对多项选择阅读练习质疑的质疑

Questioning:The “Questioning” of multiple-choice questions as a form of reading comprehension exercises

《英语学习》最近刊出“特稿”《到了该反思多项选择阅读练习的时候了》。该文在肯定多项选择阅读练习有限作用的同时,侧重反思其负面作用,然而从该文的核心观点、论证逻辑、论据材料等层面看,其反思留下了一些有待商榷之处:第一,将“外语专业学生思辨能力弱”归咎于多项选择练习在立论上有失允当;第二,将该文提出的阅读“四大目标”当作“法条”来反思多项选择练习的负面作用,在论证逻辑上失之严密;第三,该文参考文献材料多有不济,引证难免失据。多项选择练习本身不可能十全十美,但质疑其作为阅读练习的有效性还有赖于更为全面的调查数据、更为严密的逻辑分析、更多翔实可靠的材料,而这些则是眼下该文所明显欠缺的。

In a special feature article recently published in English Language Learning, Professor Qu Weiguo closely reflects upon the negative effects of multiple-choice questions as a form of reading comprehension exercises, but there is much room left for debate in terms of his argumentation, logical demonstration and citation. First, it’s not justifiable to simply attribute “the weak logical thinking of foreign language majors in China” to the multiple-choice questions. Second, it’s not a logic-based argumentation to “convict” multiple-choice questions by applying the personally invented “four goals” as inviolable law. Third, the materials cited to support his arguments and assertions are not adequate or proper to a great degree. In fact, a multiple-choice question cannot be perfect in itself, but Qu’s questioning of its efficacy should have been based on more comprehensive investigations, strictly logical analyses and accurate citation of authorities.