Technical Report Ch 01
Transcript of Technical Report Ch 01
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
1/18
!"#$%'( *"+,-.
!"#$% '(#)*+,- .(#/+0 )-
1,-2(,2+ 3)4*+%+-5+$
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
2/18
ii
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
Technical Report authorsThe table below presents the key authors of the Technical Report.
The following people were instrumental in the reviewing, proofreading and formatting
chapters of this report: Erna Gille, Johanna Kordes, Robert Manchin, Agnes Ilyes,Peter Husztik, Anna Chan, Michaela Perlman-Balme, Julia Guess, Danilo Rini,
Guiliana Bolli, Sylvie Lepage, Roselyne Marty, Heidi Endres, Inma Borrego, Joost
Schotten, Remco Feskens, Rebecca Stevens and John Savage.
Key authors Institutions Position
Neil Jones ESOL Project Director
Karen Ashton ESOL Project Manager, Field Operations Lead
Gunter Maris Cito Data Analysis Lead
Sanneke Schouwstra Cito Questionnaires development Lead includingframework and indices
Norman Verhelst Cito Standard Setting Lead
Ivailo Partchev Cito Weighing Lead, Data Management Lead
Jesse Koops Cito Data management Co-Lead
Martin Robinson ESOL Language Testing Team Lead
Manas
ChattopadhyayGallup Sampling and base weights Lead
Gergely Hideg Gallup Sampling Co-Lead
Jostein Ryssevik Gallup Software systems Lead
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
3/18
iii
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
Abbreviations and codes used in this report
The following educational system and language codes are used throughout this report.
Participatingeducationalsystem
Educationalsystem code
Questionnairelanguage(s)
Language code
Flemish Community of
BelgiumBE nl Dutch Nl
French Community of
BelgiumBE fr French Fr
German Community of
BelgiumBE de German/French de, fr
Bulgaria BG Bulgarian Bg
Croatia HR Croatian Hr
England UK-ENG English En
Estonia EE Estonian; Russian et, er
France FR French Fr
Greece EL Greek El
Malta MT English En
Netherlands NL Dutch Nl
Poland PL Polish Pl
Portugal PT Portuguese Pt
Slovenia SI Slovene Sl
Spain ES
Spanish, Basque,
Catalan, Galician,
Valencian
es, Spanish-Basque
Spanish-Catalan, Spanish-
Galician, Spanish-Valencian
Sweden SE Swedish Sv
The following abbreviations are used in this report.
Abbreviations In full
BoW Body of Work method
CB Computer-based
CD Compact Disc
CEFR Common European Framework of Reference
CFI Comparative Fit Index
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
4/18
iv
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
Abbreviations In full
CLIL Content and Language Integrated Learning
COGN Cognitive
CML Conditional Maximum Likelihood
CMOS Cumulative Measure of Size
DIF Differential Item Functioning
DVD Digital Versatile Disc
EC European Commission
EILC European Indicator of Language Competences
ENR Enrolment
ESCS Economic, social and cultural status
ESLC European Survey on Language Competences
FL Foreign Language
Gb Gigabyte
HISEI Parental Occupation
HOMEPOS Home possessions
ICT Information and Communication Technologies
ID Identification
ILO International Labour Organisation
INES OECD Indicators of Education Systems
INT International
IRT Item Response Theory
ISO International Organization for Standardization
ISCED International Standard Classification of Education
ISCO International Standard Classification of Occupations
ISCO_F International Standard Classification of Occupation Father
ISCO_M International Standard Classification of Occupation Mother
ISEI International Socioeconomic Index
MM Multiple Marking
MOS Measure of Size
NFI Normed Fit Index
NNFI Non-Normed Fit Index
NRC National Research Coordinator
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
5/18
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
6/18
vi
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 2
1.1 KEY ELEMENTS OF THE ESLC ........................................................................................ 4
1.2 THIS TECHNICAL REPORT............................................................................................... 7
1.3 REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 8
2 INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT - LANGUAGE TESTS .......................................... 10
2.1 DEVELOPMENT OF THE LANGUAGE TESTING FRAMEWORK.......................................... 11
2.2 DEVELOPMENT OF THE LANGUAGE TESTS.................................................................... 27
2.3 TEST DEVELOPMENT PROCESS...................................................................................... 34
2.4 MARKING..................................................................................................................... 41
2.5 FINAL TEST DESIGN...................................................................................................... 44
2.6 REFERENCES................................................................................................................. 49
3 INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT - QUESTIONNAIRES .......................................... 51
3.1 CONCEPTUALISATION................................................................................................... 51
3.2 OPERATIONALISATION................................................................................................. 74
3.3 REFERENCES................................................................................................................. 98
4 OPERATIONS - SAMPLING ........................................................................................ 105
