Article published In: Seeking Changes in a Challenging Time: New perspectives for proficiency-oriented Chinese teaching and beyond
Edited by Yu Liu, Qiaona Yu and Yu Wu
[Chinese as a Second Language (漢語教學研究—美國中文教師學會學報) 59:2] 2024
► pp. 90–118
Aligning curriculum design with proficiency levels in a Chinese language program
A pilot study
Published online: 25 February 2025
https://doi.org/10.1075/csl.00048.liu
https://doi.org/10.1075/csl.00048.liu
Abstract
This study evaluates the proficiency progress of Chinese L2 learners in a four-year Chinese language program using
the OPI and HSK assessments to explore benchmarks for proficiency-based program design. Findings indicated that students advanced
approximately one HSK level per year in reading and listening skills. In speaking, they advanced more than one sub-level per
semester; however, their progress slowed significantly upon reaching the ACTFL advanced level. Students completed the program
close to HSK level 5 in reading and listening and at the ACTFL advanced-mid level in speaking. A significant correlation between
HSK and OPI scores was found, suggesting that both assessments effectively measure language proficiency. The results also confirm
strong alignment between the curriculum and the program’s learning objectives in terms of proficiency achievement.
Key words: proficiency-based approach, OPI, ACTFL proficiency guidelines, HSK, program design
摘要
本研究通过对美国OPI和中国汉语水平考试(HSK)结果的对比，分析了美国一所大学四年制中文项目中学生语言水平的变化，以探讨以语言能力水平等级标准为导向的课程项目设计。研究结果显示，学习者在阅读和听力技能方面每年大约提高一个HSK等级。就口语程度而言，学习者每学期大约提高超过一个ACTFL次等级。但达到高级后，语言水平的提高明显变慢，通常需要一年或更长时间才能达到高级中等(Advanced-mid)或更高水平。学生在完成课程时大约达到了接近HSK
5级和ACTFL高级中等水平。研究还发现，HSK和OPI评分之间显著相关，表明不仅两项语言水平测试都能有效测量汉语二语学习者的能力水平，而且不同技能的测试结果也能相互作为参考。另外，结果也反映了学习者语言能力水平发展与课程项目所设定的学习目标具有一致性。
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Chinese language proficiency standards
- 3.The alignment between proficiency standards and Chinese programs
- 4.Methods
- 4.1Participants
- 4.2Procedure
- 4.3Data analysis
- 5.Results
- 5.1Proficiency progression in the program
- 5.2Correlating the OPI and HSK
- 5.3Comparing learning outcomes and students’ performance
- 6.Conclusions and discussion
References
References (17)
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (2024). ACTFL proficiency guidelines. [URL]
Center for Language Education and Cooperation, Ministry of Education (2021). Guoji Zhongwen Jiaoyu Zhongwen Shuiping Dengji Biaozhun 国际中文教育中文水平等级标准 [Chinese proficiency grading standards for international Chinese language education]. Beijing: Beijing Language and Culture University Press.
Clark, J. L., & Clifford, R. T. (1988). The FSI/ILR/ACTFL proficiency scales and testing techniques: Development, current status, and needed research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10(2), 129–147.
Council of Europe (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment — Companion volume, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, available at [URL]
Isbell, D. R., Winke, P., & Gass, S. M. (2019). Using the ACTFL OPIc to assess proficiency and monitor progress in a tertiary foreign languages program. Language Testing, 36(3), 439–465.
Jiang, W. Y. (2020). Benchmarking Students’ Attainment in Australian Tertiary Chinese Programs Using the New HSK Tests. Creative Education, 111, 624–638.
Liao, T., Lan, P., Liang, C., & Chen, P. (2022). CEFR yu ACTFL dagang kouyu zhibiao duiying yanjiu CEFR與 ACTFL大綱口語指標對應研究：以「華語文口語測驗 」為媒介 [Aligning the CEFR Oral Descriptors with the ACTFL Speaking Proficiency Guidelines Based on the TOCFL Speaking Test]. Journal of Chinese Language Teaching 華語文教學研究, 19.21: 1–32.
Martyniuk, W. (Ed.). (2010). Aligning tests with the CEFR: Reflections on using the Council of Europe’s draft manual. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Miaochun Wei. (2017). Chinese Placement Procedures at U.S. Postsecondary Institutions, Doctorate dissertation, The George Washington University, [URL]
National Academy for Educational Research. (2023). Huayuwen nengli jizhun yingyong cankao zhiyin 華語文能力基準應用參考指引 [Reference Guidelines for TBCL Application]. [URL]
Surface, E. A., & Dierdorff, E. C. (2003). Reliability and the ACTFL oral proficiency interview: Reporting indices of interrater consistency and agreement for 19 languages. Foreign Language Annals, 36(4), 507–519.
Tedick, D. J. (Ed.). (2002). Proficiency-oriented language instruction and assessment: A curriculum handbook for teachers. CARLA Working Paper Series. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, The Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition [URL]
Tschirner, E., Bärenfänger, O., & Wanner, I. (2012). Assessing evidence of validity of assigning CEFR ratings to the ACTFL oral proficiency interview (OPI) and the oral proficiency interview by computer (OPIc). [URL]
Villar, S. M. and Meuser-Blincow, F. (1993). Proficiency requirement-based and nonproficiency requirement-based second language programs: How do students rate?. Foreign Language Annals, 261: 49–62.
Vyn, R., Wesely, P. M., & Neubauer, D. (2019). Exploring the effects of foreign language instructional practices on student proficiency development. Foreign Language Annals, 52(1), 45–65.
Winke, P., & Ma, W. M. (2019). The assessment of Chinese L2 proficiency. In The Routledge handbook of Chinese language teaching (pp. 405–422). Routledge.
Winke, P., Zhang, X., Rubio, F., Gass, S., Soneson, D., & Hacking, J. (2020). The proficiency profile of language students: Implications for programs. Second Language Research & Practice, 1(1), 25–64. [URL]
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.