Proficiency underachievement remains a key concern for U.S. college-level World Language (WL) programs and a major factor behind declining student enrollment. However, current recommendations—such as regularly measuring student proficiency with standardized tests and implementing program-wide faculty professional development (PD)—are often impractical due to limited resources and varying levels of faculty readiness. In response, the field of Chinese as a Foreign Language (CFL) has increasingly called for innovative, localized solutions. This study employed the 2017 NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-Do Statements (Can-Dos) in a college CFL program to improve two critical areas influencing proficiency outcomes: ongoing teacher PD and student self-directed learning. Two faculty members with differing expertise (language pedagogy vs. comparative literature and culture) engaged in co-design-style professional learning by collaboratively revising the curriculum using the Can-Do standards, with a focus on articulating program goals and implementing corresponding performance-based assessments (e.g., Integrated Performance Assessments). To support student self-directed learning, 35 chapter-level self-assessment checklists based on the Can-Dos were developed and used across seven courses. Using a convergent mixed-methods design, data were collected through a student survey completed by 60 participants, a faculty interview, and a written faculty questionnaire. Results show significant gains in curriculum design and faculty understanding and use of ACTFL standards, especially regarding assessment. Student responses to the self-assessment tools were positive, citing improved abilities to identify learning gaps, set goals, and reflect on strategies. This exploratory study contributes to the growing shift in postsecondary CFL programs toward articulating standards-based goals, designing performance-based assessments, and advancing teacher PD. It also offers insights for other WL programs seeking sustainable ways to improve proficiency outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dong et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: