Teacher's supplement to the User's Guide.

Introduction

The purpose of this supplement is to take account of the teacher’s/tutor’s or other person’s perspective on supporting the blind and visually impaired user in adopting the European Language Portfolio in conjunction with their study of a language. Because the main User’s Guide has been written specifically for the needs and circumstances of the blind and visually impaired learner, it is appropriate that it should also be the main reference document for their teacher, rather than the more standard ELP format designed for the sighted user. Therefore, rather than write a complete parallel teacher’s guide, the focus in the present supplement is on pedagogic and administrative aspects of ELP use.

The purpose of the European Language Portfolio

The European Language Portfolio was introduced with the support and encouragement of the Council of Europe to enable individuals to build a record of the sum total of their language skills. The resulting document might be described as a ‘language curriculum vitae’,which may be presented to anyone with a need to know (e.g. a prospective employer) to demonstrate the owner’s level competence in a range of language skills.

It is hoped that the use of the European Language Portfolio will support such desirable outcomes as increased mobility of labour and tolerance and respect for diversity in languages. Indeed, it is also hoped that its use will promote ‘plurilingualism’ - the ability of increasing numbers of Europeans to speak several languages other than their mother tongue.

The European Language Portfolio is expected to perform both a reporting and a pedagogic function. Not only does it provide a record of the owner’s proficiency in languages other than his/her own, it is also intended that it will support the teaching and learning process in various ways:

1. By using the CEFR assessment framework (see below) it promotes a common awareness of a standardized scale of proficiency.
2. It encourages the learner to reflect on his/her progress and preferred learning styles and achieve a measure of autonomous self-criticality.
3. It stimulates an informed dialogue between learner and teacher, enabling them to discuss progress in relation to the assessment criteria.
4. It validates intercultural experience and recognises intercultural competence as a skill that may often be further developed.

A very brief summary of the contents of the European Language Portfolio

The User's Guide explains fully the workings and rationale of the ELP, but there follows an outline of these for quick reference.

The European Language Portfolio consists of:

1. A Language Passport, which is in effect a summary of all the linguistic attainments of its owner (the student), each attainment recorded using the six levels (A1 –C2) of the Common European Framework of Reference for Modern Languages (CEF), applied to five skills: Listening, Spoken Interaction (conversational skills), Spoken Production (e.g. prepared talk), Reading and Writing. Both the Global Scale (broad summary across the five skills) of the Council of Europe and a Self-assessment Scale (providing descriptors of competence for discrete skills) are included for reference in the Language Passport.
2. A Language Biography, in which the user records experiences of informal language learning (e.g. mother tongue or language skills acquired through personal contacts such as acquaintances or work colleagues), as well as formal language learning (e.g. in a school or training institution). It allows for the recording, not only of levels, times and dates, but also of reactions to the experience of language learning and of perceptions of how he/she learns best. It contains a task checklist, which is a breakdown of descriptors in the Self-assessment Scale into five tasks that meet the criteria for the level and should be the basis for tasks set for continuous assessment and against which both the learner and teacher may initially record what the former can do at any given point. There is finally a section in which the learner records his/her experience of intercultural encounters and how effectively he/she is able to interact with people of different cultures from his/her own.
3. A Dossier section, which contains the evidence of the learner’s ability to perform language tasks at the levels recorded in the other two documents. The evidence may fall into three broad categories: Performance evidence, i.e. simulated evidence, such as is generated in a learning situation, Witnessed evidence, in which a suitably place and qualified person attests to the learner’s performance of language tasks in a real-life situation and Certificates or Diplomas, relating to qualifications awarded, nationally or by recognized institutions. The final section of the Dossier is a Language Learning Journal. Here, it is suggested that the learner keep a log of learning experiences which will substantiate the Learning Experiences section of the Language Biography.

