evaluation of colombian standards in relation to the ... · jhoana bolaños diana urbina...

1 STANDARDS COMPARISON AND EVALUATION

EVALUATION OF COLOMBIAN STANDARDS IN RELATION TO THE COMMON

EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK AND THE PREK-12 STANDARDS

By

Luisa María Álvarez Pantoja

Giovanny Benavides

Jhoana Bolaños

Diana Urbina

Linguistics and languages department

University of Nariño

October, 2010


Evaluation of Colombian Standards in relation to the Common European Framework

and the PreK-12 Standards

Abstract

The process of learning and teaching a foreign language effectively represents a

challenge not only for students and teachers but also for people who are involved in this

process, people as external agents and policy makers, which are in charge of generating

appropriate conditions so that this teaching and learning can be carried out. For this reason

and due to the increasing strength of the standards movement worldwide, the development

of standards for instructional design has been a major force in the language teaching

profession with the purpose of improving the quality of the educative system in different

countries. Unfortunately, not all standards are feasible and applicable depending on the

context where they take place, as in the case of Colombia, where the standards set do not

foster improvement neither for the language teaching profession nor for the successful

learning of the language.

As a consequence, this article will analyze the “Estándares básicos de competencias en

lenguas extranjeras”, by comparing them to the European standards (Common European

Framework) and the American ESL standards (PreK-12).


Theoretical background

Common European Framework

The common European Framework is the product of an extensive analysis and study

of language learning carried out in Europe. Since its creation, it has made greater

contributions to language teaching and learning because it has highlighted the significance

of developing a comprehensive and coherent and outgoing process for learning and

teaching. A comprehensive process comes with the specification of the language range

knowledge, skills and language use so that it attempts to forecast language situations and

contexts. A coherent process whose main objective is to relate the components in a

harmonious way considering the specific needs, diverse cultural contexts, curriculum

guidelines, syllabi, lesson plans , definition of content, selection and creation of material,

teaching methods employed and ultimately evaluation, testing and assessment. Therefore, it

could be said that the Common European Framework has been influenced by the initiative

of the Swiss Federal Government regarding the importance of objectives, evaluation,

certification and qualifications, as well as the Committee of Ministers who stressed the

political importance at the present time and in the future of developing specific fields of

action, such as strategies for diversifying and intensifying language learning in order to

promote plurilingualism among European countries.

In this way, the idea of learning a language is not only joined to the mastery of

some elements, but is also associated with the Plurilingual approach. It has been defined as

an individual person‟s experience of language in its cultural contexts which expand from


the language of the home to the society at large and then to the languages of other peoples.

It means that people learning a particular language do not keep these languages and cultures

in strictly separated mental compartments, but rather they build up and bring the

communicative competence and access to cultural manifestations into play. Furthermore,

this unearthing has changed the mode in which language was taught owing to its

profoundly modified education into a comprehensive, dynamic and non-dogmatic process.

This has resulted in a different role for the language learners, who nowadays are active

social agents whose main purpose is to develop linguistic competence; it also enables them

to actively participate in different language contexts with heterogeneous audiences and

communicative purposes. However, this recent adjustment has increased the difficulty

regarding all the language processes due to the implementation of a new complex domain

that in this case is the language culture.

In accordance with the action oriented approach it can be said that with this

important modification the learner does not cease to be competent in the mother language

and the associated culture. Nor is the new competence kept entirely separated from the old

one, this is why this relevant process is embedded in two influential factors such as

plurilingualism and interculturality because those mechanisms are aimed at modifying the

learners‟ knowledge contributing to the enrichment of their personality, language abilities

and intercultural awareness. Consequently, the use of the Common European Framework

also offers a well- designed structure of parameters and categories, which could allow all

the participants involved in learning, teaching and assessment processes to state in concrete

terms what learners should know and be able to do with the language. However, this


process can never be reduced to simply choosing from a pre-determined menu since it

requires a certain level of judgment and creativity from the part of all participants.

The Common European Framework also considers certain aspects that can affect

language conditions and learning at a certain extent. Among them, it is possible to find the

audience, occupational context, objectives, tasks that would be accomplished, conditions of

the context, use of a variety of skills, knowledge of the culture, contribution of the personal

and cultural development.

