"All models are wrong but some are useful."

   -George E.P. Box

​

The ProficiencyBuilder is not perfect. Nor will it work for all teachers, courses, or programs. Here are some reasons why:

​

1. The model largely assumes viewers have some degree of training or education (i.e. degree related to not only languages, but education) relating to the underlying principles of various language teaching methodologies (i.e. communicative language teaching), assessment and instructional strategies, and curriculum development. In many post-secondary educational institutions, this is not always true; without such knowledge, users will engage with the contents of the model insofar as their understanding allows. 

2. Language learning is complex and no model can account for all variables

3. The model subsumes several approaches to teaching and learning concerning learning in general and language learning, and is, therefore, subject to the criticisms of each approach; for example, within standards-based education, there is an assumption that the sum of all learning outcomes of a course, or demonstrated competencies of each, means the student  is ready for subsequent coursework, which is not always the case

4. Research involved in designing this model emphasizes community college ESL contexts with significant refugee and immigrant student populations and does not directly consider specific language contexts or more affluent student populations

5. If programs or courses expect students hit certain proficiency benchmarks over time (language acquisition development), yet proficiency, by its very definition, is what students can do with their unrehearsed, spontaneous language, which implies non-course content abilities, then is it reasonable to mandate progression with something that cannot actually be taught and learned in the traditional sense? 

6. The model cannot (nor presumes to be able to) accommodate the vast and profound sociocultural factors that may contribute to preventing successful language learning with students of lower socioeconomic status (i.e. family, health, transportation, rent, obligation to work multiple jobs); the model cannot, through advising or otherwise, address the issue of reducing how much work or how many classes students take (i.e. refugee or other students from lower socioeconomic status must work to support their families)

7. Time constraints imposed by schools or programs as per the model's recommendations on "Developmental" vs. "Competency" stages may not align with each student's internal cognitive timeline concerning proficiency development

8. There is no substitute for cultural or policy shift to teach languages as early and often as possible