CEFR與ACTFL初級閱讀能力描述對應研究：以「兒童華語文能力測驗」為媒介

Aligning ACTFL and CEFR proficiency levels: utilizing children's Chinese competency certification

10.29748/TJCSL.201612_(13).0003

趙家璧(Chia-Pi Chao)；藍珮君(Pei-Jiun Lan)；陳柏熹(Po-Hsi Chen)

CEFR ； ACTFL能力指標 ； 兒童華語文能力測驗 ； 標準設定程序 ； CEFR ； ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines ； Children's Chinese Competency Certification ； standard setting

臺灣華語教學研究

13期（2016 / 12 / 01）

41 - 65

繁體中文

本研究採用國家華語測驗推動工作委員會參照CEFR 初級使用者（A 等）能力指標所研發的兒童華語文閱讀測驗為媒介，透過書籤法（Bookmark Method）標準設定程序，連結歐洲共同語文參考架構（CEFR）與美國外語教學協會能力指標（ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines）的初級閱讀能力，期能分析 CEFR 與ACTFL 初級閱讀能力描述的對應關係。本研究邀集11 位專家採用書籤法進行兩回合的標準設定研究，使用兒童華語文閱讀測驗題目，對ACTFL 初級與中級的能力描述進行標準設定。研究結果顯示：1. 低於CEFR A1 以下的Pre-A1 級約與ACTFL 初級初等、初級中等相當，而A1 級與初級高等、中級初等相當，至於A2 級則與中級中等、中級高等相當；2. 在標準設定結果的效度驗證方面，本研究提出程序性效度與內部效度兩項資料；3. 在定義初級閱讀能力時，CEFR 與ACTFL 有數項共同特徵和共通的學習進程。本研究結果有助於兒童測驗使用者透過CEFR 與ACTFL 的語言能力架構理解測驗結果，同時也提供華語文教學上有關CEFR 與ACTFL 對應的客觀依據。

ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines (ACTFL) and Common European Framework of Reference for Language (CEFR) are two major language proficiency guidelines adopted internationally in the fields of language teaching and assessment. This study aims to link the framework of CEFR and ACTFL by utilizing the Children’s Chinese Competency Certification (CCCC). 11 experts have participated in a two-round standard setting procedure applying the Bookmark Method. The CCCC Reading is a standardized test designed based on the CEFR proficiency descriptions for Basic User (A1-A2). The standard setting procedure was performed on the CCCC Reading focus on ACTFL novice and intermediate levels. The research suggests the following results. First, the pre-A1 reading proficiency which is lower than CEFR A1 is equivalent to the novice low and novice mid levels in ACTFL. The CEFR A1 reading proficiency is equivalent to ACTFL novice high and intermediate low levels and the CEFR A2 is equivalent to ACTFL intermediate mid and intermediate high levels. Second, the evidence of procedural validity and internal validity are provided to support the validation of the standard setting. Finally, in describing reading proficiency and learning progress in the beginner levels, the process of standard setting has revealed similar characteristics in both the CEFR and the ACTFL framework. The results of this study allow the test takers of CCCC to interpret test results with the language proficiency framework which they are familiar with. It can also provide language learners and educators with a more objective correspondence between CEFR and ACTFL.

1. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages(2012).General Preface to the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines 2012.
2. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages(2012).ACTFL Proficiency Guidelinesf.
3. Bärenfänger, Olaf,Tschirner, Erwin(2012).Assessing Evidence of Validity of Assigning CEFR Ratings to the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) and the Oral Proficiency Interview by computer (OPIc).White Plains, NY:Language Testing International.
4. Berk, Ronald. A.(1986).A consumer's guide to setting performance standards on criterion referenced tests.Review of Educational Measurement,56(1),137-172.
5. Council of Europe(2001).Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment.Cambridge, UK:Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
6. Impara, James C.,Plake, Barbara S.(1997).Standard-setting: An alternative approach.Journal of Educational Measurement,34,353-366.
7. Kane, Michael(1994).Validating the performance standards associated with passing scores.Review of Educational Research,64,425-461.
8. Lewis, Daniel M.,Mitzel, Howard C.,Green, Donald R.(1996).Standard setting: a bookmark approach.the Council of Chief State School Officers National Conference on Large Scale Assessment,Boulder, CO.:
9. Martínez Baztán, Alfonso(2008).Universidad de Granada.
10. Rasch, Georg(1980).Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen: Institute of Educational Research.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
11. Tannenbaum, Richard J.,Wylie, Caroline E.(2008).Linking English-Language Test Scores onto the Common European Framework of Reference: An Application of Standard-Setting Methodology.Princeton, NJ:Educational Testing Service.
12. Thorndike, R. Ladd(ed.)(1971).Educational measurement.Washington, DC:American Council on Education.
13. 國家華語測驗推動工作委員會編(2016)。兒童華語文能力測驗技術報告—2014（5）：聽力、閱讀測驗信效度。新北市:國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。
14. 國家華語測驗推動工作委員會編(2015)。兒童華語文能力測驗技術報告—2013（5）：聽力、閱讀測驗信效度。新北市:國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。
15. 國家華語測驗推動工作委員會編(2014)。兒童華語文能力測驗學習手冊。新北市:國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。
16. 國家華語測驗推動工作委員會編(2015)。華語文能力測驗技術報告—2013（1）：閱讀測驗信效度。新北市:國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。
17. 莊永山譯、夏崇舜譯、尚惠芳譯(2007)。歐洲共同語文參考架構。高雄市:和遠圖書資訊出版社。
18. 陳怡靜、趙家璧(2012)。寓試於樂—兒童華語文能力測驗。華文世界，109，26-32。

1. 藍珮君,廖才儀,陳柏熹,梁綺容(2022)。CEFR與ACTFL大綱口語指標對應研究：以「華語文口語測驗」為媒介。華語文教學研究，19(2)，1-32。
2. 廖敏旬,何萬順,何姵萱(2023)。大學英檢門檻的現況與檢討。課程與教學，26(4)，157-188。