Another equally important issue that has been emphasized by the Common European

Framework is the language competence which has been separated into the global, modular,

weighted and partial categories which are ranked from the most general to the most specific

issues of the language:

Global: bringing a learner forward in all dimensions of language proficiency

communicative competence.

Modular: improving the learner‟s proficiency in a restricted area for a particular

purpose.

Weighted: emphasizing learning in certain directions and producing a „profile‟ in

which a higher level is attained in some areas of knowledge and skills.

Partial: taking responsibility only for certain activities and skills (reception) and

leaving others aside.

Linguistic competence alone is not enough for learners of a language to be

competent in that language (Krasner, 1999). Language learners need to be aware, for

example, of the culturally appropriate ways to address people, express gratitude, make

requests, and agree or disagree with someone. They should know that behaviors and


intonation patterns that are appropriate in their own speech community may be perceived

differently by members of the target language speech community. They have to understand

that in order for communication to be successful, language use must be associated with

other culturally appropriate behavior. As the complexity of the language domain increases,

so does the difficulty of the assessment of these elements through clear and concise

objectives. Thus, the Common European Framework has faced this challenge by dividing

the several components of the language in order to specify in a detailed manner the set of

boundaries for each language level, again the most influential domains in language by

making a classification among them such as language knowledge (e. g. , language

proficiency, lexical, grammatical, phonological, orthographic, semantic competence) and

cultural domains (e. g. , sociolinguistic competence, functional competence, interaction

schemata, language tasks, situations, contexts, audience) and their constituent parts. In

view of the difficulties concerning language and its components, the CEF creates and

introduces the concept of descriptors, which are a particular set of boundaries for each level

written in an understandable fashion. However, it is plausible to say that not every phase or

language level has all the descriptors that could presumably be written since their

formulation may be very difficult, if not impossible, or sometimes the area does not exist or

is not relevant.

Taking into consideration the several notions, functions, vocabulary and grammar as

well as the variety of elements that make part of this structure, it has been necessary to

create a clear framework for each language proficiency level. For this reason, it is generally

acknowledged that the three main levels are A, B, C. Furthermore, each language scale

possesses other subsets that allow bridging the gap between them. Thus, level A1


(breakthrough) refers to the lowest level of language use which comprises simple series of

actions that are related to areas of familiar topics. Level A2 involves series of basic

information, social exchanges and arrangements found in particular situations. Level A2 +

has to do with the exchange of ideas referring to familiar topics found in daily life

situations, however this level is more complex since the information required is more

detailed. After having discussed the level A and its components, it is necessary to continue

talking about the Level B1. This level pertains to a further extended use of the language

since learners begin to express their opinions regarding their needs and finally try to

maintain the conversation. Level B+ makes reference to the use of concrete quantities of

information through the interchange of detailed instructions. Level B2 is focused on the

construction of an effective argument sustaining and accounting the opinions in discussion,

it also involves the speculation about causes, consequences, hypothetical situations, and

again the kind of interaction has a degree of fluency and spontaneity. Almost finally, level

C1 is connected to an effective operational proficiency which is characterized by a broad

range of language use because, at this stage, language learners have a better command of

the lexical repertoire and grammar knowledge. Finally, the last stage of the Common

European Framework is the level C2. It means that at this point learners master the

language because they have a high degree of precision and appropriateness due to their

abilities to convey finer shades of meaning.


Prek-12 standards

This ESL standards document is the result of years of research and commitment on

the part of the people involved in its creation. It is a 20- year research which still continues

nowadays to improve the quality of English teaching as a second or foreign language which

has its main share in the United States. The members associated with its construction are

experts on the area of TESOL, Center for Applied Linguistics, National Association for

Bilingual Education Team and other qualified experts in the field of language teaching and

learning, who have provided a considerable amount of research. ESL standards are based

on research and theories of language acquisition. The principles describe the features of

language development and the contribution of native language to that process, for instance,

they stand out the functionality and variety of the language, the cultural context involved

when learning a language, they also explain that language acquisition is a long-term

process, occurs through meaningful use and interaction, is developed interdependently and

consider bilingualism as an individual and societal asset.

