liskin-Gasparro,
Arthur Mosher, Lizette Mujica Laughlin, Chantal Thompson, and Maureen
Weissenreider.

Finally, ACTFL wishes to acknowledge the work of the Guidelines' editors,

and authors of the Explanatory Notes that accompany the ACTFL Proficiency
Guidelines-Speaking (Revised 1999). They are Karen E. Breiner-Sanders,
Pardee Lowe, Jr., John Miles, Elvira Swender.

The Revision of the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines was supported by a grant from the
United States Department of Education International Research and Studies Program.

The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines-Speaking (Revised 1999) may be used for non-
profit, educational purposes only, provided that they are reproduced in their entirety,
with no alterations, and with credit to ACTFL.

SUPERIOR
Speakers at the Superior level are able to communicate in the language with accuracy
and fluency in order to participate fully and effectively in conversations on a variety of
topics in formal and informal settings from both concrete and abstract perspectives.
They discuss their interests and special fields of competence, explain complex matters
in detail, and provide lengthy and coherent narrations, all with ease, fluency, and
accuracy. They explain their opinions on a number of topics of importance to them,
such as social and political issues, and provide structured argument to support their
opinions. They are able to construct and develop hypotheses to explore alternative
possibilities. When appropriate, they use extended discourse without unnaturally
lengthy hesitation to make their point, even when engaged in abstract elaborations.
Such discourse, while coherent, may still be influenced by the Superior speaker's own
language patterns, rather than those of the target language.

Superior speakers command a variety of interactive and discourse strategies, such as

turn-taking and separating main ideas from supporting information through the use of
syntactic and lexical devices, as well as intonational features such as pitch, stress and
tone. They demonstrate virtually no pattern of error in the use of basic structures.
However, they may make sporadic errors, particularly in low-frequency structures and
in some complex high-frequency structures more common to formal speech and
writing. Such errors, if they do occur, do not distract the native interlocutor or
interfere with communication.

ADVANCED HIGH
Speakers at the Advanced-High level perform all Advanced-level tasks with linguistic
ease, confidence and competence. They are able to consistently explain in detail and
narrate fully and accurately in all time frames. In addition, Advanced-High speakers
handle the tasks pertaining to the Superior level but cannot sustain performance at
that level across a variety of topics. They can provide a structured argument to
support their opinions, and they may construct hypotheses, but patterns of error
appear. They can discuss some topics abstractly, especially those relating to their
particular interests and special fields of expertise, but in general, they are more
comfortable discussing a variety of topics concretely.

Advanced-High speakers may demonstrate a well-developed ability to compensate for

an imperfect grasp of some forms or for limitations in vocabulary by the confident use
of communicative strategies, such as paraphrasing, circumlocution, and illustration.
They use precise vocabulary and intonation to express meaning and often show great
fluency and ease of speech. However, when called on to perform the complex tasks
associated with the Superior level over a variety of topics, their language will at times
break down or prove inadequate, or they may avoid the task altogether, for example,
by resorting to simplification through the use of description or narration in place of
argument or hypothesis.

ADVANCED MID
Speakers at the Advanced-Mid level are able to handle with ease and confidence a
large number of communicative tasks. They participate actively in most informal and
some formal exchanges on a variety of concrete topics relating to work, school, home,
and leisure activities, as well as to events of current, public, and personal interest or
individual relevance.

Advanced-Mid speakers demonstrate the ability to narrate and describe in all major
time frames (past, present, and future) by providing a full account, with good control
of aspect, as they adapt flexibly to the demands of the conversation. Narration and
description tend to be combined and interwoven to relate relevant and supporting
facts in connected, paragraph-length discourse.