Introducing the ELP to blind and visually impaired students

It is important that the ELP is integrated with a language learning and teaching course. It should not be seen as a separate aspect of the course which is artificially introduced, but rather as:

1. a reference point to which teacher and learner can go when there is a need for clarification as to the level of competence at which the learner is performing;
2. a record which is constantly at hand for noting important developments in the learner’s proficiency, experience and perceptions of his/her learning process;
3. a focal point for stimulating a dialogue between teacher and learner so that there is a common understanding of how each feels about the on-going process.

Time should be allowed for the use of the ELP, but this should be managed so that it does not unduly interfere with the flow of teaching and learning. For example, to timetable a regular, whole-period ‘ELP session’ could be obtrusive. It is better if a few minutes are set aside regularly, with perhaps a longer session from time to time for general advice and questions and answers arising from the ELP. A teacher may also find that different time allocations suit different groups.

It is important that the moment for introducing the ELP to the classroom is well chosen. It is better to introduce the overall concept early on, so that it is perceived as part of the course and so that learners are aware of its purpose and general workings.

The order in which documents are first introduced, will depend on the patterns of assessment and recording of progress you adopt. Because the Passport contains a summary of attainment to date, it may be that this is left till later, unless learners already have past attainments, (e.g. certificates awarded) to record. The Language Biography, on the other hand, contains background information about the learner, such as his/her mother tongue or past contacts with other cultures, which could be recorded first.

From your viewpoint, the first indications of progress and attainment will be in the form of tasks carried out in a learning situation and these may originate from the checklist of tasks in the Language Biography and be filed, when significant, in the Dossier.

All the above suggests that you need (a) to have a provisional strategy that is likely to work with your teaching approach and (b) to be prepared to modify the strategy in the light of course parameters and students’ preferred learning styles and rates of progress.

Assessing the learner, with reference to the European Language Portfolio

Once you have introduced learners to the idea of the ELP and they have recorded any information that they have at this stage (e.g. previous languages learned or acquired and/or prior qualifications), the first actual use of the document in a language class is likely to be to record their first achievements.

The assessment process may have several aspects. Assessment might be:

1. Continuous. Any language performance arising from a class activity or homework that is judged to be in keeping with a CEFR level descriptor might be recorded against a task in the Language Biography checklist or, when the learner can in your opinion achieve this level consistently, in the language profile of the Passport (with evidence kept on file in the Dossier once the level achieved is confirmed).
2. Periodic. Your teaching programme might be punctuated by pre-planned assessment points (e.g. a monthly test). Performance in such a test that attains a new level of proficiency could be recorded and filed as evidence in the same way as for continuous assessment.
3. Summative. Where the course culminates in an examination in which the performance on completed papers and/or an oral test demonstrates the attainment of a new level for the candidate, this can likewise be recorded and filed.

Of these three approaches, continuous assessment is perhaps the most recent and the most controversial, on the grounds that it is not always subject to the controlled conditions that apply to formal testing. Yet its very informality has the advantages that (a) the learner may perform more spontaneously if the stress associated with formal testing is not present, and (b) if judgment is based on a series of informally set tasks, a performance can result in that is more representative of the learner’s real proficiency than on the single occasion of a formal test or examination. It is recommended that a recorded attainment for continuous assessment should be based on the learner’s being able to perform consistently at this level. The checklist in the Language Biography allows for three levels of recording. The learner may record himself/herself as being able to perform a task (a) ‘a little’ (b) ‘fairly well’ or (c) ‘really well (task achieved)’. As the teacher, you are invited to enter your agreement or disagreement with their self-assessment.

Choosing or designing suitable assessment tasks

When assessing language proficiency, the teacher may use many tools, not all of which, however, are well suited to making a judgment against the CEFR scale. You will see that the descriptors in the CEFR Self-assessment Scale (Passport) always relate to the performance of a credible task, whether real-life, or as in a classroom, simulated.

