Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies ›› 2022, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (4): 133-143.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2022.04.013
Previous Articles Next Articles
Online:
2022-08-28
Published:
2022-09-13
CLC Number:
ZOU Shaoyan, FAN Jingsong. Pinpointing Analytic Rating Criteria for EFL Writing Assessment from Raters’ Perspectives[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2022, 22(4): 133-143.
评分标准 | 低水平CET-4 作文 | 中等水平CET-4 作文 | 高水平CET-4 作文 | 总均值 |
---|---|---|---|---|
均值(标准差) | 均值(标准差) | 均值(标准差) | 均值(标准差) | |
词汇的广度 | 2.13 (1.05) | 2.80 (0.81) | 3.79 (0.46) | 2.90 (1.06) |
句法的复杂度 | 2.06 (1.06) | 2.79 (0.77) | 3.79 (0.42) | 2.87 (1.07) |
语言的准确度 | 2.63 (1.08) | 3.12 (0.68) | 3.89 (0.32) | 3.21 (0.92) |
语言的得体性 | 2.35 (1.02) | 2.87 (0.78) | 3.71 (0.52) | 2.97 (0.98) |
内容和思想 | 2.49 (1.00) | 2.98 (0.69) | 3.79 (0.48) | 3.08 (0.92) |
衔接与连贯 | 2.34 (1.00) | 2.90 (0.70) | 3.78 (0.44) | 3.00 (0.95) |
篇章组织 | 2.32 (0.98) | 2.92 (0.78) | 3.70 (0.51) | 2.97 (0.96) |
任务完成度 | 2.67 (1.02) | 3.06 (0.73) | 3.80 (0.48) | 3.17 (0.91) |
写作的规范性 | 2.63 (1.01) | 3.06 (0.73) | 3.74 (0.45) | 3.14 (0.89) |
作文长度 | 2.42 (1.07) | 3.01 (0.73) | 3.74 (0.56) | 3.05 (0.98) |
评分标准 | 低水平 | 中等水平 | 高水平 | 方差分析结果 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
均值(SD) | 均值(SD) | 均值(SD) | Wilks’ Lambda | F | Sig. | Partial eta squared | |
词汇的广度 | 2.13 (1.05) | 2.80 (0.81) | 3.79 (0.46) | 0.274 | 228 | 0.00 | 0.726 |
句法的复杂度 | 2.07 (1.07) | 2.78 (0.77) | 3.79 (0.42) | 0.238 | 275.18 | 0.00 | 0.762 |
语言的准确度 | 2.63 (1.08) | 3.12 (0.68) | 3.89 (0.32) | 0.380 | 140.3 | 0.00 | 0.620 |
语言的得体性 | 2.34 (1.02) | 2.88 (0.78) | 3.71 (0.52) | 0.342 | 164.2 | 0.00 | 0.658 |
内容和思想 | 2.49 (1.00) | 2.99 (0.69) | 3.79 (0.48) | 0.336 | 168.8 | 0.00 | 0.664 |
衔接与连贯 | 2.33 (0.99) | 2.90 (0.70) | 3.78 (0.44) | 0.291 | 209.6 | 0.00 | 0.709 |
篇章组织 | 2.31 (0.98) | 2.92 (0.78) | 3.71 (0.49) | 0.352 | 157.1 | 0.00 | 0.648 |
任务完成度 | 2.68 (1.03) | 3.06 (0.74) | 3.80 (0.48) | 0.448 | 105.2 | 0.00 | 0.552 |
写作的规范性 | 2.62 (1.01) | 3.05 (0.72) | 3.74 (0.45) | 0.449 | 105.4 | 0.00 | 0.551 |
作文长度 | 2.42 (1.07) | 3.01 (0.72) | 3.75 (0.55) | 0.378 | 140.9 | 0.000 | 0.622 |
[1] | Bachman L. F. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
[2] | Barrett S. 2001. The impact of training on rater variability[J]. International Education Journal (1) : 49-58. |
[3] | Cohen J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences(2nd ed.)[M]. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. |
[4] | Creswell J. W. & J. D. Creswell. 2017. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.)[M]. London: Sage Publications. |
[5] |
Cumming A., R. Kantor& D. Powers. 2002. Decision making while rating ESL/EFL writing tasks: A descriptive framework[J]. The Modern Language Journal 86: 67-96.
