Language Learning Framework

Russian Language Programs in the United States

| Title Page | | Authors | | Table of Contents |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

stages of Russian language knowledge that will allow students maximum
freedom of movementin the current school and university environment.

Furthermore, where ACTFL proposes broadly defined benchmarks for
grades 4, 8, and 12, the framework presented here defines stages and leaves it
up to individual programs to decide what stage to aim for at particular points in
their students' Russian careers. By leaving the choice of target up to each
individual program, we are able to be much more specific about what
knowledge to include at each stage. Better still, the definition of stages is
therefore independent of level in school, and the stages can be used in the
structuring of both high school and university programs.

Another important publication in 1996 presents the results of the work of
the Articulation and Achievement Project in a volume entitled Articulation and
Achievement: Connecting Standards, Performance, and Assessment in Foreign
Language .^{1 4}This document seeks to address the need to develop a unified
framework in which the newly developed national standards can be
implemented in ways that will reduce articulation problems and build on
important national trends in education, especially toward authentic assessment.
Arguing against traditional thinking in terms of course levels and seat-time, the
authors urge that secondary and post-secondary foreign language programs be
designed based on a language learning continuum.

Within this continuum the report distinguishes five stages, each defined
with respect to five domains: function, context, text type, accuracy, and content.
These domains can be understood as addressing the following questions:^{1 5}

FUNCTION

CONTEXT

TEXT TYPE

ACCURACY

CONTENT

What can the student do with the language?

In what situation can the student perform these functions?

How does the student express himself or herself in terms of
discourse

How closely does the student's performance match the
criteria?

What is the student able to communicate about?

Fundamental to framework espoused in the report is the notion that within each
domain learners be expected to develop on a continuum. Therefore, program
design and the implied articulation practices should both take into account the
gradual nature of language acquisition and, ideally, facilitate this process in the
ways implied within the stage structure developed in the report.

The descriptions and proposals put forth in Articulation and Achievement
are closer to the aims of this document, but are still more general in that they are
not aimed at a single language. As a consequence,there are no specific
recommendations that address the concerns of specific language fields. While
Articulation and Achievement is an important document for materials and
program developers to read and understand, individual language teachers will

14
15^{New York: College Entrance Examination Board}Articulation and Achievement , pp. 22-23


stages of Russian language knowledge that will allow students maximum freedom of movementin the current school and university environment. Furthermore, where ACTFL proposes broadly defined benchmarks for grades 4, 8, and 12, the framework presented here defines stages and leaves it up to individual programs to decide what stage to aim for at particular points in their students' Russian careers. By leaving the choice of target up to each individual program, we are able to be much more specific about what knowledge to include at each stage. Better still, the definition of stages is therefore independent of level in school, and the stages can be used in the structuring of both high school and university programs. Another important publication in 1996 presents the results of the work of the Articulation and Achievement Project in a volume entitled Articulation and Achievement: Connecting Standards, Performance, and Assessment in Foreign Language .^{1 4}This document seeks to address the need to develop a unified framework in which the newly developed national standards can be implemented in ways that will reduce articulation problems and build on important national trends in education, especially toward authentic assessment. Arguing against traditional thinking in terms of course levels and seat-time, the authors urge that secondary and post-secondary foreign language programs be designed based on a language learning continuum. Within this continuum the report distinguishes five stages, each defined with respect to five domains: function, context, text type, accuracy, and content. These domains can be understood as addressing the following questions:^{1 5}
		FUNCTION CONTEXT TEXT TYPE ACCURACY CONTENT	What can the student do with the language? In what situation can the student perform these functions? How does the student express himself or herself in terms of discourse How closely does the student's performance match the criteria? What is the student able to communicate about?
	Fundamental to framework espoused in the report is the notion that within each domain learners be expected to develop on a continuum. Therefore, program design and the implied articulation practices should both take into account the gradual nature of language acquisition and, ideally, facilitate this process in the ways implied within the stage structure developed in the report. The descriptions and proposals put forth in Articulation and Achievement are closer to the aims of this document, but are still more general in that they are not aimed at a single language. As a consequence,there are no specific recommendations that address the concerns of specific language fields. While Articulation and Achievement is an important document for materials and program developers to read and understand, individual language teachers will 14 15^{New York: College Entrance Examination Board}Articulation and Achievement , pp. 22-23