Doc 9835 AN/453
Manual on the Implementation of
ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements
FOREWORD
Safety experts are constantly seeking to identify means of
improving safety in
order to reduce the already
low accident rates. With mechanical failures featuring
less prominently in
aircraft accidents, more attention
has been focussed
in recent years
on human factors
that contribute to
accidents.
Communication is one human element that is receiving renewed
attention.
In 1998, the ICAO Assembly, taking note of several accidents and
incidents where the language proficiency of
pilot and air
traffic controller were
causal or contributory
factors, formulated Assembly Resolution A32-16
in which the
ICAO Council was
urged to direct
the Air Navigation
Commission to consider, with a
high level of priority, the matter of
English language proficiency and to complete the task of strengthening the
relevant provisions of
Annex 1 — Personnel
Licensing and Annex
10 — Aeronautical
Telecommunications, with a
view to obligating
Contracting States to take steps
to ensure that
air traffic control personnel
and flight crews
involved in flight
operations in airspace
where the use
of the English language is required are proficient
in conducting and comprehending radiotelephony communications in the English
language.
Subsequently, the Air Navigation
Commission established the
Proficiency Requirements in Common English Study Group (PRICESG) to
assist the Secretariat in carrying out a comprehensive review of the existing provisions concerning all
aspects of air-ground and ground-ground voice communications and to
develop new provisions
as necessary. In March 2003,
the Council adopted amendments
to Annex 1, Annex 6 — Operation of Aircraft,
Annex 10, Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services, and the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Air
Traffic Management (PANS-ATM, Doc 4444) relating to language proficiency in
international civil aviation.
In order to
support States’ efforts
to comply with
the strengthened provisions
for language proficiency, the
development and publication of guidance material compiling comprehensive
information on a range of aspects related to language proficiency training and
testing were seen as necessary. While the ICAO Language Proficiency
Requirements were developed for use in assessing language proficiency in all
languages used for radiotelephony communications, not just in the English
language, much of the focus of this manual is
on English language training
issues, as this
is the area
in which most States and aircraft operators require
specific guidance. The principles, however,
are largely transferable
to other language training programmes as well.
The purpose of this manual is not to provide a comprehensive language learning
education to language instructors or training programme developers, nor to
provide a curriculum — tasks well beyond the scope of this document given the
breadth of language training and testing activities required — but rather to
serve as
a guide. The target
audience for this
manual includes the
training managers of
civil aviation
administrations, the airline
industry, and training
organizations. The material contained in
this manual is drawn from a
number of sources and is expressed in ways designed to be accessible to
laypersons outside the field of applied linguistics and language teaching. This
guidance material is of special interest to aviation specialists who oversee
the implementation of appropriate language training and testing programmes.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
1. Inadequate language
proficiency has played a role in accidents and incidents and led to a review of
ICAO language requirements.
Assembly Resolution A32-16
urged the Council to
direct the Air Navigation Commission (ANC)
to consider this matter with a
high level of priority, and complete
the task of strengthening
provisions related to the use of the English language for radiotelephony
communications.
2. Both ICAO phraseologies
and plain language are required for safe radiotelephony communications.
3. ICAO has
adopted strengthened language
proficiency requirements for
radiotelephony communications.
4. All States and
organizations have a role to play in improving communications.
ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) concerning
Language Proficiency Requirements
1. The ICAO language proficiency requirements:
a)
strengthen the provisions related to language use in radiotelephony
communications, both for the language of the station on the ground and, in
airspace where it is required, for English, from the level of Recommendations
to Standards;
b)
establish minimum skill level requirements for language proficiency for
flight crews and air traffic controllers;
c) introduce an ICAO
language proficiency rating
scale applicable to
both native and
non-native speakers;
d)
clarify the requirement for the use of both plain language and
phraseologies;
e) standardize on the use of ICAO phraseologies;
f)
recommend a testing schedule to demonstrate language proficiency; and
g)
provide for service provider oversight of personnel compliance.