doi: 10.1111/1540-4781.00137 URL |
[6] |
Eckes T. 2008. Rater types in writing performance assessment: A classification approach to rater variability[J]. Language Testing 25: 155-185.
doi: 10.1177/0265532207086780 URL |
[7] | Ellis R. 2003. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
[8] | Ellis R. 2008. The Study of Second Language Acquisition(2nd ed.)[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
[9] | Fulcher G. 2003. Testing Second Language Speaking[M]. London: Pearson Education. |
[10] | Grabe W. & R.B. Kaplan. 1996. Theory and Practice of Writing[M]. New York: Longman. |
[11] |
Housen A. & F. Kuiken. 2009. Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition[J]. Applied linguistics 30(4): 461-473.
doi: 10.1093/applin/amp048 URL |
[12] | Howell D. C.. 2016. Fundamental Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences[M]. Belmont: Nelson Education. |
[13] | Huot B. A.. 1993. The influence of holistic scoring procedures on reading and rating student essays[A]. In M. M. Williamson & B. A. Huot (eds.). Validating Holistic Scoring for Writing Assessment: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations [C]. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. 206-236. |
[14] | Knoch U. 2009. Diagnostic Writing Assessment: The Development and Validation of a Rating Scale[M]. Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang. |
[15] | Lumley T. 2005. Assessing Second Language Writing: The Rater’s Perspective[M]. New York: Peter Lang. |
[16] | Luoma S. 2004. Assessing Speaking[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
[17] | McNamara T. F.. 1996. Measuring Second Language Performance[M]. London and New York: Longman. |
[18] | Messick S. 1995. Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment[J]. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice (14): 5-8. |
[19] | Milanovic M., N. Saville& S. Shuhong. 1996. A study of the decision-making behaviour of composition markers[J]. Studies in Language Testing (3): 92-111. |
[20] | Shaw S. D. & C. J. Weir. 2007. Examining Writing: Research and Practice in Assessing Second Language Writing[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
[21] | Skehan P. 1998. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
[22] | Stratman J. & L. Hamp-Lyons. 1994. Reactivity in concurrent think-aloud protocols:issues for research[A]. In P. Smagorinsky (eds.). Speaking about Writing: Reflections on Research Methodology [C]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 89-114. |
[23] | Weigle S. C. 2002. Assessing Writing[M]. Cambridge: Ernst KlettSprachen. |
[24] |
Wolfe E. W., C. W. Kao& M. Ranney. 1998. Cognitive differences in proficient and non-proficient essay scorers[J]. Written Communication 15(4): 465-492.
doi: 10.1177/0741088398015004002 URL |
[25] | 费茜、 赵毓琴. 2008. 大学英语四级写作评分标准中的问题分析[J]. 外语教学理论与实践(4): 45-52. |
[26] | 辜向东、 杨志强. 2009. CET写作试题20年分析与研究[J]. 外语与外语教学(6):21-26. |
[27] | 李清华. 2014. 高校英语专业四级测试写作评分标准的设计与效度研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社. |
[28] | 刘力、 麦陈淑贤、 金檀. 2013. 写作测试内容质量评分研究——分层决策树法[J]. 现代外语(4):419-426. |
[29] | 王跃武、 朱正才、 杨惠中. 2006. 作文网上评分信度的多面Rasch测量分析[J]. 外语界(1):69-76. |
[30] | 张森、 于朋. 2010. 大学英语四级考试作文网上评阅信度保障研究[J]. 外语界(5):79-86. |
[31] | 邹绍艳、 潘鸣威. 2018. 《中国英语能力等级量表》的写作能力构念界定[J]. 当代外语研究(5):62-72. |
[32] | 邹绍艳、 范劲松. 2019. 大学英语四级写作评分量表的效度初探——基于评分员的视角[J]. 外国语文(3):148-156. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||