Specification for Linguapop's alignment with CEFR

Last updated Aug 07, 2024

This document serves as the basis for Linguapop's alignment with the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR).

Parts of the Specification were produced as part of Erasmus Key Action 2 project number 2020-1-HR01-KA204-077724.

1. Introduction

This document deals with the content analysis of the Linguapop placement test in order to relate it to the CEFR from the point of view of coverage. The analysis in this case is the combined product of individual and group contemplation, research and discussion. The end product is a claim by the Linguapop team of a degree of linking to the CEFR based on specification, profiling the Linguapop placement test in relation to CEFR categories and levels.

The claim is further supported by evidence of good practice, internal validity and adequate quality procedures for all the steps of the test development and administration cycle. The specification procedures outlined in this document involve four steps:

• assuring adequate familiarisation with the CEFR;
• analysing the content of the examination or test in question in relation to the relevant categories of the CEFR; should an area tested not be covered by the CEFR, the user is asked to describe it;
• profiling the examination or test in relation to the relevant descriptor scales of the CEFR on the basis of this content analysis;
• making a first claim on the basis of this content analysis that an examination or test in question is related to a particular level of the CEFR.

The procedures involve three types of activity: - familiarisation activities as described in Chapter 3 of the Manual; - using a number of checklists to provide details about the content of the language examination; - using relevant CEFR descriptors to relate the language examination to the levels and categories of the CEFR.

This Specification process gives examination providers the opportunity to:

• increase the awareness of the importance of a good content analysis of examinations; - become familiar with and use the CEFR in planning and describing language examinations; - describe and analyse in a detailed way the content of an examination or test;
• provide evidence of the quality of the examination or test; - provide evidence of the relation between examinations/tests and the CEFR; - provide guidance for item writers; - increase the transparency for teachers, testers, examination users and test takers about the content and quality of the examination or test and its relationship to the CEFR. The forms to be filled in have an awareness-raising function (process) and are also sources of evidence to support the claim made (product).

2. General description of the Linguapop placement test

The first step in embarking on a linking project is to define and describe clearly the test that is going to be linked to the CEFR. Does the test have sufficient internal validity? Are there areas in which further development work would be advisable in order to increase or confirm the quality of the test and thus the meaningfulness of the result of the subsequent linking project?

The process of describing the test provides an excellent opportunity to step back from operational concerns and reflect on the extent to which the examination, and procedures associated with it, was meeting its aims. The completion of the process relies on appropriate use of the Manual (Section A2 in the Appendix) and the following forms:

A1: General Description of the Examination A2: Test Development A3: Marking A4: Grading A5: Reporting Results A6: Data Analysis A7: Rationale for Decisions

3. General informaion

1. General

Name of Examination: Linguapop placement test

Languages tested: English (French, German, Italian, Spanish)

Examining institution: Linguapop and associated partners

Versions analysed (date): V1 (Jan 2022.), V2 (Dec 2023.)

Type of examination: International Adaptive online Placement test

Purpose: Initial placement test

Target population: Young adults (>12 YOA), adults, general

No. of test takers per year: over 3500

2. What is the overall aim?

The overall aim of the Linguapop placement test is to provide a fast and accurate initial evaluation of language learners in line with CEFR standards in five languages, enabling accurate placement in a learning course.

3. What are the more specific objectives? If available describe the needs of the intended users on which this examination is based.

The more specific objectives include aiding to learner's motivation and learning strategies, as well as providing language schools and language training providers with an efficient tool for successful language teaching.

4. What is/are the principal domain(s)?

Public, personal, occupational and educational

5. Which communicative activities are tested?

1. Use of language
2. Reading comprehension
3. Listening comprehension

6. What is the weighting of the different subtests in the lobal result?

1. Use of language - 70%
2. Reading comprehension - 15%
3. Listening comprehension - 15%

7. Describe briefly the structure of each subtest

Use of language comprises multiple choice, ordering, open close, and gap fill tasks.

Reading comprehension includes multiple choice tasks.

Listening comprehension includes multiple choice tasks.

