Startseite Mutual recognition of certification systems: The case of SERMO and ACLES
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Mutual recognition of certification systems: The case of SERMO and ACLES

  • Julia Zabala-Delgado

    Julia Zabala Delgado, holds an MA in English Philology from the Universitat de València, an MA in Language Testing from Lancaster University and a PhD in Language and Technology from the Universitat Politècnica de València. She co-ordinates language exams at the Language Centre of the Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain.

    und Barbara Sawicka

    Barbara Sawicka is a Deputy Director of Centre of Languages and Communication at Poznan University of Technology (PUT), Poland. She has extensive experience in teaching English for Specific Purposes (ESP) at a technical university. Her recent didactic activities also include large-scale foreign language testing.

    EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 11. Oktober 2019

Abstract

The Association of Language Centres in Higher Education in Spain (ACLES) and the Association of Academic Foreign Language Centres in Poland (SERMO) established the mutual recognition of their English language competence certificates (CertAcles and ACERT examinations) in 2017, on the basis of previously performed analyses of routine pre-exam and exam procedures, specifications and applied evaluation criteria. This paper represents a further step towards comparability by reporting the results of a quantitative and qualitative analysis of data from a summer examination session in 2018 carried out with Spanish and Polish students who took a commonly developed English exam combining the features of both certification systems. The exams were carried out at Universitat Politècnica de València (ACLES) and Poznan University of Technology (SERMO) and the data was collected by means of test scores, student and teacher questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews.

The results obtained are encouraging and provide a strong basis for further collaboration between the certification systems. Furthermore, they give support to the mutual recognition of our certificates while encouraging similar studies with other non-commercial university accreditation frameworks. These initiatives are in line with the objectives of the Bologna Process, facilitating student and staff exchange between institutions within the European Higher Education Area.

About the authors

Julia Zabala-Delgado

Julia Zabala Delgado, holds an MA in English Philology from the Universitat de València, an MA in Language Testing from Lancaster University and a PhD in Language and Technology from the Universitat Politècnica de València. She co-ordinates language exams at the Language Centre of the Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain.

Barbara Sawicka

Barbara Sawicka is a Deputy Director of Centre of Languages and Communication at Poznan University of Technology (PUT), Poland. She has extensive experience in teaching English for Specific Purposes (ESP) at a technical university. Her recent didactic activities also include large-scale foreign language testing.

Appendix A: Exam survey for students

Please help us make our exams interesting and relevant by answering these short questions about the tasks you have completed. Please mark your answer with an X.

Reading Comprehension

And … How was your flight?

  1. How difficult do you think understanding the reading text was? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult) [1]

    012345

  2. Optional question: If there were difficulties, what was the reason for them?_______________________________________________________________

  3. How difficult do you think the questions asked were? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  4. How interesting do you think the topic of the reading text was? (being 0 not interesting and 5 very interesting)

A backpack which generates electricity

  1. How difficult do you think understanding the reading text was? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  2. Optional question: If there were difficulties, what was the reason for them? _______________________________________________________________

  3. How difficult do you think the questions asked were in section A? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  4. How difficult do you think the questions asked were in section B? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  5. How interesting do you think the topic of the reading text was? (being 0 not interesting and 5 very interesting)

Listening comprehension

Car manufacturing

  1. How difficult do you think understanding the recording was? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  2. Optional question: If there were difficulties, what was the reason for them? _______________________________________________________________

  3. How difficult do you think the questions asked were? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  4. How interesting do you think the topic of the recording was? (being 0 not interesting and 5 very interesting)

Why do people live where they live?

  1. How difficult do you think understanding the recording was? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  2. Optional question: If there were difficulties, what was the reason for them? _______________________________________________________________

  3. How difficult do you think the questions asked were? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  4. How interesting do you think the topic of the recording was? (being 0 not interesting and 5 very interesting)

Writing

Task 1. Essay. The number of university students is on the rise

  1. How interesting do you think the topic of the writing was? (being 0 not interesting and 5 very interesting)

  2. Do you think the writing is relevant to what you would need to write in English in the academic context? (being 0 not relevant and 5 very relevant)

  3. Do you think the writing is relevant to what you will need to write in English in the future? (being 0 not relevant and 5 very relevant)

  4. How difficult do you think the writing was? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  5. Optional question: If there were difficulties, what was the reason for them?

    _______________________________________________________________

Task 2. Graph analysis. Oil consumption trends

  1. How interesting do you think the topic of the writing was? (being 0 not interesting and 5 very interesting)

  2. Do you think the writing is relevant to what you would need to write in English in the academic context? (being 0 not relevant and 5 very relevant)

  3. Do you think the writing is relevant to what you will need to write in English in the future? (being 0 not relevant and 5 very relevant)

  4. How difficult do you think the writing was? (being 0 very easy and 5 very difficult)

  5. Optional question: If there were difficulties, what was the reason for them?

    _______________________________________________________________

Appendix B: Exam survey and interview schedule for examiners

  1. How difficult was “Why do people live where they live” listening comprehension?Very difficult – Difficult – Neutral – Easy – Very easyWhat were the reasons for the difficulties? [2]