One may call such a task a communicative task. In real communication, several factors come into play: Note the mnemonic ‘PIFCO’

1. Purpose. We do not normally communicate unless we are wishing to ask for goods and services, help or information or to share our feelings or opinions with another person.
2. Information gap. When we do communicate, we do not ask questions to which we already know the answer. Nor do we supply information which the other person already knows. This ‘gap’ between A and B is a prime motive for using language and underpins ‘Purpose’ (above).
3. Feedback. In an interactive communication, we constantly receive responses that may alter what we say or write next. If told at a store that a product is unavailable, we do not persist in asking for it, but seek alternatives.
4. Choice and Context. In real interactions, what we talk or write about is not necessarily prescribed, as in an examination rubric. We have our own agenda, even if options are limited by, for example, a menu or list of goods. Furthermore, all manner of conditions, such as social context, weather conditions, our relationship with the other person, the solemnity or urgency of an occasion, etc., influence what it is appropriate to say or write.
5. Outcome. A successfully performed language task has a result relevant to its purpose. This does not always of course mean we always get what we had hoped for, but we would at least expect to have understood this and reacted suitably. If the other person does not know where the Post Office is, we thank them for their trouble and try someone else.

While the above may seem obvious, there can still be much reliance in language teaching assessment on evidence of attainment which is not ‘communicative’. Various extremely useful activities used for verifying a learner’s understanding of linguistic points are non-communicative. These might range from spelling and grammatical tests to check accuracy and understanding of tense-formation to cloze tests to check lexical knowledge or familiarity with the idiomatic language.

Other test items begin to resemble communicative testing, but lack key features. In one actual oral examination, a candidate has to use prompts from a role-play card to simulate a conversation with a café waiter. What the candidate actually receives is a series of requests in his/her mother tongue which he/she must make in the language examined. If the candidate cannot request an item specified on the card, the examiner eventually gives the answer he/she would have given if there had been a request. We are already aware of three things that are non-communicative. (1) The candidate is being asked to translate a series of requests into the target language (which is not what happens in a real café); (2) The waiter miraculously reads the mind of the customer to confirm the as yet un-requested item; (3) In a real café, the customer would have a menu to refer to and choose from.

The checklist of tasks in the Language Biography has been derived from the descriptors in such a way that you, the assessor, may devise specific assessment tasks whose successful completion would be consistent with the relevant level of attainment in the skill assessed. These tasks are the starting point for actual communicative tasks which you, the teacher would devise, using appropriate contexts. (e.g. where the learner is imagined to be, to whom he/she is talking/writing, what the expected outcome is etc).

Let us see how a Language Biography task might be presented as a communicative assessment task.

Example:

B1:
(a) I can exchange information with one other person about a simple and routine task where topics and activities are familiar.

This is rather more general than would happen in a real-life situation, so we might contextualise the task.

Learning context
On his/her business-related language course the learner has already gained some vocational insights into current office practice through the medium of the language learned. You, as the teacher/assessor will have prepared the role they are to play and you will not know in advance any of the information they will give.

Here is an example of how you might brief the learner for the assessment task. (‘You’ below denotes the learner).

Task context
‘You are on a work-experience visit to an office, during which you will briefly interview a number of employees to find out what their roles and responsibilities are. Your teacher will play the role of one of those employees.’

Task outcome
You are expected to:

1. Make satisfactory use of appropriate courtesies, form of address, greeting, leave-taking, etc.
2. Write a short report (100-150 words) in which:
   1. You identify the person played by your teacher and note anything else they tell you about themselves (e.g. training or qualifications, length of service with the company).
   2. Note their job title and what the job involves – routine tasks, key colleagues etc.

The task might either be presented as a Braille text, or slowly repeated until the learner says that he/she is clear about what is required.

Comments on the task
In this example, the task has a credible learning context (business language training). It is communicative in that the learner is given a situation (context); needs to find out unknown facts to achieve the report-writing outcome (purpose and information gap); will receive meaningful feedback during the conversation; and will demonstrate their understanding of what is said by writing a brief report (outcome). You will have seen that although the task lists things to find out, it does not provide a script for this and the learner is therefore not tempted to translate into the language used.

Use of published courses
Most teachers use course books which provide assessment tasks and it would be wrong to suggest that you should not have recourse to what is available. However, it is well worth the trouble of asking yourself whether a text-book task is as authentic as it might be. Often the slightest modification of a task suggested may improve its realism greatly.