Advanced-Mid speakers can handle successfully and with relative ease the linguistic
challenges presented by a complication or unexpected turn of events that occurs
within the context of a routine situation or communicative task with which they are
otherwise familiar. Communicative strategies such as circumlocution or rephrasing are
often employed for this purpose. The speech of Advanced-Mid speakers performing
Advanced-level tasks is marked by substantial flow. Their vocabulary is fairly
extensive although primarily generic in nature, except in the case of a particular area
of specialization or interest. Dominant language discourse structures tend to recede,
although discourse may still reflect the oral paragraph structure of their own language
rather than that of the target language.

Advanced-Mid speakers contribute to conversations on a variety of familiar topics,

dealt with concretely, with much accuracy, clarity and precision, and they convey their
intended message without misrepresentation or confusion. They are readily
understood by native speakers unaccustomed to dealing with non-natives. When
called on to perform functions or handle topics associated with the Superior level, the
quality and/or quantity of their speech will generally decline. Advanced-Mid speakers
are often able to state an opinion or cite conditions; however, they lack the ability to
consistently provide a structured argument in extended discourse. Advanced-Mid
speakers may use a number of delaying strategies, resort to narration, description,
explanation or anecdote, or simply attempt to avoid the linguistic demands of
Superior-level tasks.

ADVANCED LOW
Speakers at the Advanced-Low level are able to handle a variety of communicative
tasks, although somewhat haltingly at times. They participate actively in most
informal and a limited number of formal conversations on activities related to school,
home, and leisure activities and, to a lesser degree, those related to events of work,
current, public, and personal interest or individual relevance.

Advanced-Low speakers demonstrate the ability to narrate and describe in all major
time frames (past, present and future) in paragraph length discourse, but control of
aspect may be lacking at times. They can handle appropriately the linguistic
challenges presented by a complication or unexpected turn of events that occurs
within the context of a routine situation or communicative task with which they are
otherwise familiar, though at times their discourse may be minimal for the level and
strained. Communicative strategies such as rephrasing and circumlocution may be
employed in such instances. In their narrations and descriptions, they combine and
link sentences into connected discourse of paragraph length. When pressed for a fuller
account, they tend to grope and rely on minimal discourse. Their utterances are
typically not longer than a single paragraph. Structure of the dominant language is
still evident in the use of false cognates, literal translations, or the oral paragraph
structure of the speaker's own language rather than that of the target language.

While the language of Advanced-Low speakers may be marked by substantial, albeit

irregular flow, it is typically somewhat strained and tentative, with noticeable self-
correction and a certain grammatical roughness. The vocabulary of Advanced-Low
speakers is primarily generic in nature.

Advanced-Low speakers contribute to the conversation with sufficient accuracy, clarity,

and precision to convey their intended message without misrepresentation or
confusion, and it can be understood by native speakers unaccustomed to dealing with
non-natives, even though this may be achieved through repetition and restatement.
When attempting to perform functions or handle topics associated with the Superior
level, the linguistic quality and quantity of their speech will deteriorate significantly.

INTERMEDIATE HIGH
Intermediate-High speakers are able to converse with ease and confidence when
dealing with most routine tasks and social situations of the Intermediate level. They
are able to handle successfully many uncomplicated tasks and social situations
requiring an exchange of basic information related to work, school, recreation,
particular interests and areas of competence, though hesitation and errors may be
evident.

Intermediate-High speakers handle the tasks pertaining to the Advanced level, but
they are unable to sustain performance at that level over a variety of topics. With
some consistency, speakers at the Intermediate High level narrate and describe in
major time frames using connected discourse of paragraph length. However, their
performance of these Advanced-level tasks will exhibit one or more features of
breakdown, such as the failure to maintain the narration or description semantically or
syntactically in the appropriate major time frame, the disintegration of connected
discourse, the misuse of cohesive devises, a reduction in breadth and appropriateness
of vocabulary, the failure to successfully circumlocute, or a significant amount of
hesitation.

Intermediate-High speakers can generally be understood by native speakers

unaccustomed to dealing with non-natives, although the dominant language is still
evident (e.g. use of code-switching, false cognates, literal translations, etc.), and gaps
in communication may occur.