  2. How difficult was “Car manufacturing” listening comprehension?

  3. How difficult was “And…How was your flight?” reading comprehension?

  4. How difficult was “A backpack that generates electricity?” reading comprehension?

  5. How difficult was the essay writing task (“The number of university students is on the rise”)?

  6. How difficult was the graph analysis writing task (“Oil consumption trends in India and Japan”)

  7. Did the mock exam session have a motivating effect on your students?

Other comments:

References

ACLES. 2011a. Asociación de Centro de Lenguas de Educación Superior [Association of language centers of higher education]. http://www.acles.es/ (accessed 12 December 2018).Suche in Google Scholar

ACLES. 2011b. Modelo de acreditación de exámenes de ACLES [ACLES exam accreditation model]. http://www.acles.es/multimedia/enlaces/9/files/fichero_29.pdf (accessed 12 December 2018).Suche in Google Scholar

ACLES. 2014. CertAcles. Accreditation Model for ACLES exams. http://www.acles.es/multimedia/enlaces/9/files/fichero_136.pdf (accessed 12 December 2018).Suche in Google Scholar

Alderson, J. Charles, Caroline Clapham & Dianne Wall. 1995. Language test construction and evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Bachman, L. F. & A. S. Palmer. 1996. Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests, vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Bachman, Lyle F. 1990. Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Bachman, Lyle F. 2004. Statistical analyses for language assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511667350Suche in Google Scholar

Costello, Anna B. & Jason W. Osborne. 2005. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation 10(7). 1–9.Suche in Google Scholar

Council of Europe. 2001. Common European framework of reference for languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Council of Europe. 2003. Manual for relating examinations to the common European framework of reference for languages. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Suche in Google Scholar

Council of Europe. 2011. Manual for language test development and examining. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/ManualtLangageTest-Alte2011_EN.pdf (accessed 10 July 2018).Suche in Google Scholar

CRUE (Conferencia de Rectores de las Universidades Españolas). 2011. Propuestas sobre la acreditación de idiomas. Informe elaborado por la “Comisión para el análisis y estudio de la acreditación y formación en idiomas” y aprobado en la Asamblea General de la CRUE [Proposals on the accreditation of languages. Report produced by the Commission on the Analysis and Study of Accreditation and Training in Languages and approved by the General Assembly of CRUE]. http://www.crue.org/Documentos%20compartidos/Propuestas%20sobre%20la%20Acreditaci%C3%B3n%20de%20idiomas.pdf (accessed 16 August 2019).Suche in Google Scholar

DOCV (Diari Oficial de la Comunitat Valenciana). 2013. Orden 17/2013, de 15 de abril de la Consellería de Educación, Cultura y Deporte, por la que se regulan las titulaciones administrativas que facultan para la enseñanza en valenciano, del valenciano, y lenguas extranjeras en las enseñanzas no universitarias en la Comunidad Valenciana [Order 17/2013 of 15 April of the ministry of education, culture, and sports regulating the administrative qualifications that license teaching in Valencian, of Valencian, and foreign languages in non-university teaching in the Valencian Community]. http://www.docv.gva.es/datos/2013/04/18/pdf/2013_3662.pdf (accessed 16 August 2019).Suche in Google Scholar

European Commission. 2012. The European higher education area in 2012: Bologna process implementation report. Brussels: Eurydice.Suche in Google Scholar

European Commission. 2015. The European higher education area in 2015: Bologna process implementation report. Brussels: Eurydice.Suche in Google Scholar

European Commission. 2018. The european higher education area in 2018: Bologna process implementation report. Brussels: Eurydice.Suche in Google Scholar

Green, Rita. 2013. Statistical analyses for language testers. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137018298Suche in Google Scholar

Linacre, John Michael. 2019. Winsteps® Rasch measurement [computer software]. Beaverton, Oregon: Winsteps.com (accessed 25 July 2018).Suche in Google Scholar

Messick, Samuel. 1994. Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. Research report RR-94-45. Princeton, N. J.: Educational Testing Service. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED380496.pdf (accessed 4 December 2018).10.1002/j.2333-8504.1994.tb01618.xSuche in Google Scholar

NULTE (Network of University Language Testers in Europe). 2018. Memorandum of co-operation. file:///C:/Users/orourkeb/Downloads/NULTE_Memorandum-of-Coop_signed_2018_09_07_1.pdf (accessed 9 August 2019).Suche in Google Scholar

Nunally, Jum. C. 1982. Reliability of measurement. In H.E. Mitzel (ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research, 1581–1601. New York: Free Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Popham, W. James. 2000. Modern educational measurement: Practical guidelines for educational leaders. New York: Pearson.Suche in Google Scholar

SERMO. 2006. Statut Stowarzyszenia Akademickich Ośrodków Nauczania Języków Obcych SERMO [The statute of the association of academic foreign language teaching centers SERMO]. https://www.sermo.org.pl/about-sermo/ (accessed 21 December 2018).Suche in Google Scholar

StatSoft, Inc. 2016 Statistica Version 13. [computer software]. StatSoft, Inc.Suche in Google Scholar

Weir, Cyril J. 2004. Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-10-11
Published in Print: 2019-10-25

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 18.10.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/cercles-2019-0017/html?lang=de
Button zum nach oben scrollen