CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3Arabic Language Education StudiesEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An Analysis and Levelling of Reading Texts Across Arabic Textbooks Based on the CEFR Proficiency Levels

Mohamed, Salwa·2021·Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development
DOI 10.4018/978-1-7998-7226-9.ch004
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This chapter analyses the reading content in four prominent Arabic textbook series that are widely used in the UK and USA to assess their reading proficiency progression. The reading texts in each series are analysed using the Dutch CEFR grid and assigned a level as per the CEFR proficiency scale. The findings reveal that there is a lack of consistency among the different textbook series with regards to how reading proficiency is construed at different levels, especially at the intermediate and higher levels. The chapter concludes by highlighting that Arabic material developers, textbook writers, and teachers would benefit from consulting a recognized and systematic reference of proficiency such as the CEFR in developing a comprehensive view of language proficiency in Arabic that includes defining common thematic areas, most needed and suitable functions, and relevant linguistic features for each language proficiency level.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4018/978-1-7998-7226-9.ch004

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. M.Al-Batal, 2018, Arabic as One Language: Integrating Dialect in the Arabic Language Curriculum
  2. S.Al Tubuly, 2020, Evaluation of the cultural content in Arabic textbooks., The Language Scholar, 6, 26
  3. J. C.Alderson, 2004, The Development of Specifications for Item Development and Classification within The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment: Final Report of The Dutch CEF Construct Project [Paper presentation]., Workshop on Research into and with the CEFR
  4. M.Alosh, 2010, Ahlan wa sahlan: Functional Modern Standard Arabic for beginners
  5. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL). (2012). ACTFL proficiency guidelines (3rd ed.). Alexandria: ACTFL INC.
  6. K.Ashton, 2008, The languages ladder and Asset Languages: A new assessment framework for languages in England, Multilingual Europe: Diversity and learning, 175
  7. 2018, Language Mapping Pilot Project: Arabic Language Provision in the UK
  8. K.Brustad, 2004, Al-Kitaab fii taallum al-arabiyya: a text for Arabic, part 1
  9. K.Brustad, 2006, Al-Kitaab fii taallum al-arabiyya: a text for Arabic, part 2
  10. K.Brustad, 2007, Al-Kitaab fii taallum al-arabiyya: a text for Arabic, part 3
  11. 2018, How long does it take to learn a foreign language?
  12. 2001, Common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching, assessment
  13. F. N.Fisne, 2018, A CEFR-based comparison of ELT curriculum and course books in Turkish and Portuguese primary schools., Novitas-Royal, 12, 129
  14. N.Jones, 2010, Asset Languages: A case study of piloting the CEFR Manual, Aligning tests with the CEFR, 227
  15. J.Keddle, 2004, The CEF and the Secondary School Syllabus, Insights from the Common European framework, 43
  16. S.Mohamed, The development of an Arabic curriculum framework based on a compilation of CEFR levels’ salient features., Language Learning Journal
  17. T.Odlin, 1994, Introduction, Perspectives on Pedagogical Grammar, 1
  18. 2007, Asset languages teacher assessment pack (Breakthrough)
  19. 2008, Asset languages teacher assessment pack (Preliminary)
  20. 2009, Asset languages teacher assessment pack (Intermediate)
  21. F.Roberts, 2020, Malaysian teachers’ perception on Cambridge English textbook evaluation checklist for materials adaptation: A preliminary study., International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29, 2020
  22. Ryding, K. C. (2013). Teaching and learning Arabic as a foreign language. Georgetown University Press.
  23. E.Volodina, 2013, Compiling a corpus of CEFR-related texts [Paper presentation]., Proceedings of the Language Testing and CEFR Conference, Universiteit Antwerpen
  24. K. M.Wahba, 2015, The current trends in Arabic language teaching materials., Annuals of Japan Association for Middle East Studies, 31, 83
  25. K. M.Wahba, 2013, Arabic language learning textbooks: an evaluation of current approaches. Al-‘Arabiyya
  26. M.Younes, 2014, Arabiyyat Al-Naas Part Two

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 3

Related

Metadata

Authors
Mohamed, S.
Affiliations
Manchester Metropolitan University (GB)
Corresponding author
Mohamed, Salwa
ORCID
Mohamed, Salwa
Venue
Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development
Publisher
IGI Global
Published
2021
Pages
57-83
ISSN
  • 2327-6983 (ISSN-L)
  • 2327-6991
DOI
10.4018/978-1-7998-7226-9.ch004
OpenAlex
W3187503075
Cited by
3
References
36
Citations by year
2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
5.13
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Advances in higher education and professional development book series (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Arabic Language Education Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
Arabic language textbooks, reading texts, CEFR proficiency levels, reading proficiency, language assessment, Arabic language teaching

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review