Recording attainment

Once evidence begins to be produced by learners, they should be encouraged to look at the Self-assessment Scale (Passport) and the corresponding item in the checklist (Language Biography) and reflect on which descriptor best fits the task they have performed. This is one of the many situations in which they may be motivated to enter into discussion with you, the teacher, of what it is about their performance of the task that meets, or does not yet meet, the criteria of the level towards which they are working.

At this point, they may be ready to record their success (one of three stages of progress) against the checklist item and here you may confirm, upgrade or downgrade their self-assessment. You are both entitled to disagree at this point, but it is advisable to wait till there is firm agreement before recording a level of attainment in the Passport.

This may also be the moment at which they begin to reveal what it is that they most, or least, enjoy about their learning experiences to date. This might also lead to their wishing to record these feelings in the Learning experiences sub-section of the Language Biography. Note that there is a questionnaire on learning experiences. Both you and the learner have the key to this (in the learner’s Language Biography, after the questionnaire and as an appendix to this guide.) The profile that emerges of the learner’s approach to learning is intended, not as a ‘label’ for the learner, but to stimulate constructive discussion between you and the learner.

Building a Dossier of evidence

The Dossier notes are very comprehensive and a reading of this section should make clear how the Dossier might be built. ‘Might be’, because although a workable system of cross-referencing is described, it should be regarded as a template, rather than as prescriptive. Local circumstances and available technologies may determine the individual teacher’s preferred system.

The Dossier is simply the storehouse of all evidence on which assessment and recording are based. The Dossier itself can be in the form of a suitable storage container, such as a wallet file or ring-binder, suitably equipped to hold both paper and recorded evidence on e.g. cassette or CD. In the case of the European Language Portfolio for the Blind and Visually Impaired, it is of course quite possible that the Dossier will be kept mainly electronically.

It has already been noted that evidence may include:

1. Language performance under simulated conditions (e.g. classroom tasks).
2. Witness statements authenticating performance in real-life situations (e.g. in the workplace) and relating both to language proficiency and to intercultural skills.
3. Certificates and/or diplomas issued by a national Ministry of Education or other recognised Awarding Body or institution.

Working with blind and visually impaired learners

The emphasis in this specially adapted European Language Portfolio is on acknowledging the different needs of blind and visually impaired learners in a positive light. While such learners are subject to undeniable constraints, when compared with sighted individuals.

There are various references in this ELP itself to the circumstance of blind and visually impaired users which we do not need to reiterate in detail. A short summary will suffice:

1. Blind and visually impaired language learners will need access to a range of specific support according to their degree of visual impairment.
   1. An obvious device is the Braille alphabet and various technologies for generating this in written assignments. A key constraint arising from this, apart from technological dependency, is the difficulty of scanning text predictively when reading. The European Language Portfolio for the Blind and Visually Impaired has been carefully constructed to avoid the use of tables. Its wording has also been chosen to give regular and accessible notice of what is to come and in what order, with clear introductory notification of contents and periodic advice of what is to follow each sub-section.
   2. Such devices as screen reader and Braille display software provide the vital links between the learner and non-Braille text composition and reading.
   3. In the case of visually impaired learners, a range of text-enhancing devices may be used, mainly optical, and including magnifying and projecting devices. Large text books and teacher-produced study material in large font sizes may be of sufficient help in some cases.
   4. The use of most of the above may affect the speed at which the blind and visually impaired learner can participate in a language task and this should not be prejudicial to the assessment process.
   5. Similarly, use of specific support may slightly increase the risk of inaccuracies or misunderstandings occurring in productive and receptive skills. Whether such errors should influence the assessment outcome would depend on how important they were to the successful achievement of the task.
2. Blind and visually impaired learners will be at a disadvantage when involved in any communication process in which visuals plays a significant role. (This is acknowledged in descriptors.)
   1. In Spoken Interaction, blind and visually impaired learners cannot be expected to respond to such non-verbal signals as facial expression, manual gesture or body stance.
   2. In Spoken Interaction, while one-to-one conversations (subject to (a) above) may be handled well, discussion in large groups may be more difficult with respect to awareness of who is speaking and their role or standpoint in the conversation. Members of a group may help by giving brief explanations.
   3. In Spoken Production, follow-up question and answer sessions may be subject to the same constraints as in (b) above.
   4. When listening to screened (e.g. projected or broadcast) material, no visual content that is not explained by commentaries or dialogues can play any part in providing meaning, though naturally, on-screen sound effects can be interpreted to aid understanding.
3. The above having been said, the blind and visually impaired learner may be at an advantage over the sighted learner, in that:
   1. Past reliance on the non-visual senses may have rendered these more acute, so that aspects of Listening comprehension and Spoken Interaction may actually be easier for the blind and visually impaired learner than for the sighted learner. The former may, for example, be more aware of the subtleties of intonation in speech.
   2. A blind and visually impaired learner may, from the need to focus intently on what is actually said, have a more precise grasp and better recall of what he/she has heard, than would a sighted learner who may be distracted, as well as helped, by non-verbal signals or extraneous images, dependence on which may make him/her complacent and less attentive to detail.

