Faizah Idrus , Mohd Khairul Abu Sufi

CEFR, localisation, Malaysia, higher education, written production

1. Asmah Haji Omar. (2016). Positioning languages in the Malaysian education system. In A. H. Omar (Ed.), Languages in the Malaysian Education System (pp. 1–30). Routledge. 2. Azirah Hashim, & Leitner, G. (2014). English as a lingua franca in higher education in Malaysia. The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 16–27. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2418116%5Cnhttp://caes.hku.hk/ajal 3. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/328718 4. Barni, M. (2015). In the name of the CEFR: Individuals and standards. In B. Spolsky, O. Inbar-Lourie, & M. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Challenges of language education and policy. Making space for people (pp. 40–52). Routledge. 5. Barni, M., & Salvati, L. (2017). The Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). In E. Shohamy, I. G. Or, & S. May (Eds.), Language Testing and Assessment (pp. 417–426). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02261-1 6. Council of Europe. (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. 7. Deygers, B., Zeidler, B., Vilcu, D., & Carlsen, C. H. (2018). One Framework to Unite Them All? Use of the CEFR in European University Entrance Policies. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2016.1261350 8. Engku Haliza Engku Ibrahim, Isarji Sarudin, Khairiah Othman, Faridah Abdul Malik, & Ainon Jariah Muhamad. (2017). The assessment of writing within the CEFR scale: A Malaysian context. Advanced Science Letters, 23(5), 4944–4947. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2017.8968 9. Erda Wati Bakar. (2020). Can-Do descriptors – Realigning English language curriculum at higher education institution to CEFR. International Journal of Modern Languages And Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 84. https://doi.org/10.24191/ijmal.v4i2.7975 10. Fatima Sabbir. (2019). Perceived view of teachers towards pentaksiran tingkatan tiga (PT3) (Form Three assessment) English language: A case study. Asian Journal of University Education, 15(3), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v15i3.7819 11. Foley, J. A. (2019). Adapting CEFR for English Language Education in ASEAN, Japan and China. The New English Teacher, 2, 101–117. http://www.assumptionjournal.au.edu/index.php/newEnglishTeacher/article/view/3879/2371 12. Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory and practice of writing. Longman. 13. Green, A. (2018). Linking Tests of English for Academic Purposes to the CEFR: The Score User’s Perspective. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1350685 14. Harsch, C., Peña, I. de la C. C., Baffil, T. G., Álvarez, P. C., & Fernández, I. G. (2020). Interpretation of the CEFR Companion Volume for developing rating scales in Cuban higher education. CEFR, 3. 15. Harsch, C., & Seyferth, S. (2020). Marrying achievement with proficiency – Developing and validating a local CEFR-based writing checklist. Assessing Writing, 43(January), 100433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100433 16. Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences, and Applications, April, 1–27. 17. Holzknecht, F., Huhta, A., & Lamprianou, I. (2018). Comparing the outcomes of two different approaches to CEFR-based rating of students’ writing performances across two European countries. Assessing Writing, 37(April 2017), 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.009 18. Huang, L. fen, Kubelec, S., Keng, N., & Hsu, L. hsun. (2018). Evaluating CEFR rater performance through the analysis of spoken learner corpora. Language Testing in Asia, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-018-0069-0 19. Izzah Ismail, & Rahani Othman. (2020). A review of literature on the English language entry requirement for international students into postgraduate programs in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(11), 543–549. https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.11.98 20. Jacob, S. A., & Furgerson, S. P. (2012). Writing interview protocols and conducting interviews: Tips for students new to the field of qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 17(42), 1–10. 21. Jerald, G. G., & Parilah M Shah. (2018). The Impact of CEFR-Aligned Curriculum in the Teaching of ESL in Julau District: English Teachers’ Perspectives. International Journal of Innovative Research and Creative Technology, 4(6), 121. www.ijirct.org 22. Jernudd, B. ., & Neustupný, J. V. (1987). Language planning: For whom? In Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Language Planning (pp. 71–84). 23. Kok, N. M., & Azlina Abdul Aziz. (2019). English language teachers’ perceptions on the implementation of CEFR-aligned curriculum among primary schools in Malaysia. Seminar Wacana Pendidikan 2019, February, 212–222. 24. Little, D. (2006). The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Content, purpose, origin, reception and impact. Language Teaching, 39(3), 167–190. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003557 25. Little, D. (2007). The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Perspectives on the making of supranational language education policy. The Modern Language Journal, 645–655. 26. Liyana Ahmad Afip, M. Obaidul Hamid, & Renshaw, P. (2019). Common European framework of reference for languages (CEFR): Insights into global policy borrowing in Malaysian higher education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 0(0), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2019.1578195 27. Mardiana Idris, & Abdul Halim Abdul Raof. (2015). CEFR rating scale: Scaling its functionality through ESL learners’ self- and peer assessments. Advanced Science Letters. 28. Mardiana Idris, & Mohamad Hassan Zakaria. (2016). Gauging ESL learners’ CEFR ratings on oral proficiency in rater training. Man in India, 96(6), 1675–1682. 29. Mazidah Mohamed, & Mohd Sallehhuddin Abd Aziz. (2018). Juxtaposing the primary school assessment concepts and practices in Singapore and Malaysia. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(3.21), 552. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i3.21.17232 30. McNamara, T. (2014). 30 Years on-evolution or revolution? Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(2), 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2014.895830 31. Mohd. Khairul Abu Sufi, & Mahani Stapa. (2020). Should the CEFR illustrative scales be localised to Malaysian higher education standards? A conceptual paper. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(9), 885–897. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v10-i9/7882 32. Nagai, N., Ayano, S., Okada, K., & Nakanishi, T. (2013). Adaptation of the CEFR to remedial English language education in Japan. Language Learning in Higher Education, 2(1), 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2012-0003 33. Nekvapil, J., & Sherman, T. (2015). An introduction: Language management theory in language policy and planning. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2015(232), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2014-0039 34. Nguyen, V. H., & Hamid, M. O. (2020). The CEFR as a national language policy in Vietnam: Insights from a sociogenetic analysis. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 0(0), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2020.1715416 35. Nor Liza Ali. (2013). A changing paradigm in language planning: English-medium instruction policy at the tertiary level in Malaysia. Current Issues in Language Planning, 14(1), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2013.775543 36. Norsharina Mohd Yusof, & Mohamad Maslawati. (2020). Stakeholders’ perceptions and implications of classroom-based reading assessment: A literature review. Creative Education, 11(08), 1324–1335. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2020.118097 37. North, B. (2007). The CEFR: Development, Theoretical and Practical issues. Babylonia, 1, 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M409962200 38. North, B., & Piccardo, E. (2016). Developing illustrative descriptors of aspects of mediation for the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). Language Teaching, 49(3), 455–459. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444816000100 39. Nurul Farehah Mohd Uri, & Mohd Salehhuddin Abd Aziz. (2020). The appropriacy and applicability of English assessment against CEFR global scale: Teachers’ judgement. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 26(3), 53–65. 40. Nurul Farehah Mohd Uri, & Mohd Sallehhuddin Abd Aziz. (2018). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and the challenges. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 168–183. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2403-13 41. Nurul Farehah Mohd Uri, & Mohd Sallehhudin Abd Aziz. (2020). Ascertaining the suitability of writing syllabus specifications to the CEFR: Subject matter experts’ perspectives. Issues in Language Studies, 9(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.33736/ils.2347.2020 42. Nurul Hidayah Razali, & Lilisuriani Abdul Latif. (2019). CEFR-based English speaking skill self-assessments by Malaysian graduating non-native English speaking students. Malaysian International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 2, 82–93. 43. Pillai, S., & Ong, L. T. (2018). English(es) in Malaysia. Asian Englishes, 20(2), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678.2018.1459073 44. Ramiaida Darmi, Fariza Puteh-Behak, Hazlina Abdullah, Ramiza Darmi, & Wahiz Wahi. (2018). Variations of L1 use in the English language class. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 18(2), 284–311. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2018-1802-19 45. Savski, K. (2020). Local problems and a global solution: Examining the recontextualization of CEFR in Thai and Malaysian language policies. Language Policy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-019-09539-8 46. Savski, K., & Savaki, K. (2019). Putting the plurilingual/pluricultural back into CEFR: Reflecting on policy reform in Thailand and Malaysia. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(2), 644–652. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.2.13.644 47. The Roadmap. (2015). English language education reform in Malaysia: The roadmap 2015-2025 (Zuraidah Mohd Don (ed.)). Ministry of Education Malaysia. 48. Van Huy, N., & Hamid, M. O. (2015). Educational policy borrowing in a globalized world: A case study of Common European Framework of Reference for languages in a Vietnamese university. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 14(1), 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-02-2015-0014 49. Weir, C. J. (2005a). Language testing and validation. In Language Testing and Validation. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230514577 50. Weir, C. J. (2005b). Limitations of the Common European Framework for developing comparable examinations and tests. Language Testing, 22(3), 281–300. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532205lt309oa 51. Wind, S. A., Stager, C., & Patil, Y. J. (2017). Exploring the relationship between textual characteristics and rating quality in rater-mediated writing assessments: An illustration with L1 and L2 writing assessments. Assessing Writing, 34(April), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2017.08.003 52. Zarina Mohd Ali, Fatimah Ali, Noor Raha Mohd Radzuan, Nik Aloesnita Nik Mohd Alwi, Noor Lide Abu Kassim, & Zuraidah Mohd Don. (2018). Contextualising the CEFR: The Universiti Malaysia Pahang English language proficiency writing test. ICERI2018 Proceedings, 1(April 2019), 4892–4902. https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2018.2114 53. Zou, S., & Zhang, W. (2017). Exploring the adaptability of the CEFR in the construction of a writing ability scale for test for English majors. Language Testing in Asia, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-017-0050-3 54. Zuraidah Mohd Don, & Mardziah Hayati Abdullah. (2019, May 22). The reform of English language education in Malaysia. Free Malaysia Today, 1. https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2019/05/22/the-reform-of-english-language-education-in-malaysia/