4.1 TARGET POPULATION AND OVERVIEW OF THE SAMPLING DESIGN............................. 105
4.2 POPULATION COVERAGE AND SCHOOL AND STUDENT PARTICIPATION RATE
STANDARDS........................................................................................................................... 107
4.3 COVERAGE OF THE INTERNATIONAL TARGET POPULATION....................................... 107
4.4 ACCURACY AND PRECISION........................................................................................ 109
4.5 RESPONSE RATES........................................................................................................ 110
4.6 ESTABLISHING THE NATIONAL TARGET POPULATION................................................ 111
4.7 SAMPLING IMPLEMENTATIONTEST LANGUAGES.................................................... 111
4.8 TESTING GRADES........................................................................................................ 112
4.9 SCHOOL SAMPLING FRAME......................................................................................... 116
4.10 STRATIFICATION..................................................................................................... 117
4.11 ASSIGNING A MEASURE OF SIZE TO EACH SCHOOL................................................. 122
4.12 SORTING THE SAMPLING FRAME............................................................................. 122
4.13 SCHOOL SAMPLE ALLOCATION ACROSS EXPLICIT STRATA..................................... 123
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
7/18
vii
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
4.14 PROBABILITY PROPORTIONAL TO SIZE SAMPLING.................................................. 123
4.15 IDENTIFYING REPLACEMENT SCHOOLS................................................................... 125
4.16 STUDENT SAMPLING............................................................................................... 126
4.17 SELECTING THE SCHOOL SAMPLE PERSONNEL........................................................ 129
4.18 SAMPLING FORMS................................................................................................... 130
5 OPERATIONS - TRANSLATION ................................................................................ 133
5.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 133
5.2 OVERVIEW OF TRANSLATION SYSTEM,SUPPORT AND TRAINING............................... 134
5.3 DOCUMENTATION NEEDING TRANSLATION AND THE TRANSLATION PROCESS.......... 135
5.4 SURVEYLANG TRANSLATION GUIDELINES................................................................. 140
5.5 QUESTIONNAIRE LANGUAGE,LOCALISATIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO STANDARD
PROCESS................................................................................................................................ 141
5.6 DEVELOPMENT OF SOURCE VERSIONS........................................................................ 143
5.7 FIELD TRIAL AND MAIN STUDY TRANSLATION PROCESSES....................................... 144
5.8 RECRUITMENT GUIDELINES FOR TRANSLATORS........................................................ 145
5.9 REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 145
6 OPERATIONS - THE SURVEYLANG SOFTWARE PLATFORM ........................ 148
6.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 148
6.2 REQUIREMENTS.......................................................................................................... 148
6.3 ARCHITECTURE.......................................................................................................... 150
6.4 TEST-ITEM AUTHORING TOOL.................................................................................... 151
6.5 TEST-ITEM DATABANK............................................................................................... 154
6.6 TRANSLATION MANAGEMENT.................................................................................... 156
6.7 TEST ASSEMBLY......................................................................................................... 157
6.8 A:TEST ASSEMBLY.................................................................................................... 157
6.9 B:ALLOCATION.......................................................................................................... 160
6.10 TEST MATERIALS PRODUCTION............................................................................... 162
6.11 THE USBMEMORY STICK PRODUCTION UNIT......................................................... 163
6.12 TEST RENDERING.................................................................................................... 164
6.13 THE USB-BASED TEST RENDERING OPERATING ENVIRONMENT............................ 166
6.14 DATA UPLOAD SERVICE.......................................................................................... 166
6.15 ADDITIONAL UTILITIES........................................................................................... 167
6.16 SOFTWARE QUALITY AND TESTING........................................................................ 167
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
8/18
viii
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
6.17 PERFORMANCE........................................................................................................ 168
7 FIELD OPERATIONS ................................................................................................... 170
7.1 OVERVIEW OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES............................................................ 170