While the criteria (CEFR descriptors) that apply to the assessment process make some allowance for the specific support for the blind and visually impaired and constraints that apply to the blind and visually impaired learner, it should be clearly understood that no concessions should be made where a task is simply not successfully completed. If it takes longer for a blind and visually impaireds learner to reach a given level, this is quite acceptable and not unfairly discriminatory, just as any learner of a ‘difficult’ language (i.e. a language having contrastive features alien to the speaker’s mother tongue) would take longer than any learner of an ‘easy’ language (e.g one that shared many features with the mother tongue) to reach level ‘x’.

This being the first European Language Portfolio to be designed for blind and visually impaired use, it is recommended that teachers pioneering its use should make a note of, and share with others their experience of what works well in classroom practice, especially the integration of specific support for the blind and visually impaired into the learning process.

Appendix 1: Teachers’ key to learning preferences

These relate to the list of statements which the learner is asked to rate in the Language Biography, sub-section ‘My language learning experience’.

There are

1. 21 items which follow.
2. Notes on interpreting and further developing the profiles for the items, which are almost equally divided into 2 categories, according to broadly extravert and broadly introvert learner preferences.
3. Profiles reflected in a range of scores.

How you react to various teaching/learning activities when you learn a language

On a scale of 0 (‘greatly dislike – feel threatened by’) to 5 (‘greatly enjoy – feel confident in’), give your personal rating to these activities.

1. The tutor always uses the foreign language expecting you to deduce what is being said
   
2. The tutor gives regular lists of vocabulary to learn and tests you
   
3. Class work usually consists of written exercises which are marked and discussed
   
4. Oral work is often practised in pairs, using a stimulus, e.g. role-play cards
   
5. Translation plays an important part in lessons
   
6. You are given a situation, from which you are asked to write a letter or report
   
7. A recorded listening comprehension exercise or test is a regular feature of lessons
   
8. You are expected to use a range of linguistic and commonsense strategies to work out the meaning of an unfamiliar foreign language text
   
9. A teaching unit tends to begin with a reading text, which is explored for grammar points
   
10. Your homework task is to write a work-related report
    
11. You are asked to read a foreign language text aloud to the class
    
12. The tutor uses games as a language teaching technique
    
13. A gap filling exercise is used for practising grammatical points
    
14. Reading comprehension is tested using multiple-choice items
    
15. In listening comprehension you sometimes have to match items
    
16. You are recorded while making a short presentation in the foreign language
    
17. You answer questions about a text using the foreign language
    
18. You are given a difficult unfamiliar authentic text and asked to use logic and contextual clues to work out the meaning
    
19. Your tutor outlines a simulated situation in which you have to play a role
    
20. A list of vocabulary is written up on the board and the tutor comments on each item before the lesson gets under way
    
21. When marking your written work the tutor ignores some mistakes and focuses instead on a few you are required to pay special attention to
    

Teacher’s key to responses.