INTERMEDIATE MID
Speakers at the Intermediate-Mid level are able to handle successfully a variety of
uncomplicated communicative tasks in straightforward social situations. Conversation
is generally limited to those predictable and concrete exchanges necessary for survival
in the target culture; these include personal information covering self, family, home,
daily activities, interests and personal preferences, as well as physical and social
needs, such as food, shopping, travel and lodging.
Intermediate-Mid speakers tend to function reactively, for example, by responding
to direct questions or requests for information. However, they are capable of asking
a variety of questions when necessary to obtain simple information to satisfy basic
needs, such as directions, prices and services. When called on to perform functions or
handle topics at the Advanced level, they provide some information but have difficulty
linking ideas, manipulating time and aspect, and using communicative strategies,
such as circumlocution.

Intermediate-Mid speakers are able to express personal meaning by creating with the
language, in part by combining and recombining known elements and conversational
input to make utterances of sentence length and some strings of sentences. Their
speech may contain pauses, reformulations and self-corrections as they search for
adequate vocabulary and appropriate language forms to express themselves.
Because of inaccuracies in their vocabulary and/or pronunciation and/or grammar
and/or syntax, misunderstandings can occur, but Intermediate-Mid speakers are
generally understood by sympathetic interlocutors accustomed to dealing with non-
natives.

INTERMEDIATE LOW
Speakers at the Intermediate-Low level are able to handle successfully a limited
number of uncomplicated communicative tasks by creating with the language in
straightforward social situations. Conversation is restricted to some of the concrete
exchanges and predictable topics necessary for survival in the target language
culture. These topics relate to basic personal information covering, for example, self
and family, some daily activities and personal preferences, as well as to some
immediate needs, such as ordering food and making simple purchases. At the
Intermediate-Low level, speakers are primarily reactive and struggle to answer
direct questions or requests for information, but they are also able to ask a few
appropriate questions.

Intermediate-Low speakers express personal meaning by combining and

recombining into short statements what they know and what they hear from their
interlocutors. Their utterances are often filled with hesitancy and inaccuracies as
they search for appropriate linguistic forms and vocabulary while attempting to give
form to the message. Their speech is characterized by frequent pauses, ineffective
reformulations and self-corrections. Their pronunciation, vocabulary and syntax
are strongly influenced by their first language but, in spite of frequent
misunderstandings that require repetition or rephrasing, Intermediate-Low
speakers can generally be understood by sympathetic interlocutors, particularly by
those accustomed to dealing with non-natives.

NOVICE HIGH
Speakers at the Novice-High level are able to handle a variety of tasks pertaining to
the Intermediate level, but are unable to sustain performance at that level. They are
able to manage successfully a number of uncomplicated communicative tasks in
straightforward social situations. Conversation is restricted to a few of the
predictable topics necessary for survival in the target language culture, such as
basic personal information, basic objects and a limited number of activities,
preferences and immediate needs. Novice-High speakers respond to simple, direct
questions or requests for information; they are able to ask only a very few formulaic
 questions when asked to do so.

Novice-High speakers are able to express personal meaning by relying heavily on

learned phrases or recombinations of these and what they hear from their
interlocutor. Their utterances, which consist mostly of short and sometimes
incomplete sentences in the present, may be hesitant or inaccurate. On the other
hand, since these utterances are frequently only expansions of learned material and
stock phrases, they may sometimes appear surprisingly fluent and accurate. These
speakers' first language may strongly influence their pronunciation, as well as their
vocabulary and syntax when they attempt to personalize their utterances. Frequent
misunderstandings may arise but, with repetition or rephrasing, Novice-High
speakers can generally be understood by sympathetic interlocutors used to non-
natives. When called on to handle simply a variety of topics and perform functions
pertaining to the Intermediate level, a Novice-High speaker can sometimes respond
in intelligible sentences, but will not be able to sustain sentence level discourse.