7.2 KEY NATIONAL RESEARCH COORDINATOR TASKS.................................................... 170
7.3 COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN SURVEYLANG AND NRCS.......................................... 173
7.4 STAFF SELECTION AND STAFF TRAINING.................................................................... 174
7.5 NRCSAMPLING TASKS............................................................................................... 175
7.6 NRCPRE-ADMINISTRATION TESTING TASKS.............................................................. 176
7.7 NRCTEST MATERIALS MANAGEMENT TASKS............................................................ 176
7.8 KEY SCHOOL COORDINATOR TASKS.......................................................................... 178
7.9 KEY TEST ADMINISTRATOR TASKS............................................................................ 1817.10 KEY TECHNICAL SUPPORT PERSON TASKS (IF CBTESTING) .................................. 183
7.11 RECEIPT OF MATERIALS AT THE NRCAFTER TESTING........................................... 183
7.12 DATA ENTRY TASKS................................................................................................ 183
7.13 MARKING OF WRITING........................................................................................... 185
7.14 DATA SUBMISSION.................................................................................................. 188
7.15 DATA CHECKING..................................................................................................... 189
7.16 CODING OF STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRES................................................................ 189
7.17 MAIN STUDY:A REVIEW......................................................................................... 191
7.18 REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 191
8 OPERATIONS - QUALITY MONITORING .............................................................. 193
8.1 AN INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 193
8.2 SUPPORT FOR NRCS IN QUALITY MONITORING.......................................................... 194
8.3 IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY MONITORING PROCEDURES...................................... 196
8.4 ESLCQUALITY MONITORS......................................................................................... 197
8.5 QUALITY MONITORING DATA..................................................................................... 200
9 DATA PROCESSING - WEIGHTING ......................................................................... 203
9.1 MOTIVATION AND OVERVIEW.................................................................................... 203
9.2 BASE WEIGHTS........................................................................................................... 205
9.3 ADJUSTING WEIGHTS FOR NON-RESPONSE................................................................. 207
9.4 VARIANCE ESTIMATION.............................................................................................. 214
9.5 REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 215
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
9/18
ix
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
10 DATA PROCESSING - QUESTIONNAIRE INDICES .......................................... 217
10.1 TYPE OF INDICES..................................................................................................... 217
10.2 TESTING THE STRUCTURE OF LATENT VARIABLES................................................. 217
10.3 DATA PREPARATION............................................................................................... 218
10.4 STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................................................................... 219
10.5 TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE..................................................................................... 247
10.6 PRINCIPAL QUESTIONNAIRE................................................................................... 261
10.7 REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 273
11 SETTING STANDARDS IN RELATION TO THE CEFR .................................... 275
11.1 OUTLINE OF THE STANDARD SETTING CONFERENCE (SEPT 26-302011) ................ 276
11.2 STANDARD SETTING METHODOLOGY..................................................................... 277
11.3 THE STANDARD SETTING CONFERENCE -RESULTS................................................. 283
11.4 THE WRITING ALIGNMENT STUDY (AUGUST 2011) ................................................ 289
11.5 WRITING ALIGNMENT STUDY OUTCOMES............................................................... 291
11.6 THE STATUS OF THE STANDARDS............................................................................ 294
11.7 REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 295
12 ANALYSES .................................................................................................................. 298
12.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 298
12.2 ITEM RESPONSE THEORY........................................................................................ 300
12.3 LINKING LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY TO KEY POLICY INDICATORS:LATENT
REGRESSION.......................................................................................................................... 308
12.4 APPENDIX:GENERATING PLAUSIBLE VALUES........................................................ 310
