How Do the Indonesian Pre-Service Teachers Perceive CEFR?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15642/ijet2.2024.13.1.14-28Keywords:
CEFR, EFL, Kurikulum Merdeka, Pre-service TeacherAbstract
The Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) provides a basis for developing language education curriculum, conducting language learning and teaching, and administering language assessment. In the Indonesian context, the recently launched Kurikulum Merdeka refers to the CEFR in targeting the English Proficiency levels that should be achieved in English Subject across different schooling levels. Hence, teachers’ understanding and perceptions of the framework become important. This study aimed to examine the pre-service EFL teachers’ perception of the CEFR. A survey using a 5-point Likert Scale questionnaire and semi structured interviews were conducted to collect both quantitative and qualitative data from 49 pre-service EFL teachers who were selected through a random sampling technique. The results showed that the participants had positive perceptions of the CEFR but they had limited to a moderate understanding level of the CEFR. They only received limited CEFR exposure from a course in their teacher training program. They also mostly associated the CEFR with standardized testing and language certification without understanding the underlying principles of the framework. More comprehensive CEFR training for teacher candidates should be considered before Kurikulum Merdeka is compulsorily implemented. Also, the research can play a crucial role in shaping language education by influencing curriculum development, teacher training, policy decisions, quality assurance measures, student outcomes, and ongoing professional development within the field.
Downloads
References
Aisyiyah, S. (2020). The role of leadership in education for sustainable development curriculum reform in Indonesian higher education. Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/s2055-364120200000022014
Azmi Rohimajaya, N., Hartono, R., Yuliasri, I., & Wuli Fitriati, S. (2022). Need analysis of English ebook based on Merdeka Curriculum for Indonesian senior high school students. International Conference on Science, Education, and Technology, 8(1 SE-1001–1100), 1033–1038. https://proceeding.unnes.ac.id/index.php/ISET/article/view/1875
Deygers, B. (2021). The CEFR Companion Volume: Between research-based policy and policy-based research. Applied Linguistics, 42(1), 186–191. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amz024
Díez-Bedmar, M. B., & Byram, M. (2019). The current influence of the CEFR in secondary education: Teachers’ perceptions. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2018.1493492
EF-EPI. (2020). EF English Proficiency Index. https://www.ef.com/epi/
Emilia, E. (2016). Pendekatan berbasis teks dalam pengajaran bahasa Inggris. Kiblat Buku Utama.
Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Language: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. In New Cambridge Modern History (Vol. 13). Council of Europe Publishing. http://universitypublishingonline.org/cambridge/histories/ebook.jsf?bid=CBO9781139055895
Faez, F., Majhanovich, S., K. Taylor, S., Smith, M., & Crowley, K. (2011). The power of “Can Do” statements: Teachers’ perceptions of CEFR-informed instruction in French as a second language classrooms in Ontario. The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14, 106–128. http://ez-proxy.cdc.qc.ca/docview/1016751445?accountid=50242
Fleckenstein, J., Keller, S., Krüger, M., Tannenbaum, R. J., & Köller, O. (2020). Linking TOEFL iBT® writing rubrics to CEFR levels: Cut scores and validity evidence from a standard setting study. Assessing Writing, 43, 100420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100420
Foley, B. (2019). Intersectionality: A Marxist critique. New Labor Forum, 28(3), 10–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1095796019867944
Freeman, L. (2017). The importance of explicitly teaching language and literacy to English language learners. Practical Literacy: The Early & Primary Years, 22(2), 37–39. http://ezproxy.msu.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=122939605&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Hulstijn, J. H. (2007). The shaky ground beneath the CEFR: Quantitative and qualitative dimensions of language proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 663–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00627_5.x
Hynninen, N. (2014). The Common European Framework of Reference from the perspective of English as a lingua franca: What we can learn from a focus on language regulation. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 3(2), 293–316. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/jelf-2014-0018
Kamil, D. (2023). Are they finely tuned?: Mapping the CEFR level of the reading texts of the English textbook for grade 10 of Indonesian senior high school. Eduvelop: Journal of English Education and Development, 6(2), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.31605/eduvelop.v6i2.2332
Kanchai, T. (2019). Thai EFL university lecturers’ viewpoints towards impacts of the CEFR on their English language curricula and teaching practice. NIDA Journal of Language and Communication, 24(35), 87–104.