The teacher is recommended to look at the scores for two types of activities. These are:

1. Activities which are informal, social, open-ended and communicative. They tend to appeal to the extravert, risk-taking learner, for whom the adventure of making inferences in receptive skills and improvising and using strategies in productive skills is an exciting challenge.
2. Activities which are formal, individual, highly-structured and linguistically-oriented. They tend to appeal to the introvert learner who may feel threatened by the risk of error and likes to internalise vocabulary, grammar and syntax, as it were, in ‘slow-motion’ on his/her own or in a controlled situation, before applying the theory to practice.

Please note that this analysis is prone to generalisation and that the resultant picture of the learner will not be clear-cut. Many learners will fall into a compromise category.

For instance, the high scorer (31-50) for both categories of items may simply be a really talented linguist who enjoys not only interacting in real or simulated tasks and learning games, but is fascinated by the intricacies of grammar, which he/she has a flair for converting into real language acts. Any initial impression gained from the profiles calculated should simply be the basis for further enquiry through discussion with and observation of the learner.

However, the analysis may provide a valuable basis for discussion with the learner about what they feel comfortable with in their learning. It may also alert the teacher to how the learner needs to be monitored and supported to help him/her become a more effective learner. For example, the ‘risk-taker’ may become stuck at a level enthusiastic, but highly error-prone performance, while the ‘safe player’ may become very knowledgeable about abstruse points of grammar, while being unable to participate in a social dialogue.

Teachers are further recommended to look at section 'Choosing or designing suitable assessment tasks' of this Teachers’ Supplement where characteristics of communicative assessment tasks are listed. This is helpful in discriminating between the two activity types (a) and (b) dealt with here.

(a)
Items:
1; 4; 6; 8; 10; 12; 15; 16; 18; 19; 21;
relate to activities that tend to appeal to the extravert ‘risk-taker’.

If the learner’s score totals 0-10 on these items,

He/she may:

1. invariably ‘play safe’ when learning a language,
2. always expect vocabulary and grammar and structures to have been formally presented and explained before they are either introduced receptively or used actively,
3. always tend towards introverted learning behaviour, e.g. be absorbed by individual study but be averse to taking part in interactive learning activities,
4. always favour formal, written exercises over informal, oral activities, unless these are highly structured and focused on linguistic points.

If he/she scores 11-20 on these items,

He/she may:

1. usually ‘play safe’ when learning a language.
2. tend to expect vocabulary and grammar and structures to have been formally presented and explained before they are either introduced receptively or used actively,
3. usually tend towards introverted learning behaviour, e.g. be absorbed by individual study but need encouragement to take part in interactive learning activities,
4. usually favour formal written exercises over informal, oral activities, unless these are to some extent structured and focused on linguistic points.

If he/she scores 21-30 on these items,

He/she may:

1. Like to feel formally prepared for activities (e.g. some prior vocabulary and grammar input) but not be afraid of making the occasional mistake,
2. While expecting some prior explanation, be prepared to draw occasional inferences in receptive skills and take informed chances in productive skills,
3. Be equally at home with private and individual work and interactive learning activities, though may want help from reference sources in the latter. May quite enjoy games as a learning activity,
4. Be equally at home with simple communicative written and oral tasks as long as these relate to recently learned linguistic points.

If he/she scores 31-40 on these items,

He/she may:

1. Be moderately adventurous about performing tasks in which they may draw on prior knowledge that is not always recent. He/she is not normally deterred by the risk of error,
2. Be able to tackle receptive and productive language tasks without preparation on topics that are fairly familiar,
3. Tend to favour interactive, communicatively devised tasks and activities over individual and linguistically-focused work; may enjoy games,
4. Tend to favour communicative written and oral tasks, in which he/she must rely on a wide range of linguistic knowledge acquired over some time.

