Thai EFL University Students’ Engagement with CEFR: Perceived Proficiency, Awareness and Skill Development Requirement
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In Thailand, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) serves as a standard for assessing English proficiency in educational institutions and is incorporated into curricula to guide and assess students’ learning outcomes. This study aimed to understand how Thai university students engage with the CEFR in their English language learning. Specifically, it investigated (1) students’ perceived English proficiency based on the CEFR, (2) their awareness of implementing the CEFR, (3) their perceptions of the CEFR, and (4) their needs for improving their English skills to meet the CEFR standards. A mixed-methods approach was employed to gather data from 177 students through convenience sampling, along with interviews conducted with 12 selected participants representing each CEFR level from A1 to C2. The questionnaire results indicated that students rated their English proficiency at the A1 level and had moderate awareness of the CEFR. Although students faced challenges such as limited understanding and a lack of materials, interview findings revealed that students had a positive view of the CEFR for promoting autonomy and self-assessment. For their needs, lower-level students expressed a desire to improve their listening and speaking skills, while higher-level students needed to enhance their reading and writing abilities. Moreover, students requested additional support from the university and clearer guidance from teachers on how to use the CEFR effectively. This study proposes directions for future research and offers practical recommendations to enhance students’ successful engagement with the CEFR.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Aksyah, C. M. B. A., Muslem, A., and Marhaban, S. (2021). Teachers’ perceptions of English language teaching process via online learning during Covid-19. English Education Journal (EEJ), 12(4), 668-684.
Alih, N. A. C., Yusoff, M. A. M., and Abdul, A. H. (2020). Teachers’ knowledge and belief on the CEFR implementation in Malaysian ESL classroom. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Current Educational Research, 2(5), 126-134.
Anantapol, W., Keeratikorntanayod, W., and Chobphon, P. (2018). Developing English proficiency standards for English language teachers in Thailand. Humanities Journal, 25(2), 1-35.
Apelgren, B. M. and Baldwin, R. (2018). Can Do and Cannot Do – CEFR inspired examination and assessment in a Swedish higher education context. Apples–Journal of Applied Language Studies, 12(2), 19-35.
Association of Southeast Asian Nations. (2008). Association of Southeast Asian Nations: Annual report 2007-2008. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat.
Behnke, A. O., Piercy, K. W., and Diversi, M. (2004). Educational and occupational aspirations of Latino youth and their parents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 26, 16-35.
Chaiyamat, Y. and Chalauisaeng, B. (2024). Has the GMS educational policy on English reading at the tertiary level been effectively interpreted and implemented?. Journal of Mekong Societies, 20(2), 67-100.
Charttrakul, K. and Damnet, A. (2021). Role of the CEFR and English teaching in Thailand: A case study of Rajabhat universities. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 12(2), 82-89.
Council of Europe. (2001). The common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Council of Europe (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching and assessment, companion volume with new descriptors. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, Language Policy Program.
Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Creamer, E. G. (2018). An introduction to fully integrated mixed methods research. New York: SAGE.
Díez-Bedmar, M. B. and Byram, M. (2019). The current influence of the CEFR in secondary education: teachers’ perceptions. Language Culture and Curriculum, 32(1), 1-15.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow: Longman.
Farehah, N. M. U. and Sallehhudin, M. A. A. (2018). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and the challenges. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 168-183.
Foley, J. (2019a). Issues on assessment using CEFR in the region. LEARN Journal, 12(2), 28-48.
Foley, J. (2019b). Issues on the initial impact of CEFR in Thailand and the region. International Journal of Applied Linguistic, 9, 359-370.
Ghazali, S. (2016). Learner background and their attitudes towards studying literature. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 4, 1-17.
He, L. and Shi, L. (2008). ESL students’ perceptions and experiences of standardized English writing tests. Assessing Writing, 13(2), 130-149.
Jeon, J. (2022). A systematic review of CEFR-related research of English education in South Korea. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 11(8), 363-375.
Jiménez, P. K. (2018). Exploring students’ perceptions about English learning in a public university. HOW, 25(1), 69-91.
Kaewwichian, D. and Jaturapitakkul, N. (2018). Self-perception of English proficiency of Thai lower secondary EFL teachers. rEFLections, 25(2), 21-41.
Kaur, A., Young, D., and Kirkpatrick, R. (2016). English education policy in Thailand: Why the poor results? In R. Kirkpatrick (Ed.). English language education policy in Asia (pp. 345-361). New York: Springer.
Kendall, L. (2008). The conduct of qualitative interview: Research questions, methodological issues, and researching online. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, and D. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 133-149). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kwangsawad, T. (2017). In-service EFL teacher development for technology integration in communicative language teaching. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning, 5(2), 44-52.
Lai, Y. and Aksornjarung, P. (2018). Thai EFL learners’ attitudes and motivation towards learning English through content-based instruction. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(1), 43-65.