Khair, A. H. M., & Shah, P. M. (2021). ESL teachers’ perceptions on the implementation of CEFR in Malaysian primary schools: Issues and challenges. Journal of Advances in Education Research, 6(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.22606/jaer.2021.61005
Kok, N. M., & Aziz, A. A. (2019). English language teachers’ perspectives on the implementation of CEFR in primary schools in Malaysia. Prosiding Seminar Wacana Pendidikan 2019 (SWAPEN 2.0), 24(2), 87–100.
Kramsch, C., & Steffensen, S. V. (2008). Ecological perspectives on second language acquisition and socialization. Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 8, 2595–2606. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_194
Martyniuk, W., & Noijons, J. (2007). Executive summary of results of a survey on the use of the CEFR at national level in the Council of Europe member states. Council of Europe Language Policy Division.
Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. The European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091
Nassaji, H. (2015). Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis. Language Teaching Research, 19(2), 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815572747
Negishi, M. (2022). The impact of the CEFR in Japan. In D. Little & N. Figueras (Eds.) Reflecting on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and Its Companion Volume (pp. 10–22). Multilingual Matters.
North, B. (2021). The CEFR Companion Volume - What’s new and what might it imply for teaching/learning and for assessment? CEFR Journal - Research and Practice, 4, 5–24. https://doi.org/10.37546/jaltsig.cefr4-1
Novawan, A., Tosalem, S. M. P. A., Binarkaheni, S., & Mariana, E. R. (2023). Reflecting on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, and Assessment (CEFR) in the Indonesian context. Journal of English in Academic and Professional Communication, 9(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.25047/jeapco.v9i1.3754
Pajarwati, D., Mardiah, H., Harahap, R. P., Siagian, R. O., & Ihsan, M. T. (2021). Curriculum reform in Indonesia: English education toward the global competitiveness. ETDC: Indonesian Journal of Research and Educational Review, 1(1), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.51574/ijrer.v1i1.51
Paquot, M. (2018). Phraseological competence: A missing component in university entrance language tests? Insights from a study of EFL learners’ use of statistical collocations. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1405421
Phoolaikao, W., & 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. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v14n6p25
Richards, J. C. (2013). Curriculum approaches in language teaching: Forward, central, and backward design. RELC Journal, 44(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688212473293
Rizaldi, D. R., & Fatimah, Z. (2022). Mataram city student perceptions in recognizing and using smartphones. Indonesian Journal of Education, 1(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.56495/ije.v1i1.172
Saville, N., & Salamoura, A. (2010). Exemplifying the CEFR: Criterial features of written learner English from the English Profile Programme. In Communicative Proficiency and Linguistic Development: Intersections between SLA and Language Testing Research (pp. 101–132). Eurosla. http://eurosla.org/monographs/EM01/101-132Salamoura_Saville.pdf
Schneider, S. (2020). A critical analysis of the role of intercultural communication in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) Companion Volume. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching, 7(2), 193–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/23247797.2020.1864112
Supunya, N. (2022). Towards the CEFR action-oriented approach: Factors influencing its achievement in Thai EFL classrooms. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 28(2), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2022-2802-03
Tono, Y., Runnels, J., Runnels, V., Pavlovskaya, I. Y., Lankina, O. Y., Hai, L. T. T., & Nhung, P. T. H. (2020). CEFR Journal: Research and Practice (1–67).
Tosun, Ü. F., & Glover, P. (2020). How do school teachers in Turkey perceive and use the CEFR? International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 7(4), 1731–1739. http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/1041
Yüce, E., & Mirici, I. H. (2022). Self-assessment in EFL classes of secondary education in Türkiye: The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)-based implementations. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 13(1), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.13.01.38