8. What type(s) of responses are required?

• Multiple-choice
• True/False
• Ordering
• Sentence completion
• Gapped text / cloze, selected response
• Open gapped text / cloze

9. What information is published for candidates and teachers?

• Overall aim
• Principal domain(s)
• Test subtests
• Test tasks
• Sample test papers
• Video of format
• Sample answer papers
• Standardised performance
• Sample certificate

10. Where is this accessible?

• Inside the Linguapop application
• On request from a testing institution

11. What is reported?

• Global grade plus graphic profile
• Detailed analysis (viewable by testing institution)

4. History of the Linguapop placement test development

Test development	Short description and/or references
What organisation decided that the examination was required?	The project partners have set the test profile based on the widespread need for efficient and accurate placement test for the five languages.
If an external organisation is involved, what influence do they have on design and development?	All Linguapop users give active feedback on the test's accuracy and their requirements, creating a closed loop of feedback for the further design and development of the test.
If no external organisation was involved, what other factors determined design and development of examination?	Although external organisations are involved, the initial development of Linguapop was based on: A needs analysis Internal description of examination aims Internal description of language level A syllabus or curriculum Profile of candidates
In producing test tasks are specific features of candidates taken into account?	The following specific features have been taken into account, to an adequate degree: Linguistic background (L1) Language learning background Age Educational level Socio-economic background Social-cultural factors Ethnic background Gender
Who writes the items or develops the test tasks?	Project partners, assisted by local/regional associate partners, language teachers and members of community of practice
Do test writers have guidance to ensure quality?	Training Guidelines Checklists Examples of valid, reliable, appropriate tasks calibrated to CEFR level description
Is training for test writers provided?	Yes
Are test tasks discussed before use?	Yes
If yes, by whom?	Individual colleagues Internal group discussion Internal stakeholders External stakeholders
Are test tasks pretested?	Yes
If yes, how?	Pilot testing sessions conducted by project partners Continuous review and feedback sessions from users
If no, why not?	N/A
Is the reliability of the test estimated?	Data collection and psychometric procedures Continuous review and feedback sessions from users Independent estimation of individual tasks by language experts
Are different aspects of validity estimated?	Yes for all: Face validity Content validity Concurrent validity Predictive validity Construct validity
If yes, describe how.	All aspects of validity are verified independently through an initial piloting phase, followed by independent review by language experts. Users of Linguapop provide additional feedback which is then implemented back into the contents of the placement test to increase validity.

5. Marking

Marking
How are the test tasks marked?	Computer software based on statistical matchmaking algorithms
Where are the test tasks marked?	Centrally, within the software itself
What criteria are used to select markers?	The software itself marks the tests. External markers may access the results of the test for further marking.
How is accuracy of marking promoted?	Regular checks performed by project team Regular checks performed by external providers Feedback system for potentially faulty tasks Automatic detection of outlier tasks based on statistical analysis
Describe the specifications of the rating criteria of productive and/or integrative test tasks.	One holistic score for each task Marks for different aspects for each task Rating scale for overall performance in test Rating grid for aspects of test performance Rating scale for each task Rating grid for aspects of each task Rating scale bands are defined in relation to CEFR
6-9. Rating Are productive or integrated test tasks single or double rated? If double rated, what procedures are used when differences between raters occur? Is inter-rater agreement calculated? Is intra-rater agreement calculated?	Linguapop is an automated tool for placement testing. Therefore, all tasks are single-rated by the tool by default. An optional double-rating may be performed by a member of the testing institution's staff. As Linguapop uses a statistical model for rating, inter-rater agreement is guaranteed. Intra-rater agreement - between algorithm and staff memebers - is not calculated.

6. Grading and results

Grading
Are pass marks and/or grades given?	Grades
Describe the procedures used to establish pass marks and/or grades and cut scores	Grade boundaries are predefined in accordance with CEFR for each test item.
If only pass/fail is reported, how are the cut-off scores for pass/fail set?	N/A
If grades are given, how are the grade boundaries decided?	The CEFR scale is divided into sub-sections, with each sub-section being given a numeric rating. The candidate is assigned a grade according to the CEFR based on the sub-section closest to their rating at the end of the test.
How is consistency in these standards maintained?	Being an automated test tool based on stable statistical algorithms, consistency is guaranteed accross all grades.

