Zettelkasten Proficiency Levels
What learning a language taught me about building a second brain.
Today I took an online test for „English as second language“. The test uses the popular CEFR standard (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages) for evaluation.
The CEFR defines six levels of English proficiency: A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 and C2. These levels are widely accepted as the global standard for grading an individual’s language proficiency. I achieved a C1 level and was very proud.
But what‘s the connection to Zettelkasten? My brain automatically transferred the phrase „English as a second language“ to „Zettelkasten as a second brain“.
Why? I have no answer. However, my thoughts were heading in a new direction. What do these levels mean? Google showed me a list of related vocabulary:
- A1 - 500 words
- A2 - 1,000 words
- B1 - 2,000 words
- B2 - 4,000 words
- C1 - 8,000 words
- C2 - 16,000 words
- native speaker - 32,000 words
It's a nice, non-linear function. The vocabulary at each level is double that of the level below.
What might this list look like for a Zettelkasten user? My proposal:
- A1 - 500 ideas
- A2 - 1,000 ideas
- B1 - 2,000 ideas
- B2 - 4,000 ideas
- C1 - 8,000 ideas
- C2 - 16,000 ideas
- native Zettelkasten user - 32,000 ideas
On the CEFR scale, you are expected to have a reasonable degree of fluency at B1 level, which should improve further up the scale.
How many ideas do I have in my vault? Let's take a look: 1,606 permanent notes. According to my newly created CZFR standard (Common Zettelkasten Framework of Reference for Second Brains), this is an A2 level.
Wow! According to CZFR, I need less than 400 ideas to reach my B1 level.
I’m very excited.
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
Howdy, Stranger!
Comments
I've also been involved with the CEFR levels, both as a learner and a teacher.
When teaching a language (English), my learners found these levels a bit confusing, so I renamed them to something they could understand better:
A1; Lower beginner
A2; Upper beginner
B1; Lower intermediate
B2; Upper intermediate
C1; Lower advanced
C2; Upper advanced
This helped them to understand what was expected of them, and at the same time encouraged them to not judge their own ability too harshly.
As a learner of a language myself, I felt a great sense of achievement when I got my C1 certificate in my 2nd language, and I thought quite a bit about integrating language learning with the Zettelkasten method.
But here's the thing... the CEFR levels are about what you can do with the language, not just what you know about the language. It's not only about what you've learned, it's also about what you can do with what you've learned. That's why speaking and writing (output) are included in the test, not just reading and listening (input).
I believe that to better grade ourselves as Zettelkasten users, it can't be just about how many ideas/notes we've recorded (input). What we do with that information is just as important, whether that means writing or something else (output).
For example, when I was looking for a new job last year, I spent time with books about interviewing skills and recruitment tests, converting them into notes in my Zettelkasten and revising them weekly. Then I found a new job... so a productive use of the notes.
Also, I completed a part-time Masters and spent time with related books, adding key notes to my Zettelkasten. The result was passing the modules and writing my final thesis. Last but not least, a book on presentation skills to prepare for defending my thesis (which I successfully did and got my Masters). This is also a kind of output.
If it wasn't for the output side of things I wouldn't use Zettelkasten at all.
I would consider other parameters, like degree of connections of zettels (even if I don't know if this value can be obtained). Connections, the edges of the graph, are as important as the zettels, the nodes.
Others are lenghts of train of thoughts, number of "ah" ideas emerged from zettelkasten, number of original links between two distant zettels, quantity of output/outcome/purpose artifacts produced from zettelkasten.
All these values are much more difficult to quantify, I know, in this case I would prefer a qualitative aproach.
One of my preferred aproach to qualify the maturity of a section of my zettelkasten is if I can easily develop answers to questions about that section.
My most mature section within my zettelkasten is precisely the one that deals with the zettelkasten :-), and in this topic I feel like an expert:-P.
I always feel like I can give an answer or build a reflection on a topic about the zettelkasten theory.
Based on my zettelkasten, I can report that the behavior of the zettelkasten stopped changing after roughly 4000 notes and I stopped learning at a reasonably fast pace after roughly 10-12 years. Now, I think I learn specifically how to solve particular problems, but my zettelkasten skills are either fully matured or I plateaued for other reasons.
