Communication from the Commission to the Council - Framework for the European survey on language competences
Date: 2007-04-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, assessment, information, language teaching, multilingualism

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 13.4.2007 
COM(2007) 184 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 

Framework for the European survey on language competences  

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 

Framework for the European survey on language competences  

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Multilingualism  is  a  core  value  in  Europe.  It  is  part  of  what  makes  Europe  unique  and 
contributes to the richness of its culture and society. Learning languages provides people with 
better  career  possibilities,  deeper  understanding  of  their  own  and  others’  cultures  and 
increases their mobility.  

Improving  language  skills  in  Europe  is  also  an  important  objective  within  the  drive  to 
improve the skills and competences of the population as part of the Lisbon growth and jobs 
strategy. In March 2002 in Barcelona, The European Council called for further action “...to 
improve the mastery of basic skills, in particular by teaching at least two foreign languages 
from  a  very  early  age.”  They  also  “called  for  the  establishment  of  a  linguistic  competence 
indicator in 2003.”1 

Thus the Commission and the Member States undertake a range of different activities aimed 
at promoting good policy approaches for language learning within the Education and Training 
2010 strategy.2 

In  its  Communication  The  European  Indicator  of  Language  Competence  in  20053  the 
Commission outlined a detailed strategic approach for the creation of a European Survey on 
Language Competence as a means to collect the data necessary to construct a European level 
indicator.  On  this  basis  the  Council  concluded  in  May  20064  on  a  number  of  key  issues 
concerning  the  European  Indicator  of  Language  Competence,  and  stressed  that  a  survey 
should be carried out as soon as possible. The Council invited the Commission to set up the 
European  Indicator  of  Language  Competence  Advisory  Board  (hereafter  referred  to  as  the 
Board) of national experts to advise the Commission on the preparation and implementation 
of  the  survey5.  The  work  of  the  Board  has  formed  an  important  input  to  the  writing  of  this 
communication.  The  Council  furthermore  requested  the  Commission  to  report  back  to  the 
Council on the progress of work. The present Communication answers this request. 

The  Commission  has  recently  presented  a  Communication  on  a  coherent  framework  of 
indicators  and  benchmarks6  to  support  the  Education  and  Training  strategy  generally.  The 
framework  proposes  the  development  of  a  set  of  20  core  indicators  to  cover  the  main 
domains. Creating an indicator for language competence poses particular challenges.  

1 
2 
3 
4 

5 

6 

Presidency conclusions, Barcelona, part I, Paragraph 43.1. March 2002.  
A new framework Strategy for Multilingualism, COM (2005) 596 final 
The European Indicator of Language Competence COM (2005) 356 final 
Council  conclusions  of  18  and  19th  May  2006  on  the  European  Indicator  of  Language  Competence 
(2006/C 172/01) 
The Board was set up by the Commission in a Commission Decision of 26th October 2006. The Board 
has had two meetings during 2006.  
A  coherent  framework  of  indicators  and  benchmarks  for  monitoring  progress  towards  the  Lisbon 
objectives in education and training COM (2007) 61 final 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
This  Communication  outlines  conclusions  on  all  the  outstanding  issues  regarding  the 
development of the survey highlighted in the Council Conclusion of May 2006. It invites the 
Council to take note of the proposed framework of the survey. On that basis the Commission, 
in cooperation with the Board and the Member States would be able to implement the survey. 
The present Communication foresees a survey to be carried out during the first six months of 
2009.  

2. 

FRAMEWORK OF THE EUROPEAN SURVEY ON LANGUAGE COMPETENCES  

The  European  survey  aims  to  provide  Member  States,  policy  makers,  teachers  and 
practitioners  with  reliable  and  comparable  data  on  foreign  language  competence  in  the 
European Union. It will provide knowledge about the multilingual capacities of young people, 
on where good practice and performance can be found, and on progress towards the objective 
of improving foreign language learning.  

The  survey  will  be  implemented  by  the  Commission  advised  by  the  Board  in  close 
cooperation with the Member States.  

2.1. 

