What makes the CEFR an "action-oriented" language framework?

The CEFR treats learners as social agents who use language to accomplish real-world tasks in specific domains (personal, public, educational, occupational). Proficiency is defined by what a learner can do, not by what grammatical structures they know in isolation. This action-oriented perspective directly shapes how can-do descriptors are written and how lessons and assessments are designed around them.

How are CEFR can-do statements translated into daily lesson objectives?

Teachers select the relevant can-do descriptor for the target level and skill, contextualise it with a specific task, topic, and domain, and define transparent success criteria that learners can understand before the activity begins. For example, the B1 descriptor "Can write simple connected text on familiar topics" becomes "Write a 120-word informal email describing a recent holiday, using at least three travel collocations."

How do self-assessment grids using can-do statements build learner autonomy?

When learners regularly evaluate their own performance against concrete, task-anchored can-do statements, they develop a more realistic understanding of their current proficiency and what they need to improve. This metacognitive awareness supports autonomous learning, provided the self-assessment process is guided by the teacher and the criteria are specific rather than vague.

CEFR Can-Do Descriptors & Action-Oriented Approach

What are CEFR can-do descriptors?

Can-do descriptors are positive, criterion-referenced statements that describe what a language user can do at a given proficiency level. Unlike norm-referenced tests that rank learners against each other, the CEFR defines each level (A1 through C2) by a set of communicative competencies — listening, reading, spoken interaction, spoken production, and writing — phrased as observable actions.

The 2020 Companion Volume expanded the original 2001 descriptor set substantially, adding scales for online interaction, mediation, plurilingual and pluricultural competence, and sign-language use. The underlying principle, however, remains the same: every statement begins with "Can..." and describes what a learner is able to accomplish, not what they cannot.

The CEFR is a reference tool, not a prescriptive curriculum. National education systems and examination bodies may adopt, adapt, or select from its descriptors when designing their own frameworks.

The action-oriented approach explained

The action-oriented approach is the pedagogical philosophy underpinning the CEFR. It views language learners and users as social agents — members of society who accomplish real-world tasks (ordering a meal, writing a complaint, mediating between speakers of different languages) within specific domains: personal, public, educational, and professional.

This perspective has practical consequences for lesson design. Activities should not merely practise discrete language points in isolation; they should require learners to mobilise linguistic, sociolinguistic, and pragmatic competences together to achieve a communicative purpose. The teacher's role becomes that of a facilitator who designs task conditions, monitors, and provides feedback.

Core principles of the action-oriented approach:

Learners are social agents performing real-world tasks
Tasks are situated in domains (personal, public, educational, occupational)
Language use is purposeful: communication serves a goal beyond language practice itself
Competence is holistic: linguistic, sociolinguistic, and pragmatic resources work together
Assessment criteria are transparent and shared with learners in advance

Anatomy of a can-do descriptor scale

Each communicative activity (e.g., "Reading for information and argument") has its own illustrative scale. The descriptors progress from A1 to C2, with each level adding complexity in terms of text length, abstraction, precision, and independence from support. The table below shows how a single activity scale builds across three adjacent levels.

Illustrative can-do progression — Spoken Interaction: Conversation

CEFR level	Can-do descriptor (abbreviated)	Observable classroom behaviour
A2	Can handle very short social exchanges and simple everyday transactions	Participates in scripted role-plays on familiar topics; uses formulaic expressions
B1	Can enter unprepared into conversation on familiar topics; can express personal opinions	Sustains pair-work discussions on known topics; gives short justifications for choices
B2	Can interact with a degree of fluency that makes regular interaction with native speakers possible	Engages in group debates, negotiates meaning, and self-corrects without disrupting flow

Abbreviated from the CEFR 2020 Companion Volume, Table 4. Full descriptors should be consulted in the original source.

Translating can-do statements into lesson objectives

A common challenge for teachers is converting a broad can-do descriptor into a specific, assessable lesson objective. The following three-step process may help:

Select the relevant descriptor for the target level and activity (e.g., B1 Writing: "Can write simple connected text on familiar topics")
Contextualise it with a task, topic, and domain: "By the end of this lesson, learners will be able to write a 120-word informal email describing a recent holiday" (personal domain)
Define success criteria that learners understand before they begin: coherence (paragraphing), task fulfilment (covers all prompts), and lexical range (at least three travel-related collocations)

Share the can-do descriptor with learners at the start of the lesson. Making criteria visible builds metacognitive awareness and helps students self-assess throughout the task.

Self-assessment grids and learner autonomy

The CEFR includes a self-assessment grid that summarises each level across six categories (Listening, Reading, Spoken Interaction, Spoken Production, Writing, and an overall descriptor). This grid is designed for learners, not just teachers, and its use can significantly strengthen learner autonomy.

Research suggests that when learners regularly review can-do checklists against their own performance, they develop a more realistic sense of their current level and what they need to work on next. This is not the same as asking students to grade themselves; rather, it is a guided reflection exercise that the teacher facilitates and discusses.

Self-assessment is most reliable when learners have been trained in its use and when the criteria are specific. Vague prompts ("I can understand spoken English") tend to produce overestimates; concrete, task-anchored prompts ("I can follow the main points of a radio news bulletin on a familiar topic") yield more accurate self-ratings.

Common misconceptions about can-do descriptors

"Each level is a stage students must complete before moving on." — Learners typically show uneven profiles (e.g., B2 reading but B1 writing). The CEFR acknowledges this partial competence explicitly.
"Can-do descriptors are examination criteria." — They are reference descriptions. Examination boards (Cambridge, IELTS, DELE, DELF) align to them but define their own assessment criteria independently.
"If a student cannot do something at a lower level, they cannot be at a higher level." — Proficiency is not strictly cumulative across all descriptors. A C1 speaker may still struggle with a specific A2-level pragmatic convention in an unfamiliar cultural context.

Practical classroom applications

Using can-do descriptors in the teaching cycle

Stage	How can-do descriptors are used	Example
Needs analysis	Identify which descriptors the cohort has/has not met	Diagnostic writing task mapped to B1 writing descriptors
Syllabus design	Select target descriptors as unit learning outcomes	"Can describe events, real or imagined" → narrative writing unit
Lesson planning	Convert descriptors into task-anchored lesson objectives	"Write a 100-word account of a memorable journey"
Formative assessment	Use descriptors as success criteria shared with learners	Peer review checklist derived from the B1 descriptor wording
Summative reporting	Report achievement using CEFR levels rather than raw scores	End-of-course profile: Listening B2, Writing B1+, Speaking B1

CEFR Can-Do Descriptors: Implementing the Action-Oriented Approach