NOVICE MID
Speakers at the Novice-Mid level communicate minimally and with difficulty by using a
number of isolated words and memorized phrases limited by the particular context in
which the language has been learned. When responding to direct questions, they may
utter only two or three words at a time or an occasional stock answer. They pause
frequently as they search for simple vocabulary or attempt to recycle their own and
their interlocutor'?s words. Because of hesitations, lack of vocabulary, inaccuracy, or
failure to respond appropriately, Novice-Mid speakers may be understood with great
difficulty even by sympathetic interlocutors accustomed to dealing with non-natives.
When called on to handle topics by performing functions associated with the
Intermediate level, they frequently resort to repetition, words from their native
language, or silence.

NOVICE LOW
Speakers at the Novice-Low level have no real functional ability and, because of their
pronunciation, they may be unintelligible. Given adequate time and familiar cues, they
may be able to exchange greetings, give their identity, and name a number of familiar
objects from their immediate environment. They are unable to perform functions or
handle topics pertaining to the Intermediate level, and cannot therefore participate in
a true conversational exchange.

http://www.actfltraining.org/actfl_posting.cfm?recno=11
1. Historical overview of the development of the notion of
"communicative competence".
1.1. the model development

Chomsky (1965) in "Aspects of the Theory of Syntax."

competence and performance

competence is the perfect knowledge of an ideal speaker-listener of

the language in a homogeneous speech community.

linguistic knowledge is separated from sociocultural features

"Linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal speaker-

listener, in a completely homogeneous speech community, who
knows its language perfectly and is unaffected by such
grammatically irrelevant conditions as memory limitations,
distractions, shifts of attention and interests, and errors (random or
characteristic) in applying his knowledge of the language in actual
performance. (1965 p.3)"

Hymes (1972)

points out that Chomsky's competence/performance model does not

provide an explicit place for sociocultural features.

also points out that Chomsky's notion of performance seems

confused between actual performance and underlying rules of
performance.

"Communicative Competence"

1. Whether (and to what degree) something is formally possible;

2. Whether (and to what degree) something is feasible in virtue of

the means of implementation available;
3. Whether (and to what degree) something
is appropriate (adequate, happy, successful) in relation to a context
in which it is used and evaluated;

4. Whether (and to what degree) something is in fact done,

actually performed and what its doing entails.

It can be said that these four represent the four aspects of language
user's knowledge and ability. by Munby (1981)

1. grammatical

2. psycholinguistic

3. sociocultural

4. de facto

Halliday (1971,72)

rejects dichotomy of competence/performance

"meaning-potential" covers both knowing and doing

the notion of language functions

macro- and micro- functions

Macro-functions

1. ideational

2. manipulative

3. heuristic

4. imaginative

(Firthian view of language) affected by Malinowski

language is as a mode of human behavior (social interaction)

the context of situation provides a first approximation to the

specification of the components of the communication situation

Widdowson (1978)

use and usage

usage --- manifestation of the knowledge of language system

use --- realization of the language system as meaningful `

communicative behavior

both are the aspects of "performance"

(take note)

The distinction of "usage" and "use" is based on the notion of

"effectiveness for communication" This means that an utterance
with a well-formed grammatical structure may or may not have a
sufficient value for communication in a given context.

Whether an utterance has a sufficient communicative value or not is

determined in discourse. This is why Widdowson's approach is
considered as discourse-based approach.

cohesion and coherence --- emphasized discourse

Munby (1978)

1. linguistic encoding

2. sociocultural orientation

3. sociosemantic basis of linguistic knowledge

4. discourse level of operation



Canale and Swain (1980), Canale (1983)

four components of Communicative Competence (just a list!)

