1. Intergovernmental Policy Forum Strasbourg, 6-8 2007 The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and the development of language policies: challenges and responsibilities Language Learning Policies in the United States Jacque Bott Van Houten National Council of State Supervisors for Languages

2. U.S. National Education Policies  No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001  Accountability--adequate yearly progress Local flexibility in spending and testing  Priority areas of Reading, Math, English  Focus on : STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) Early Childhood Education, High School Redesign NCSSFL

3. The Role of World Languages in U.S. Policy  NCLB core subjects also include: Science, Foreign Languages, Arts, History Geography, Civics/Government  NCLB new requirements for teacher qualifications  National Security Language Initiative Expand critical language mastery Increase numbers of advanced speakers Increase number of teachers & resources  New Interest in International Education NCSSFL

4. State and Local Language Policies  16 states require 2 years or more language study for graduation or college admission  Most states and/or school districts have: Foreign Language Frameworks based on national standards Benchmarks for achievement  Most school districts have foreign language curricula  Federal grant funding sets priorities NCSSFL

5. Support for Language Learning  U.S. Department of Education, Office of English Language Acquisition  National Council of State Supervisors for Languages  National Association of District Supervisors for Foreign Languages  15 National Language Resource Centers  American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages  National Network for Early Language Learning  Joint National Committee on Languages  Modern Language Association NCSSFL

6.  Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century  ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines  ACTFL Performance Guidelines for K-12  Assessment tools, such as the Oral Proficiency Interviews NCSSFL National Tools for Teaching and Learning

7. Why CEFRL Appeals to Americans  Makes language learning transparent  Motivates and empowers the learner  Promotes reflective learning  Provides a new way of looking at culture  Recognizes and values heritage languages  Records individual progress  Facilitates articulation among language programs  Provides a common criteria/scale  Promotes language learning as a life-long endeavor NCSSFL

8. American Interest in CEFRL  Cornell University German Studies Dept.  University of Dayton research  Brigham Young University, use of ELP/CEFR  Virginia Commonwealth University  Kennesaw University (GA)  Others (Missouri State U., University of Kentucky, Murray State Univ., etc. NCSSFL

9. American Interest in the ELP - LinguaFolio  2003 Goethe-Institut sponsored seminar for NCSSFL members in Düsseldorf  2004 Kentucky Meeting  LinguaFolio versions in Kentucky, Nebraska, Virginia, Indiana,Virginia  NCSSFL LinguaFolio Year of Language Project  5-state pilot, NE research  Concordia Language Village  STARTALK NCSSFL

10. Why the interest?  Shared communicative focus  Parallels to our ACTFL scales  Supports U.S. trends and research  Addresses the individual learner

11. Challenges in the U.S.  Question of ELP/LF validation  Alignment of ACTFL scales with Global Scale NCSSFL www.ncssfl.org