If he/she scores 41-50 on these items,

He/she may:

1. Be very adventurous in performing tasks, often with high risk of error. A compulsive risk-taker who is excited by trying out communicative possibilities,
2. Be willing to take part in all manner of communicative tasks whose linguistic implications and subject matter are not necessarily familiar,
3. Strongly favour interactive, socially-involving communicative tasks over individual and linguistically-focused work. May respond very well to games, entering into them spiritedly and competitively,
4. Strongly favour communicative written and oral tasks, in which he/she must rely on a wide range of linguistic knowledge acquired over some time.

(b)
Items:
2; 3; 5; 7; 9; 11; 13; 14; 17; 20
relate to activities that tend to appeal to the introvert ‘safe-player’.

If the learner’s score totals 0-10 on these items,

He/she may:

1. Invariably take risks rather than check sources when using the language,
2. Attach no importance to mastering vocabulary and grammar in the learning of a language,
3. Always tend towards extraverted learning behaviour, e.g be impatient to get on and conduct a conversation or play a language-related game, but be averse to individual textbook learning,
4. Always favour e.g. informal, oral activities over formal, written exercises.

If he/she scores 11-20 on these items,

He/she may:

1. Usually take risks rather than check sources when using the language,
2. Attach little importance to mastering vocabulary and grammar in the learning of a language,
3. Typically tend towards extraverted learning behaviour, e.g be impatient to get on and conduct a conversation or play a language-related game, but be less inclined to individual textbook learning,
4. Typically tend to e.g. favour informal, oral activities over formal, written exercises.

If he/she scores 21-30 on these items,

He/she may:

1. Only occasionally take risks when using the language, and feel a little insecure when an activity is not supported by reference source,
2. Have a basic awareness of the value of mastering vocabulary and grammar in the learning of a language,
3. Have a balanced response to learning types, e.g. while seeing the value of ‘social’ activities that simulate real situations, wants activity to be supported e.g. based on recent formal learning or closely directed. May quite enjoy games as a learning activity,
4. Respond similarly to both e.g. informal, oral activities and formal, written exercises.

If he/she scores 31-40 on these items,

He/she may:

1. Very rarely take part in a language task unless fairly sure of most of the language exponents that will be required for its completion,
2. Be committed to mastering vocabulary and grammar when learning a language,
3. Tend towards introverted learning behaviour, clearly preferring formal individual rote learning of vocabulary or grammar exercises to the informal task-based application of linguistic knowledge. May not respond particularly to games,
4. Tend to favour e.g. formal, written exercises over informal, oral activities.

If he/she scores 41-50 on these items,

He/she may:

1. Always insist on researching all language exponents and grammar relevant to a task before being willing to embark on it,
2. Be utterly absorbed by mastering vocabulary and grammar, often finding this as satisfying in its own right as applying formal knowledge to practical task,
3. Habitually adopt introverted learning behaviour, clearly preferring formal individual rote learning of vocabulary or grammar exercises to the informal ‘social’, task-based application of linguistic knowledge. May find games irritating,
4. Strongly favour e.g. formal, written exercises over informal, oral activities.

Appendix 2: Global Scale (standard)

Basic User A1
Can understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type. Can introduce him/herself and others and can ask and answer questions about personal details such as where he/she lives, people he/she knows and things he/she has. Can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and clearly and is prepared to help.

Basic User A2
Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local geography, employment). Can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters. Can describe in simple terms aspects of his/her background, immediate environment and matters in areas of immediate need.

Independent User B1
Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. Can deal with most situations likely to arise whilst travelling in an area where the language is spoken. Can produce simple connected text on topics which are familiar or of personal interest. Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes & ambitions and briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions and plans.

Independent User B2
Can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics, including technical discussions in his/her field of specialisation. Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party. Can produce clear, detailed text on a wide range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue giving the advantages and disadvantages of various options.

Proficient User C1
Can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and recognise implicit meaning. Can express him/herself fluently and spontaneously without much obvious searching for expressions. Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes. Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use of organisational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices.