1. grammatical competence

concerned with mastery of the language code itself

2. discourse competence

concerns mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and

meanings to achieve a unified spoken or written text in different
genres

3. sociolinguistic competence

addresses the extent to which utterances are produced and

understood appropriately in different sociolinguistic contexts
depending on contextual factors

4. strategic competence

is composed of mastery of verbal and non-verbal communication

strategies that may be called into action for two main reasons: (a) to
compensate for breakdowns in communication due to limiting
conditions in actual communication or to insufficient competence in
one or more of the other areas of communicative competence; and
(b) to enhance the effectiveness of communication

Savignon (1983)

interactional approach

the development of learners' communicative competence is defined

as "expression, interpretation, and negotiation of meaning involving
interaction between two or more persons or between one person
and a written or oral text".
The central characteristics of competence in communication are
associated with:

1. the dynamic, interpersonal nature of communicative competence

and its dependence on the negotiation of meaning between two or
more persons who share to some degree the same symbolic system

2. its application to both spoken and written language as well as to

many other symbolic systems

3. the role of context in determining a specific communicative

competence, the infinite variety of situations in which
communication takes place, and the dependence of success in a
particular role on one's understanding of the context and on prior
experience of a similar kind

4. communicative competence as a relative, not absolute, concept,

one dependent on the cooperation of all participants, a situation
which makes it reasonable to speak of degrees of communicative
competence.

Bachman (1990)

tree model of CC

1. Language Competence

a. Organizational Competence

(i) grammatical competence

(II) textual competence

+ cohesion/coherence

+ conversational analysis

Grice (1975), Sinclair and Coulthard (1975), Hatch (1978), Hatch and
Long (1980), Richards and Schmidt (1983)

b. Pragmatic Competence
(i) illocutionary competence

+ speech acts

Austin (1962), Searle (1969)

+ language functions

Halliday (1973) macro- and micro-functions

(ii) sociolinguistic competence

sensitivity to differences in (a) dialects, or varieties, (b) register, (c)

naturalness ability to interpret cultural references and figures of
speech

2. Strategic Competence

pointing out that Canale and Swain's and Canale's model did not
describe the mechanisms by which strategic competence operates.

referred to Faerch and Kasper (1983)'s view on strategic

competence

+ interactional view --- CS functions as compensation for

communication breakdowns

psycholinguistic view --- enhance rhetorical effect of utterances

+ Faerch and Kasper (1983) drew on the psycholinguistic work

(Clark and Clark 1977) and described two phases of communication
strategy, which is (a) planning and (b) execution

three phases (Bachman added assessment phase to F and K's

model)

(1) assessment

(2) planning

(3) execution

3. Psychophysiological Mechanisms
channel --- visual/auditory

mode --- productive/receptive

2. Model Assessment
CC model revised

1. Grammatical Competence

the knowledge of abstract language system

2. Discourse Competence

cohesion/coherence

Gricean maxims

conversational competence

speech acts

3. Sociolinguistic Competence

appropriacy of language form

language function

interactional patterns

sociocultural values and constraints

speech acts

4. Strategic Competence

1. assessment

in order to assess speech situations properly, sufficient background

knowledge (e.g. social values, taboos, interactional patterns,
interlocuter's personality, topic selection, etc.)is needed.

also, precise evaluation of effectiveness is necessary.

2. planning

3. execution (closely related to "psychophysiological mechanisms")

5. Psychophysiological Mechanisms

actual performative skills

4 skills

Now, let's assess what is needed for some language performances:

(example 1) "pronunciation"

1. phonological knowledge (grammatical)

2. ariticulatory capability (psychophysiological)

3. paralinguistic features: e.g. appropriate tone of voice

(sociolinguistic, discourse)

all of the above go through the processes of assessment, planning

and execution. (strategic)

(example 2) "listening to an oral text"

1. phonological knowledge (grammatical)

2. perceptual capability (psychophysiological)

3. inferencing: correct guessing of sounds and words and

constructing meanings in a text (discourse, also sociolinguistic)

all of the above go through the processes of assessment, planning

and execution. (strategic)

2. Mapping of areas of study onto CC model

a. Grammatical Competence

Chomsky (1965)