2. Annex 10 SARPs clarify that ICAO
phraseologies shall be used whenever possible.
3. Annex 1 SARPs describe how language should be
used for radiotelephony communication.
4. The language proficiency requirements in
Annex 1 apply equally to native and non-native speakers.
5. Pilots and controllers are required to
demonstrate Operational Level 4 language proficiency in the use of both ICAO
phraseology and plain language by 2008.
6. A Standard in Annex 1 stipulates
recurrent testing for pilots and controllers who demonstrate language
proficiency below Expert Level 6.
7. Annexes 6 and 11 stipulate service provider
or airline oversight of personnel language proficiency.
Linguistic Awareness
1. The ICAO language proficiency requirements
apply to native and non-native speakers alike.
2. The burden of improving radiotelephony
communications should be shared by native and non-native speakers.
a) States should ensure
that their use
of phraseologies aligns
as closely as
possible with ICAO standardized phraseologies.
b)
Pilots and controllers should be aware of the natural hazards of
cross-cultural communication.
c)
Native and other expert users of English should refrain from the use of
idioms, colloquialisms, and other jargon in radiotelephony communications and
should modulate their rate of delivery.
d) Native speakers must
ensure that their
variety of English is comprehensible to
the international aeronautical
community.
e)
Plain language should be specific, explicit, and direct.
f)
English-speaking organizations, airlines or training centres may wish to
explore how they might
provide cost-efficient English
language learning opportunities
to code share
partners and other airlines at minimal cost.
Language Training and Radiotelephony Communications
1. An important first
step in the
establishment of efficient
and cost-effective language
learning programmes is the selection of appropriately and adequately
qualified teachers.
a) Learning a language
is a great
deal more complex
than the familiar
use of our
own native language in our daily
lives often leads us to believe.
b) Language teaching is
a professional activity
that requires specialized
training and is further
distinguished from other teaching activities because of the unique nature of
language learning: a complex blend of skill, knowledge and cultural awareness,
combining physical components with mental and communicative processes.
c) A
chart outlining appropriate qualifications for a language training and testing
specialist is provided in this chapter.
2. Aeronautical subject matter
experts (SME) should
collaborate with language
teachers to develop accurate and effective programmes.
a) The
SME can ensure
accurate and appropriate
training content, and
the language teacher
can ensure that delivery focusses on language learning.
b) The task of
teaching language classes
or developing appropriate
language learning materials should be guided by language
teaching experts and material developers.
3. Flight crews
and air traffic
controllers need to
acquire phraseologies, but
aviation English training should not be limited to
phraseologies.
4. Language proficiency is an
intricate interplay of knowledge,
skills, and competence, requiring much
more than memorization of vocabulary items.
5. Many factors influence the language learning
process. It is difficult to predict how long any particular individual will
require to reach the ICAO Operational Level 4 proficiency; as a general rule of
thumb, between 100 and
200 hours of
language learning contact
hours are required
for measurable improvement. This
number can be reduced
by involvement in specific-purpose classes which focus solely on speaking and listening.
6. There are no short cuts in language learning.
Time, motivation, and mature effort are always required.
7. Adherence to
the standards set
by a number
of professional language
teaching associations best guarantees effective programmes.
Compliance with ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements
1. Until 5 March 2008, States may continue to
use the procedures they currently have in place to assess the English proficiency
of flight crews and controllers.
2. The relative facility
to assess proficiency
at the expert
level allows flexibility
in the way
the assessment is made.
3. Licensing authorities should
require a specialized
evaluation (or test)
of those who
do not demonstrate Expert
proficiency.
4. Phraseologies-only testing is not
appropriate.
5. Demonstration of actual speaking and
listening ability is required.
Aviation Language Testing
1. Language testing in aviation has high stakes
because careers and safety are at stake.
a)
Language testing is a specialized professional activity.
b)
Language testing is, on the whole, an unregulated industry.
c) General lack of
awareness of the professional requirements for language testing, combined with
the high-stakes nature of language testing, might present a risk if
inadequately prepared tests are used.
