A Japanese version of the CEFR, the CEFR-J, has been developed and validated (www.cefr-j.org).
The experience of aligning the GEPT (General English Proficiency Test, see www.lttc.ntu.edu.tw) with the CEFR has suggested within the CEFR a lack of sufficiently detailed descriptors for describing how well learners at a particular CEFR level perform (see Wu and Wu 2007; Wu 2014).
The levels of the GEPT, which are also linked with the CEFR empirically, are roughly equivalent to CEFR A2 C1 (e.g., Wu and Wu 2010; Wu 2011).
Despite, or perhaps because of, the wide and rapid adoption of the CEFR, the somewhat inevitable limitations of the CEFR became apparent, and these are described in the paper by Jin, Wu, Alderson and Song in this collection of papers.
Our data show that descriptor no. 4 (CEFR B1) has obtained a slightly higher logit value than descriptor no. 15 (CEFR B2).
Language policies were widely developed with the CEFR at their core, both within and beyond Europe, resulting not only in CEFR-based language tests, but also CEFR-based language textbooks and language education curricula.
The results have shown that CEFR writing descriptors can be used in the description of the writing ability of TEM candidates, but most of the CEFR descriptors surveyed have had their original level altered in our writing ability scale.
The model is verified with the design results of design code SG-33 and CEFR.
The Chinese Experimental Fast Reactor (CEFR) is under installation and commissioning right now.
TIB calculations help to give a better understanding and prediction of hypothetical accident scenario in subassembly blockage accidents for CEFR.
The discrepancy is probably due to less fuel inventory and better cooling capacity in CEFR subassembly design.
