Advanced Low Language Proficiency–An Achievable Goal?

Aleidine J. Moeller

19 citations0/0 files storedModern Language Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Second Language Learning and Teaching EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning Multilingual Education and Policy

Abstract

A standard of language proficiency recommended for world language preservice teachers has been set at advanced low as defined by the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. The National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) requires that foreign language teacher candidates in specific languages (e.g., French, German, Spanish) achieve the Advanced Low (AL) rating on the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) Oral Proficiency interview (OPI) and the Writing Proficiency Test (WPT). They stipulate that 80% of preservice teachers must successfully demonstrate an AL level of language proficiency in order to achieve NCATE program accreditation. Many questions and concerns have emerged as a result of this policy that can benefit from national inquiry and discussion. Change is always uncomfortable, but necessary for continued growth. The decision to require an AL level of proficiency is a natural consequence of standards we have set for our profession and our students. Required will be a thoughtful examination of how we teach language, how we prepare teachers, how we collaborate across colleges in order to ensure that our students are optimally prepared to teach language and content with an ease of use that does not interfere with communication and that promotes a language and culture rich learning environment. Rather than viewing this as a top-down decision, it should be regarded as being at the heart of setting standards to ensure that all students have the same opportunity to learn and be optimally prepared for life in the 21st century. All constituents (learners, teachers, language departments, education departments) have a role in ensuring that AL is not an elusive, but both a desirable and an achievable goal.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

References

1986Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching 1968The Matthew Effect in Science 1968The Matthew effect in science. The reward and communication systems of science are considered.1996The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition 1968Pygmalion in the classroom 2000Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence 1986Input in Second Language Acquisition 2000Teacher Quality and Student Achievement

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.