Results
What results are reported to candidates?	Global grade Grade per subtest
In what form are results reported?	In form of standardised CEFR Level Visual profile of global grade
On what document are results reported?	On-line, at the end of the placement test On-line, within an administrative section available to the testing institution
Is information provided to help candidates to interpret results? Give details.	Yes, information is provided to help candidates define their own CEFR level, together with recommendation regarding opportunities/ strategies for further learning.
Do candidates have the right to see the corrected and scored examination papers?	No. However, testing institutions may request the entire marked test.
Do candidates have the right to ask for remarking?	No. However, candidates may retake the test.

Data analysis
Is feedback gathered on the examinations?	Yes, via the test platform.
If yes, by whom?	Internal experts External experts Test administrators
Is the feedback incorporated in revised versions of the examinations?	Yes
Is data collected to do analysis on the tests?	Yes.
If yes, indicate how data are collected?	During pretesting, piloting and testing. Data on success rates for each test task is collected for analysis.
For which features is analysis on the data gathered carried out?	Difficulty Discrimination Reliability Validity
State which analytic methods have been used (e.g. in terms of psychometric procedures).	Repeat studies (to determine accuracy) Comparison of expected vs. actual results based on teacher feedback Comparison of results with other placement tests Entry and exit testing - tracking progress
Are performances of candidates from different groups analysed? If so, describe how.	Yes, in pilot testing sessions, care is taken to engage different groups of test takers.
Describe the procedures to protect the confidentiality of data.	Only necessary PII is collected (one or more of: name, email, phone number) The results available to candidates (public) do not display candidate PII. Only the testing institution has access to PII of their candidates.
Are relevant measurement concepts explained for test users? If so, describe how.	Yes. The test is accompanied with a rationale and instructions for users, including relevant measurement concepts as regards the evaluation of their initial L2 knowledge in line with CEFR.

Rationale for decisions (and revisions)

Short description and/or reference

Give the rationale for the decisions that have been made in relation to the examination or the test tasks in question. Is there a review cycle for the examination? (How often? Who by? Procedures for revising decisions)

All decisions in relation to the test tasks and algorithm are made based on continuous data influx from candidates taking the placement test. These incorporate testing institution feedback in addition to standard statistical data. The development of the placement test involves continual revision based on the incoming data. It is performed by the Linguapop development team in conjunction with external language experts and testing institutions.

Initial Estimation of Overall CEFR Level

The Linguapop placement test covers CEFR levels from A1 to C2.

Short rationale, reference to documentation

By utilizing matchmaking algorithms, Linguapop can quickly (within 10 language tasks) determine the approximate langauge skill level of the candidate. Further tasks are administered to confirm the candidate's language skill level, and achieve sub-level precision.

7. Listening comprehension

(part of Specification: Communicative Language Activities / Reception)

1. In what contexts (domains, situations, ...) are the test takers to show ability?

The test takers are required to show ability in all four domains: personal, public, educational and professional (Table 5 in CEFR 4.1), depending on the level and selected combination of test items within their respective test experience.

2. Which communication themes are the test takers expected to be able to handle?

Communication themes handled by the test takers include:

1. personal identification
2. house and home, environment
3. daily life
4. free time, entertainment
5. travel
6. relations with other people
7. health and body care
8. education
9. shopping
10. food and drink
11. services
12. places
13. language
14. weather

The above thematic areas can also be subcategorised as follows:

1. leisure
2. sports, hobbies and interests
3. internet, radio and TV
4. cinema, theatre, concert, etc.; exhibitions, museums, etc.
5. intellectual and artistic pursuits
6. press

(lists in CEFR 4.2)

3. Which communicative tasks, activities and strategies are the test takers expected to be able to handle?

In aural reception (listening) activities the language user as listener receives and processes a spoken input produced by one or more speakers.

