From the International Second Language Proficiency Rating Scales E. Wylie 2006 Halaman

Printable PDF version

Note the number beside the paragraph which you believe most closely describes your level of proficiency in Indonesian in Speaking, Listening, Reading and Writing

SPEAKING

0 Zero Proficiency
I can’t communicate anything at all in spoken Indonesian.

0+ Formulaic proficiency
I can communicate by using a limited range of simple stock Indonesian phrases I have learned.

1- Minimum ‘creative’ proficiency
I communicate mainly with simple stock Indonesian phrases. I can be ‘creative’ (ie. say new things I have not learned as stock phrases) but any creative language consists of no more than, for example, a subject and verb with perhaps also an object or adverb, and I make many mistakes that most people have great trouble understanding unless the context makes it very predictable.

1 Basic transactional proficiency
I can communicate my basic needs and basic factual information in situations or on topics that are very familiar (eg I can conduct basic shopping transactions and outline such things as how long and where I have learned Indonesian). I can maintain a very simple conversation (satisfying minimum courtesy requirements) with a simple series of exchanges, using complete, though very simple sentences (generally consisting of a single clause). I make a lot of mistakes and I may have to repeat myself often to be understood.

1+ Transactional Proficiency
I speak Indonesian well enough to take part in simple social conversations in face-toface situations with a background speaker. My language is ‘creative’ enough (see above) to allow me to interact as an individual, and complex enough to convey my simple opinions about familiar matters. I make a lot of mistakes and I often have great trouble coming up with the vocabulary and structures I need. I make mistakes in grammar, particularly when I am trying to express more complex ideas (e.g. with an ‘if’ clause).

2 Basic social proficiency
I speak Indonesian well enough to take part in face-to-face conversations with a number of background speakers and in telephone conversations describing familiar things and relating familiar events, and conveying my opinions fairly precisely ‘off the cuff’. I use a range of complex sentences (eg with an ‘if and ‘because’). I often have trouble coming up with the vocabulary I need. I get frustrated in conversations about complex or abstract issues, because I can’t express the things I want to, and I worry that other people may think I am ignorant. I use a variety of constructions with clauses but I make mistakes in grammar, particularly when I am trying to express more complex ideas (e.g. with an ‘unless’ clause). Beyond basic courtesy forms I have limited ability to tailor my language as outlined below.

2+ Social proficiency
I am midway between the description above and the one below.

3 Basic vocational proficiency
I can speak Indonesian well enough to substantiate my own and discuss other people’s opinions effectively in conversations or unprepared monologues, although I can’t pursue my ‘argument’ to great depths. I make mistakes, though these rarely confuse or amuse the listener. In familiar situations I can generally tailor what I say and how I say it to considerations such as the formality of the occasion and whether the person I am talking to is older or younger than me, though I cant always come up with the appropriate vocabulary or structure.

3+ Basic vocational proficiency plus I am midway between the description above and the one below.

4 Vocational proficiency
I can operate effectively in complex in-depth discussions or monologues in social and academic or work situations. My language is mostly accurate, fluent and appropriate to the situation. Someone might think I was a background speaker for a few moments, but they wouldn’t be fooled for long.

4+ Advanced vocational proficiency
I am midway between the description above and the one below.

5 Native-like proficiency I speak the language just as well as similarly educated background speakers do. There is nothing about the way I speak that suggests that I am not a background speaker. From the International Second Language Proficiency Rating Scales E. Wylie 2006 Halaman

LISTENING

0 I can’t understand anything at all when I hear Indonesian spoken, however familiar the topic may be, and however slowly and carefully the other person may speak.

0+ I understand a limited range of short, simple things that I have often heard in Indonesian (e.g. basic personal questions, my own language teacher’s basic classroom or tutorial instructions).

1- I understand a range of short, simple things that I have often heard in Indonesian. I can also understand some ‘novel’ (i.e. new to me) things in face-to-face situations, provided they are very short and simple (generally consisting of a single clause) and very predictable (e.g. answers to my own questions where the range of possible answers is very limited) and provided the other person uses gestures, and slow, careful speech, and is willing to re-word things in Indonesian to help me.

1 I understand very simple conversations in face-to-face situations with a background speaker of Indonesian, provided the topics are very familiar or have direct relevance to me (e.g. how long and where I have studied the language) and provided the other person uses simple sentences, speaks slowly and repeats or re-words things in Indonesian to help me.

1+ I understand simple conversations in face-to-face situations with a background speaker of Indonesian provided the topics are familiar or of particular interest to me. I can follow some complex sentences (e.g. with an ‘if’ or ‘because’ clause) provided the other person is willing to speak slowly and carefully. I understand just isolated bits of very simple news stories on Indonesian TV or radio.

2 I understand when I am participating in conversations with background speakers of Indonesian (face-to-face or on the telephone) about topics that are familiar or of interest to me. If I am not a participant in a conversation (e.g. when I overhear people talking on a bus), I generally understand very little. I can get the main ideas of very simple news stories on Indonesian TV and radio on general (e.g. human-interest) topics, provided the newsreader is speaking relatively slowly.

2+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

3 I understand almost everything when I am participating in social conversations with background speakers of Indonesian on fairly complex and abstract topics (e.g. the extent to which a government should subsidise sporting activities). I can generally follow a conversation I overhear between background speakers (e.g. on a bus) even though I can’t understand some things that they say. I can use the telephone for most purposes and I understand most TV and radio news stories.