This could be a reference for a scale?
I am a Zettler
Research on expertise suggests this is common across disciplines: after a certain point, “learning” shifts from acquiring general structure to fine‑tuning and applying it to specific problems — problems you might not even have noticed or been able to detect before. In other words, your plateau isn’t a sign that you’ve stopped growing, but that you have entered a mastery phase where improvements become more incremental and context‑dependent.
Whenever I felt the need to reinvigorate that sense of growth, I tried introducing new inputs from other disciplines (there’s never been a lack of interest on my side), reframing the questions I posed to my Zettelkasten in its current state, or exploring more advanced ways of making connections. Sometimes a shift in focus can catalyze a new phase of learning — even for seasoned practitioners.
@wjenkins81 :
A great comment! So many helpful suggestions! Thank you for supporting my initial ideas. I value your professional teacher's perspective. However, I can now turn my attention from the theoretical concept to its application.
Yes, named and descriptive labels are better. A short description for each level could help for orientation:
A1 – Novice Note-Taker
Can capture short thoughts, quotes, or paraphrased content in a consistent format. Can create individual notes that contain one idea each. Can occasionally write down personal reactions to information.
A better view!
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
What kinds of questions test the maturity of a Zettelkasten section?
An option to look for typical questions related to the skills of a typical user at each level might be useful:
A1 – Novice Note-Taker
“Should I write down everything I read?”
A2 – Emerging Collector
“How do I link my notes—and why should I?”
B1 – Structured Organizer
“How can I structure my notes so I don’t get lost later?”
B2 – Independent Thinker
“How do I turn this growing archive into something I can write from?”
C1 – Knowledge Weaver
“What’s the best way to build a line of argument from my notes?”
C2 – Reflective Master
“How can I help others build a Zettelkasten that fits their thinking style?”
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
The Gröpl Scale of Zettelkasten has a nice ring to it, much like early 20th century physicists.
Author at Zettelkasten.de • https://christiantietze.de/
The 'Common International Framework of Reference for Zettelkasten' (CIFRZ), a guideline used to describe the achievements of Zettelkasten learners across Europe and increasingly in other countries, is a framework for learning, teaching and assessment.
The six reference levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 and C2) are set to become an internationally recognised standard for grading individuals' Zettelkasten proficiency.
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
Ah, I bet you wish
But as Luhmann might say: Systems don’t standardise, they differentiate.
Just what we need to discourage others, unless this is a joke.
The CEFR measures how well someone communicates with others following a common standard of grammar and vocabulary. A Zettelkasten is the opposite. It's a tool for communication with your future self. Much of its value stems from its personal relevance and idiosyncrasy.
Standardized language instruction is not a good analogy for Zettelkasten.
I suppose a psychometrician could attempt to measure how well you communicate with your future self. Imagine the "Future Self Communication Competency Scale." Or the inherently condescending "Future Self Messaging Maturity Model." The word "maturity" is code for "superannuated" and suggests the putative grown-ups who conceived it overlooked something crucial.
My Zettekasten is a fungus among us, measured by the Zettelkasten Myceliation Metric.
GitHub. Erdős #2. Problems worthy of attack / prove their worth by hitting back. -- Piet Hein. Alter ego: Erel Dogg (not the first). CC BY-SA 4.0.
Don't take it too seriously. But it's not a joke to me.
It's more like playing with ideas. It all starts with a bridge note connecting the CEFR with Zettelkasten. Now, I'm looking for some useful insights. My first application might be a Zettelkasten reading list.
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
Books recommended for Zettelkasten proficiency levels A1 to C2
A short list of recommended specific as well as non-specific Zettelkasten books that are still wonderfully in line with what Zettelkasten users need at each proficiency level (A1-C2, CIFRZ)
These books focus on thinking, writing, idea development, learning, and synthesis—the true muscles behind the method.
A1
A1-B1 *
A2
A2-B2 *
A2-C1 *
B1
B1-C1 *
B2-C1 *
C2
*) Re-read books at different levels to understand the deeper logic behind each rule or concept.