Listening activities include:

• listening to public announcements (information, instructions, warnings, etc.);
• listening to media (radio, TV, recordings, cinema);
• listening as a member of a live audience (theatre, public meetings, public lectures, entertainments, etc.);
• listening to overheard conversations, etc.

In each case the user may be listening:

• for gist;
• for specific information;
• for detailed understanding;
• for implications, etc.

(Source: CEFR 4.3, 4.4.2.1)

Comprehension tasks may be designed so that the input text may contain differing amounts of information or degrees of cognitive and/or organisational complexity, or different amounts of support (visuals, key words, prompts, charts, diagrams, etc.) may be made available to help learners. Input may be chosen for its relevance to the learner (motivation) or for reasons extrinsic to the learner.

A text may be listened to up to three times. The type of response required can be quite simple (yes /no) or demanding (choose the best option).

Linguapop draws among other things on the fact that individuals may differ considerably in their approach to the same task. Consequently the difficulty of any particular task for an individual, and the strategies which he or she adopts to cope with the demands of the task, are the result of a number of interrelated factors arising from his or her competences (general and communicative) and individual characteristics, and the specific conditions and constraints under which the task is carried out. For these reasons the ease or difficulty of tasks cannot be predicted with certainty, least of all for individual learners, and in language learning contexts consideration needs to be given to ways of building flexibility and differentiation into task design and implementation.

In considering levels of task difficulty, therefore, Linguapop design takes into account:

• user/learner's competences and characteristics, including the learner's own purposes and learning style;
• task conditions and constraints which may affect the language user/learner's performance in carrying out specific tasks, and which, in learning contexts, may be adjusted to accommodate learner competences and characteristics

(CEFR 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3)

4. What text-types and what length of text are the test takers expected to be able to handle?

Types of texts featured in Linguapop's listening comprehension subtest include:

• public announcements and instructions;
• public speeches, lectures, presentations, sermons;
• entertainment (drama, shows, readings, songs);
• sports commentaries (football, boxing, atheltics, etc.);
• news broadcasts;
• public debates and discussion;
• inter-personal dialogues and conversations;
• telephone conversations;
• job interviews.

(CEFR 4.6)

5. After reading the scale for Overall Listening Comprehension, given below, indicate and justify at which level(s) of the scale the subtest should be situated.

Linguapop first tests the candidate's general use of language skills. Based on the result of the use of language section, an appropriate listening task is selected for the candidate, and marked upon completion.

This ensures that the level of the listening task is approximately within the candidate's skill level, and gives an estimation of their listening skills in relation to their general use of language skills.

8. Reading comprehension

(part of Specification: Communicative Language Activities / Reception)

1. In what contexts (domains, situations, …) are the test takers to show ability?

The test takers are required to show ability in all four domains: personal, public, educational and professional (Table 5 in CEFR 4.1), depending on the level and selected combination of test items within their respective test experience.

2. Which communication themes are the test takers expected to be able to handle?

Communication themes handled by the test takers include:

1. personal identification
2. house and home, environment
3. daily life
4. free time, entertainment
5. travel
6. relations with other people
7. health and body care
8. education
9. shopping
10. food and drink
11. services
12. places
13. language
14. weather

The above thematic areas can also be subcategorised as follows:

1. leisure
2. sports, hobbies and interests
3. internet, radio and TV
4. cinema, theatre, concert, etc.; exhibitions, museums, etc.
5. intellectual and artistic pursuits
6. press

(lists in CEFR 4.2)

3. Which communicative tasks, activities and strategies are the test takers expected to be able to handle?

In reading activities the candidate receives and processes a sample - usually a paragraph - of text.

Reading activities include:

• books, fiction and non-fiction, including literary journals;
• magazines, newspapers;
• instruction manuals (DIY, cookbooks, etc.);
• textbooks;
• comic strips;
• brochures, prospectuses, leaflets;
• advertising material;
• public signs and notices;
• supermarket, shop, market stall signs;
• packaging and labelling on goods, tickets, etc.;
• forms and questionnaires;
• dictionaries (monolingual and bilingual), thesauri;
• business and professional letters, emails, faxes;
• personal letters;
• essays and exercises;
• memoranda, reports and papers;
• notes and messages, etc.;
• databases (news, literature, general information, etc.).

