Publication: Mapping the CU-TEP to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)
Submitted Date
Received Date
Accepted Date
Issued Date
2018
Copyright Date
Announcement No.
Application No.
Patent No.
Valid Date
Resource Type
Edition
Resource Version
Language
en
File Type
No. of Pages/File Size
ISBN
ISSN
2630-0672 (Print), 2672-9431 (Online)
eISSN
DOI
Scopus ID
WOS ID
Pubmed ID
arXiv ID
item.page.harrt.identifier.callno
Other identifier(s)
Journal Title
LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network
Volume
11
Issue
2
Edition
Start Page
163
End Page
180
Access Rights
Access Status
Rights
Rights Holder(s)
Physical Location
Bibliographic Citation
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Title
Mapping the CU-TEP to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)
Alternative Title(s)
Author(s)
Author’s Affiliation
Author's E-mail
Editor(s)
Editor’s Affiliation
Corresponding person(s)
Creator(s)
Compiler
Advisor(s)
Illustrator(s)
Applicant(s)
Inventor(s)
Issuer
Assignee
Other Contributor(s)
Series
Has Part
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to map the Chulalongkorn University Test of English Proficiency, or the CU-TEP, to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) by employing a standard setting methodology. Thirteen experts judged 120 items of the CU-TEP using the Yes/No Angoff technique. The experts decided whether or not a borderline student at A2, B1, B2, and C1 levels would or would not correctly answer each item. They judged the items for three rounds. Expert judgment from the third round shows that the CU-TEP cut-off scores for A2, B1, B2, and C1 levels are 14, 35, 70, and 99, respectively, out of the total of 120 points. The standard deviations of A2, B1, B2, C1 levels are 4.75, 10.68, 19.57, and 10.11, respectively. The standard errors of judgment are 1.32, 2.96, 5.42, and 2.80, respectively. Once mapped with the CEFR, the CU-TEP scores are now meaningful in that, first, score users would know which CU-TEP score range falls into which particular CEFR level, and, second, score users would also know what test takers can do with the English language with respect to a particular CEFR level. Discussion, recommendation, and limitations of the study will also be presented in this article.