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
@Edmund, in my view, you usually overemphasize books as a source for notes and underemphasize original research. I pointed this out at least once before, a year ago. This is reflected in your first description of level A1 above, "Should I write down everything I read?", and in your recommendation of How to Read a Book as a reference for level A1. You mistakenly presume that reading is where notes must come from. However, the description of level A1 in your graphic above is better, as it is not limited to reading as a source for notes: "Can capture short thoughts, quotes, or paraphrased content in a consistent format. Create individual notes that contain one idea each." Instead of How to Read a Book for level A1, I would recommend something not so focused on reading, such as Jeff Conklin's Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems (Wiley, 2006).
OK, I admit, my recommendation of Jeff Conklin's book was mischievous, one of my periodic attempts to slip some IBIS into the drinking water. The book is not really appropriate for your level A1, although the skills it teaches wouldn't hurt. But, dang, I enjoyed writing that last sentence of that last comment.
@Andy:
Thank you for your insightful reply. But, dang, it‘s not that last sentence of that last comment.
I just started to get some first insights about dialogue mapping. And you are right, it‘s not for A1, C1 might be better.
At C1 (Knowledge Weaver) the users can already synthesize across domains and want to design frameworks or teach others. They can see parallels between Dialogue Mapping and Zettelkasten structure notes or branching chains of reasoning.
The book sharpens thinking about argument structure and context. Dialogue Mapping doesn’t just document ideas—it surfaces relationships, conflicts, and assumptions. This complements the Zettelkasten’s goal of capturing idea evolution over time.
But for me it will take some more reading and understanding. Reaching a C1 Zettelkasten proficiency is a long journey.
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
There is nothing better than a sip of fresh water. Here is my first IBIS map on the discussion of Zettelkasten proficiency levels:
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
@Edmund, I'm glad to see that you tried making an issue map. There is a problem with this one. The "con" nodes should be "pros": they support the "no" positions to which they are attached. All the arguments are pros, so a way to refactor this map using IBIS rules would be simply to have one "yes" and "no" position answering the key question, followed by two "why" questions, one attached to the "yes" and one attached to the "no", and the list of supporting statements attached as positions answering the "why" questions. Then those positions could be attacked or supported with arguments, or questioned.
But, first and more importantly, this map demonstrates that the key to an issue map is how the questions are framed. The question you have asked in the issue map sounds like it is about frameworks of proficiency levels for Zettelkasten users in general. But in this discussion we only have one such framework: CIFRZ. So it's not clear to me whether the answers refer only to CIFRZ or also to other not-yet-existing frameworks. You would want to clarify this by splitting the question into at least two questions: one about the desirability of such frameworks in general and one about CIFRZ specifically. You would also want to ask other types of questions, I expect. The question in this map is what Conklin calls a factual question. Other types of questions that Conklin identified in Dialogue Mapping are deontic, instrumental, criterial, conceptual/semantic, background, and stakeholders. The current map could be seen as mixing deontic, factual, and criterial statements under one question. Again, the key to an issue map is differentiating the issues.
@Andy I have the counter-position: The value of taking notes while reading is way underestimated and ones "own thoughts" is overrated.
Especially, if you are a beginner, you have to really push fundamental education. Reading and processing books is the way to go. Mechanistically, you develop the ability for original thinking by mastering the two previous stages: Understanding and Interpretation. For both, books (and certain essays) are the best training material as long as you have enough training volume in spoken language.
But even as an expert, you'll benefit from a constant push from below: Processing, processing, processing.
I consider myself almost an expert in health and fitness, while being a low-level expert in some areas (like habit or a section of the general field of training). If I want to develop myself, even in the areas I consider myself having passed the threshold of being an expert, to get the creative machinery going, I have to do the same thing as always: Seek high quality sources, process them with great effort.
I think this similar to how training works: If you are a high-performance athlete, you have to do a lot of work just to keep the ability to train and access your skills unlocked. This is how I explain some of high-performance clients the value of work capacity training (I prefer low-intensity cardio + long-duration sled work for that): If you want to be able to get the most out of your key sessions, you need to have the infrastructure set in place. Practical example: When I did free style wrestling in a club with a friend, he was at a MUCH higher level than me. However, I was able to learn and improve much more than him. With his background in grappling, he should've been able to progress much quicker. But I never needed to take rest and was rarely pushed to a point at which fatigue would hinder my learning progress. So, a I could extract almost the full 2h out of a 2h-session of quality learning time, while he could extract half of this. In part, because he had to rest, in part because he was pushing himself, so he performed (he was very athletic, so he performed well), but couldn't learn effectively.