These standards reflect the growing body of literature and methodologies that focus

on language proficiency within the academic demands of the classroom. This proficiency is

tied to the functions of language, the context of interaction, and graphic, visual or

paralinguistic support. Moreover, social and academic language proficiencies go together

with academic achievement and involve the vocabulary, language patterns which are

present in specific content areas. As a result, academic language proficiency is achieved

through constant content-based language instruction.


PreK-12 standards have established three main goals for learners which are widely

explained in the document. The first one is the use of English to communicate in social

settings, that is, students have to be able to hold conversations naturally inside and outside

the classroom; the second has to do with the use of English in relation to other core content

areas such as language arts, mathematics, science and social studies. The third goal refers to

the use of English regarding the social and cultural aspects of the language due to the

diversity of cultures that are found in United States of America. These goals aim to guide

teachers to face the classroom reality by helping student to achieve high levels of academic

and social language performance.

The process of language acquisition is described through the use of five levels of language

proficiency: starting up, beginning, expanding, developing and bridging over. These stages

lead to the attainment of the standards through a process of developmental progression

which starts from the simplest to the most complex stage. The highest level, Bridging Over,

is aligned with state and national academic content standards; once the students have

crossed the “bridge”, they will have reached a level of English language proficiency that

supports academic achievement. For each level, students are expected to perform a

determined behavior represented in what is called performance indicators which are

flexible and dynamic and which are to be developed depending on the students‟ age,

cognitive development, and previous educational experiences.

Estándares Básicos de Competencias en Lenguas Extranjeras: inglés

Recently, Colombian Educational System has begun to face new challenges

regarding foreign language education. This recent breakthrough has led the Ministry of


Education to create the Plan Nacional de Educacion. The main purpose of this plan is to set

language standards for Colombian students so as to enable them to develop communicative

competence considering the future needs of a globalized world and the new challenges that

people have to face in order to be competitive with such modern demands. Another point is

that Colombian government has also participated in the creation of another policy or plan

for language education. It is Vision Colombia 2019 which seeks to contribute to the

implementation of bilingualism which has been defined as the ability to use two languages.

Definitions of bilingualism range from a minimal proficiency in two languages, to an

advanced level of proficiency which allows the speaker to function and appear as a native-

like speaker of two languages. A person may describe themselves as bilingual but may

mean only the ability to talk and communicate orally. Thus, it can be said that in terms of

competence, a bilingual may have very high levels of proficiency in both languages or may

have only limited proficiency in one and be far more proficient in the other.

Consequently, for avoiding those confusions the Colombian Educational System has

also designed a series of standards to state publicly the intended goals not only for teachers

and students, but also for parents and all the people inside and outside this process. Those

levels are based upon the common European Framework and have been assorted into

different stages establishing diverse goals for each grade. For instance, the students from

the first to the third grade of primary school have to achieve the Level A1; it means that

students have minimal language knowledge since they are just beginning to accommodate

themselves with the basis of the target language. Then, students from fourth grade of the

primary school to the seventh grade of secondary/high school ought to attain the level A2;

it refers to a basic knowledge of the target language that allows them to produce a limited


amount of messages in certain situations. Next, students from eighth to eleventh grade have

to accomplish a pre-intermediate competence level; in this case it is the level B1. The

Colombian standards have also set a further level beyond B1 for students of Bachelor of

arts, which refers to level B2 which is an intermediate level required for English teachers or

overall professionals. At the end of this classification the ultimate level to be achieved

according to those Colombian standards is the level C1. It appertains to the upper

intermediate level required for English students graduated from foreign language teaching

Bachelor of Arts.

Another equally relevant tenet of the Vision Colombia project or commonly known

as Plan Nacional de Bilingüismo is to stimulate educative policies to support the

development of the mother tongue as well as the development of indigenous languages with

the purpose of fostering the learning of creole/native and foreign languages, this allows

population to have a different perspective of their own culture and other ones. However,

when considering Colombia as a bilingual country, it is assumed that the main spoken

languages in the country will be English and Spanish, leaving apart indigenous languages

and contributing to their decline, which turns out to be ambiguous with the information

previously mentioned.

Furthermore, Colombian standards have been divided into language sub-skills such

as listening, reading, writing and speaking. Each sub skill consists of a series of

interconnected items which specify the abilities acquired at a certain level which also

consider pragmatics, sociolinguistics and linguistics competence. However, it is likely to

state that the boundaries for each section are blurred; consequently this creates a sort of


confusion either for teachers, students and administrators or the population who have

access to this kind of information.