Proficient User C2
Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read. Can summarise information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation. Can express him/herself spontaneously, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades of meaning even in more complex situations.

Appendix 3: Global Scale adapted for the blind and visually impaired

The Global scale as defined by the Council of Europe with modifications for Blind and visually impaired users

Specific provisos for the blind and visually impaired
All levels
The blind and visually impaired user can, subject to the constraints arising from a lack of visual support and stimuli and the need to use assistive devices, understand and express himself/herself as described at each of the 6 levels summarised below.

Reasonable allowance is made for delays necessitated by the use of assistive devices and for less than complete accuracy arising from inevitable constraints affecting blind and visually impaired users. However the blind and visually impaired user should assume wherever possible that they should meet the criteria specified at each level of performance for the purposes of self-assessment, even though their particular constraints may extend the learning time required to achieve those levels.

There will, of course, be types of source material which the blind and visually impaired user cannot be expected to understand or respond to and should be exempted from processing, for the purpose of assessment and allocation of level. Examples include texts inaccessible via assistive devices (e.g. public display boards, street signs, etc.) and uncommented pictorial illustrations and film/video sequences.

The term ‘constraint’ has been adopted to refer routinely to e.g. the absence of visual clues habitually used by sighted learners to make inferences about spoken and written text. This could include facial expression, bodily stance and gesture in conversation, illustration in text and uncommented video sequences in screened information or entertainment and so on.

The term ‘assistive device’ has been adopted to refer routinely to, e.g., Braille texts or a synthesised voice generated by a text source, software enabling the writer to use their voice to generate text, optical equipment facilitating reading by a visually impaired reader and so on.

The performance criteria or ‘descriptors’ listed below briefly incorporate these provisos and are very broad summaries of the global skills expected of learners who may be deemed competent at each level. For detailed descriptors of competence in specific skills, of which there are five: Listening, Spoken interaction (e.g. conversation), Spoken production (e.g. delivering speech or lecture), Reading and Writing.

The Global scale as defined by the Council of Europe with modifications for Blind and visually impaired users

Basic User A1
Can understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type, using appropriate assistive devices. Can introduce him/herself and others and can ask and answer questions about personal details such as where he/she lives, people he/she knows and things he/she has. Can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and clearly and is prepared to help. May require additional response time, depending on the constraints operating in interactive situations.

Basic User A2
Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local geography, employment), using appropriate assistive devices. Can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters. Can describe in simple terms aspects of his/her background, immediate environment and matters in areas of immediate need. May require additional response time, depending on the constraints operating in interactive situations.

Independent User B1
Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. , using appropriate assistive devices. Can deal with most situations likely to arise whilst travelling in an area where the language is spoken. Can produce simple connected text on topics which are familiar or of personal interest. Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes & ambitions and briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions and plans. May require additional response time, depending on the constraints operating in interactive situations.

Independent User B2
Can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics, including technical discussions in his/her field of specialisation, using appropriate assistive devices. Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party. Can produce clear, detailed text on a wide range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue giving the advantages and disadvantages of various options. May require additional response time, depending on the constraints operating in interactive situations.

Proficient User C1
Can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and recognise implicit meaning, using appropriate assistive devices. Can express him/herself fluently and spontaneously without much obvious searching for expressions. Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes. Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use of organisational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices. May require additional response time, depending on the constraints operating in interactive situations.

Proficient User C2
Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read, using appropriate assistive devices. Can summarise information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation. Can express him/herself spontaneously, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades of meaning even in more complex situations. May require additional response time, depending on the constraints operating in interactive situations.

Note on the telling of experiences

When a blind and visually impaired learner recounts experiences, allowance will always be made for his/her non-visual perception of elements contained in those experiences, which will necessarily differ in emphasis from those of sighted learners. It would, however, be expected that a blind and visually impaired learner would familiarise himself/herself with terms appropriate to his/her sensory experience. For example, while they would be unlikely to refer to colours and two-dimensional shapes, a blind and visually impaired learner’s tactile and auditory vocabulary might be richer than for a sighted person.