Skip to content
Research Article Open access CC BY 4.0

A Comparative Study of the Chinese Proficiency Grading Standards for International Chinese Language Education and the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages

Chunying Shi

Asian Research Journal of Arts & Social Sciences · pp. 194–204 · Published 4 Aug 2025

10.9734/arjass/2025/v23i8759

Abstract

Aims: Language is the key to understanding a country and its culture, and standards are crucial for mastering a language. Based on the current state of global language education cooperation and exchange, this paper explores the differences in language proficiency descriptions between the Chinese Proficiency Grading Standards for International Chinese Language Education (CPGSICLE) and the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), both of which hold significant positions in academia. Methodology: A comparative analysis from multiple perspectives was used in the study. Results: By comparing and analyzing the similarities and differences in their descriptor system construction, descriptive perspectives, and core features, the study reveals that the CPGSICLE excels in quantitative evaluation and highlighting the unique features of the Chinese language, while the CEFR demonstrates outstanding strengths in cross-language comparison and the description of communicative competence. Conclusion: This research provides essential references for language teaching and assessment practices, contributing to the comprehensive evaluation and effective improvement of students’ language proficiency.

Analysis of descriptor differences Chinese proficiency grading standards for international Chinese language education common European framework of reference for languages language proficiency standards

Cited by 2

The Construction and Practice of AI-Supported Contextualized Teaching in Chinese Language Education

Honglian Deng · Frontiers in Humanities and Social Sciences · 2025

Showing 1 of 2 known citations — external sources report more than can currently be individually listed.

Article metrics

Real usage data collected on this platform.

22

Page views

0

PDF downloads

6

Outbound clicks

2

Citations

Views over time

Views by country

Approximate, from request IP at view time — not citizenship or institution. Countries with fewer than 5 views are grouped as "Other".

Traffic sources

Referring site, by host.

Views and downloads exclude known bots/crawlers. Citations combines this platform's own DOI-resolved index with each external source's own reported total — see Cited by above for individually listed citing works. Last refreshed 0 seconds ago.