Language Skills to be tested 

In  the  first  round  of  data-gathering,  tests  will  be  developed  on  three  language  skills: 
reading comprehension; listening comprehension; and writing. The Commission will take 
the  initiative  to  develop  instruments  to  cover  the  fourth  skill  speaking  in  time  for  the 
subsequent surveys.  

The purpose of the European survey is to measure “overall foreign language competence in 
each  Member  State”  7.  In  its  final  form,  it  should  test  all  four  language  skills:  reading; 
listening; writing; and speaking. However, some skills are easier to test than others. Tests of 
oral productive skills may require face-to-face tests with a human examiner and will be more 
complex than testing receptive skills.  

The Council conclusion of May 2006 stated that for practical reasons it would be advisable, in 
the  first  round  of  data-gathering,  for  tests  to  be  made  available  in  the  three  language  skills 
which  may  be  assessed  most  readily  (listening  comprehension,  reading  comprehension  and 
writing). The Board supports this approach.  

The  first  round  survey  should  therefore  cover  these  three  skills.  The  Commission  will  take 
initiative  in  time  to  ensure  that  the  fourth  skill,  speaking,  will  be  included  in  subsequent 
rounds of the survey.  

2.2. 

Languages to be tested 

The European survey in each Member State should cover tests in the first and second of 
the  most  taught  official  European  languages  of  the  European  Union,  namely  English, 
French, German, Spanish and Italian.  
The  framework for testing will  be made available for all countries that wish to ensure 
that  tests  other  than  in  these  five  languages  can  be  included  in  the  first  round  of  the 
survey as national options. 

7 

COM (2005) 356 final 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The Council Conclusions of May 2006 recommended that in the first round of the survey the 
test should be available “…in those official languages of the European Union that are most 
widely taught in the Member States, to the extent that they provide a sufficiently large sample 
of  testees”  and  that  “Member  States  shall  themselves  determine  which  of  those  official 
languages  are  to  be  tested”8.  The  number  of  languages  that  should  be  assessed  in  the  first 
round  of  the  survey  should  therefore  be  limited  to  English,  French,  German,  Spanish  and 
Italian which are the most widely taught official European foreign languages in the Member 
States9. The survey in each Member State should, therefore, cover the two most widely taught 
of these languages.  

However, the testing tool will be made available and can be used by Member States if they so 
wish to test competence in languages other than the two most widely taught within this list of 
five.  The  Commission  will  take  initiative  in  due  time,  before  subsequent  rounds  of  tests,  to 
ensure  that  the  survey  covers  all  the  official  European  languages  taught  in  the  European 
Union.  

2.3. 

The framework of reference 

The  survey  should  be  based  on  an  instrument  measuring  a  continuum  of  increasing 
levels of competences from level A1 to level B2 on the scales of the Common European 
Framework of Reference for Languages. 

The  Council  invited  the  Commission  to  develop  the  European  Indicator  of  Language 
Competence  and  stated  that  “test  scores  should  be  based  on  the  scales  of  the  Common 
European Framework of Reference for Languages”10. 

The  Common  European  Framework  of  References  (CEFR)  is  a  guideline  used  to  describe 
achievements  of  learners  of  foreign  languages.  Its  main  aim  is  to  provide  framework  for 
methods  of  assessing  and  teaching  which  applies  to  all  languages  in  Europe.  The  CEFR 
consists  of  a  scale  with  six  levels  for  different  language  skills  divided  into  three  broad 
divisions: Basic user (A1-A2), Independent user (B1-B2) and Proficient user (C1-C2).  

The six reference levels are widely accepted in the Member States as a standard for grading 
an  individual's  language  proficiency.  Several  European  countries  have  already  used  tests 
related to the scales of the CEFR for testing proficiency of languages.  

The Board has informed the Commission that the most pertinent levels of the scale in the EU 
for  testing  language  proficiencies  in  lower  secondary  education  (ISCED  2),  and  at  upper 
secondary education (ISCED 3) if the second foreign language is taught at that level, are the 
range  of  competences  from  Basic  users  to  Independent  users  (levels  A1  to  B2).  Very  few 
pupils have the cognitive capacity to perform at a higher level than B2 at the concerned age 
and  level  of  schooling.  A  test  consisting  of  all  the  six  levels  would  be  a  considerable 
challenge and expensive. Accordingly, it is proposed that tests should therefore be developed 
to cover the four levels from A1 to B2 of the CEFR.  