Lee, B. C. (2020). Applicability of CEFR to national curriculum and assessment of English. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 20, 496-516.
Liddicoat, A. J. (2014). The interface between macro and micro-level language policy and the place of language pedagogies. International Journal of Pedagogies & Learning, 9(2), 118-129.
Luksup, S. L. S. and Chaisoda, P. (2019). English proficiency of Thai undergraduate students using CEFR in Khonkaen. Journal of Buddhist Education and Research, 5(2), 160-172.
Ministry of Education. (2014). English language teaching reform policy. Bangkok: Office of The Basic Education Commission Ministry of Education.
Musoeva, A. (2019). What do Uzbekistani EFL teachers know and believe about the usefulness of the CEFR? International Journal of Academic Research and Reflection, 7(6), 5-19.
Namfah, N. (2022). Perception towards the CEFR-based English proficiency test: A case of the student-teacher in the teacher for local development project at one university in Thailand. Journal of Education Burapha University, 33(3), 16-38.
Nawai, R. and Said, N. E. M. (2020). Implementation challenges of Common European Framework Reference (CEFR) in a Malaysian setting: Insights on English teachers’ attitude. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10, 28-41.
Nayos, S. and Chuaychoowong, M. (2017). Thai students’ perceptions towards self-study and the use of a self-access language learning center. MFU Connexion: Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(1), 243-268.
Negishi, M. (2012). The development process of the CEFR-J: Where we are, where we are going. ARCLE Review, 5(3), 37-52.
Nii, A. and Yunus, M. (2022). Teachers’ perceptions on the implementation of Common European Framework Reference (CEFR) in an ESL classroom: The Malaysian context. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 10, 226-240.
North, B. (2014). The CEFR in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Office of the Basic Education Commission. (2008). Basic education core curriculum B.E. 2551 (A. D. 2008). Bangkok: Ministry of Education.
Ohashi, Y. and Katagiri, N. (2020). The ratios of CEFR-J vocabulary usage compared with GSL and AWL in elementary EFL classrooms and suggestions of vocabulary items to be taught. Asia Pacific Journal of Corpus Research, 1(1), 61-94.
Phong-a-ran, N., Luksup, S., and Chaisoda, P. (2019). English proficiency of Thai undergraduate students using CEFR in Khon Kaen. Journal of Buddhist Education and Research, 5(2), 160-172.
Phoolaikao, W. and Sukying. A. (2021). Insights into CEFR and its implementation through the lens of preservice English teachers in Thailand. English Language Teaching, 14(6), 25-35.
Pickens, J. (2005). Attitudes and perceptions. Organizational Behavior in Health Care, 3, 43-76.
Savski, K. (2022). CEFR and the ELT practitioner: Empowerment or enforcement? ELT Journal, 77(1), 62-71.
Sülü, A. and Kir, E. (2014). Language teachers’ views on CEFR. International Online Journals of Education and Teaching, 1(5), 358-364.
Topal, İ. H. (2019). CEFR-oriented probe into pronunciation: Implications for language learners and teachers. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(2), 420-436.
Tosun, F. U. and Glover, P. (2020). How do school teachers in Turkey perceive and use the CEFR? International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 7(4), 1731-1739.
Uri, N. F. M. and Aziz, M. S. A. (2018). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and challenges. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24, 168-183.
Waluyo, B. (2019). Examining Thai first-year university students’ English proficiency on CEFR levels. The New English Teacher, 13(2), 51-71.
Williams, M., Burden, R., Poulet, G., and Maun, I. (2004). Learners’ perceptions of their successes and failures in foreign language learning. Language Learning Journal, 30(1), 19-29.
Xie, Q. and Andrews, S. (2013). Do test design and uses influence test preparation? Testing a model of washback with structural equation modelling. Language Testing, 30(1), 49-70.
Yalatay, S. and Gurocak, F. (2016). Is CEFR really over there? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 705-712.
Yüce, E. and Mirici, İ. H. (2019). A qualitative inquiry into the application of 9th grade EFL program in terms of the CEFR. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(3), 1171-1187.
Yusoff, Z., Gurmani, M., Sanif, S., and Noor, S. (2022). The effect of mobile-assisted CEFR English vocabulary profile word lists on L2 students’ vocabulary knowledge. Asian Journal of University Education, 18(2), 526-543.
Website
Education First. (2022). EF English proficiency index. Retrieved March 14, 2023, from https://www.ef.co.th/epi/regions/asia/thailand/
Interviews
Student A1/1. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student A1/2. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student A2/1. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student A2/2. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student B1/1. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student B1/2. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student B2/2. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student C1/1. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student C1/2. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student C2/1. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.
Student C2/2. (Pseudonym). (2023, January 4). Interview. A Thai EFL undergraduate student. Khon Kaen province.