Processing, especially processing books, puts you in an excellent spot to learn: You have something to wrestle with, yet you are (at least should) always push a bit beyond the given.
I am a Zettler
@Sascha said:
I agree with that. I am probably underestimating how much I rely on books. It is probably obvious in my comments that I have read a lot and am always reading.
@Andy: Thank you—this is very thoughtful and precise feedback, and it hits on the core strengths and limits of IBIS as a mapping method. You're absolutely right in both critique and suggestions.
Your personal coaching has motivated me to start a second draft of my IBIS map still before reading your recommended book, Dialogue Mapping. I sometimes learn faster by doing than by reading. Sometimes ;-)
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
@Edmund said:
I haven't read everything in the diagram, but this is a huge improvement, and very interesting! You are an excellent student!
@Sascha wrote:
I'll add my agreement to Andy's, "I agree with that."
Here is an unintentional Haiku of the philosophers:
GitHub. Erdős #2. Problems worthy of attack / prove their worth by hitting back. -- Piet Hein. Alter ego: Erel Dogg (not the first). CC BY-SA 4.0.
Zettelkasten Proficiency Levels (CIFRZ) - Updated
The 'Common International Framework of Reference for Zettelkasten' (CIFRZ), a guideline used to describe the achievements of Zettelkasten learners across Europe and increasingly in other countries, is a framework for learning, teaching and assessment.
The six reference levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 and C2) are set to become an internationally recognized standard for grading individuals' Zettelkasten proficiency:
A1 - You’re learning what makes a note useful. You may be taking many notes—quotes, thoughts, article summaries—but they mostly sit side by side. You might feel unsure about how to link or use them, but you’re experimenting. The system feels bigger than you right now—and that’s okay.
A2 - You’re beginning to transform your input into something of your own. You rewrite, summarize, and rephrase instead of copy-pasting. You notice when notes connect—and start acting on that. Patterns are still emerging slowly, and some habits are fragile, but you're gaining agency over your notes.
B1 - You begin to link your notes intentionally. You cluster ideas and start forming patterns. You’re curious about structures—yours or others’. You make first attempts to write from notes, even if the outcomes feel rough or exploratory.
B2 - You’ve developed reliable habits: your notes talk to each other, structure emerges, and you can write short pieces based on your network. You’re not just thinking in the Zettelkasten—you’re starting to think with it. Writing is no longer separate from note-taking; the two begin to merge.
C1 - You use your Zettelkasten to engage with the world: through writing, conversation, teaching, or public discourse. You contribute not only by producing polished work, but by modeling a way of thinking in progress. You reflect on how your system evolves—and how it shapes the person you are becoming.
C2 - You’ve developed a durable relationship with your ideas, your questions, and your voice. You shape insight at a structural level—within your own work, but also in the communities, disciplines, or domains you care about. You can zoom in and out—handling details without losing sight of the big picture. Your system helps you spot what’s missing, not just what’s next.
The CIFRZ Proficiency Levels Map is a high-level conceptual map that visualizes how users move through the six CIFRZ levels (A1 to C2), not as a strict ladder, but as a dynamic landscape of skill, confidence, and reflection.
The core design principles of this map are:
When viewing the map, imagine a terraced mountain landscape rather than a ladder. Each level is a plateau, connected by paths and scenic loops that lead back to earlier viewpoints. Forking trails offer different routes, and some users may choose to camp for longer at a level that suits them.
The key message of this map is: You are not on a linear path. You are not behind. Wherever you stand, there is something worth crossing toward—and something worth returning to.
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
Zettelkasten Coaching - CIFRZ Proficiency Levels
I can find an increasing number of Zettelkasten coaching options on the internet. However, it's difficult to find the right level to start at. The CIFRZ proficiency levels might help me to get an overview. The results of my research are as follows:
A2
B1
B2
C1
What is your experience? What is your strategy for the best starting point?
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.
deleted
Edmund Gröpl
100% organic thinking. Less than 5% AI-generated ideas.