3+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

4 I understand most things in the language, even things as difficult as complex radio documentaries with fast speech. However I tend to miss subtle plays on words or references to ‘deep’ aspects of the culture. I have difficulty with some accents.

4+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

5 I understand the spoken Indonesian language just as well as similarly educated background speakers do. I understand subtleties and cultural references just as well as they do, and cope just as well when people speak very fast, mumble or have a heavy, unfamiliar accent, or when there is severe interference from background noises.

From the International Second Language Proficiency Rating Scales E. Wylie 2006 Halaman

READING

0 I can't understand anything at all when I read the language, however familiar the topic, and however simple the text

0+ I recognise and understand a limited range of short, simple texts that I have often seen (eg the names of major cities, titles of familiar textbook, common street signs).

1- I recognise and understand a range of short, simple texts that I have often seen. I can get the essential information in some very simple ‘novel’ (ie. new to me) texts on very familiar topics provided they are very short (generally consisting of a single clause).

1 I get the essential information in short, very simple ‘novel’ texts (eg. notices and or advertisements for familiar events or products). I can follow short, very simple instructions (eg consisting of a set of several single-clause sentences) about things I am familiar with. I am lost with longer, more complicated text on less familiar topics.

1+ I get the essential information in simple texts on familiar topics where the meaning is clearly spelled out or where they are fairly predictable (eg circulars about routine events or simple personal notes addressed to me). If the notes are handwritten, the style of handwriting must be one I am familiar with, and the writing neat. I can understand some complex sentences (eg with an ‘if’ or ‘because’ clause.). I can follow short, very simple instructions (eg consisting of a set of several single-clause sentences) about things I am familiar with. I am lost with longer, more complicated texts on less familiar topics.

2 I get the essential information in simple texts on familiar topics (eg short, simple human interest stories from a daily paper and personal letters to me about everyday events). Handwriting must be in a standard style and neat. I may need to use a dictionary to help with unfamiliar key items.

2+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

3 I get the essential information from straightforward texts such as general news stories in the daily paper and semi-technical texts in familiar fields (eg middle school text books in a subject I am interested in). I don’t need a dictionary unless I want a full understanding of these (eg to do a translation). I can read short popular novels for enjoyment, although I need a lot more time than a similarly educated background speaker.

3+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

4 I generally understand quite complex texts (eg editorials in an ‘intellectual’ newspaper and very detailed articles in my own field of interest) although I miss subtle plays on word or references to ‘deep’ aspects of culture. I read these texts nearly as fast as a similarly educated background speaker does. I cope with most forms of print and handwriting

4+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

5 I understand the written language just as well as similarly educated background speakers do. I understand subtleties and cultural references and cope with non-standard or untidy handwriting just as well as they do. From the International Second Language Proficiency Rating Scales E. Wylie 2006 Halaman

WRITING

0 I can’t communicate anything at all in written Indonesian.

0+ I can communicate by using a limited range of simple stock Indonesian phrases I have learned.

1- I communicate mainly with simple, stock Indonesian phrases I have memorised. I can be ‘creative’ (see SPEAKING) but any creative language consists of just, for example, a subject and verb with perhaps also an object or adverb. Even using a dictionary I make so many mistakes that most readers have great trouble working out what I want to convey unless the context makes it very predictable. I’m usually concentrating so much on the basic vocabulary that I can’t worry about grammatical accuracy.

1 I can communicate my basic needs and basic factual information about very familiar things to a background speaker who is sympathetic and/or experienced in communicating with beginning learners of Indonesian. I can use complete, though very simple, sentences (generally consisting of a single clause). When I need to use more than one sentence to convey a message, I can’t make links between the ideas in these sentences through language (with words such as ‘however’ or ‘therefore’) so I rely on the reader’s knowledge of the context and ability to ‘read between the lines’. Even using a dictionary I make a lot of mistakes, but I generally get my meaning across if the reader has good will and patience.

1+ I can write Indonesian well enough to conduct simple social correspondence with background speaking friends and to describe myself to a stranger such as a member of the community who has volunteered to be a language partner. My language is ’creative’ enough (see SPEAKING) to allow me to interact as an individual, and complex enough to convey my simple opinions about familiar matters. Even if I use a dictionary, however, I make a lot of mistakes, particularly when I try to express more complex things (e.g. with an ‘if’ clause) but I generally get my ideas across.

2 I can write Indonesian well enough to describe familiar things, relate familiar matters and to convey my opinions about them fairly precisely ‘off the cuff’. I use a range of complex sentences (eg, with ‘if’ and ‘because’). Even using a dictionary I make a lot of mistakes but I generally get my ideas across. I have limited ability to tailor my language as outlined below.

2+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

3 I can write Indonesian well enough to substantiate my own opinion and to discuss other peoples’ opinions, though I can’t pursue my ‘argument’ in great depth. Readers generally follow the development of my reasoning, though it may seem quite ‘second-language’ in its organisation. Even when I use a dictionary I make mistakes, but these rarely confuse or amuse the reader. In familiar situations I can tailor what I write and how I write it to considerations such as the intended audience, my purpose in writing, and the type of text.

3+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

4 I can write texts as complex as a major project report or a senior school history assignment. My language is mostly accurate and appropriate. Someone might think I was a background speaker after reading a few sentences but they wouldn’t be fooled for long.

4+ I am midway between the description above and the one below.

5 I write the language just as well as similarly educated background speakers do. If I make any mistakes, they are the sorts of mistakes that such background speakers make.