I think we ought to do a poll style thing on meta; two answers (yes or no), the highest voted one after a week is the solution
We've already sorted out the site's desired name to a degree in another post (which could be the location for the suggestions), but we could do another if the other post is too far into rigor mortis
@fi12 it needs great questions, but with activity... meaning that if there are no upvotes, and no answer in a short time, it's unlikely to get to the HNQ....
time matters
@Quill I don't think now is a good time for changing the site's name...
but now we are, as we say, at the bottom of the wave... we have to concentrate our effort of climbing the next one, otherwise we'll be thrown out under water
@Quill I only did the Level 4... and it was already some step. A friend did the 1st and told me that's above the average Japanese native speaker. So apart from the big steps in each level, I don't see much how it scales...
Proficiency is a much better term for what most people think they mean when they say "fluency"
But proficiency is more complicated
As language proficiency is made up of at least 4 distinct skills. Commonly recognized are: reading, writing, speaking, and listening comprehension. But there are others, and even within those four, there are other sub-proficiencies.
@Flimzy and without going to such extreme, when I compared my wife proficiency in the local language with mine, she uses more appropriate vocabulary, better grammatics, but I sound more fluent...
at a low level, I remember a test for our kids, when they were asking how the language dev was going... we had a formular with a list of words and were asked whether they could say those words... and there were "cats" on the list but not "dogs". Is it really better to know cats and not dogs than the other way around?
@bilbo_pingouin For a test, that's probably reasonable... Why waste time testing both "cat" and "dog", when you could use only one as a proxy for "can they name common household animals", and spend the other time asking if they can say "anathema"?
But if the actual lesson made the omission of "dog", that would probably be problematic.
I don't know how they generally treat that... we have a specific case that our kids learn 3 languages at once, so it's normal for them to get a little bit behind on apparent language development. So the fact that they knew "dog" and not "cat" was completely discarted in our case
Well, it may depend on the purpose of the test. But most tests are intended to get a general feel for whether a student mastered the full gamut of information presented during the course work. It's not usually feasible to test 100% of that knowledge, so representative samples are selected and tested.
In such a case, testing for both 'cat' and 'dog' might be seen as redundant.
All that being tangential to the question of whether traditional testing is the best way to gauge a student's proficiency in the first place :)
yeah, I remember when I was first presented with the A1-C2 levels, they explained that you should get 80% of the aims for each step to claim it. Based on the fact that even native speakers generally did not know all the vocabulary, expression and less frequently used grammar rules in their own language
but often tests focus on more singular blocks... like learn the preteritum for a set of 30 verbs in English. That's measurable.
how does that relate to fluency, proficiency or overall mastery is, to me, an open question
@Quill yes/no polls aren't a good idea: people should have room to justify their answers
But with a negative scoring question, it isn't going to happen. A site name change isn't a neutral thing, it requires a significant majority in favor of switching
it's a pity, because I don't think “language learning” is a good name to attract experts