Adapting the CEFR to enhance language graduates’ employability Marga Menendez-Lopez Dr. Doris Dippold University of Surrey

Objectives  to set the context for languages in UK higher education  to present, by way of the case study of an oral module, how the CEFR as a tool and frameworks of communicative competence can be adapted to a curriculum that highlights professional skills  to show how language degrees contribute to employability

Languages & Employability  QAA: languages > multifaceted Intellectual Vocational Transferable  Recent history of language departments Reduction on student numbers Globalised market and student choices  Perception of language degrees language skills vs. subject matter lack of economic impact factor

Language strategy at Surrey  University: professional and international vision statement  Our degrees: languages for the professional world joint language honours or combinations with other subject (Business, Law or Politics)  merge of linguistic + transferable skills  experts on communication theory + expert communicators!  all aspects of communicative competence

Common European Framework of Reference  Council of Europe  5 skills: listening, reading, writing, spoken production & interaction  six proficiency levels  outcome-based statements of linguistic skills e.g. “I can give a clear, systematically developed presentation on a topic in my area of work, study or special interest, highlighting significant points and relevant supporting detail.”  guidelines NOT rules! – need to adapt to specific contexts and to underpin by theory

Critiques to the CEFR  little/unsystematic correlation with aspects of communicative competence  Language levels = age of learner  no specific contexts taken into account  static and unnegotiable

Communicative competence  numerous models (e.g. Celce-Murcia et. al. 1995; Bachman 1990; Canale & Swain 1980)  competence (knowledge of language) vs. performance (actual use of language in concrete situations)  communicative competence: some competences negotiable – not taken account by CEFR!

Communicative competence Celce-Murcia et al. 1995:  Discourse competence  Linguistic competence  Strategic competence  Sociocultural competence  Actional competence

Adapting the CEFR to an Oral module  Level 1 B2 Oral module (French, German, Spanish)  Bring to life B2 oral descriptors Academic and professional contexts Linguistic theory to underpin language learning Integration of all competences for these contexts

Adapting the CEFR to an Oral module Sample of module content: a product presentation competence Genre: product presentationdiscourse Schemata: greetings + small talk + main part + discussion and questions discourse Vocabulary with positive connotationslinguistic Simple sentenceslinguistic Politeness: present your audience in a positive way sociocultural Non-verbal communication: openness, honesty and trust, beat gestures for structure sociocultural Objective: persuading and sellingactional Dealing with critical questions, nerves, equipment failure and “going blank” strategic

Benefits & Challenges  “Professional professional communicators”  academic language learning Prescriptive (models) and descriptive (reflection)  teaching and research Generic communication skills: employability! Theoretically underpinned by CEFR and competence frameworks  Linguistic / Sociolinguistic basis: Authenticity vs. pedagogic requirements  language degree for the professional world: relevant for society and economy

References  Bachman, Lyle (1990): Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford, Oxford University Press.  Canale, Michael (1983): From Communicative Competence to Communicative Language Pedagogy. In: Language and Communication. J. Richards and R. Schmidt. New York, Longman:  Canale, Michael and Merrill Swain (1980): Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing. Applied Linguistics 1(1):  Celce-Murcia et al. (1995): Communicative Competence: A Pedagogically Motivated Model with Content Specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics 6(2):  Coleman, James A. (2004): Modern Languages in British Universities: Past and Present. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 3:  Council for Industry and Higher Education (2008): Graduate employability: what do employers think and want? Available: (accessed May ).  Council of Europe (2001): Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: CUP.  Figueras, Neus (2007): The CEFR, a Lever for the Improvement of Language Professionals in Europe. The Modern Language Journal 91:

References  James, Carl and Peter Garrett (1992): Language Awareness in the Classroom. London: Longman.  Kelly, Michael and Diana Jones (2003): A New Landscape for Languages. London: Nuffield Foundation. Available: ort_48pp_hires.pdf ort_48pp_hires.pdf  Krumm, Hans-Jürgen (2007): Profiles Instead of Levels: The CEFR and Its (Ab)Uses in the Context of Migration. The Modern Language Journal 91:  Little, David (2005): The Common European Framework and the European Language Portfolio: involving learners and their judgements in the assessment process. Language Testing 22(3):  Little, David (2007): The Common European Framework of References for Languages: Perspectives on the Making of Supranational Language Education Policy. The Modern Language Journal 91:  North, Brian (2007): The CEFR Illustrative Descriptor Scales. The Modern Language Journal 91:  Quality Assurance Agency (2007, 12/2007): Subject benchmark statements: Languages and Related Studies. QAA /07. Available: /languages07.pdf (accessed May ). /languages07.pdf  Weir, C.J. (2005): Limitations of the Common European Framework for developing comparable examinations and tests. Language Testing 22:

Questions