Comparison between the Common European Framework, Prek-12 Standards with

Colombian standards.

Quality, quantity and relevance of the theoretical framework

The common European Framework in its last version presents a well organized and

structured document of 264 pages supported by a list of references of international

committees and the people involved in this process throughout the years. In this document,

the Common European Framework offers a well-structured analysis of the process by

which languages are being learned and taught. Through a well organized lay -out, it begins

stating its overall objectives of promoting plurilingualism and linguistic diversity as being

necessary to the satisfaction of the learner‟s communicative needs. In recent times, it also

claims the relevance of a sufficient strong research based on the processes involved in

learning a foreign language so as to have a conscious manipulation of the techniques used

and the best ways to exploit them, as well as the importance of using a notional-functional

approach adopted in the Council of Europe like: Waystage (1990), Threshold Level (1990)

and Vantage Level. Additionally, the Common European Framework also considers the

establishment of a variety of fundamental factors that influence learning such as the

context, the curriculum design which provides detailed instructions for the classroom

and/or individual tasks and activities to be undertaken by learners in response to the

material presented, the activation of previous knowledge or commonly known as schemata,

the creation and adaptation of materials, language tasks, procedures, strategies, topics,


themes and sub-themes, resources, tools to equip learners for diverse communicative

settings, adjustments made to facilitate successful learning and maximize the effectiveness

of it.

In a similar way, the Prek-12 standards are presented in a considerable length of 96

pages in which the content, information and literature are backed up in general principles of

language acquisition theories. These have also paid special attention to the conception of

the target language as whole since it not only comprises the knowledge of the language, but

also the idea of language as a complex process that is developed interdependently as a long

term process which occurs through meaningful use and interaction. As a result of this

concept, the standards encompass social and intercultural interaction along with the

language associated with instruction across the curriculum. Accordingly, the design of a

well organized framework for language teaching and learning facilitates the selection of the

most relevant guideposts for curriculum, instruction and assessment used to illustrate: the

outline of language stages regarding language acquisition and content, the consolidation of

the existing ESL standards and addition of new standards with strands of model

performance indicators and the reorganization of the standards, descriptors, and sample

progress indicators according to language domain (e. g. , listening, speaking, reading,

writing). Notably, the Prek-12 standards also provide an explicit explanation justification of

the objectives for each level so as to avoid misinterpretations.

On the other hand, Colombian standards are presented through a 41 page booklet

which lacks of theoretical framework that supports their creation and application, and, to

make things worse this booklet does not have comprehensible parameters because its

information has a general overview of language learning. Due to the lack of theoretical


background for Colombian standards, it could be said that there is a wide range of

weaknesses since there is no a clear criteria for the language objectives previously set;

furthermore, its adaptation for Colombia is still inadequate since it does not take under

consideration the real needs for the Colombian educational system, curriculum design and

finally approaches in methodology to provide the means and processes to reach the goals.

Feasibility of the goals and applicability of standards

The Common European Framework is the product of years of research in the field

of foreign and second language learning. It has more than fifty years of research from the

first Governmental Conference for Language Teaching (1957), the launch of the Major

Project on language teaching (1963) to the creation of the European Centre for Modern

Language Teaching (1994) as well as the creation of the Common European framework for

Languages (2001). At the same time, it has also had the participation of the Council of

Europe, the Council for Cultural Co-operation of the Council of Europe, Committee of

Ministers, the collaboration of governmental and non-governmental institutions, and the

cooperation of the fifty five member states in areas such as law, education, culture and

human rights. For this reason, it is plausible to assert that the development process of the

Common European Framework has led to set the basis for a clear criteria regarding the

objectives that students should attain taking note of the significance of their previous

knowledge and contexts, thereby each language level has a variety of features that

contribute to the different language domains. Thus, the Common European Framework has

evident, coherent, feasible, attainable parameters of target language objectives for students.


Not only the Common European frame has explicit goals, but it also has processes, learning

conditions and language policies.