8 
9 
10 

Council Conclusions (2006/C 172/01) 
Eurostat UOE. 
Council Conclusions (2006/C 172/01) 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The various levels of CEFR are wide and it takes a long time for students to progress from 
one level to the other. The gap between the levels (especially from levels A2 to B1) can be too 
large for practical use with beginners and younger students. Hence a testing instrument should 
be developed which enables to measure a continuum of levels of competencies between levels 
A1 and B2. This will also provide more precise measurements of statistical measures such as 
variance, median and average performances for each of the skills tested.  

2.4. 

Contextual data to be collected 

A questionnaire for students, teachers, head masters and governments will be developed, 
to gather contextual information that will allow analysis of possible factors which might 
impact on pupils’ language competences. 

The  intention  is  not  only  to  undertake  a  survey  of  language  competences  but  a  survey  that 
should  be  able  to  provide  information  about  language  learning,  teaching  methods  and 
curricula.  

Contextual  information  will  allow  relating  the  level  of  language  competences  of  pupils  in 
relation to possible determinants. Issues such as socio-economic background of the pupils and 
specific  aspects  like  migrant  status,  language  spoken  at  home;  whether  learning  the  foreign 
language  is  compulsory  or  voluntary;  whether  the  teacher  has  formal  education  in  teaching 
languages  or  is  a  native  speaker;  "streaming"  of  pupils  and  gender  can  all  affect  the  results 
and data on them should be collected.  

Such contextual data will address questions concerning individual pupils, schools and the type 
of  curricula,  structure  of  the  education  and  training  systems  and  governmental  educational 
policy. Separate questionnaires addressed to sample students,  teachers and school principals 
and  to  education  administrators  should  be  developed.  These  background  questionnaires  will 
be designed to allow for an in-depth policy analysis which may provide answers to causes and 
effects  in  developing  language  competences.  In  order  to  facilitate  international  comparison, 
existing concepts and classifications should be used and links to similar international surveys 
should be explored to allow for a multidimensional secondary analysis of the results. 

2.5. 

Population to be tested in the survey 

The "total population" of the survey, in statistical terms, should be the total number of 
pupils enrolled in the final year of lower secondary education (ISCED 2), or the second 
year of upper secondary education (ISCED 3), if a second foreign language is not taught 
at lower secondary education. 
The  "target  populations"  are  the  pupils,  enrolled  in  schools  from  the  total  population 
that are taught the language being tested. 

The  survey  will  respect  the  general  scientific  standards  for  sampling  used  in  international 
surveys  to  ensure  that  the  data  from  the  survey  are  reliable  and  can  be  compared  between 
countries. The size of the sample should take into account the need for collecting contextual 
information in order to analyse and explain the differences in results between Member States. 
The  survey  should  aim  at  developing  reliable  and  comparable  results  with  the  smallest 
possible sample. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
The  Council  conclusions11  stated  that  the  survey  would  gather  data  from  a  representative 
sample  of  all  pupils  registered  in  education  and  training  at  the  end  of  lower  secondary 
education (ISCED 2). Where a second foreign language is not taught before the end of ISCED 
2,  the  sample  of  pupils  should  be  collected  from  pupils  at  the  upper  secondary  education 
(ISCED 3).  

Concerning the question at which level of upper secondary education pupils should be tested, 
the Board advises that data should be gathered from pupils at the second year of ISCED 3. By 
the  end  of  ISCED  3,  some  pupils  have  ended  their  education  or,  in  the  case  of  several 
countries,  are  enrolled  in  education  that  no  longer  teaches  foreign  languages.  Furthermore, 
during the final year of upper secondary education, pupils and teachers are occupied with final 
examinations  and  might  be  less  open  to  cooperate  with  the  survey.  The  first  year  of  upper 
secondary  education  is  considered  to  be  too  early  because  pupils  in  some  countries  only 
receive teaching in the second foreign language during the second year. On the basis of the 
advice of the Board, the survey should gather data from pupils at the second year of ISCED 3 
in  the  case  of  countries  where  the  second  foreign  language  is  not  taught  before  the  end  of 
ISCED 2.  

