The CEFR and teaching Japanese as a foreign language

Abstract

Soon after the publication of the CEFR in 2001, the Association of Japanese Language Teachers in Europe (AJE) started a research project on the history of language teaching in Europe, carried out a survey of language policies in various European countries, and presented prospects for learning and teaching Japanese as a foreign language in Europe. The association recognizes the need to share the concepts and achievements of the CEFR.The Japan Foundation (JF), partially influenced by the CEFR, set up the JF Standard for Japanese Language Education in 2010. This standard offers tools that teachers and students can use to plan their teaching/learning through self-assessment of their language ability levels. The JF is also publishing new types of textbooks for Japanese education, emphasizing cross-cultural understanding between peoples.The Japanese Language Proficiency Test was revised in 2010 and is now ability-oriented; it is indirectly influenced by the CEFR.The authors analyzed Japanese education at the University of Ljubljana in relation to the CEFR assessment levels. At the end of their undergraduate study, students reach approximately level B1/B2 of the CEFR, and at the end of the master’s course level C1. There are difficulties in assessing the current Japanese courses using the CEFR framework due to the specific character of Japanese, particularly in relation to the script, politeness and pragmatic strategies, and students’ familiarity with current events in Japan and background knowledge of Japanese society. Nevertheless, the CEFR framework offers concrete ideas and new points of view for planning language courses, even for non-European languages.

Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR): A Review on its Implementation in ESL/EFL Classrooms

“…Similar behaviour was observed in Japan in 2012 (Negishi, Takada, Tono, 2013, p. 156-163). In order to make the CEFR-J more appropriate for the Japanese EFL setting, the 'can do' statements were remapped, the lower proficiency levels were divided, and additional sublevels were added to allow for greater difference at the levels most pertinent to the majority of Japanese learners.In order to make sure that the framework reflects local requirements for curriculum creation, teaching and learning, and assessment, the CEFR-J is employed (Bucar, Ryu, Skof, & Sangawa, 2014). To make CEFR more applicable in the Japanese setting than CEFR, CEFR-J included scales utilizing a branching technique with narrower levels of A1+ and A2+ B1+ and B2+ (Negishi et al, 2013).…”

Orthoepic Competence Descriptors in Japanese Language Education: CEFR Levels B1 to C2

“…That is to say, in North's view, in particular cases there is a need to formulate entirely new descriptors for reading and writing. Länsisalmi (2012) and Shigemori Bučar, Ryu, Moritoki Škof, & Hmeljak Sangawa (2014) also point out the character/kanji issue as one of the difficulties in using the CEFR framework in Japanese teaching. Furthermore, when conducting task-based testing within Japanese language education, insufficient writing ability can cause problems with respect to completing and evaluating tasks (Kumano, Ito, & Hachisuka, 2013).…”

Orthoepic Competence Descriptors in Japanese Language Education: CEFR Levels B1 to C2

“…That is to say, in North's view, in particular cases there is a need to formulate entirely new descriptors for reading and writing. Länsisalmi (2012) and Shigemori Bučar, Ryu, Moritoki Škof, & Hmeljak Sangawa (2014) also point out the character/kanji issue as one of the difficulties in using the CEFR framework in Japanese teaching. Furthermore, when conducting task-based testing within Japanese language education, insufficient writing ability can cause problems with respect to completing and evaluating tasks (Kumano, Ito, & Hachisuka, 2013).…”