Indeed, the Prek-12 is also similar to the Common European Framework since the

set of standards is clearly identifiable, understandable and the most important fact is that

they are feasible to be applied since they have an organized lay-out for teaching and

learning processes with consideration of the variety of learners‟ language levels, student‟s

ages, cognitive development and educational experiences. Another point is that the Prek-12

standards are the outcome of a vast period of time and commitment from its members such

as: Center for Applied Linguistics members, TESOL members, National Association for

Bilingual Education team and other qualified experts in this field. Besides, the Pre-k 12

standards present the language indicators through a connected and holistic process.

Additionally, the Prek-12 has also made emphasis on the significance of a well-structured

framework based on language acquisition theories and the long-term mechanism embedded

to it. The Prek-12 performance indicators are very intelligible since these bring with them

specific curriculum content for English.

In contrast, Colombian standards are considered to be broad, vague and difficult to

understand and apply in our context due to the lack of theoretical framework and research

connected to its implementation in our context. In fact, the Ministry of Education has a

incorrect conception regarding the purpose established for the application of these

standards in Colombia. Supposedly, they were created to meet the unrealistic and

unfeasible goal of making Colombia a bilingual country, goal which is far away to be

accomplished given the poor conditions of our educational system. Even countries with

excellent, well-grounded standards do not crave too much with this ambitious goal, but


rather they seek to improve the education of students who are learning English as a second

or additional language as in the case of the United States.

Furthermore, they do not consider the student‟s cognitive development associated

with the student‟s pace, in other words, students just learn what it is taught to everybody at

the same pace, through the use of scarce language tools “if any” that could be a book, the

board or what is even worse, no materials at all. Consequently, this mismatch has been

particularly caused since there was no participation of people who are knowledgeable about

applied linguistics, language acquisition theories, methodology, and finally TESOL

foundations.

As a conclusion, the Common European Framework and the Prek-12 standards are

the result of a growing interest in second or foreign language acquisition and the

development of ways to improve the quality of education. Those standards have not only

paid attention to the knowledge of the target language but also to the context, the

conditions, the processes inside learning and acquisition. As a consequence, this analysis

and study carried out in the last decades have facilitated the formulation of clear objectives

and processes to be attained through carefully planning and appropriate resources, which

makes the application of standards completely possible. Nonetheless, in Colombia the

educational concern is not as important as for European countries; the implementation of

Colombian standards is improvised; the adaptation of European standards for our context

could have good intentions but it turns out to be the opposite since the cultural, social and

economical conditions are dissimilar to the ones in North America and Europe. As for that

matter, if we ever consider applying these standards, surely there will not be any gratifying

outcome since the objectives and goals set in the document are unlikely to match the


citizens‟ characteristics and needs, leaving no room for improvements on the area of

language teaching and learning.

Learning conditions

The Common European Framework has noticed the relevance of learning a foreign

language in context. Thereby, one of its main concerns is to preserve and protect the

diversity of European languages, cultures and population identities. Hence, it has been

necessary to adopt an action oriented approach which takes language users/learners as

social agents who actively participate in society to accomplish a given set of circumstances

in a well-defined field of action. Given this issue, social agents need to participate in a wide

range of communicative and language competences under various conditions, constraints,

language processes, activities, domains, use diverse strategies to carry out certain given

tasks. As far as one can see, the Common European Framework has taken into

consideration the fact that languages are not only related to the knowledge of the structures

and the components that form them, but also a different perspective regarding language as

the opportunity for students to communicate and function inside the target language culture

as they could do in their normal daily life.

Along with the Common European Framework, the Prek-12 standards have also

reckoned the significance of language learning and the influence that context has in this

process. As for that matter, it could be said that the aims are clearly expressed throughout

all the prek-12 standards, likewise these have a coherent relationship between the setting in

which they were established and the communicative needs of the native students as well as

those of immigrant students.


Conversely, Colombian standards are questionable because the people who adapted

the Common European Framework in order to make it fit with our context, did not deem

the real needs of this setting, learning styles, learning conditions and the scarce materials

for teaching. The Colombian educational system has to face many difficulties, including the

lack of economical resources for investing in public education, neither are there enough

resources for research and study which could take many years for yielding the results, nor

capital to subsidy the purchase of materials such as books, laboratories and libraries, or

improve the conditions of the schools and the preparation of the people in charge of

teaching English.