2. Tests prepared by people
who do not have the specialized knowledge and experience possessed by language
testing professionals may be adequate for placing someone within a training
programme or for judging student progress, but the need for the reliability and
validity of language proficiency tests in an aviation context is very high.
a) With careers and possibly lives
at stake, administrations should
turn to language
testing professionals in order to ensure
that the tests used or developed for compliance with the
ICAO language proficiency requirements will provide reliable and valid
results.
b) A code of
ethics and a
sample code of
practice to guide
test development are
provided in Appendix D to this
manual.
c) All
participants and stakeholders — testers, test developers, and test users —
involved in aviation language testing have the responsibility to ensure that
the language proficiency tests they select, provide, or develop for the
aviation industry are valid, reliable, effective and appropriate.
d)
Test developers, administrators and providers, in particular, are
accountable to the stakeholders: to the pilots and controllers taking their
tests; to the airlines and air navigation service providers contracting for the
testing, and to
the passengers relying on the individual language skills of the airline pilots
and air traffic controllers.
3. Testing services, rather than “a test”, are
required.
4. Direct, communicative proficiency tests of
speaking and listening abilities are appropriate assessment tools for
the aviation industry and will
allow organizations to determine
whether flight crews and air traffic
controllers are able to meet the ICAO language proficiency Standards.
a) The
ICAO language proficiency requirements point towards an aviation context for
testing.
b)
Phraseologies-only testing is not appropriate.
c)
Indirect tests of grammatical knowledge, reading or writing are not
appropriate.
d) Tests that test
proficiency in another
specific-purpose context (academics
or business) are
not appropriate.
Aviation Language and Aeronautical Radiotelephony Communicative
Language Functions
1. There are three distinct roles of language as
a factor in aviation accidents and incidents.
a) Use
of phraseologies;
b)
Proficiency in plain language;
c) Use
of more than one language.
2. The following information and material in
Appendix B will support curriculum development for aviation language
programmes:
a)
Aeronautical communicative language functions;
b)
Inventory of events and domains;
c)
Priority lexical domains;
d)
Aviation language tasks.
Additional Support for Teaching and Learning
Additional Support for Teaching and
Learning contains
three brief articles
directed, in turn,
to aviation language
teachers, material developers, and
to pilots and air traffic controllers.
APPENDICES
Appendix
A. ICAO SARPs
Part
I. Extracts from ICAO Annexes 1, 6, 10
and 11.
Part
II. ICAO Language Proficiency Rating
Scale
Part
III. Explanation of rating scale
Appendix
B. Aviation Language
Part I. Communicative Language Functions, Events,
Domains and Tasks Associated with Aviation
Part II. Events and Domains
Part III. Priority Lexical Domains
Part IV. Language Tasks of Air Traffic Controllers.
Part V. Four-Word Clusters in Spoken English
Appendix
C. Case Studies in Aviation Language
Testing
1. Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) Testing
2. PELA — Proficiency in English Language for
Air Traffic Control
Appendix
D. Standards for Language Training and
Testing
1. Training Programme Standards
2. Language Testing Standards — The
International Language Testing Association (ILTA) Code of Ethics
3. Language Testing Standards — The Japan
Language Testing Association (JLTA) Code of Practice
Appendix
E. Additional References
Part
I. References
Part
II. What is not Standard in Real
Radiotelephony
Extracts by Servet BASOL
Bu konu kitap dışı yorumlarla bambaşka yerlere çekilmiştir.
Öncelikle şunu ifade etmeliyim.
APPENDIX 1.
REQUIREMENTS FOR PROFICIENCY IN LANGUAGES USED FOR RADIOTELEPHONY
COMMUNICATIONS
Asla bir Lisan Seviye Tespiti DEĞİLdir.
