Open Access
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 113, 2021
International Scientific and Practical Conference “Professionalism of a Teacher: Psychological and Pedagogical Support for a Successful Career” (ICTP 2021)
Article Number 00048
Number of page(s) 7
Published online 25 June 2021
  1. N.P. Lyubetckiy, A.M. Shevchenko, S.I. Samygin, Intellectual Potential of Cooperation in Modern Russia as a Strategic Priority of the Russian Federation State Youth Policy, Humanitarian, socio-economic and social sciences, 10, 86–90 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  2. E.F. Zeer, L.N. Stepanova, Psychological Features of Interrelation of Prognostic Abilities and Self-Regulation of Behavior of Students, Pedagogical Education in Russia, 2, 46–52 (2017) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. A.A. Iudin, I.V. Sitnikova, Modern Student: The Formation of the Professional Future Image, Sociology of Education, 3, 89–103 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  4. D.Yu. Vagin, O.A. Nemova, V.V. Retivina, Value Choice of Nizhni Novgorod Students, Modern Issues of Pedagogical Education, 61(2), 100–104 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  5. S.D. Reznik, M.V. Chernikovskaya, Russian Students: Life Priorities and Social Sustainability, 242 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  6. K. Naginder, Lexical competence among tertiary students: teacher-student perspectives, The English Teacher, 90–104 (2008) [Google Scholar]
  7. [Google Scholar]
  8. I.S.P. Nation, Learning vocabulary in another language, 477 (2001) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. [Google Scholar]
  10. [Google Scholar]
  11. [Google Scholar]
  12. J.H. Hulstijn, The Shaky Ground Beneath the CEFR: Quantitative and Qualitative Dimensions of Language Proficiency, The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 663–667 (2007) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. N. Jones, N. Saville, European Language Police: Assessment, Learning, and the CEFR, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 51–69 (2009) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. J. Treffers – Daller, P. Psrslow, Sh. Williams, Back to Basics: How Measures of Lexical Diversity Can Help Discriminate Between CEFR Levels, Applied Linguistics, 39(3), 302–327 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  15. St. Arnott, L.M. Brogden, F. Faez, M. Reguret, E. Piccardo, K. Rehner, Sh.K. Taylor, M. Wernicke, The Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in Canada: A Research Agenda, The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20 (1), 31–54 (2017) [Google Scholar]
  16. A. Green, Linking Tests of English for Academic Purposes to the CEFR: The Score User’s Perspective, Language Assessment Quarterly, 15 (1) (2018) [Google Scholar]
  17. Th. Francois, E. Volodina, Il. Pilan, A. Tack, SVALex: a CEFR-graded lexical resource for Swedish foreign and second language learners, Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources, (2016) [Google Scholar]
  18. L. Taylor, N. Jones, Cambridge ESOL exams and the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), Research Notes, 24, 2–4 (2006) [Google Scholar]
  19. J. Runnels, Usage of the CEFR and CEFR-J in Japanese universities: Preliminary survey results, Framework & Language Portfolio SIG Newsletter, 14, 8–18 (2015) [Google Scholar]
  20. J. Beresova, The Impact of the Common European Framework of Reference on Teaching and Testing in Central and Eastern European Context, Synergies Europe, 6, 177–190 (2011) [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.