Following the advice of the Board, the survey should only test pupils enrolled in schools that 
are being taught the language tested.  

The age of pupils at the end of ISCED 2 and at the second year of ISCED 3 differs between 
Member States. At the end of ISCED 2 it ranges from 14 to16 years. The year of introduction 
of a first and second foreign language is also different in Member States. Hence the age and 
time during which pupils have been learning a foreign language will be different for the pupils 
tested  in  the  survey.  The  Board  stresses  that  this  should  be  taken  into  consideration  when 
analysing the results from the survey.  

2.6. 

Testing instruments 

Both  computer  based  tests,  using  open  source  software,  and  paper  and  pencil  tests 
should  be  made  available  to  countries  in  the  survey.  The  testing  instrument  should 
permit adaptive testing. 

International  experiences  with  computer  based  testing  of  competences  have  been  gathered 
throughout recent years. DIALANG is an internet based test, currently managing diagnostic 
tests in 14 different European languages. International surveys such as PISA and TIMSS have 
made  some  pilot  studies  using  computer  based  testing.  Member  States  have  experiences  in 
networks on open source software. Carrying out the survey using computer based tests would 
be a major European achievement.  

The  testing  instrument  should  be  made  available  for  countries  to  adapt  to  national  needs 
outside the survey, and should therefore be developed according to a protocol of open source 
software12.  

11 
12 

Council Conclusion (2006/C 172/01) 
The  Centre  for  research  on  lifelong  learning  (CRELL/the  Joint  Research  Centre,  Ispra)  is  currently 
carrying out a research and development project on open source computer-based assessment tools for 
skills assessment taking into account on-going research initiatives in this field. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Computer based testing represents a challenge when compared to traditional testing methods 
based  on  paper  and  pencil  tests.  Receptive  skills  such  as  listening  and  reading  are  easier  to 
implement  and  deliver  via  computers  than  productive  skills  like  writing.  The  Board  has 
underlined several potential difficulties in using computer based testing linked to questions of 
software  compatibility,  the  available  speed  of  Internet  connection  and  the  computer  and 
typing  skills  of  pupils.  At  the  same  time  there  are  several  benefits  linked  to  the  use  of 
computer based testing in, for example, marking and coding as well as statistical treatment of 
data  which  can  be  faster  and  less  subject  to  error  and  thus  more  efficient.  Computer  based 
testing is also considered to be a better tool for adaptive tests where the choice of questions 
addressed to individual testees is tailored to the specific level of competences of the person. 

The  development  of  instruments  for  computer  based  testing  is  significantly  more  expensive 
than  traditional  paper  and  pencil  tests,  however  these  costs  must  be  seen  in  the  light  of 
benefits of more efficient implementation of the survey and the improved basis for adapting 
the  test  to  the  needs  of  individual  countries  and  the  further  development  of  the  test  for 
possible subsequent surveys.  

On  this  basis,  introducing  computer  based  testing  would  be  the  optimal  step  forward  in 
relation  to  the  survey.  However,  the  Board  underlines  that  there  are  different  levels  of 
readiness in the countries concerning testing with computers. The survey should be based on 
alternative or complementary testing based on computers and on paper and pencil tests.  

2.7. 

Implementation costs of the survey  

The  national  cost  of  implementing  the  survey  will  depend  on  the  final  structure  of  the 
survey. The survey should use national experiences in order to find economies of scale. 
The international costs will be covered by the European Union. 

The level of national costs of international surveys for testing skills depends in particular on 
testing  methods  used,  the  sample  size,  the  number  of  skills  tested  and  the  contextual 
questionnaires  being  used.  The  national  costs  of  such  surveys  cover  in  particular  the 
implementation of the test in the Member States, the setting up and running of organisational 
support  structures,  training  of  national  and  school  coordinators  and  examiners,  printing  of 
tests, coding of test results, quality assurance procedures and translation needs. 