In each case the user may be reading:

• for gist;
• for specific information;
• for detailed understanding;
• for implications, etc.

(Source: CEFR 4.3, 4.4.2.1)

Comprehension tasks may be designed so that the input text may contain differing amounts of information or degrees of cognitive and/or organisational complexity, or different amounts of support (visuals, key words, prompts, charts, diagrams, etc.) may be made available to help learners.

Input may be chosen for its relevance to the learner (motivation) or for reasons extrinsic to the learner.

A text may be read as often as necessary. The type of response required can be quite simple (yes /no) or demanding (choose the best option).

Linguapop draws among other things on the fact that individuals may differ considerably in their approach to the same task.

Consequently the difficulty of any particular task for an individual, and the strategies which he or she adopts to cope with the demands of the task, are the result of a number of interrelated factors arising from his or her competences (general and communicative) and individual characteristics, and the specific conditions and constraints under which the task is carried out. For these reasons the ease or difficulty of tasks cannot be predicted with certainty, least of all for individual learners, and in language learning contexts consideration needs to be given to ways of building flexibility and differentiation into task design and implementation.

In considering levels of task difficulty, therefore, Linguapop takes into account: • user/learner's competences and characteristics, including the learner's own purposes and learning style; • task conditions and constraints which may affect the language user/learner's performance in carrying out specific tasks, and which, in learning contexts, may be adjusted to accommodate learner competences and characteristics (CEFR 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3)

4. What text-types and what length of text are the test takers expected to be able to handle?

Types of texts featured in Linguapop include:

• books, fiction and non-fiction, including literary journals;
• magazines, newspapers;
• instruction manuals (DIY, cookbooks, etc.);
• textbooks;
• comic strips;
• brochures, prospectuses, leaflets;
• advertising material;
• public signs and notices;
• supermarket, shop, market stall signs;
• packaging and labelling on goods, tickets, etc.;
• forms and questionnaires;
• dictionaries (monolingual and bilingual), thesauri;
• business and professional letters, emails, faxes;
• personal letters;
• essays and exercises;
• memoranda, reports and papers;
• notes and messages, etc.;
• databases (news, literature, general information, etc.).

(CEFR 4.6)

5. After reading the scale for Overall Reading Comprehension, given below, indicate and justify at which level(s) of the scale the subtest should be situated.

Linguapop first tests the candidate's general use of language skills. Based on the result of the use of language section, an appropriate reading task is selected for the candidate, and marked upon completion.

This ensures that the level of the reading task is approximately within the candidate's skill level, and gives an estimation of their reading skills in relation to their general use of language skills.

9. Interaction, spoken interaction and production, written production

Linguapop's placement test coverage does not include spoken interaction or production in its main subtest suite. Testing institutions may subject their candidate to their own subtest to supplement Linguapop's assertion of the candidate's skill level.

Written production is currently not covered, but it is being considered as an optional part of the placement test. However, testing institutions would have to mark the tasks themselves, with Linguapop serving exclusively as the testing medium.

10. Specification: Sources used in establishing communicative language competence

The CEFR scales most relevant to Receptive skills have been used to create Table A3 (download), which can be referred to in this section. Table A3 does not include any descriptors for “plus levels”. The original scales consulted, some of which do define plus levels, include:

General Linguistic Range	English: page 110
Vocabulary Range Socio-linguistic Competence	English: page 112
Socio-linguistic Appropriateness Pragmatic Competence	English: page 122
Thematic Development	English: page 125
Cohesion and Coherence	English: page 125
Propositional Precision Strategic Competence	English: page 129
Identifying Cues/Inferring	English: page 72

