You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There is currently no standardized way to measure fluency in a language. The fluency field is simply a string, which leads to inconsistencies when used across different themes. For example, some themes cause errors when fluency is set to values like "2" instead of descriptive terms like "Master".
To address this, I propose adopting a standardized set of levels or bands to measure language proficiency. This will ensure consistency across all resume themes and eliminate errors caused by ambiguous or non-standard inputs. While we don’t need to default to test scores, we could adopt levels from a well-known scale to provide a clear and uniform way to measure language proficiency.
Proposed Solution
I suggest using the ILR (Interagency Language Roundtable) scale, which includes six levels of proficiency:
Level
Proficiency
Description
0
No proficiency
Knowledge of the language is nonexistent or limited to a few words.
1
Elementary proficiency
Basic sentence structure and common tourist phrases.
2
Limited working proficiency
Ability to engage in limited social conversations and understand basic commands.
3
Professional working proficiency
Fluent enough to contribute in a workplace, though with some accent or terminology limitations.
4
Full professional proficiency
Advanced level, with the ability to hold conversations on most topics, though occasional mistakes may occur.
5
Primary fluency / bilingual proficiency
Completely fluent with little to no accent, similar to a native speaker.
The fluency field should be updated to accept a numeric value between 0 and 5, reflecting the ILR proficiency levels:
"fluency": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"maximum": 5,
"description": "A number from 0 to 5 representing proficiency levels: No proficiency (0), Elementary proficiency (1), Limited working proficiency (2), Professional working proficiency (3), Full professional proficiency (4), and Primary fluency / bilingual proficiency (5)."
}
Benefits
Consistency: Establishes a uniform standard for measuring language proficiency.
Clarity: Reduces confusion and prevents theme-related errors due to inconsistent string values.
Flexibility: The numeric scale is easy to understand and aligns with commonly used proficiency measures.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Problem
There is currently no standardized way to measure fluency in a language. The fluency field is simply a string, which leads to inconsistencies when used across different themes. For example, some themes cause errors when fluency is set to values like "2" instead of descriptive terms like "Master".
Current schema.json (v1.0.0)
To address this, I propose adopting a standardized set of levels or bands to measure language proficiency. This will ensure consistency across all resume themes and eliminate errors caused by ambiguous or non-standard inputs. While we don’t need to default to test scores, we could adopt levels from a well-known scale to provide a clear and uniform way to measure language proficiency.
Proposed Solution
I suggest using the ILR (Interagency Language Roundtable) scale, which includes six levels of proficiency:
Source: Indeed
The fluency field should be updated to accept a numeric value between 0 and 5, reflecting the ILR proficiency levels:
Benefits
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: