Is the CEFR Interaction Scale neglected?

[s_allard]

Generally speaking, when talking about foreign language skills, the traditional viewpoint has emphasized Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing. The first two are often called passive skills and the last two active skills. The advent of the CEFR model has changed all this, at least in Europe.
http://ebcl.eu.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CEFR-all-scales-and-all-skills.pdf

In addition to changing the terminology (Reception Spoken, Production Spoken, Reception Written, Production Written) the CEFR introduced a new category called Interaction (Written, Spoken).

Interaction Spoken includes : Understanding a Native Speaker Interlocutor, Conversation, Informal Discussion, Formal Discussion (Meetings), Interviewing and being interviewed, etc. Interaction Written includes Correspondence, Notes and messages.

I have systematically implemented this category in activities with my tutors. For example, I have done a number of mock meetings and conferences. I have also written over real 100 letters that were great learning opportunities with my tutor.

I wonder if other people are implementing this CEFR category in their learning activities.

[aokoye]

Generally speaking, when talking about foreign language skills, the traditional viewpoint has emphasized Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing. The first two are often called passive skills and the last two active skills. The advent of the CEFR model has changed all this, at least in Europe.
http://ebcl.eu.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CEFR-all-scales-and-all-skills.pdf

In addition to changing the terminology (Reception Spoken, Production Spoken, Reception Written, Production Written) the CEFR introduced a new category called Interaction (Written, Spoken).

Interaction Spoken includes : Understanding a Native Speaker Interlocutor, Conversation, Informal Discussion, Formal Discussion (Meetings), Interviewing and being interviewed, etc. Interaction Written includes Correspondence, Notes and messages.

I have systematically implemented this category in activities with my tutors. For example, I have done a number of mock meetings and conferences. I have also written over real 100 letters that were great learning opportunities with my tutor.

I wonder if other people are implementing this CEFR category in their learning activities.

I went to a talk about this in March at AAAL that was given by someone who works for/is on the body that creates the CEFR and someone who works in assessment. Some of the take aways were that it appears that testing bodies don't really know how to test this and that this would look very interesting in the context of translanguaging but that that's significantly harder to test for. I think there may have also been some talk about it's implementation in situations where one is studying interpreting and/or translation (or if there wasn't I had thought to myself that that'd be a very good place for that to be worked on).

[Cavesa]

Thanks for a link to such a useful document.
It reminds me of this one, that I have been using for years:
https://www.laits.utexas.edu/fi/sites/l ... ropean.pdf

Perhaps, it is the same thing in a different format.

Yes, I have implemented the list in my studies, both as a self-assessment tool, and as a hint to activities I should focus on. I am not using it with any tutor, but on my own, to prepare for future interactions, when the opportunity arises.