11. Linguistic competence

Linguistic Competence	Short description and/or reference
What is the range of lexical and grammatical competence that the test takers are expected to be able to handle?	Lexical competence, knowledge of, and ability to use, the vocabulary of a language, consists of lexical elements and grammatical elements. Lexical elements include: Fixed expressions, consisting of several words, which are used and learnt as wholes (sentential formulae, including direct exponents of language functions such as greetings, proverbs, relict archaisms), phrasal idioms, intensifiers, fixed frames, learnt and used as unanalysed wholes, into which words or phrases are inserted to form meaningful sentences (e.g.: "Please may I have..."), other fixed phrases, such as phrasal verbs, compound prepositions, fixed collocations, single word forms… Grammatical elements belong to closed word classes, e.g. (in English & other languages): articles (a, the) quantifiers (some, all, many, etc.) demonstratives (this, that, these, those) personal pronouns (I, we, he, she, it, they, me, you, etc.) question words and relatives (who, what, which, where, etc.) possessives (my, your, his, her, its, etc.) prepositions (in, at, by, with, of, etc.) auxiliary verbs (be, do, have, modals) conjunctions (and, but, if, although) particles (e.g. in German: ja, wohl, aber, doch, etc.) (CEFR 5.2.1.1 and 5.2.1.2)
After reading the scale for Linguistic Competence in Table A3, indicate and justify at which level(s) of the scale the examination should be situated.	The various elements of lexical and grammatical competence are embedded in the respective test items spanning the range from A1 to C2 of language competence, wherein the item level determines the level of its grammatical and lexical components that the test takers are expected to be able to handle.

Socio-linguistic Competence	Short description and/or reference
What are the socio-linguistic competences that the test takers are expected to be able to handle: linguistic markers, politeness conventions, register, adequacy, dialect/accent, etc.?	Linguistic markers of social relations are widely divergent in different languages and cultures, depending on such factors as relative status, closeness of relation, register of discourse, etc. The examples given below for English are not universally applicable and are provided solely by way of example: Use and choice of greetings: on arrival, e.g. Hello! Good morning! introductions, e.g. How do you do? leave-taking, e.g. Good-bye . . . See you later Use and choice of address forms: frozen, e.g. My Lord, Your Grace formal, e.g. Sir, Madam, Miss, Dr, Professor (+ surname) informal, e.g. first name only, such as John! Susan! informal, e.g. no address form familiar, e.g. dear, darling; (popular) mate, love peremptory, e.g. surname only, such as Smith! You (there)! ritual insult, e.g. you stupid idiot! (often affectionate) conventions for turntaking use and choice of expletives (e.g. My God!, Bloody Hell!, etc.) Politeness conventions vary from one culture to another and are a frequent source of inter-ethnic isunderstanding, especially when literally interpreted. They include "positive" politeness (e.g.: showing interest in a person's well being, sharing experiences and concerns, "troubles talk", expressing admiration, affection, gratitude…), "negative" politeness (e.g.: avoiding face-threatening behaviour, expressing regret, apologising…), using hedges, appropriate use of "please", "thank you", etc., impoliteness, bluntness, frankness, expressing contempt, dislike...; Expressions of folk wisdom make a significant contribution to popular culture. They are frequently used, or perhaps more often referred to or played upon, for instance in newspaper headlines. A knowledge of this accumulated folk wisdom, expressed in language assumed to be known to all, is a significant component of the linguistic aspect of sociocultural competence. proverbs, e.g. a stitch in time saves nine idioms, e.g. a sprat to catch a mackerel familiar quotations, e.g. a man's a man for that expressions of: belief, such as - weathersaws, attitudes, etc. Register differences referring to systematic differences between varieties of language used in different contexts and implying differences in level of formality: frozen, e.g. Pray silence for His Worship the Mayor! formal, e.g. May we now come to order, please. neutral, e.g. Shall we begin? informal, e.g. Right. What about making a start? familiar, e.g. O.K. Let's get going. intimate, e.g. Ready dear? In developing Linguapop, and especially in determining the level of the test items, care is taken of the fact that in early learning (say up to level B1), a relatively neutral register is generally more appropriate. Conversely, acquaintance with more formal or more familiar registers is likely to come over a period of time, and at first as a receptive competence. Sociolinguistic competence also includes the ability to recognise the linguistic markers of, for example: social class regional provenance national origin ethnicity occupational group Such markers include: lexicon, e.g. Scottish wee for "small" grammar, e.g. Cockney I ain't seen nothing for "I haven't seen anything" phonology, e.g. New York "boid" for "bird" vocal characteristics (rhythm, loudness, etc.) paralinguistics body language (CEFR 5.2.2)
After reading the scale for Sociolinguistic Competence in Table A3, indicate and justify at which level(s) of the scale the examination should be situated.	The various elements of Socio-linguistic competence are embedded in the respective test items spanning the range from A1 to C2 of language competence, wherein the item level determines the level of its Socio-linguistic components that the test takers are expected to be able to handle.