Therefore, the use of the Common European Framework standards in Colombia has

been imposed for people who do not know their real implications in our context. Besides

they added a set of disconnected parameters for the development of abilities such as:

listening, reading, writing (monologues), and speaking (conversations). What is even

worse, the boundaries created for each ability are disjoined since those parameters

overlooked the second language acquisition process. As a result, there is no a coherent

order for the development of language skills, because according to this document, it is up to

the teachers to decide the sequential order in which they are going to be taught, as well as

the activities required for achieving the standards . This is of course a wrong notion since

the natural order for appropriately learning a second or foreign language starts with

listening, followed by speaking, reading and finally writing, as occurs in first language

acquisition. Besides, there are no clear and concise parameters which allow to meet the

standards successfully, this shows the lack of professionalism from the part of the people

involved into their creation since what they are doing is just passing the buck to the


teachers, that is, teachers are responsible for devising the right path to accomplish the goals

proposed in the paper based on their perspectives.

Another equally important issue is the idea of bilinguism propounded in Vision

Colombia 2019 whose main objective is to foster the learning of foreign languages such as

English. Nonetheless, throughout Colombian standards‟ booklet it can be seen that there are

several contradictions with this statement. Put in another way, it says that one of the goals

of the Plan Nacional de Bilinguismo is to create educational policies so as to improve the

development of the native languages and indigenous languages, but at the end of this, it

clearly states that the learning of a foreign language is a tool for reducing the ethnocentrism

and that facilitates a better understanding and respect of the differences not only in

Colombian settings but also in other found in a globalized world. If the Plan Nacional de

Bilinguismo or Vision 2019 is widely used in the Colombian territory, it is clear that in the

future there will be a linguistic conflict because the indigenous languages can be threatened

by English or Spanish languages, due to the fact that these have a linguistic imperialism

that at some extend can isolate the communities who do not speak those languages.

As a whole, the contexts in which the Common European Framework and the Prek-

12 standards take place are different from the context encountered in Colombia. Whereas

the CEF and PreK-12 standards call to mind the function of the context and the influence

that this exerts in learning, the Colombian standards neglect somehow this significant

contribution owing to the fact that the standards are disengaged from the objectives for

learning a target language, the educational system, the audiences, the conditions and the

population in which these are going to be used.


Analysis

To start discussing this issue, it is essential to recall that the Estandares Básicos de

Competencias en Lenguas Extranjeras is a very short document of 42 pages that lacks of

theoretical foundations and it is just an adaptation made from the Common European

Framework but without taking into account the needs and the cultural context. In its

introduction it says that these standards were created as a “challenge” that the MEN

provided to our country in order to foster the development of citizens able to communicate

in English, with standards internationally comparable. This is certainly an ambitious

challenge and the starting point of its failure to be adapted in our country since these

standards were not originally created to meet the needs of the students and teachers in

Colombia, it is just a “copy and paste” from the Common European Framework to make it

more appealing to the public, but for people who do not actually know about what the

creation of good and feasible standards really means. Actually, the real problem stems from

the fact that these standards were created for people who are not knowledgeable of second

language acquisition theories and much less about TESOL and everything it implies like

approaches, methods and strategies for language teaching and learning suitable for a

specific context. In other words, accomplished TESOL teachers were not considered for

their creation.

Besides, there is no a clear research process for the development of these standards,

there is no reliable literature support for their implementation here in Colombia and along

the document it is pretty likely to find weaknesses which undermine the validity of this

document. Due to its lack of literature support and research, there is no evidence which

guarantees the successful implementation of these standards in Colombia.


One important drawback of this document is the apparent confusion of concepts

regarding the setting and context where a language is learnt. Let us take as reference a

passage from the document on page 5: “En el contexto colombiano y para los alcances de

esta propuesta, el inglés tiene carácter de lengua extranjera”(Colombian standards p.25)

According to this excerpt, there is notably a disparity between their pushy goal of

bilingualism and the context of our country, they oppose their ideas themselves by

recognizing that English is learnt as a foreign language in our country. As a result, there is

no coherence between their goals and the theory included in the document to support such

goals, what can be expected from this unreliable document then?

