Combining Language Proficiency Testing in
Accordance with STANAG 6001 with
Specialist Language Skills Testing
Dr. Dugald Sturges, Federal Office of Languages
Hürth, Germany
STANAG 6001 Testing Conference
SHAPE, Mons, Belgium
4 September 2013
1
Combining Language Proficiency Testing with Specialist
Language Skills Testing
T ES T I N G
SLP
P
Goal of testing i.a.w. STANAG 6001:
• To determine language proficiency
• …defined as “An individual’s unrehearsed,
general language communication
ability.”
Goal of testing i.a.w. STANAG 6001:
The table of language proficiency levels on
which the SLP is based is intended to:
• a. Communicate language requirements for
international staff appointments.
• b. Record and report, in international
correspondence, measures of language
proficiency.
• c. Compare national standards through a
standardized table while preserving each
nation’s right to maintain its own internal
proficiency standards.
The implication:
• An SLP does not qualify you to do
anything.
Content Language Acquisition vs
General Language Acquisition
ESP aims at conveying:
• a) abilities required for successful communication in
occupational settings;
• b) content language acquisition dominates
s. Dudley Evans and St. John: Developments in ESP: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: CUP, 1998.
• ESP may be restricted as to the language skills to be
learned (e.g. reading only - mechanics)
• It also may be restricted in terms of standardized lexis
(e.g. air traffic controllers)
• General language competency is often incongruous to
occupational experience.
Special language requirements
Certain professional tasks require
specialist language certification
• International requirements:
e.g. Aviation (ICAO certification)
• National requirements:
e.g. Technical-logistic English
Pre-Deployment courses (mentors, observers)
Medical personnel
Etc.
The reaction of some stakeholders:
• “If an SLP does not qualify you to do
anything, but specialist language
certification is required, why bother with an
SLP?”
• Result: Specialists are often not sent
for (mandatory) SLP testing before
specialist training and testing.
8
• Can SLP testing replace all professional language
skills certification?
• Is testing according to STANAG proficiency levels
always necessary?
• Does testing according to STANAG proficiency
levels make sense as a means of maintaining and
improving quality of specialist performance?
• Proficiency Testing
vs
• Qualification Testing
Proficiency vs. Qualification
• SLP is an EVALUATION –
• You cannot “FAIL” an SLP: “You are what
you is.”
• Qualification oriented testing verifies the
mastery of certain skills needed to perform
a particular task
• If you do not have these skills you FAIL to
be qualified for the task
Analogy: Driving Licence vs. Vehicle
Certification
In order to be certified to operate a particular
military vehicle, you first need a valid driver’s
license:
Example of general driving proficiency (source: USAREUR driver‘s
license exam)
• “What does this sign indicate?”
This is a basic certification. It qualifies you to
operate most cars.
Analogy: Driving Licence vs. Vehicle
Certification
However, prior to this certification, you need to
have your aptitude for driving evaluated:
e.g. Have your vision evaluated:
SLPSLPSLP
SLPSLPSLP
SLPSLPSLP
SLPSLPSLP
This is a basic aptitude. Without it you cannot be
certified.
Specialist tasks require specialized
certification – and testing
19. When you ford the HMMWV, the vehicle speed should be
- a. 20 MPH or less. b. 15 MPH or less. c. 10 MPH or less. d.
5 MPH or less. (Circle choice.)
“But if you gotta Ford,
why you wanna
Humvee?”
Military Driver – or Military Vehicle Operator?
• Both require basic prerequisite aptitudes
and basic driving proficiency, but one also
requires additional specialized skills
certification.
The same holds true for language learning and testing:
• Standardized Language Profile
SLP
• Specialized Language Profile
• ESP does not work without SLP.
But why not?
What makes specialist language “special?”
•Specialist language aims at functional tasks, but may
require the conveyance of abstract concepts, specialist
terminology or use of more advanced structural devices
as appropriate to the user’s professional field.
• The task may be within the SLP Level 2 range, but
the language required to perform that task may be
more sophisticated.
• Language proficiency is not a value unto itself, but is
inextricably embedded in the performance of a
particular professional task.
17
ESP testing anchored in a STANAG 6001 framework
Example: ICAO certification of Bundeswehr ATC and FIS:
• In case of failure of either or both parts of the
language examination, all ratings are to be
suspended and the examination is to be repeated
after 3 months at the latest. During this period the AT
officer is to refresh his or her language skills in self
study. (…)
• “In the case of a repeat failure it is
necessary to obtain a new valid 3332
SLP” before the suspension of the
rating can be lifted.
SLP Level 2… PLUS specialist knowledge?
• Examinees with solid language proficiency plus
knowledge of specialist terminology and usage are
usually prepared for specialist language certification
(e.g. ICAO Level 4)
• The less specialist knowledge the examinees have,
the higher level of language proficiency they need to
make up for the deficit.
• However, even a Level 4 SLP candidate can not
make up for a total lack of specialist knowledge:
Language cannot entirely replace practical skills.
Consequence : a combination of SLP
testing PLUS specialist language
qualification is essential.
19
Summary
• SLP testing i.a.w. STANAG 6001 is a prerequisite for
specialist language training and testing.
• Despite considerable agreement between the
results of the two types of examination, SLP testing
alone cannot entirely replace specialist language
certification.
• On the same token, specialist language certification
alone cannot replace SLP evaluation, as it only tests
proficiency in a very specific context.
Summary (continued)
• SLP testing i.a.w. STANAG 6001 and specialist
language testing need to be closely coordinated.
• Any combination of SLP and specialist language
testing needs to be carefully approached due to the
differing testing goals.
The reaction of another stakeholder:
• “If my commander had sent me to an SLP
refresher course beforehand, I would have
felt more comfortable taking this
qualification exam.”
• ‘Nuff said?
22
Thank you for your attention.