Adı üzerinde
PROFICIENCY IN LANGUAGES USED FOR
RADIOTELEPHONY COMMUNICATIONS
Yani bir iletişim becerisi tespitidir. Freyzyoloji temelli diksiyon
ve mikrofon kullanımı üzerine verilen bir eğitimdir.
Bu derecelendirme is Dil, Din, Irk, Milliyet, Cinsiyet ve Ülke
kavramlarının üzerinde olup havacılığın her kademesinde çalışacak yada çalışmakta olan tüm personeli kapsar.
Linguistic Awareness
1. The ICAO language proficiency requirements
apply to native and non-native speakers alike.
Eğitim ve sınav ASLA yazılı yapılamaz, sadece SÖZLÜ yapılacaktır.
Doc.4444 sayıların ve alfabenin nasıl okunacaği ile freyzyolojinin okunuşları
hakkında sayfalar dolusu talimatlarla doludur.
Unutulmamalı ki bu eğitimde en çok başarısız olan Amerikalılardır.
Forumumuzda bile kavram kargaşası yaratan tabirleri ICAO dışı
üretip kullananlar da onlardır.
Havacılık dili ortak bir dildir.
Ne Amerikan, ne İngiliz, ne İrlandalı ne de Avustralyalı gibi
konuşamazsınız.
4, her zaman four olarak yazılır ama havacılıkta fov-ver, 9 da
nay-nır diye okunur.
Bakın ICAO araştırması neleri belgelemiş;
1.1
BACKGROUND TO STRENGTHENED ICAO LANGUAGE
PROFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS
1.1.1 In
three accidents (one collision on the ground, one accident involving fuel
exhaustion and one
controlled
flight into terrain),
over 800 people
lost their lives.
What these seemingly
different types of
accidents
had in common
was that, in
each one, accident
investigators found that
insufficient English
language proficiency on the part of the flight crew or a
controller had played a contributing role in the chain
of events leading
to the accident.
In addition to
these high-profile accidents, multiple incidents
and near
misses as a
result of language
problems are reported
annually, instigating a
review of communication
procedures and standards worldwide.
1.1.2 Concern
over the role of language in these and other aviation accidents and incidents
has been
expressed
from several quarters. Data obtained from
the ICAO Accident/Incident Data
Reporting System
(ADREP) database, the United States’ National Transportation and
Safety Board reports, and
the United
Kingdom’s Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Systems corroborate that
the role of language in accidents and
incidents
is significant. A number of other fatal and non-fatal accidents
appear in the ICAO ADREP which
cite “language barrier” as
a factor. Additionally,
the United Kingdom’s Mandatory Occurrence
Reporting
Systems cite 134 language-related problems in fewer than six
years.
1.1.3
Such concern heightened
after a 1996
mid-air collision in
which 312 passengers
and crew
members were killed in yet another accident in which insufficient
English language proficiency played a role.
Assembly Resolution A32-16
1.1.4
Concern over the
role of language
in airline accidents
led to the
1998 ICAO Assembly
Resolution
A32-16, in which
the ICAO Council
was urged to
direct the Air
Navigation Commission to
consider
this matter with a high degree
of priority, and complete the
task of strengthening relevant
ICAO
provisions concerning language requirements, with a view to
obligating Contracting States to take steps to
ensure that air traffic control personnel and flight crews involved in flight operations in airspace where the
use of the
English language is
required are proficient
in conducting and
comprehending radiotelephony
communications in the English language.
Development of the language proficiency provisions
1.1.5 In
2000, the Proficiency Requirements in Common English Study Group (PRICESG)
convened
for the first time. PRICESG had been established to assist ICAO in
advancing the task established by the Air
Navigation
Commission on language
competency, which included,
among other elements,
the following
aspects:
a) carry out
a comprehensive review
of existing provisions
concerning all aspects
of airground
and ground-ground voice
communications in international
civil aviation, aimed at
the identification of deficiencies and/or shortcomings;
b) develop ICAO provisions
concerning standardized English language testing requirements
and procedures; and
c) develop minimum skill
level requirements in the common usage of the English language.
