CEFR levels have been added to the JLPT

Japanese
#1

For those of you who don’t know, CEFR levels are used for European languages as a way to measure/compare ability. A CEFR level indicator will now be added to JLPT results. For more information about CEFR levels and how they have been applied in this case please refer to here (also available in Japanese).

For an overview please refer to the below image:

image

So, what do you guys make of this? Anyone taken a proper CEFR test for a different language and also taken the JLPT? How do they compare? If a proper full CEFR style test were offered for Japanese would you want to take it? Do you think kanji writing should be included in that sort of test?

I think there are definitely pros and cons that come with this addition. I have long wanted a higher level than N1 although not because I love tests but simply because I think there is obviously a higher level of Japanese that isn’t tested by the JLPT (to say nothing of output). There are some tests aimed at natives however they’re a completely different beast for obvious reasons. There are also some less popular tests aimed at foreigners which do go to a higher level, such as the J-Test.

18 Likes
#2

Going from, “I passed N2! :star_struck:” to seeing, “I’m B1 on the CEFR” might be considered a slap in the face for some :sweat_smile:

20 Likes
#3

That A2 rating for a pass at N3 has got to feel bad :sweat_smile: The ratings seem accurate to me personally but I know some people perhaps slightly overestimate their ability based purely off of the JLPT.

8 Likes
#4

I don’t know a ton about CEFR, so maybe the current mapping makes sense, but a bit surprised that there is no equivalent C2 mapping. I agree that there really is a ton of post N1 material/being N1 doesn’t mean you can actually function in Japanese society, so perhaps it’s a valid and deliberate decision.

But if the goal of introducing the CEFR mappings is to increase standardisation between different language tests/evaluations then I do hope that they add an additional level or something to JLPT so that people can demonstrate C2 competency.

4 Likes
#5

As someone who has recently passed the N2, if anything it feels more accurate to my situation :rofl:

5 Likes
#6

Seems like a strange fit, according to that I’d be C1 but don’t match 3/4 of the criteria.
Can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and recognise implicit meaning. - Yes
Can express him/herself fluently and spontaneously without much obvious searching for expressions.- Nope
Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes.- Nope
Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use of organisational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices. - Nope

5 Likes
#7

I think there’s been a longstanding argument that the JLPTs will never map neatly onto the CEFR levels, because the former doesn’t test for active/production skills like writing and speaking.

I’m preparing for the French B1 test now (after years of self-learning and reading news articles etc), and there’s certainly a mental gear shift required from, say, reading to writing - I’m comfortable with reading B2 stuff, but I write at an A2 level at best, due to a lack of practice.

I think anyone who takes this JLPT->CEFR scale seriously will be in for a rude surprise, unless they have been practicing speaking/writing on the side.

10 Likes
#8

I would personally say this is because the material on the test is not wide or deep enough to be an accurate measure of C2 ability although of course someone who is C2 would in practice be expected to get a score in the top range.

They do explicitly state that the CEFR rating given is purely for receptive ability, not output, which does mitigate this issue slightly. Still, I can imagine this being misconstrued or misunderstood quite easily, especially if someone has near no speaking or writing experience as is somewhat common with learners who live abroad.

I personally would like a full CEFR style test that is also widely adopted (perhaps making it modular so one can choose to take reading/writing/listening/speaking/kanji writing(?) separately). I think the JLPT would have to be massively reworked for it to become a CEFR style test though so I am not holding my breath.

As more people learn Japanese and Japan has more and more foreigners living here it would be nice if they reworked the levels to add something beyond N1, perhaps making the current N1 something like a 準一級. I think as the scale stops at N1 it gives people a false sense that N1 is absolutely the highest level of Japanese so they consider it near impossible.

Having said that, the positive here is that on CVs or applications or other similar things it is now possible to put something more understandable, even if slightly misleading, than an N-level. Another small but useful consequence is it puts to bed most debates about how hard the Japanese on the JLPT is. Though, I guess people will still argue over what counts as beginner/intermediate/advanced until the end of time.

8 Likes
#9

My ego has been properly checked. Learning languages is hard :sob:

On my language learning level, I’ve gone from ‘Can’t explain’ to ‘Can explain with a lot of confusion and clarification when I invariably mix up the order of letters in a word’

2 Likes
#10

A2 rating for passing N3, are you fricking joking!

1 Like
#11

I’ve never taken a language test outside of JLPT, so my only experience with CEFR scale is guesstimating what to put on a resume.

With that, this mapping looks reasonable. My high score N3 now maps to reading/listening B1, I’ll take that.

I think it’s difficult to create a mapping to CEFR levels for a test that explicitly doesn’t test output. CEFR criteria are mostly phrased in terms of interaction, and one cannot really interact without output. Maybe if you picture a scenario of listening to Japanese, and replying with a mobile phone translator. But then again that wouldn’t pass B2 criteria of “without strain for either party”.

2 Likes
#12

Thank you for sharing.

I only use the JLPT for assessing my progress and for setting a goal.
I use it to ensure that I keep different aspects of my learning process evenly distributed.
I’d love a test that tests even more aspects of the language.

With that said, I’d still like a pure input-based tests because that is my main reason for learning Japanese.
Also, it would make it easier for people of lesser means to afford (a test with more aspects and a live interview and review is bound to be more expensive).

I’m curious to see whether more people will be inclined to re-take already passed tests because that will be the easiest way to up the CEFR level.

2 Likes
#13

I’m curious if they will increase the JLPT Levels? Because by N1, you functionally literate. So like, yea they could test on the thousandish more known and used kanji, but now they get into specialization to an extent and not really needed for the day to day.

Would they spread that wonder if they would spread that out at all, or start introducing speaking? Maybe do something like the Eiken English tests here, and release the results sooner, and then those who pass move onto a spoken test?

Open up more city testing sites so that people are not reliant on having to go far, and those in the states even states away. Anyway, its good to know!

1 Like
#14

Wow this is soul-crushing. At the same time Japanese is in fact a hard language to learn on your own, especially outside of Japan. Even if youtubers and influencers often make it seem easy by focusing on immersion, my experience with different languages I’ve learned (I got way more expensive C1 certification in English and French) you are kinda forced to make multiple trips - if you’re a mediocre language learner like me - if you cannot go live there.

1 Like
#15

The “Language Knowledge (Vocabulary/Grammar),” “Reading” and “Listening” tested by the JLPT correspond to the “Linguistic” and “Reception” in the CEFR. It does not include skills such as “Production (speaking and writing)” and “Interaction” that are not tested by the JLPT.

I interpret that as: the CERF levels provided on the JLPT result sheets do not give any indication about your ability to speak and write. Which I think is reasonable, as your speaking, listening, reading and writing skills can differ dramatically, and the JLPT essentially only tests reading and listening.

2 Likes