Prabhu (1983)
b. Discourse Competence

pragmatic elements

1. conversational analysis (e.g. Coulthard's (1977) adjacency pairs)

2. Gricean maxims

3. Cohesion/coherence (Halliday & Hasan 1976)

4. Speech Acts/Speech Events (Ranney 1992)

5. Pragmatic Failure & Transfer (Thomas 1983, Beebe et. al. 1985)

6. Planned/unplanned discourse (Ochs 1979)

c. Sociolinguistic Competence

BICS/CALP (Cummins 1979, 84)

Speech Acts (Brown & Levinson 1978, Austin 1962, Wolfson 1981,
Holmes and Brown 1987)

Pragmatic Failure & Transfer (Thomas 1983, Beebe et. al. 1985)

d. Strategic Competence

Faerch and Kasper (1983 or 84)

Tarone (1981)

Wolfson (1983) "remedial interchange"

Bachman (1990)

e. Psychophysiological Mechanisms

Bachman (1990)

Arguments:

1. Some studies and theories do not neatly fit into one component of
CC and overlap several components. For instance, interactional
competence, in Kramsch's term, cannot be categorized as a part of
sociolinguistic competence. ("interactional competence" is related to
research on group work done by Long & Porter 1985, Pica & Doughty
1985, Varonis & Gass 1985)

speech act theory --- discourse, sociolinguistic, strategic

pragmatic transfer & failure --- discourse, sociolinguistic

2. The definition of CC varies depending upon learner's needs to

communicate in TL and contexts in which TL is used.

McGroarty (1984)

ESP

3. Related Areas of Study

1. discourse analysis

Goffman (1976) conversational analysis

Grice (1975)

Cooperative Principles

Conversational Maxims

1. relation

2. quantity

3. quality

4. manner

Sinclair and Coulthard (1975)

classroom discourse

Coulthard (1977) adjacency pairs

Ochs (1979) planned/unplanned discourse

defined by whether the speaker have had the chance to plan what is
to be said before uttering discourse.

in unplanned discourse, speakers use contexts to express

propositions which would otherwise be expressed syntactically.

Hatch (1978)

Hatch and Long (1980)

Richards and Schmidt (1983)

Hatch (1992)

2. speech act theory

Austin (1962)

locutionary/illocutionary/perlocutionary acts

Searle (1969)

Brown and Levinson (1978)

Wolfson (1981) on compliments

Olshtain and Cohen (1983) on apology

Hatch (1983)

speech acts and small structured speech events

Beebe et. al. (1985) pragmatic transfer (sociolinguistic transfer in

Wolfson's term)

discourse completion test

used semantic formulas and found the transfer in three areas: the
order, the frequency and the content of semantic formulas

this study shows that many speech acts, small structured speech
events reflect fundamental cultural values.

Ranney (1992)

doctor-patient speech event

claims that learning forms for speech acts and politeness is only part
of acquiring sociolinguistic competence. Too much emphasis on
teaching conventional speech act and politeness forms may mislead
learners into thinking that politeness may always be conveyed by
using conventional forms.

in order to make conscious sociolinguistic choices, learners need

considerable cultural information about communicative settings and
roles.

Holmes and Brown (1987) see below

3. Interactional Competence

Schmidt (1983)

Kramsch (1986)

points out that inability of or insensitivity to L2 discourse may lead

to impede communication more than grammatical inaccuracy

Long and Porter (1985)

Pica and Doughty (1985)

Varonis and Gass (1985)

4. Cross-cultural considerations

Thomas (1983)
"pragmatic failure"---"the inability to understand what is meant by
what is said."

"pragmalinguistic failure" --- caused by mistaken beliefs about

pragmatic force of utterance

"sociopragmatic failure" --- caused by different beliefs about rights,

'mentionables', etc.

It is not the responsibility of the language teacher qua linguist to

enforce Anglo-Saxon standards of behaviour, linguistic or otherwise.
Rather, it is the teacher's job to equip the student to express
her/himself in exactly the ways s/he chooses to do so-rudely,
tactfully, or in an elaborately polite manner. What we want to
prevent is her/his being unintentionally rude or subservient.

Holmes and Brown (1987)

based on Thomas's theoretical framework (1983) and Manes and

Wolfson's work on compliment (1981)

suggests that the formulaic nature of compliments provides an ways

solution to the problem of how to express this speech act in English
and that pragmalinguistic competence can be taught in the same
way as any other linguistic formulas

developing sociocultural awareness will lead to some discussion of

the differences between the cultural and social values of a L1
learner and L2 community

Tannen (1976) Greeks and Greek Americans

Her most indirect forms were taken as directives by her Greek host
family.

Wolfson (1981)

cross-cultural miscommunication on compliments

Learners with different cultural background simply do not

understand why Americans compliment so frequently


4. Implications into Language Teaching

Some approaches proposed

Savignon (1983) interactional approach (meaning-making)

"expression, interpretation and negotiation of meaning involving

interaction between two or more persons or between one person
and a written or oral text"

Widdowson (1978) discourse-based approach

Prabhu (1983) Procedural approach

Mohan (19??) Content-based instruction

Nunan (1988) Learner-centered approach

(Communicative Language Teaching) according to Richards and

Rodgers (1986)

1. Background

a. British functional approach (Firth, Halliday)

b. American sociolinguistic approach (Labov, Hymes, Gumperz)

c. Linguistic philosophy (Austin, Searle)

2. Versions (by Howatt 1984)

a. strong version --- using TL to learn it

b. weak version --- learning to use TL

b is dominant.

3. Principles
a. use > usage

b. meaning > form

c. fluency > accuracy

d. contextualized > decontextualized

e. learner-centered, experience-centered

Problems of CLT

When we draw some implications into language classroom from the

development of the theory of communicative competence, the term
communicative approach is often associated with it. On the surface
level, it seems reasonable to say that the goal of communicative
approach of language teaching is to make learners acquire
communicative competence. If it is so, then learners have to cover
all five components that the model proposed here suggests. This is
too demanding a goal for any learner to achieve.

We must be aware that there is some degree of discrepancy

between the principles of CLT and what the theory of CC suggests.
CLT emphasized on the ability to execute one's communicative
needs rather than on the complete knowledge of language use for
communication. According to Richards and Rodgers (1986), CLT has
some priority principles such as:

use > usage

meaning > form

fluency > accuracy

The notion of communicative competence intended by Hymes does

not provide any priorities for any single components, or aspects over
another. Hymes did not claim that a language user does not need to
have a accurate knowledge of linguistic form or usage, but rather
claimed that the perfect knowledge of linguistic form is not enough
to make him/her a communicatively competent language user.
Wolfson (1989) points out that grammatical competence is an
intrinsic part of communicative competence but in many cases, the
term CC misinterpreted for language teachers and curriculum
developers as the separation of grammatical competence from CC.

If CLT's goal should be the acquisition of CC in TL, this is highly

demanding for any L2 learner to achieve and does not seem
achievable, consequently. Therefore, if we need to set up an
accessible goal of LT, we must first assess what kind and level of
communicative competence will be sufficient for specific L2 learners
in a specific situations. This means that learning goals cannot be
prescribed until learners' needs and wants and the contexts in which
they use TL are described. Also, the curriculum has to be designed
by the gradual developmental change of learner's language.
Therefore, the focuses and emphases on form/function or
fluency/accuracy should be shifted and consequently, the priorities
mentioned above will be changed as the course and language
learners' language ability progress.

McGroarty (1984) suggests that communicative needs of language

use varies from learner to learner.