1.2
REVIEW OF PROVISIONS PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS CONTAINING
LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS
1.2.5
Although standardized ICAO phraseologies have been developed to
cover many circumstances
(essentially routine events, but also including some predictable
emergencies or non-routine events), no set
of
phraseologies can fully
describe all possible
circumstances and responses.
Aircraft are flown
and
controlled by humans, and human behaviour is infinitely variable;
the need to communicate an infinite variety
of
circumstances or nuances
will continue. Pilots and
air traffic controllers
need sufficient language
proficiency
to manage all of
the potential requirements
of communications, which can
range from routine
situations
to circumstances not
addressed by the
limited phraseologies, as well
as non-routine situations
and outright emergencies. Human language is characterized, in
part, by the ability to create new meanings
and to use words in novel contexts, a creative and complex
function of language which accommodates the
complex
and unpredictable nature
of human interaction,
even within the
relatively constrained context
of
aviation
communications.
Summary
1.2.6 The ICAO
language proficiency requirements
cannot completely eliminate
all sources of
miscommunication in radiotelephony communications. Rather, the
goal is to ensure, as far as possible, that
all speakers have sufficient proficiency in
the language used to negotiate
for meaning, in order to handle
non-routine
situations. Communication errors will
probably never be
completely eliminated; however,
compliance with the ICAO language proficiency requirements will
enable speakers to more readily recognize
errors and work towards the successful and safe resolution of
misunderstandings.
Anahtar kelimeler burada miscommunication ve misunderstanding kelimeleridir.
Önemli olan çok iyi bir
İngilizce ile talimat vermek değil, yerinde bir freyzolojiyi her dilden insanın
kolayca anlayacağı bir akıcılık içerisinde düzgün telaffuz ile yanlış
anlaşılmaya meydan vermeyecek bir şekilde vurgu ile iletişim yapmaktır.
Örneklerle açıklamak
gerekirse;
Communication Level-3:
Soran da cevaplayanda
Level-3 örnekleridir. Kuvvetli başlayıp zayıflayan bir tonlama, iletişimi
aksatmaktadır.
Pronaunciation Level-4:
Beğenseniz de beğenmeseniz
de anlaşılır olması önemlidir. “Ağız” yoktur, yani anadilini öncelikle size
anımsatmaz ama anlaşılır.
Vocabulary Level-4:
Gereken kelimeler
kullanılmaktadır ve ifade edilmek istenen karşı tarafça anlaşılmaktadır.
Interaction Level-4:
Zor da olsa bu karşılıklı
görüşme gerçekleşmiştir. Burada hedef bu iletişimin devamıdır.
Fluency Level-4:
Gerekli olan akıcılık
mevcuttur. Eee ler ve hımm lar azalmış ve amaca yönelik ikili konuşma
kesintisiz sağlanmaktadır.
Fluency Level-5:
Buradaki akıcılığa
“vurgu” eklenmiştir. Söylenen cümlenin içerisindeki asıl kelimenin üzerine
basılarak söyleniyor olması, önemini arttıran vurgu ile olmaktadır.
Bu bir RADIOTELEPHONY
COMMUNICATIONS eğitimidir.
Havacılık içerisinde
hangi meslek grubunun hangi seviyede konuşuyor/iletişim yapıyor olması tabloda
belirtilmiştir.
Mikrofon kullanmak,
tonlama ve vurgu ile konuşmak, mesleki kelime ile akıcı cümle kurmak gibi
eğitimler zaten ilgililerin eğitim planlarında mevcuttur. Hedef ise bu
eğitimleri daha düzgün ve ciddi yapmaktır.
Kaza nedenleri arasına bu konunun girmesi, zaten var olan bu
eğitimin daha da ciddiye alınmasını sağlamaya yöneliktir.
Sevgiler
Servet BASOL
100105
