Language Qualifications and Jobs

[IronMike]

Deinonysus beat me to it. If you know you're B1, describe that on your resume. "Intermediate high level of proficiency in Spanish." Even better, describe each of your skills. Many are better at reading than listening/speaking, so if you're B2 at reading Spanish: "Low-Advanced level of proficiency in reading Spanish," or something like that?

Or take a legit test. If there is a language requirement at the company you want to work at, then there is someone in that company's HR who knows what 1+ or B1 or Intermediate high means.

[mcthulhu]

That might depend on the employer. In the United States, the Interagency Language Roundtable scale is the relevant one at the federal level; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ILR_scale, where 0 is no proficiency, and 5 is full native proficiency. I don't know if there is any formal equivalence with CEFR levels, but I suspect you could estimate where you are after taking a look at the criteria, and put that estimate in parentheses on your resume.

If you would feel better actually taking a test, you could try applying for a federal job that requires language skills at a particular ILR level (you don't need to actually get the job, if you just want the test....). Then you could at least say you'd been tested at that level. Normally an agency would be looking for L-3, or "professional working proficiency," I think, but maybe some jobs could be listed as L-2.

Some universities and private language schools use the ILR levels in testing, too, but enrollment might be a bigger step than you want to take just to find out where you are...

[eido]

For this interview, I went with "intermediate" because of the position I was applying for. It was in the education sector, but not directly educating anybody.

Thank you all who replied. I think I need to take a test. I'll see what I can take and hopefully pass.

[David1917]

I've had 2 language-based interviews:

For a call-center, I had a brief conversation in both Russian & Spanish. Just to make sure I could hold one - the specialized vocabulary and other such work-related skills are expected to be trained anyway. Unless you're saying you speak Spanish for a department on Spanish literature, I doubt someone will come at you expecting to discuss Cervantes.

For a social media monitoring position, I had to translate one Spanish and one Portuguese text (it was a South American company). They didn't want me to use Google, just wanted to see how reasonably I could quickly interpret something in each language - so I could be efficient in my work. I ended up not being able to take this job, but it was still an interesting interview. Again, no Cervantes.

Finally, I would echo the 1st post on this page and use some of the generally accepted terms, or honest non-committal terms like "conversational" or "proficient." Fluent implies all sorts of things to "normal" people, and without actually sitting a DELE test, claiming B1 is disingenuous.

[eido]

Fluent implies all sorts of things to "normal" people, and without actually sitting a DELE test, claiming B1 is disingenuous.

I said something like: “I have an intermediate level in Spanish. I’m better at reading and listening, but I could speak if you asked me to. So if you need help deciphering an email or something, I could help you.” Not that they’d ever need that, but I was going for an example of something that’d need to be read.

So you’d say all the other advice about estimating your level with other scales is wrong, too?

[David1917]

Well, it's like competitive powerlifting. You can say you've squatted 500 lbs but if you haven't done it in competition in front of judges and certified by some federation or other, then who's to say you reached depth, maintained control, etc. You can however use that as a gauge for yourself when planning your squat training.

I find the self-stylized CEFR ratings that people use on here to be the same thing. You cannot put B1 on a job/school application until you have sat the test. You cannot say you got xyz score on the GRE until you have sat that test, etc. I think again that for yourself you can use it to say, "OK, I feel I might be at this level, I should seek out these types of materials now to improve," and I think there is a general understanding on this forum that it is an estimate and it's an easy way to offer each other advice. I would just stay away from committing yourself to a standard you have not been certified for. What if someone on the hiring committee was familiar with the ranking system and asked you how the test went, what it was like, etc.? That's why again I'd say Deinonysus's advice is the best to heed - translate your estimated B1 into "Elementary proficiency," and elaborate as you said you did above on being able to interpret an e-mail.

[eido]

What if someone on the hiring committee was familiar with the ranking system and asked you how the test went, what it was like, etc.? That's why again I'd say Deinonysus's advice is the best to heed - translate your estimated B1 into "Elementary proficiency," and elaborate as you said you did above on being able to interpret an e-mail.

If you think I'm being a little combative about this, it might be because I have a romantic notion of what it's like to be fluent in a language. I can't cite any specific anecdotes to illustrate my point, but whenever I've read about people using a language for their job, things fall into two camps. There's people who have taken DELEs or TOEICs and used them to get hired. Others simply say something vague, like, "I got fluent in Japanese and was hired for my company after I took a test conducted by that company." They didn't take a test beforehand. It was just magical. So that's why I'm like, "Can't I just approximate my ability?" And I do know what I use here on the forum is a self-approximation. Another reason I went with what I did on the interview was that was you (all) were giving me didn't mean anything to me. "Conversational" means "B2" to my ears, or even higher. "Elementary proficiency" means "A2" or maybe lower. So I wanted to use something I understood so I could readily explain it. But I should probably be looking through the employer's eyes, not mine.

And I think you got the gist of what I was trying to say about Cervantes. I was generalizing to make a point. I meant by saying that that I'd have to discuss something highly complex and a bit niche, since most people I know don't discuss literature in their everyday lives. This kind of discussion would require many advanced structures and vocabulary, which you'd have to be prepared for. I hope that makes sense - maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

[Speakeasy]

I think that we have an unresolvable issue before us.