SLA

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/kurazumi/peon/ccmodel.html

STRING THEORY AND QUANTUM

PHYSICS

RELATED BOOK
String Theory For Dummies
By Andrew Zimmerman Jones, Daniel Robbins

One hope scientists have is that string theory will explain some of the unusual
results in quantum physics or, at the least, reconcile it with general relativity.
Quantum physics traces its roots back to 1900, when German physicist Max
Planck proposed a solution to a thermodynamics problem a problem
having to do with heat.

He resolved the problem by introducing a mathematical trick if he assumed

that energy was bundled in discrete packets, or quanta, the problem went
away. (It proved to be brilliant because it worked.) In the process of doing this,
Planck used a quantity known as Plancks constant, which has proved
essential to quantum physics and string theory.

Planck used this quantum concept the concept that many physical
quantities come in discrete units to solve a problem in physics, but even
Planck himself assumed that this was just a clever mathematical process to
remove the infinity. It would take five years for Albert Einstein to continue the
quantum revolution in physics.

The blackbody radiation problem, which Planck was trying to solve, is a basic
thermodynamics problem where you have an object that is so hot that it glows
inside. A small hole allows the light to escape, and it can be studied. The
problem is that in the 1800s, experiments and theories in this area didnt
match up.

A hot object radiates heat in the form of light (hot coals in a fire or the metal
rings on electric stoves are both good examples of this). If this object were
open inside, like an oven or a metal box, the heat would bounce around
inside.

This sort of object was called a blackbody because the object itself doesnt
reflect light, only radiates heat and throughout the 1800s, various
theoretical work in thermodynamics had examined the way heat behaved
inside a blackbody.

Now assume that theres a small opening like a window in the oven,
through which light can escape. Studying this light reveals information about
the heat energy within the blackbody.

Essentially, the heat inside a blackbody took the form of electromagnetic

waves, and because the oven is metal, theyre standing waves, with nodes
where they meet the side of the oven. This fact along with an
understanding of electromagnetics and thermodynamics can be used to
calculate the relationship between lights intensity (or brightness) and
wavelength.

The result is that as the wavelength of light gets very small (the ultraviolet
range of electromagnetic energy), the intensity is supposed to increase
dramatically, approaching infinity.

In nature, scientists never actually observe infinities, and this was no

exception. The research showed that there were maximum intensities in the
ultraviolet range, which completely contradicted the theoretical expectations,
as shown in this figure. This discrepancy came to be known as the ultraviolet
catastrophe.

The ultraviolet catastrophe threatened to undermine the theories of

electromagnetics and/or thermodynamics. Clearly, if they didnt match
experiment, then one or both of the theories contained errors.
When Planck resolved the ultraviolet catastrophe in 1900, he did so by
introducing the idea that the atom could only absorb or emit light in quanta (or
discrete bundles of energy). One implication of this radical assumption was
that there would be less radiation emitted at higher energies.

By introducing the idea of discrete energy packets by quantizing energy

Planck produced a solution that resolved the situation without having to
dramatically revise the existing theories (at least at that time).

Plancks insight came when he looked at the data and tried to figure out what
was going on. Clearly, the long wavelength predictions were close to matching
with experiment, but the short wavelength light was not. The theory was over-
predicting the amount of light that would be produced at short wavelengths, so
he needed a way to limit this short wavelength.

Knowing some things about waves, Planck knew that the wavelength and
frequency were inversely related. So if youre talking about waves with short
wavelength, youre also talking about waves with high frequency. All he had to
do was find a way to lower the amount of radiation at high frequencies.

Planck reworked the equations, assuming that the atoms could only emit or
absorb energy in finite quantities. The energy and frequency were related by a
proportion called Plancks constant. Physicists use the variable h to represent
Plancks constant in his resulting physics equations.

The resulting equation worked to explain the experimental results of

blackbody radiation. Planck, and apparently everyone else, thought this was
just a mathematical sleight of hand that had resolved the problem in one
strange, special case. Little did anyone realize that Planck had just laid the
foundation for the strangest scientific discoveries in the history of the world.

http://www.dummies.com/education/science/physics/string-theory-and-quantum-
physics/