INVESTIGATING THE RELATIONSHIP OF ANALYTIC SCORING CRITERIA TO THE HOLISTIC ASSESSMENT OF SPEAKING PERFORMANCE

Jindaporn Sangganjanavanish
{"title":"INVESTIGATING THE RELATIONSHIP OF ANALYTIC SCORING CRITERIA TO THE HOLISTIC ASSESSMENT OF SPEAKING PERFORMANCE","authors":"Jindaporn Sangganjanavanish","doi":"10.20472/iac.2019.051.037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Two approaches in assessing speaking ability are holistic scoring and analytic scoring. In the holistic approach, an examinee’s speech is given a single rating to reflect its overall quality. Analytic scoring, on the other hand, involves different aspects of performance, with each receiving its own rating. The present study investigated the relationship of analytic scoring criteria to the holistic assessment of speaking performance. It aimed to discover whether raters, in assigning a single global rating, had a tendency to focus significantly more on certain aspects of speaking than others. Ten experienced raters judged speech performance of thirty-five non-native English speakers. Two types of scores were obtained – a single score for holistic rating and a set of scores corresponding to five analytic criteria, i.e. coherence, fluency, grammatical accuracy, lexical resource, and pronunciation. Multiple regression analysis revealed that fluency had the strongest impact on the holistic score, followed by pronunciation, coherence, and lexical resource, while grammatical accuracy did not contribute significantly to the rating. Despite the slight differences in the weight contribution of each criterion to the overall score, the findings suggest that raters seemed to favor the ability to communicate at the right speed without too many pronunciation difficulties, while focusing less on lexical and grammatical accuracy.","PeriodicalId":419018,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 51st International Academic Conference, Vienna","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 51st International Academic Conference, Vienna","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20472/iac.2019.051.037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

: Two approaches in assessing speaking ability are holistic scoring and analytic scoring. In the holistic approach, an examinee’s speech is given a single rating to reflect its overall quality. Analytic scoring, on the other hand, involves different aspects of performance, with each receiving its own rating. The present study investigated the relationship of analytic scoring criteria to the holistic assessment of speaking performance. It aimed to discover whether raters, in assigning a single global rating, had a tendency to focus significantly more on certain aspects of speaking than others. Ten experienced raters judged speech performance of thirty-five non-native English speakers. Two types of scores were obtained – a single score for holistic rating and a set of scores corresponding to five analytic criteria, i.e. coherence, fluency, grammatical accuracy, lexical resource, and pronunciation. Multiple regression analysis revealed that fluency had the strongest impact on the holistic score, followed by pronunciation, coherence, and lexical resource, while grammatical accuracy did not contribute significantly to the rating. Despite the slight differences in the weight contribution of each criterion to the overall score, the findings suggest that raters seemed to favor the ability to communicate at the right speed without too many pronunciation difficulties, while focusing less on lexical and grammatical accuracy.
探讨分析评分标准与口语表现整体评估的关系
口语能力的评估有两种方法:整体评分法和分析评分法。在整体方法中,对考生的演讲进行单一评分,以反映其整体质量。另一方面,分析评分涉及表现的不同方面,每个方面都有自己的评级。本研究探讨了分析性评分标准与口语表现整体评价的关系。它的目的是发现评分者在给出一个单一的全球评分时,是否倾向于更关注说话的某些方面,而不是其他方面。10名经验丰富的评分员对35名非英语母语人士的演讲表现进行了评判。获得了两种类型的分数-整体评分的单一分数和对应于五个分析标准的一组分数,即连贯性,流畅性,语法准确性,词汇资源和发音。多元回归分析显示,流利度对整体得分的影响最大,其次是发音、连贯性和词汇资源,而语法准确性对评分的影响不显著。尽管每个标准在总分中所占的权重略有不同,但研究结果表明,评分者似乎更看重以适当的速度进行交流、没有太多发音困难的能力,而不太关注词汇和语法的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信