The structure and costs of international surveys testing pupils’ skills like PISA and TIMSS, 
can be used as a comparable measure for costs of the survey. However, the Board considers 
that  the  survey  could  be  more  expensive  than  other  international  surveys  because  it  will 
include tests of listening comprehension, and because the organisation of the survey could be 
more complex since there will be more subjects, more levels and more domains involved than 
in other international surveys.  

The Board has discussed the possibility of using existing national competences, experiences 
and  organisational  structures  for  the  implementation  of  the  survey  and  thereby  ensuring 
economies of scales (see below).  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
The  international  costs  of  the  survey  are  foreseen  to  be  covered  by  the  European  Union, 
within the framework of the life-long learning programme (2007 – 2013) in agreement with 
the  Programme  Committee.  The  international  costs  will  cover  costs  related  to  the 
development of the tests, the coordination and follow-up of the Pilot tests, identification of the 
sample  and  sampling  methods,  the  development  and  coordination  of  the  full  set  of  tests  as 
well as analysis and reporting results.  

All  decisions  concerning  the  survey  that  imply  national  costs  will  be  taken  in  close 
cooperation with the Board and the Member States. 

2.8. 

National organisational structures for implementing the survey  

The  participating  countries  should  ensure  that  the  necessary  organisational  structures 
are available for carrying out the survey. 

Member  States  should  take  initiatives  to  ensure  that  the  necessary  organisational  structures 
are available to permit the implementation of the survey and that responsibilities are defined 
from  the  very  start.  Most  Member  States  have  experiences  from  national  surveys  or 
participation  in  similar  international  surveys  and  could  draw  on  such  experiences. 
Experiences from surveys such as PISA and TIMSS can be used as a basis for planning the 
national organisational structures and the necessary competences and experiences can in many 
cases  be  found  among  national  experts  with  experience  from  such  surveys.  Therefore,  the 
competences and organisation of already existing services should be utilized.  

2.9. 

Implementation of the survey  

The  Commission  will  take  steps  to  develop  the  survey  on  language  competence. 
Technical work should be launched in March 2007 in order to enable tests to be carried 
out in the beginning of 2009.  

The  Commission  will  initiate  the  work  to  develop  testing  instruments  and  to  implement  the 
survey. It will define the sampling methods and criteria for selecting participating institutions 
and testees, securing agreement from relevant authorities where necessary, and make sure that 
the quality on these issues respects the general international standard for such surveys. It will 
design and implement the survey, gather data and analyse and draw up the final results. The 
work will be carried out in close cooperation with the Board and the Member States. 

The Board argues that the test should be run in the first part of the calendar year and not in the 
beginning  of  the  school  year.  The  first  survey  should  therefore  be  implemented  during  the 
beginning of 2009. 

In  order  to  be  able  to  run  the  test  in  the  beginning  of  2009,  preparatory  work  should  be 
launched in March 2007. This will lead to the development of the test and pilot tests, to be 
carried out in the spring of 2008. On the basis of the experiences from the pilot tests, full tests 
should be developed and run in the Member States in the beginning of 2009.  

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
The Board will continue to meet throughout the whole period and work in close cooperation 
with the Commission on all stages of the development and implementation of the survey.13  

3. 

CONCLUSION 

The Commission invites the Council to take note of the proposed framework of the survey as 
presented in this Communication, concerning the following items: 

•  Skills to be tested 
•  The languages to be tested 
•  The levels the CEFR to be used 
•  The collection of contextual information 
•  The target and the total population to be tested 
•  The development of testing instruments, both computer based tests and paper and 

pencil tests 

•  The implementation of the survey 

On that basis the Commission would be able to launch preparations for the survey. This will 
be done in close cooperation with the Board and with the Member States. Testing instruments 
should  be  developed  with  a  view  to  the  implementation  of  the  survey  in  the  beginning  of 
2009.  

