Oyun-Erdene Tumurbat, Namuun Sergelen


There are several evaluation standards to assess English levels. Through this article, we consider the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) as an important tool. We aimed to reveal the evaluation standards used in universities and English language training courses in our country and to clarify how the standard tolerates internationally accepted English language evaluation standards. Within the scope of this goal, 27 teachers who teach English in universities and colleges in Mongolia, 22 teachers of English language training centers (general informants), and 656 students who study English in 21 universities and colleges in Mongolia (casual informants) were randomly selected and a survey with 3 groups of 24 questions was conducted over 2 months using Google Form, and the collected results were processed and compared using SPSS program.96.3% of the teachers of universities and colleges evaluate the English course on a 100-point scale. 55.5% of them agreed that the future use of CEFR assessment standards would provide a more objective assessment of students' language levels. According to the responses of training center teachers, 68.2% of the participating training center teachers evaluate the student's language level according to the CEFR standard, which shows that they use an internationally recognized evaluation method. In this regard, 42.7% of the 656 students who participated in the study agreed that the CEFR assessment standard, rather than the 100-point scale, could fully reflect their language level internationally in the future, which was in line with the researchers' hypothesis.


100-point scale, CEFR standards, comparison of evaluation standards, English language evaluation method

Full Text:



Alderson, C. J. (2007). The CEFR and the need for more research. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4) 695-663.

Barni, M. (2015). In the name of the CEFR: Individuals and standards. In B. Spolsky, O. Inbar-Lourie, & M. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Challenges of language education and policy (pp.40-52). New York: Routledge.

Byram, M., & Parmenter, L. (2012). The common European framework of reference. In M. Byram & L. Parmenter (Eds.), The globalisation of language education policy. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters

CEFR. (2018). Common European framework of reference.

Coste, D. (2007). Contextualizing uses of the common European framework of reference for languages, In Council of Europe, The common European framework of references for languages (CEFR) and the development of language policies: Challenge and responsibilities (pp. 40-49). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

Deygers, B. (2019). The CEFR companion volume: Between research-based policy and policy-based research. Applied Linguistics, 42(1), 186–191.

Europe, C. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Strasborg: Language Policy Unit.

Figueras, N. (2012). The impact of the CEFR. ELT Journal, 66(4), 477-485.

Fulcher, G. (2004). Deluded by artifices? The common European framework and harmonization. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1(4), 253-266.

Green, A. (2012). Language functions revisited: Theoretical and empirical bases for language construct definition across the ability range. English Profile Studies, 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hulstijn, J. H. (2007). The shaky ground beneath the CEFR: Quantitative and qualitative dimensions of language proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 663–667.

Hung, N. N. (2013). Vietnam‘s national foreign language 2020 project: Challenges, opportunities, and solutions. The International Academic Forum, 62-64.

Komorowska, H. (2014). The CEFR in pre- and in-service teacher education. In K, Morrow (Ed.), Insights from the common European framework (pp. 55-64). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Krumm, H. J. (2007). Profiles instead of levels: The CEFR and its (ab)uses in the context of migration. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 667–9.

McNamara, T. (2014). 30 years on—Evolution or revolution?. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(2), 226-232.

Nguyen, V., & Hamid, M. O. (2015). Educational policy borrowing in a globalized world a case study of common European framework of reference for languages in a Vietnamese University. Journal of English Teaching, Practice and Critique, 14(1), 60-74.

North, B. (2004). Europe‘s framework promotes language discussion, not directives.

North, B. O. (2010). A core inventory for general English. London: British Council.

Orosoo, M., & Jamiyansuren, B. (2021). Language in Education planning: Evaluation Policy in Mongolia. Journal of Language and Linguistic studies, 17(3), 1608-1614.

Poszytek, P. (2012). Policy perspectives from Poland. In M. Byram & L. Parmenter (Eds.), The common European framework of reference: The globalization of languageeducation policy (pp. 97-103). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Trim, J. (2012). The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages and its background: A case study of cultural politics and educational influences. The Common European Framework of Reference.

Van Ek, J., & Trim, J. L. M. (1990). Threshold Cambridge . Cambridge: Cambridge University.



  • There are currently no refbacks.


Indexed in: (to be arranged)


Flag Counter


e-ISSN (validity starting Vol 1, No 2, November 2020): 2774-9401


This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License


 UC Journal: ELT, Linguistics and Literature Journal, a scientific peer-reviewed journal, was established in 20 May 2020 and is published twice a year, namely in May and November, by the English Language Education Study Programme (S1/Sarjana PBI) in collaboration with the English Education Master's Programme (S2/Magister PBI) of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.