Language Resources

LANGUAGE TABLES

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter for information on weekly Filipino, Hmong, Indonesian, Vietnamese, and Thai language tables (as available).

Oral Proficiency Evaluation Guidelines

The Center for Southeast Asian Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison initiated a series of meetings, beginning in 2009, to develop sets of oral proficiency guidelines for Indonesian and Filipino languages. The mission of the project was to write descriptors for each of the 8 sub-levels of ACTFL proficiency guidelines, from novice to advanced high. The pedagogical foundations for these guidelines are based on the ACTFL scale and OPI procedures, but also take into account previous efforts among the language teaching groups for developing proficiency guidelines. We are currently seeking funding so that, in the future, these guidelines can be extended in two directions: to add additional languages, and to add reading proficiency to oral proficiency.

Please contact us at: (608) 263-1755 or send an email seasia@seasia.wisc.edu for more info.

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Filipino Oral Proficiency Guidelines

Eleven teachers of Filipino language worked on the Filipino Proficiency Guidelines project. The teachers met in 2011 for a planning workshop. They then collected language samples from their own students. Each sample was rated by other teachers. In 2012, a second workshop was held, where rating discrepancies were discussed and the general outline of the proficiency guidelines was determined. Detailed descriptions of the eight sublevels were then written and circulated for comments and revisions among the workshop participants.

Indonesian Oral Proficiency Guidelines

Eleven teachers of Indonesian language worked on the Indonesian Proficiency Guidelines project. The teachers met in 2009 for a planning workshop. They then collected language samples from their own students. Each sample was rated by other teachers. In 2010, a second workshop was held, where rating discrepancies were discussed and the general outline of the proficiency guidelines was determined. Detailed descriptions of the eight sublevels were then written and circulated for comments and revisions among the workshop participants.