12.5 REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 320
13 DATA PROCESSING - DATA SETS ........................................................................ 332
13.1 THE STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE AND PERFORMANCE DATA FILE........................... 332
13.2 LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT ITEMS DATA FILES.......................................................... 332
13.3 TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE DATA FILE................................................................... 333
13.4 SCHOOL QUESTIONNAIRE DATA FILES.................................................................... 333
13.5 RECORDS IN THE DATA SETS................................................................................... 334
13.6 RECORDS EXCLUDED FROM THE DATASETS........................................................... 334
13.7 WEIGHTS IN THE DATASETS.................................................................................... 334
13.8 REPRESENTING MISSING DATA............................................................................... 335
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
10/18
x
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
13.9 IDENTIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS,SCHOOLS AND MARKERS................................ 335
14 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................. 338
14.1 EXAMPLE LANGUAGE TEST TASK TYPES................................................................. 338
14.2 QUESTIONNAIRES ................................................................................................... 373
14.3 SAMPLING FORMS................................................................................................... 553
14.4 ESLCTECHNICAL STANDARDS.............................................................................. 630
14.5 DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................... 641
14.6 MULTIPLE MARKING............................................................................................... 630
14.7 MANAGING AND IMPLEMENTING THE ESLC .......................................................... 630
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
11/18
1
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
!"#$%&' )*
+,%'-./0%1-,
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
12/18
2
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
1 Introduction
The European Survey on Language Competences (ESLC), the first survey of its kind,is designed to collect information about the foreign language proficiency of students in
the last year of lower secondary education (ISCED2) or the second year of upper
secondary education (ISCED3) in participating countries or country communities
(referred to herein as
language competences but a survey that should be able to provide information about
language learning, teaching methods and curricula. (European Commission 2007a).
by questionnaires to teachers and pupils to gather contextual informatio
The ESLC is a collaborative effort among the 16 participating educational systems and
SurveyLang partners to measure the language proficiency of approximately 53000
students across Europe, to assist the European Commission in establishing a
European Indicator of Language Competence to monitor progress against the March
2002 Barcelona European Council conclusions. These conclusions
improve the mastery of basic skills, in particular by teaching at least two foreign
languages from a v linguistic
competence indicator 2005). As the Commission (European
Commission 2005) states, the decision to launch the ESLC arose from the current
lack of data on actual language skills of people in the European Union and the need
ESLC was thereforeinitiated by the Commission with the aim that
establishment of a European Indicator of Language Competence and will provide
reliable information on language learning and on the language competences of young
a)
policy makers, teachers and learners in all surveyed
of contextual information in the background questionnaires (European Commission
2007b).
Each educational system tested students in two languages; the two most widely taught
of the five most widely taught European languages: English, French, German, Italian
and Spanish. This effectively meant that there were two separate samples within each
educational system, one for the first test language, and one for the second. Each
sampled student was therefore tested in one language only.
assessed in two of the three skills of Listening, Reading and Writing.
understand spoken or written texts, or to express themselves in writing. Their observed
language proficiency is described in terms of the levels of the Common European
Framework of Reference (CEFR) (Council of Europe 2001), to enable comparison
across participating educational systems. The data collected by the ESLC will allow
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
13/18
3
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
participating educational systems
weaknesses across the tested language skills, and to share good practice with other
participating educational systems.
To facilitate a more productive comparison of language policies, and language
teaching methods (European Commission 2005:5) context questionnaires, covering
the 13 policy issues detailed below, were administered to the students tested, their
teachers of foreign languages, and their institution principals. In addition, system-wide
information was collected through the National Research Coordinators.
