不同文章体裁概要写作任务的Rasch模型分析被引量：13

A Rascb Analysis of Summary Writing Task with Different Genres of Source Texts

导出

摘要英文概要写作任务的难度与原文文本特征紧密相关,而文章体裁是文本的一个重要特征。本文通过实证研究,探索文章体裁如何影响学生的概要写作。研究抽取了83名某国内大学本科生作为被试,要求他们分别为一篇记叙文和一篇说明文撰写英文概要,然后利用多层面Rasch模型对数据进行处理分析。结果显示,被试在说明文概要写作中的表现总体要好于记叙文,在这两次测试中各评分项目的难度发生了变化,有些难度差异达到了统计意义上的显著性。 Task demands of summary writing are closely related to the characteristics of the source text, and genre is an important characteristic. This paper reports the results of an empirical study that examines how genre as a characteristic of the source text affects test takers＇ performance in summary writing task. A sample of 83 participants was drawn from an undergraduate program in a Chinese university. They were required to write a summary for a narrative text first,and then another for an exposi- tory text. Data were processed with the multi - facet Rasch measurement model. Results showed participants performed better in expository than narrative text summary writing overall. The difficulties of rubric components differed, some of which were significantly different across the two tasks.

作者李久亮

机构地区北京服装学院外语系

出处《外语与外语教学》 CSSCI 北大核心 2014年第5期30-35,共6页 Foreign Languages and Their Teaching

基金北京服装学院创新团队与优秀人才选拔与培养计划项目(项目编号:QTXM02140201/0631001)的阶段性成果

关键词概要写作文章体裁影响 summary writing genre influence

分类号 H0 [语言文字—语言学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献23

1Bond,T.& C.Fox.2007.Applying the Rasch Model:Funda-mental Measurement in the Human Sciences [ M ].Mahwah:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2Brooks,L.,D.Dansereau,J.Spurlin & C.Holley.1983.Effects of heading on text processing [ J ].Journal of Educa-tional Psychology,(2):292-302.
3Carson,J.2001.A task analysis of reading and writing in aca-demic contexts [ A ].In D.Belcher & A.Hirvela(eds.).Linking Literacies:Perspectives on L2 Reading-writing Con-nection[ C].Ann Arbor:The University of Michigan Press.
4Crossley,S.,J.Greenfield & D.McNamara.2008.Assessing text readability using cognitively based indices [ J ].TESOL Quarterly,(3):475-493.
5Crossley,S.,D.Allen & D.McNamara.2011.Text readability and intuitive simplification:A comparison of readability for-mulas[ J].Reading in a Foreign Language,(1):86-101.
6Hale,G.,C.Taylor,B.Bridgeman,J.Carson,B.Kroll & R.Kantor.1996.A Study of Writing Tasks Assigned in Academic Degree Programs [ M ].Princeton:Educational Testing Service.
7Hidi,S.& V.Anderson.1986.Producing written summaries:Task demands,cognitive operations,and implications for in-struction [ J ].Review of Educational Research,(4):473-493.
8Hyona,J.,R.Lorch,Jr.& J.Kaakinen.2002.Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text:Evidence from eye fixation patterns [J ].Journal of Educational Psy-chology,(1):44-55.
9Keck,C.2006.The use of paraphrase in summary writing:A comparison of L1 and L2 writers[ J].Journal of Second Lan-guage Writing,(4):261-278.
10Kintsch,W.& J.Yarbrough.1982.The role of rhetorical structure in text comprehension [J].Journal of Educational Psychology,(6):828-834.

二级参考文献52

1王华.《二语口语测试》评介[J].现代外语,2005,28(2):210-213. 被引量：13
2Eckes, T. 2005. Examining rater effects in TestDaf writing and speaking performance assessments: A many-facet Rasch analysis [J]. Language Assessment Quarterly 2, 3: 197-221.
3Eckes, T. 2008. Rater types in writing performance assessments: A classification approach to rater variability [J]. Language Testing 25: 155-185.
4Elder, C., U. Knoch, G. Barkhuizen & J. yon Randow. 2005. Individual feedback to enhance rater training: Does it work? [J]. Language Assessment Quarterly 2: 175-196.
5Engelhard, G., Jr. 1994. Examining rater errors in the assessment of written composition with a manyfaceted Rasch model [J]. Journal of Educational Measurement 31, 2: 93-112.
6Gyagenda, I. S. & G. Jr. Engelhard. 1998. Applying the Rasch model to explore rater influences on the assessed quality of students' writing ability [P]. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego.
7Hedge, J. W. & M. J. Kavanagh. 1988. Improving the accuracy of performance evaluations: Comparison of three methods of performance appraiser training [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology 73 : 68-73.
8Johnson, V. E. & J. H. Albert. 1999. Ordinal Data Modeling [M]. New York: Springer-Vedag.
9Kondo-Brown, K. 2002. A facets analysis of rater bias in measuring Japanese second language writing performance [J]. Language Testing 19, 1: 3-31.
10Kumar, D. D. 2005. Performance appraisal: The importance of rater training [J]. Journal of the Kuala Lumpur Royal Malaysia Police College 4: 1-17.