Building a Corpus of 2L English for Automatic Assessment: the CLEC Corpus

In this paper we describe the CLEC corpus, an ongoing project set up at the University of Cádiz with the purpose of building up a large corpus of English as a 2L classified according to CEFR proficiency levels and formed to train statistical models for automatic proficiency assessment. The goal of this corpus is twofold: on the one hand it will be used as a data resource for the development of automatic text classification systems and, on the other, it has been used as a means of teaching innovation techniques

Assessing versus Achieving: if you think you can(‘t), can(‘t) you do it?:A survey about the self-assessment of language [Drents dialect] in relation to language proficiency of high school students in Drenthe

The aim of this thesis is to map the relationship between self-assessment of dialect knowledge and actual language proficiency in Drents dialect of high school students (vmbo basis/kader) in the province of Drenthe. Besides that, the thesis aims to demonstrate the dialect affinity of students and to provide useful recommendations of implementing Drents dialect in high school education in the future. The thesis is carried out with the help of a survey and consists of four parts: (1) the self-assessment grid in which students assess their dialect knowledge, (2) the language proficiency test in Drents dialect where they prove their language abilities, (3) their attitude towards dialects and the Dutch language and (4) the amount of input in various language domains was asked. The students are split into three groups for analysis: non-dialect-speakers, little dialect-speakers and full dialect-speakers. Non-dialect-speakers are included in the research for comparing their attitude towards the dialect and Dutch fragments in relation to the attitude of dialect-speakers. The results of the project show that students were aware of their own strengths and weaknesses considering Drents dialect: full dialect-speakers assessed themselves as ‘proficient’ users (highest level) while little dialect-speakers assessed themselves as ‘independent’ users (middle level). The results of the self-assessment grid did not match the language proficiency test completely, but the self-assessment grid proved a reliable measurement scale (α = 0.89). The attitude of all students towards speakers in dialect and Dutch was generally the same: Dutch was assigned more modern and attractive than the dialects. However, the dialects were not assessed as ‘silly’ or ‘funny’ which indicated that the dialect-speakers were considered as full-fledged partners in conversation too. Last, students were asked if they saw a permanent place for dialect in education. Full dialect-speakers were thrilled with the idea of Drents dialect as regular course, but little dialect-speakers were less enthusiastic. Students might not be ready for Drents dialect as a prominent course of its own, but Drents dialect would benefit if merged with existing courses. In this way, students could slowly get used to the fact of Drents dialect being part of their education