Early language learning is explored through questions on the onset of foreign
language learning, and the weekly amount of time for target and foreign
language learning (lesson time and homework).
The diversity and order of foreign language teaching is explored through
questions to principals and students on the number of foreign and ancient
languages provided (schools) and learned (students).The language friendly living environment explores the number of students' first
languages, languages used at home, and parents' target language
knowledge; also the ways in which students use the target language: at
home, in the living environment, through visits abroad or through the media.
The concept of the language friendly school looks at the degree of language
specialisation, for example, whether content and language integrated
learning (CLIL) is practised.
A set of indices related to the use of ICT to enhance foreign language learning
and teaching.
Intercultural exchanges arising from school trips, visits or language projects are
explored from the perspective of students, teachers, principals andeducational systems.
The impact of teachers from other language communities is explored.
Language learning for all looks at provision for immigrant students of the first
and second generation.
Under approaches to foreign language teaching a large number of indices
explore, for example, the relative emphasis teachers put on teaching the
different skills, emphasis placed on similarities between the target language
and other known languages, and use of the target language during lessons
by teachers and students - all these from the perspective of teachers and
students.
language: their perception of its usefulness, of how difficult it is to learn andof how they evaluate the lessons, teacher and textbooks.
Teacher initial and in-service training includes indices for teacher qualifications
and competences. Questions to teachers and principals explore financial
and other incentives for in-service training, how much training teachers
attend, and whether the focus of training is on language teaching.
A period of work or study in another country addresses questions to teachers
and principals on the number of such stays, financial incentives, and
availability of funding for exchange visits or stays abroad.
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
14/18
4
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
Several questions on the use of existing European language assessment tools
explore uptake of the CEFR and a language portfolio: is use of the CEFR
language portfolio, and how do they use it?
for example on
the target language and other languages and
the number of languages taught over the past five years.
The ESLC data adds significantly to the knowledge base that was previously available
at European level or from official national statistics. The data should prove a valuable
resource for researchers, policy makers, educators, parents and students and will
enable them to review progress towards achieving the March 2002 Barcelona
European Council conclusions of learning two foreign languages from an early age.
SurveyLang recognises the contribution of all of its partners and National Research
Coordinators (NRCs) in the delivery of the survey. The ESLC is methodologicallycomplex and its implementation has required a considerable collaborative effort by the
participating educational systems with SurveyLang. The in-country administration of
the survey was the responsibility of the representatives of each educational system
(NRCs). Implementing the ESLC depended not only on this collaboration but also on
pooling the expertise of SurveyLang partners to develop and exploit innovative
methodologies, test instruments and technologies. This Technical Report describes
these methodologies, together with other aspects of the methodology that have
enabled the ESLC to provide data to support the European Commission in this area of
policy. The descriptions are provided at a level that will enable review of the
implemented procedures and the solutions adopted for the challenges faced.
This report contains a description of the theoretical underpinning of the complex
techniques used for the ESLC and to create the ESLC data sets, which contain data
on approximately 50000 students from 151educational systems. The data sets include
not only information on student performance in two of the three language skill areas of
Listening, Reading and Writing, but also their responses to the Student Questionnaire
that they completed as part of the administration. Data from the school principals and
language teachers of participating schools teaching at the eligible ISCED level are also
included in the data sets.
1.1 Key elements of the ESLC
Elements central to the design of the ESLC are outlined in brief below. The remainder
of this report describes these elements, and the associated procedures and
methodology, in more detail.
1As England participated in the Main Study later than other adjudicated entities, at this stage data from England is notincluded in the data sets.
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
15/18
5
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
Sample size: Approximately 53000 students enrolled in schools in 16 participating
educational systems were assessed in the ESLC Main Study 2011.
Tested education level: Students were tested at the last year of lower secondary
education (ISCED2) or the second year of upper secondary education (ISCED3) in
participating educational systems.