12. Pragmatic & strategic competence

Pragmatic competence	Short description and/or reference
What are the pragmatic competences that the test takers are expected to be able to handle: discourse competences, functional competences?	Pragmatic competences are concerned with the user/learner's knowledge of the principles according to which messages are: organised, structured and arranged ("discourse competence"); used to perform communicative functions ("functional competence"); sequenced according to interactional and transactional schemata ("design competence"). (CEFR 5.2.3)
After reading the scale for Pragmatic Competence in Table A3, indicate and justify at which level(s) of the scale the examination should be situated.	The various elements of pragmatic competence are embedded in the respective test items spanning the range from A1 to C2 of language competence, wherein the item level determines the level of its pragmatic components that the test takers are expected to be able to handle.

Strategic Competence	Short description and/or reference
What are the strategic competences that the test takers are expected to be able to handle?	Reception strategies involve: identifying the context and knowledge of the world relevant to it, activating in the process what are thought to be appropriate schemata. These in turn set up expectations about the organisation and content of what is to come (Framing). During the process of receptive activity cues identified in the total context (linguistic and nonlinguistic) and the expectations in relation to that context set up by the relevant schemata are used to build up a representation of the meaning being expressed and a hypothesis as to the communicative intention behind it. Through a process of successive approximation, apparent and possible gaps in the message are filled in order to flesh out the representation of meaning, and the significance of the message and of its constituent parts are worked out (Inferring). The gaps filled through inference may be caused by linguistic restrictions, difficult receptive conditions, lack of associated knowledge, or by assumed familiarity, obliqueness, understatement or phonetic reduction on the part of the speaker/writer. The viability of the current model arrived at through this process is checked against the evidence of the incoming co-textual and contextual cues to see if they "fit" the activated schema - the way one is interpreting the situation (Hypothesis testing). An identified mismatch leads to a return to step one (Framing) in the search for an alternative schema which would better explain the incoming cues (Revising Hypotheses). Planning: Framing (selecting mental set, activating schemata, setting up expectations). Execution: Identifying cues and inferring from them. Evaluation: Hypothesis testing: matching cues to schemata. Repair: Revising hypotheses. (CEFR 4.4.2.4)
After reading the scale for Strategic Competence in Table A3, indicate and justify at which level(s) of the scale the examination should be situated.	The various elements of Strategic competence are embedded in the respective test items spanning the range from A1 to C2 of language competence, wherein the item level determines the level of its stragegic components that the test takers are expected to be able to handle.

13. Mediation

The question of which CEFR scales are most relevant to Mediation depends upon the type of mediation involved.

In a foreign language context, one will naturally focus on the foreign language skill. Thus the language competences required in mediating from the foreign language to mother tongue will be primarily those required for reception, whilst for mediating from the mother tongue to the foreign language those for production will be necessary. For Mediation entirely in the foreign language, aspects of competence for both reception and production will be required.

Linguapop does not currently test for mediation skills, nor are there plans for subsequent inclusion.

14. Specification: Outcome of the analysis

Internal piloting, piloting with partner testing institutions and continuous analysis confirms that the Linguapop placement test covers the entirety of the CEFR scale accross all tested competences.

CEFR Level	Covered by Linguapop?
A1	Use of language
A1+	Use of language
A2	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension
A2+	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension
B1	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension
B1+	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension
B2	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension
B2+	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension
C1	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension
C1+	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension
C2	Use of language Reading comprehension Listening comprehension