期刊文献+

基于多面Rasch模型的交替传译测试效度验证 被引量:13

A Validating Study on Consecutive Interpreting Test Using Many-facet Rasch Model
下载PDF
导出
摘要 本研究对一次交替传译测试结果进行多面Rasch模型检验,从评分标准、评分员、被试和任务4个方面验证了测试的效度,并用偏差分析发现了影响测试结果的因素。检验结果显示:1)所用分项评分标准和任务设计能够显著体现和区分被试口译水平,适合用于口译教学测试的评分;2)评分标准中的"口译技巧与素质"子项对测试结果的整体效度略有影响,可做进一步改善。 Through many-facet Rasch analysis on a consecutive interpreting test,this paper validates the result of the test from four aspects,i.e.rating scale,raters,examinees and tasks.The results show that: 1) this rating scale and task design can effectively reflect and screen examinee's interpreting competence,thus making it suitable for assessing interpreting teaching effect;2) one of the sub-scales,i.e.interpreting skill and interpreter quality,has a slightly nega-tive effect on the overall validity of the test,making further revision on this sub-scale desirable.
作者 赵南 董燕萍
出处 《解放军外国语学院学报》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第1期86-90,128,共5页 Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages
基金 国家社会科学基金项目(10BYY010) 教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大课题(2009JJD740007) 广东外语外贸大学项目(GDUFS211-1-007)
  • 相关文献

参考文献12

  • 1李清华,孔文.TEM-4写作新分项式评分标准的多层面Rasch模型分析[J].外语电化教学,2010(1):19-25. 被引量:29
  • 2刘建达.话语填充测试方法的多层面Rasch模型分析[J].现代外语,2005,28(2):157-169. 被引量:46
  • 3王斌华,等.中译杯全国口译大赛评分标准[Z/OL].http://www.tac-online.org.cn/ch/tran/2010--10/04/eontent--3755172.htm.
  • 4叶舒白,刘敏华.口译评分客观化初探:采用量表的可能性[J].国立编译馆馆刊,2006,(4):57-78.
  • 5Bonk, J. & G. Ockey. A many-facet Rasch analysis of the second language group oral discussion task [ J ]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (1): 89-110.
  • 6Btihler, H. Linguistic ( semantic ) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference inter- pretation and interpreters [J]. Multilingua, 1986, 5 (4) : 231 - 235.
  • 7Carroll, B. An experiment in evaluating the quality of trans- lations [ J ]. Mechanical Translation and Computational Lin- guistics, 1966, 9 (3) 55 -66.
  • 8Linacre, M. A User's Guide to FACETS: Rasch-Model Computer Program [ M], Chicago: MESA Press, 2010.
  • 9McNamara, F. Measuring Second Language Performance [ M]. London/New York: Longman, 1996.
  • 10Moser, P. Expectations of users of conference interpreta- tion [J]. Interpreting, 1996, 1 (2): 145-178.

二级参考文献54

  • 1Bacha, N. Writing evaluation: what can analytic versus holistic essay scoring tell us[J]. System,2001,29:371 -383.
  • 2Bonk, W. J. & G. J. Ockey. A many-facet Rasch analysis of the second language group oral discussion task [ J]. Language Testing,2003,20( 1 ) :89 - 110.
  • 3Cumming, A. , R. Kantor & D. Powers. Scoring TOEFL essays and TOEFL 2000 Prototype Writing Tasks: An Investigation into Raters' Decision Making and Development of a Preliminary Analytic Framework. TOEFL Monograph Series MS-22 [ R]. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. 2001.
  • 4Eckes, T. Rater types in writing performance assessments: A classification approach to rater variability [ J ]. Language Testing, 2008,25 (2) :155 -185.
  • 5Elder, C. , Barkhuizen, G. , Knoch, U. , &von Randow, J. Evaluating rater responses to an online rater training program [ J ]. Language Testing,2007,24( 1 ) :37 -64.
  • 6Fulcher, G & F. Davidson. Language Testing and Assessment [ M ]. NY : Routledge,2007.
  • 7Hamp-Lyons, L. Scoring procedures for ESL contexts [ A ]. In : L. Hamp-Lyons( Ed. ), Assessing second language writing in academic contexts [ C ]. Norwood, NJ : Ablex, 1991:241 - 276.
  • 8Knoch, U. Diagnostic assessment of writing: A comparison of two rating scales [ J ]. Language Testing,2009,26 ( 2 ) :275 - 304.
  • 9Kondo-Brown, K. A FACETS analysis of rater bias in measuring Japanese L2 writing performance[ J ]. Language Testing, 2002,19 ( 1 ) : 3 -31.
  • 10Linacre, J. M. Many-facet Rasch Measurement[M]. MESA Press: Chicago. 1959, 1994.

共引文献69

同被引文献216

引证文献13

二级引证文献117

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部