Assessing writing performance in TOEFL-iBT

IF 0.1 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Farah Shooraki, Hossein Barati, Ahmad Moinzadeh
{"title":"Assessing writing performance in TOEFL-iBT","authors":"Farah Shooraki, Hossein Barati, Ahmad Moinzadeh","doi":"10.1075/etc.00036.sho","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis study aims to determine the linguistic and discoursal differences in essays produced by Iranian test-takers of TOEFL-iBT in response to integrated and independent writing tasks. A sample of 40 essays, written by 20 Iranian test-takers of scored integrated and independent writing tasks, was compared and analyzed in terms of the four latent constructs of text easability (fourteen variables), cohesion (nine variables), lexical sophistication (nineteen variables), and syntactic complexity (six variables), using the Coh-Metrix 3.0 program. Results indicate differences in the linguistic and discoursal features of integrated and independent writing tasks. The findings reveal that the scores on writing tasks of EFL test-takers can be anchored empirically through the analysis of some discourse qualities like cohesion. Independent tasks contain more connectives and particles so they can result in better discourse structure organization and the generation of more cohesive devices. Stakeholders of the test should verify test constructs in terms of particular contexts like EFL and communicative views of language proficiency. Consequently, the findings contribute to the ongoing validity argument on TOEFL-iBT writing tasks for designing and interpreting scoring schemes for the writing component of the test.","PeriodicalId":42970,"journal":{"name":"English Text Construction","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Text Construction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.00036.sho","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aims to determine the linguistic and discoursal differences in essays produced by Iranian test-takers of TOEFL-iBT in response to integrated and independent writing tasks. A sample of 40 essays, written by 20 Iranian test-takers of scored integrated and independent writing tasks, was compared and analyzed in terms of the four latent constructs of text easability (fourteen variables), cohesion (nine variables), lexical sophistication (nineteen variables), and syntactic complexity (six variables), using the Coh-Metrix 3.0 program. Results indicate differences in the linguistic and discoursal features of integrated and independent writing tasks. The findings reveal that the scores on writing tasks of EFL test-takers can be anchored empirically through the analysis of some discourse qualities like cohesion. Independent tasks contain more connectives and particles so they can result in better discourse structure organization and the generation of more cohesive devices. Stakeholders of the test should verify test constructs in terms of particular contexts like EFL and communicative views of language proficiency. Consequently, the findings contribute to the ongoing validity argument on TOEFL-iBT writing tasks for designing and interpreting scoring schemes for the writing component of the test.
评估托福iBT的写作成绩
本研究旨在确定伊朗托福iBT考生在综合和独立写作任务中所写文章的语言和话语差异。使用Coh-Metrix 3.0程序,对20名伊朗考生在综合和独立写作任务中所写的40篇文章样本进行了比较和分析,考察了四个潜在结构,即文本可分解性(14个变量)、衔接性(9个变量),词汇复杂度(19个变量)和句法复杂性(6个变量)。结果表明,综合写作任务和独立写作任务在语言和话语特征上存在差异。研究结果表明,通过对衔接等话语品质的分析,可以从经验上确定英语考生的写作成绩。独立任务包含更多的连接词和助词,因此它们可以更好地组织话语结构,并产生更有凝聚力的手段。测试的利益相关者应该根据特定的语境来验证测试结构,如EFL和语言能力的交际观。因此,这些发现有助于对托福iBT写作任务的有效性进行争论,以设计和解释考试写作部分的评分方案。
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
English Text Construction
English Text Construction LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
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