A language qualification for people who can't read or write the language in question?

Question

In former times studying a modern foreign language meant learning to read and write it and also speak it. A recent proposal in the UK is to offer a language qualification which does not require all three. In other words, you might be awarded the certificate on the basis of being able to speak the language, without being able to read or write it. Opinion is divided. What do you think? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=LMACR15FNT0EHQFIQMFSFFOAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2007/12/22/ngcse122.xml

Answer 1

I think a person should know how to read and write too, because if s/he is not able to read or write it's really hard to say s/he can speak well, because what s/he speaks isn't a standard language but one community's idolect and a person risks being understood by those people only and being able to use the language just in that community.
By not being able to read or write a peron's language input is very limited.

Nowadays there is a Common European Framework by which our language knowledge is "quantified" and it ranks the knowledge from the level A1, which is a basic user, to C2, which refers to a native-like language user and each level has a descriptor for different competences( oral production/interaction, writing, reading, listening) , thus a person's oral skills can be qualified as belonging to C2 while writing and reading correspond to level A1(but a minimum knoledge for those is required.)

Answer 2

I think literacy is important in any language you speak. To not attempt to learn the written language leaves out an intricate part of the culture of any language. This proposal seems to downplay literacy. As someone with an English degree, the thought makes me shutter.

Answer 3

Knowing only one of the four aspects of a language(speaking/writing/listening/reading) would have little use in today's world.

Answer 4

Should have to qualify for all THREE no question about it! Period end of story!