If you could change the structure of the JLPT how would you

[everdream]

I would change the gap between 3 and two. It almost looks to me as if there's a whole test missing, because of the gap. ( Level 3 284 Kanji, 1409 words and 32 greeting expressions, level 2 1023 Kanji, 5035 words and 49 greeting expressions)

I'd also bring in a speaking part to the test on levels 1 and maybe 2. Since level 1 is more or less showing fluency I think speaking should be a must.

And the best change I think they could make is holding it every 6 months as oppossed to every 12.

[Yudan Taiteki]

Actually I think the gap makes sense. The more kanji you learn, the less useful each new kanji is. The first 500 kanji you learn (assuming you're learning them at least roughly by frequency) are much more important than the next 500, which are far more important than the next 1000, and so on.

The mistake is trying to make your "number of kanji learned" equal to your language proficiency. If you're considering taking level 2, you should be at the point where you can no longer keep track of how many kanji you "know".

(Personally I think there should be a level beyond 1.)

[Gundaetiapo]

The level numberings seem backwards to me.

[everdream]

^ You mean because the highest is 1, and the lowest 4 ?
It depends how you look at it. I always grew up where the higher the level, the higher the grade, but it lso makes sense in a way.Being number 1 is being the best, so makes it's a better number...
Ack, that proberly made no sence.

[Yudan Taiteki]

That is a standard way of marking levels in Japan. There are a huge variety of tests in all kinds of things where you can get certification for various levels, and all of them use the "1 is the best" system.

[Gundaetiapo]

Interesting. When they translated Mario Bros, did they change the beginning level from 8 to 1 for English speakers?

[clay]

(Personally I think there should be a level beyond 1.)

I've heard the JLPT will add a 準一級 (pre-1 kyuu) in addition to 一級 probably in 2009. I don't know if this is true, but it was from a credible source.

[katafei]

I wish the tests would use more kanji with furigana instead of all that hiragana.
(I'm not talking about 2kyuu of 1kyuu ^_^)

[Harisenbon]

I wish they would include a speaking or writing section on the test, make it point based instead of level based (with a pass fail), and have it more than once a year.

But then it would be the JETRO.

[Shirasagi]

Gundaetiapo wrote:
Interesting. When they translated Mario Bros, did they change the beginning level from 8 to 1 for English speakers?

No, because we're talking about different levels.

"Level" in Mario would be レベル or ステージ and be numbered sequentially.

"Level" in the JLPT (and other tests) is 級 (kyuu) and is more akin to "degree" or "class". For example, in the Navy you have Petty Officer 3rd Class (lowest ranked) and Petty Officer 1st Class (highest ranked).

Similarly, in martial arts like judo and karate (as well as shogi and shodo), you start at a kyuu level (say, 4 or 5) and progress to 1 kyuu. After 1 kyuu is shodan, after which the ranks are numbered sequentially.

[chchan45]

clay wrote:

(Personally I think there should be a level beyond 1.)

I've heard the JLPT will add a 準一級 (pre-1 kyuu) in addition to 一級 probably in 2009. I don't know if this is true, but it was from a credible source.

(Launching into Victor Meldrew mode) I do not believe it!

Having had a look at the level 1 and 2 test questions, I can say that the level 2 is almost as difficult as level 1. Many grammar and listening questions are repeated across the two levels. The reading section is as long as the level 1 examination (one long passage, three medium length passages and a few short passages - exactly the same as level 1) and you get 20 minutes less time (70 minutes vs 90) for the section. The only redeeming feature is the pass mark of 60% rather than 70%.

If they introduce 準一級, it is almost certain that they will make level 1 even harder, which is bad news for those who need it to study/work in Japan. Those who took the level 1 test before the change may have to "recertify" because their certificate would be seen as inferior.

I agree with the initiator that the biggest gap is between level 3 and level 2. In my opinion, the difficulty of level 3 has remained unchanged over the years, while level 2 has been made more and more difficult.


As to what I think should change, my suggestions are:
1. Rather than just give you the scores, the result sheet should resemble those of the kanji kentei. It should have a per-question breakdown of the questions you got right/wrong. This will allow post-mortems which is not possible at the moment.
2. Hold the examination twice a year instead of once a year.
3. Have another level between level 3 and level 2.
4. Make the reading section more relevant. The test should test if you can read the passage, rather than if you can reason in the way the examiners want you to. You should be able to answer the questions with confidence if you can understand the passage.
5. And for God's sake, put the certificates in an A380 rather than the boot a truck doing the Siberian run. That way we may actually get the results before March. It is just some OCR multiple choice papers you are marking - a monkey can do it given enough training.

[Harisenbon]

If they introduce 準一級, it is almost certain that they will make level 1 even harder

Good. They need a test that is something to aim for after 1kyuu.
I still think that while passing 1kyuu is impressive, it does not convey the mastery of Japanese that a level one examination should. Level one of the Eiken is INCREDIBLY difficult, and even native speakers sometimes have problems with it. On the other hand, all Japanese HS students should be able to pass the JLPT 1kyu handily.

[cj261]

nan da JLPT deska?

[hungryhotei]

chchan45 wrote:
1. Rather than just give you the scores, the result sheet should resemble those of the kanji kentei. It should have a per-question breakdown of the questions you got right/wrong. This will allow post-mortems which is not possible at the moment.

Actually, within a day of the exam you can find lists of all the (usually) correct answers (and even listening transcripts in some places) on the internet. At least for 1Q anyway.

I can understand that they wouldn't want to give us an answer sheet as we leave (as with the kanken) as this would make cheating across time lines much easier. And by the time the results come a couple of months later I don't really care what I got right or wrong anymore.

[pepperpowder]

I agree that per-question breakdown should be given & they should test your speaking skills as that's what most of us would do unless we have like a penpal in Japan.

I also fewl that Grammar should be given more time as comprehension is quite tough..