ILR scale explained

The Interagency Language Roundtable scale is a set of descriptions of abilities to communicate in a language. It is the standard grading scale for language proficiency in the United States's Federal-level service. It was originally developed by the Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR), which included representation by United States Foreign Service Institute, the predecessor of the National Foreign Affairs Training Center (NFATC).

The scale grades people's language proficiency on a scale of 0–5. The designation 0+, 1+, 2+, 3+, or 4+ is assigned when proficiency substantially exceeds one skill level but does not fully meet the criteria for the next level. Thus the scale totals 11 possible grades.

Grades may be assigned separately for different skills such as reading, speaking, listening, writing, translation, audio translation, interpretation, and intercultural communication. For some of these skills, the level may be referred to with an abbreviation, for example, S-1 for Speaking Level 1.

ILR scale

ILR Level 0 – No proficiency

No communicative ability. Possibly able to speak a few isolated words.

ILR Level 0+ – Memorized proficiency

A person who can satisfy their immediate needs using memorized phrases is rated 0+ on the scale. The following describes the traits of an ILR Level 0+ individual:

ILR Level 1 – Elementary proficiency

Elementary proficiency is rated 1 on the scale. The following describes the traits of an ILR Level 1 individual:

The majority of individuals classified as Level 1 are able to perform most basic functions using the language; this includes buying goods, reading the time, ordering simple meals and asking for minimal directions

ILR Level 2 – Limited working proficiency

Limited working proficiency is rated 2 on the scale. A person at this level is described as follows:

ILR Level 3 – Professional working proficiency

Professional working proficiency is rated 3 on the scale. Level 3 is what is usually used to measure how many people in the world know a given language. A person at this level is described as follows:

Individuals classified at level 3 are able to use the language as part of normal professional duties and can reliably elicit information and informed opinion from native speakers; examples include answering objections, clarifying points, stating and defending policy, conducting meetings, and reading with almost complete comprehension a variety of prose material on familiar and unfamiliar topics such as news reports, routine correspondence, and technical material in trained fields of competence.[1]

ILR Level 4 – Full professional proficiency

Full professional proficiency is rated 4 on the ILR scale. A person rated at this level should have the following characteristics:

Individuals classified at level 4 are able to understand the details and ramifications of concepts that are culturally or conceptually different from their own language and can set the tone of interpersonal official, semi-official and non-professional verbal exchanges with a representative range of native speakers; examples include playing an effective role among native speakers in contexts such as conferences, lectures and debates on matters of disagreement, as well as advocating a position at length. While proficiency may match that of an educated native speaker, the individual is not necessarily perceived as culturally native due to occasional weaknesses in idioms, colloquialisms, slang, and cultural references.

ILR Level 5 – Native or bilingual proficiency

Native or bilingual proficiency is rated 5 on the scale. A person at this level is described as follows:

Equivalence with the European language proficiency scale CEFR

See main article: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages.

A table published by the American University Center of Provence gave the following correspondences between the ILR, the European language proficiency scale CEFR, and the proficiency scale of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL):[2]

CEFRILRACTFL
A10/0+NL, NM, NH
A21IL, IM
B11+IH
B22/2+AL, AM, AH
C13/3+S
C24/4+D

However, a comparison between the ILR self-assessment grids (reading, speaking, listening)[3] and the CEFR assessment grid[4] could suggest a different equivalence:[5]

CEFRILRACTFL
A10/1NL, NM, NH
A21+IL, IM
B12/2+IH
B23/3+AL, AM, AH
C14S
C24+D

See also

References

External links

Notes and References

  1. http://www.govtilr.org/Skills/ILRscale2.htm Interagency Language Roundtable Language Skill Level Descriptions
  2. Web site: Understanding the TEF Results: Level Breakdown and Equivalencies. https://web.archive.org/web/20140116123131/http://www.aucp.org/sous_pages/aix/Students_Aix_docs/TEF_Levels_and_Equivalencies.pdf. 2014-01-16. 2017-11-28. .
  3. Web site: March 21, 2022 . SELF-ASSESSMENT OF READING PROFICIENCY . live . https://web.archive.org/web/20220130173825/https://www.govtilr.org/Skills/readingassessment.pdf . January 30, 2022 . March 21, 2022 . Interagency Language Roundtable.
  4. Web site: March 21, 2022 . Understanding, Speaking, Writing . live . https://web.archive.org/web/20220123135428/https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168045bb52 . January 23, 2022 . March 21, 2022 . Council of Europe.
  5. Web site: March 21, 2022 . The CEFR . live . https://archive.today/20220321202611/https://french-baltimore.com/about-us/the-cecr/index.html . March 21, 2022 . March 21, 2022 . French Academy DC MD VA / Baltimore.