13 

The financial and human recourses of the foreign language indicator survey have already been outlined 
in the financial annex of COM (2005) 356 final 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
ANNEX  

List of Members of the European Indicator of Language Competence Advisory Board 

Country 

Organisation 

Title Family Name 

First name 

Austria 

Belgium (Flemish 
Community) 

Belgium (German 
Community) 
Belgium (French 
Community) 
Bulgaria 

Cyprus 

Czech Republic 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany  

Germany (substitute) 

Greece 

Greece 

Hungary 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Council of Europe 

Eurydice 

Österreichisches Sprachen-
Kompetenz-Zentrum 
Flemish Department for 
Education and Training - 
Curriculum Division 

Mr 

Ms 

Mr 

Sheils 

Baidak 

Abuja 

Joseph 

Nathalie 

Gunther 

Ms 

Raes 

Nicole 

Service général de pilotage 
du système éducatif 

Mr  Woolf 

Alain 

not yet 
nominated 

Ministry of Education and 
Culture 
Institute for Information on 
Education 
Ministry of Education, 
International unit 
National Examination and 
Qualification Center 
Finnish National Board of 
Education 
Ministère de l'Education 
Nationale, de 
l'Enseignement Supérieur et 
de la Recherche 
Deutsches Institut für 
Internationale Pädagogische 
Forschung (DIPF) 
Deutsches Institut für 
Internationale Pädagogische 
Forschung (DIPF) 
Ministry of National 
Education and Religious 
Affairs 
Greek Unit of the Eurydice 
Network, Ministry of 
National Education and 
Religious Affairs 
ELTE University - National 
Institution of Public 
Education 
Ministry of Education 

Centre for Language and 
Communication Studies 

not yet 
nominated 
Tofaridou 

Ms 

Efrosyni  

Ms   Kramplova 

Iveta 

Ms 

Andersen 

Ms 

Sõstar 

Pernille Skou 
Brønner 
Kersti 

Ms  Mustaparta 

Anna-Kaisa 

Mr  Monnanteuil 

François 

Mr  Klieme 

Eckhard 

Mr  Hesse 

Hermann-
Günter 

Mr 

Papadakis 

Nikolaos 

Mr  

Papamanolis 

Nikos 

Ms  Major 

Eva 

Ms   Kádár-Fülöp 

Judit 

Mr 

Little 

David 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
Italy 

Latvia 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Luxembourg 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 
(Wales) 

Directorate-General for 
Foreign Affairs, Ministry of 
Education 
Ministry of Education and 
Science 
The Centre for Curriculum 
Development and 
Examinations  
Education Development 
Centre, Ministry of 
Education and Science 
Ministère de l’Education et 
de la Formation 
professionnelle 
Ministry for Education, 
Youth and Employment 
Hesta Advies - en 
Vertaalbureau 
Ministry of National 
Education 
Faculdade de Psicologia e 
Ciências da Educação, 
Universidade de Lisboa 
National Institute for 
Educational Sciences 
National Institute for 
Education, Department of 
foreign Languages 

Ministerio de Educación y 
Ciencia - Instituto de 
Evaluación (IE) 
Skolverket - Swedish 
National Agency for 
Education 
Strategic Analysis and Data 
Services Group - 
Department for Education 
and Skills 
University of Swansea 

Ms 

Di Nicuolo 

Giulia 

Mr  Mankovs  

Leonīds  

Ms  Muceniece  

Gundega 

Ms 

Jariene 

Raimonda 

Mr 

Fandel 

Jean-Claude 

Mr 

Camilleri 

George 

Mr  Molenaar 

Peter 

Mr 

Poszytek 

Pawel 

Ms 

Peralta 

Helena 

Mr 

Nasta 

Dan Ion 

Ms 

De Jaegher 

Darina 

waiting for new 
nomination 
Tovar Sánchez  Carmen 

Ms 

Mr 

Lagergren 

Tommy 

Mr 

Leman 

Steve 

Mr  Meara 

Paul 

United Kingdom 
(Scotland) 

Scottish Qualifications 
Authority 

Mr 

Van Krieken 

Robert 

EN 

11 

   EN