Additionally, the time devoted for English lessons in the vast majority of public

schools is only limited to just one to three hours per week, and in some particular cases the

time frame for this subject is less than an hour (e. g., forty five or fifty minutes). This factor

does not allow English teachers to cover a wide variety of topics, themes and notions that

students should learn in order to develop communicative competence and actively

participate in communicative situations. With respect to this issue, it is also likely to say

that these standards are unrealistic since most teachers make still use of traditional methods

or approaches for delivering knowledge of the target language, reducing in this way the

quality of learning and teaching. Particularly, those teachers continue to use the grammar

translation method whose main purpose is to enable students to master a series of language

features that account linguistic aspects of the language such as: grammar, lexis, phonology,

and syntax. As a result, it is not feasible to develop communicative competence since the

mastery of language structures does not guarantee their acquisition and their appropriate

use in real life communication.


The Colombian Standards presented by the Ministry of Education in the Plan

Nacional de Bilinguismo do not offer guidance for teachers in the application, adaption and

evaluation of those standards. As a consequence, it would be very difficult for teachers to

reach a consensus about the stages that they should teach and follow, so this issue can

originate some problems in the long term future, since if there is a lack of organization,

there will be a lack of coherence and cohesion in this process regarding Colombian

standards‟ objectives. Teachers will not follow the same parameters, language topics and

processes and for this reason the accomplishment of the language goals will not be the

same. Another equally important fact is that some teachers reject to use those standards

simply because there are some misunderstandings of the objectives as these are not clearly

stated. Although standards are supposed to be followed by force, teachers do not take them

seriously and prefer to develop their own syllabi “if they do it” and lessons. Finally one of

the most worrying issues has to do with the assessment of the performance of standards.

Regarding this aspect, there is not consistency between the standards, language instruction

and assessment since teachers are more concerned with training students for the ICFES

exam, which does not account for performance in the language, that is, the use of English in

real communicative situations. Thus, teachers only look for accountability and are not

interested in promoting communicative competence which is the main goal of standards.

Due to the use of traditional views regarding language teaching teachers tend to

overlook the natural process of the acquisition and development of language skills/abilities.

It is because they tend to teach grammar and reading for the language students whose

cognitive level could be quite different and in some occasions they are not cognitive ready

to acquire them. Clear examples of this are students for primary schools who begin to


accommodate themselves with the symbols of their mother language and almost the same

time they need to encounter the symbols of the target language.

Conclusion

After having analyzed the three standards documents, it can be inferred that

Colombian standards are not appropriate to meet and satisfy the needs that our country has

since they were not created taking into account the context and learning conditions of our

nation but imposed as a guideline for teachers to achieve ambitious and unrealistic goals. In

general, the document that presents the ministry of education regarding the implementation

of standards is full of contradictions and plenty of gaps and confusions which in turn

reflects minimal time devoted for their creation, and not even creation, it is just a poor and

useless adaptation from the Common European Framework since they do not account for

the cultural and social necessities that our country has to face.

Moreover, Colombia is not a country with chances to become a bilingual country

due to the different cultural, social, economical and educational factors that come into play

in our context. In other words, Colombia is not a bilingual country, nor will it ever be in the

time set by the government, so it is no use implementing European standards and trying to

make them fit by force without considering the real needs of our society. The development

of clear, realistic, good and effective standards requires a big deal of time devoted for their

analysis, a lot of research and a huge commitment on the part of the people in charge of

creating them, who at the same time have to be experts on the area of second language

acquisition and accomplished TESOL teachers, aspects which were ignored in the

consolidation of Colombian standards.


References

Estandares de Competencias Básicas: inglés retrieved from http://

www.colombiaaprende.edu.co/html/home/1592/channel.html

Krasner, I. (1999). The role of culture in language teaching. Dialogue on Language

Instruction, 13(1-2), 79-88.

The disparition of indigenous languages retrieved from http://

www.yachana.org/research/oxford_langs.html

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching,

Assessment (CEFR) retrieved from http:// http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/cadre_en.asp

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages retrieved from http://

www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/Framework_EN.pdf

http://www.yachana.org/research/oxford_langs.html

http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/cadre_en.asp

http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/Framework_EN.pdf

evaluation of colombian standards in relation to the ... · jhoana bolaños diana urbina...

Documents