Tests: The tests covered three language skills: Listening, Reading and Writing in five
test languages: English, French, German, Italian and Spanish. Each student was
assessed in two out of these three skills in one test language and also completed a
contextual questionnaire. The language tests measure achievement of levels A1 to B2
of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001).
The pre-A1 level which is also reported indicates failure to achieve A1. Language
teachers and school principals at sampled schools also completed a contextual
questionnaire.
Testing mode: The ESLC was administered in both paper and computer-based
formats. The Teacher and Principal Questionnaires were administered through an
internet-based system.
Testing duration: Students had either 30 minutes or 45 minutes to complete each
test. All Listening and Reading tests were set at 30 minutes. The low and intermediate
Writing tests were set at 30 minutes, while the high level Writing test and Student
Questionnaires (including a CEFR self-assessment) were set at 45 minutes. The total
testing time for a student, including the questionnaire, was thus 105 or 120 minutes.
Summary of tested languages, levels and testing mode across participatingeducational systems: The tables below provide a summary of the tested languages,
levels and testing mode of each educational system. Further details on the tested
languages and levels can be found in Chapter 4 on sampling.
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
16/18
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
17/18
7
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
Table 2 Tested languages summary
Language Number of countries testing
language as first most widelytaught language
Number of countries testing language
as second most widely taught language
English 13 2
French 3 3
German 0 8
Italian 0 1
Spanish 0 2
Table 3 Tested levels summary
Number of countries testing
ISCED 2
Number of countries testing ISCED 3
First most widely taught
language13 3
Second most widely
taught language11 5
Outcomesthe ESLC delivers the following outcomes:
A profile of the language proficiency of sampled students. Contextual
indicators providing a broad range of information on the context of foreignlanguage teaching policies and foreign language learning at student, teacher
and school level.
Information on the relationship between language proficiency and the
contextual indicators.
A resource and knowledge base for policy analysis and research.
1.2 This technical report
This technical report is concerned with the technical aspects of the ESLC whereas the
Final Report is concerned with the results of the ESLC. Policy recommendations areoutlined in the conclusions of the Final Report and not discussed in this report.
This technical report describes the methodologies and procedures adppted to enable
the ESLC to provide high quality data to support the European Commission in this
area of policy. The descriptions are provided at a level that will enable review of the
implemented procedures and solutions to the challenges faced.
The report covers the following areas:
-
8/9/2019 Technical Report Ch 01
18/18
8
First European Survey on Language Competences: Technical Report
Instrument design: Chapters 2 and 3 describe the development of the
language tests to produce measures comparable across languages and
interpretable in relation to the CEFR, and the questionnaires, to address a
range of European language policy issues.
Operations: Chapter 4 describes the sampling procedures, Chapter 5 the
translation of the questionnaires, Chapter 6 the innovative software platform
developed for the ESLC to support both paper-based and computer-based
administration, Chapter 7 the field operations and Chapter 8 the approach
taken to quality monitoring.
Data processing, scale construction and data products: Chapter 9 describes
the handling of sampling weights, Chapter 10 design of the questionnaire
indices, Chapter 11 the approach to setting CEFR-related standards for the
five languages, Chapter 12 the analyses, and Chapter 13 the development
and the contents of the data sets.
Appendices: Examples of the language test task types, the complete set ofMain Study Questionnaires, the sampling forms, the Technical Standards and
a comprehensive report on multiple marking of Writing.
1.3 References
Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, Teaching, Assessment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
European Commission (2005) Commission Communication of 1 August 2005 - The
European Indicator of Language Competence [COM(2005) 356 final - Not
published in the Official Journal], retrieved 18 January 2012, from
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/education_training_youth/lifelong_learni
ng/c11083_en.htm
European Commission (2007a) Communication from the Commission to the Council of
13 April 2007 entitled Framework for the European survey on language
competences[COM (2007) 184 finalNot published in the Official Journal]
European Commission (2007b) Terms of Reference: Tender no. 21 European Survey
on Language Competences, Contracting Authority: European Commission.