On one hand, there is good reason to believe that, should an applicant not have independent proof of their linguistic skills, then even their most honest self-evaluation entered on a job application may be not only misleading to the prospective employer, but could also prove to be a source of future embarrassment for the employee, if not just cause for their dismal, should they be granted the sought-after position. The independent proof of linguistic skill would be particularly important in cases where it forms one of core competencies of the position that the employer is seeking to fill. Here, tommus’ caveat “don’t get caught overstating your abilities” is instructive. Telling even a “little white lie” could be very costly.

On the other hand, despite the very large number of languages that are spoken (unofficially) in North America, most people, whether they are native speakers of a language other than English, heritage speakers of one, or non-native speakers who have studied one, very few have independent proof of their linguistic skills. Actually, I suspect that this situation prevails throughout much of the world. The vast majority of employers are aware of this situation and, whereas some of them have the clout to impose independent proof of linguistic competency as a requirement, most accept the applicant’s self-evaluation and hope for the best. So then, while David1917’s parallel to competitive sports is at first-glance seductive, as an admittedly-exaggerated example, I would point out that Bruce Lee’s self-evaluation as a master was questioned by many experts in the field and, furthermore, he never entered a tournament so as to prove his unquestionable abilities. Where do we go from here?

In general, I accept the argument that having independent proof of one’s linguistic skills is likely the surest solution to this issue. Nevertheless, I accept eido’s modest self-evaluation and her description of it on an employment application form. Should she be granted an interview, I suggest that she seek an opportunity to clarify the matter for her prospective employer. Doing so would not only reassure the employer as to her linguistic competencies, but would be a demonstration of her honesty and her awareness of her limitations in this field. This places the ball squarely in the employer’s court.

Bon, okay, d’abord, the employer always “serves” and he has the privilege of launching as many balls -- soft, hard, slow, fast, curve, knuckle – as pleases him.

[eido]

In general, I accept the argument that having independent proof of one’s linguistic skills is likely the surest solution to this issue. Nevertheless, I accept eido’s modest self-evaluation and her description of it on an employment application form. Should she be granted an interview, I suggest that she seek an opportunity to clarify the matter for her prospective employer. Doing so would not only reassure the employer as to her linguistic competencies, but would be a demonstration of her honesty and her awareness of her limitations in this field. This places the ball squarely in the employer’s court.

I have yet to place my language skills on my resume or an employment form for a job that didn't directly relate to languages. When I was applying for the position I have during the week, I listed English only because I felt the descriptions they provided didn't match my skills. On another application, they had three options, two of which I can't remember, but one of which was "literate" and which they defined as "being able to read a newspaper" but neglected to delineate any other skills at the level. So I put that, but wasn't confident of it because it was half a description or less of what's required for that type of employment. The only reason at the interview I said I could speak the level of Spanish I mentioned was because my mom said I would have better chances, but because I'm so unconfident with my speaking skills, I was hesitant to mention it. I also don't like to mention I speak Spanish at all, because in the past my parents have embarrassed me with going up to native speakers or advanced learners and going, "My daughter speaks Spanish! Do it, eido! Speak some Spanish for this lady!" And that's mortifying. So I don't want to re-create it in any environment. But thank you for the reply, @Speakeasy.

I can't travel or really arrange to take a DELE or SIELE at the moment, but I found this website a while ago. How does it seem to you all? Which should I be keen on taking? What level?

[David1917]

I think we are all mostly on the same page here, I'm just being cautiously pedantic about using a specific rating system. Especially because even it seems to vary across different countries (example: the Russian test is 2 days and features a whole grammar component, while others are one day and are just testing the four modalities). That's all. Getting a B2 in Spanish means you've taken the DELE exam at that level and passed. I'm reminded of a user's detailed threads on taking the DELE C2 exam (my emphasis added):

The point is that it is questionable how this exam actually measures overall proficiency and especially speaking ability. I even have major doubts about how parts of the text are corrected. As I tell my students, language tests, like most tests, measure above all ability to perform on tests. More specifically, I think this C2 test measures the ability to do certain tasks under major time constraints. In fact I believe that many native speakers could not pass this test because it is not a true measure of "speaking" ability. Given its emphasis on writing somewhat academic prose, this test will tend to eliminate people who are not university educated or used to writing a lot.

https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... le+spanish

I understand the combative nature, we have an emotional attachment to the scores of hours we've poured into learning a language, so we want recognition for it. Shit I WISH I could put Chinese anywhere on my resume, but I still don't feel confident enough to be drilled on it in an interview. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said you ought to look through your employer's eyes. They probably don't want/need a previous cert (as Speakeasy has suggested), just to know where you're at in simple terms and the rest comes later. You're likely to have to learn your new company's jargon in English as it is, so of course you will need to learn it in Spanish as well. And yes, I understood the nature of the Cervantes reference, I was using it as a similar placeholder for a niche topic appearing in an interview!