二语评分者对综合和独立写作任务评分时的认知过程

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Kobra Tavassoli, Leila Bashiri, Natasha Pourdana
{"title":"二语评分者对综合和独立写作任务评分时的认知过程","authors":"Kobra Tavassoli, Leila Bashiri, Natasha Pourdana","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.13466","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Recently, there has been a growing interest in the personal attributes of raters which determine the quality of cognitive processes involved in their rating writing practice. \nPurpose. Accordingly, this research attempted to explore how the rating experience of L2 raters might affect their rating of integrated and independent writing tasks. \nMethods. To pursue this aim, 13 experienced and 14 novice Iranian raters were selected through criterion sampling. After attending a training course on rating writing tasks, both groups produced introspective verbal protocols while they were rating integrated and independent writing tasks which were produced by an Iranian EFL learner. The verbal protocols were recorded and transcribed, and their content was analyzed by the researchers. \nResults. The six extracted major themes from the content analysis included content, formal requirement, general linguistic range, language use, mechanics of writing, and organization. The results indicated that the type of writing task (integrated vs. independent) is a determining factor for the number of references experienced and novice raters made to the TOEFL-iBT rating rubric. Further, the raters’ rating experience determined the proportions of references they made. Yet, the proportional differences observed between experienced and novice raters in their references were statistically significant only in terms of language use, mechanics of writing, organization, and the total. \nConclusion. The variations in L2 raters’ rating performance on integrated and independent writing tasks emphasize the urgency of professional training to use and interpret the components of various rating writing scales by both experienced and novice raters. \nnced and novice raters. ","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Experienced and Novice L2 Raters’ Cognitive Processes while Rating Integrated and Independent Writing Tasks\",\"authors\":\"Kobra Tavassoli, Leila Bashiri, Natasha Pourdana\",\"doi\":\"10.17323/jle.2022.13466\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background. Recently, there has been a growing interest in the personal attributes of raters which determine the quality of cognitive processes involved in their rating writing practice. \\nPurpose. Accordingly, this research attempted to explore how the rating experience of L2 raters might affect their rating of integrated and independent writing tasks. \\nMethods. To pursue this aim, 13 experienced and 14 novice Iranian raters were selected through criterion sampling. After attending a training course on rating writing tasks, both groups produced introspective verbal protocols while they were rating integrated and independent writing tasks which were produced by an Iranian EFL learner. The verbal protocols were recorded and transcribed, and their content was analyzed by the researchers. \\nResults. The six extracted major themes from the content analysis included content, formal requirement, general linguistic range, language use, mechanics of writing, and organization. The results indicated that the type of writing task (integrated vs. independent) is a determining factor for the number of references experienced and novice raters made to the TOEFL-iBT rating rubric. Further, the raters’ rating experience determined the proportions of references they made. Yet, the proportional differences observed between experienced and novice raters in their references were statistically significant only in terms of language use, mechanics of writing, organization, and the total. \\nConclusion. The variations in L2 raters’ rating performance on integrated and independent writing tasks emphasize the urgency of professional training to use and interpret the components of various rating writing scales by both experienced and novice raters. \\nnced and novice raters. \",\"PeriodicalId\":37020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Language and Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Language and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13466\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13466","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景最近,人们对评分者的个人属性越来越感兴趣,这些属性决定了他们在评分写作实践中所涉及的认知过程的质量。意图因此,本研究试图探讨二语评分者的评分体验如何影响他们对综合和独立写作任务的评分。方法。为了实现这一目标,通过标准抽样选择了13名经验丰富的伊朗评分员和14名新手。在参加了一个关于评分写作任务的培训课程后,两组在对伊朗EFL学习者产生的综合和独立写作任务进行评分时,都产生了内省的言语协议。研究人员对口头协议进行了记录和转录,并对其内容进行了分析。后果从内容分析中提取的六个主要主题包括内容、形式要求、一般语言范围、语言使用、写作机制和组织。结果表明,写作任务的类型(综合与独立)是有经验的和新手评分者对TOEFL iBT评分标准的参考数量的决定因素。此外,评分者的评分经验决定了他们所做推荐的比例。然而,经验丰富的评分者和新手在参考文献中观察到的比例差异仅在语言使用、写作机制、组织和总量方面具有统计学意义。结论二语评分者在综合和独立写作任务中的评分表现的变化强调了专业培训的紧迫性,即由经验丰富的评分者和新手使用和解释各种评分写作量表的组成部分。ed和新手评分员。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Experienced and Novice L2 Raters’ Cognitive Processes while Rating Integrated and Independent Writing Tasks
Background. Recently, there has been a growing interest in the personal attributes of raters which determine the quality of cognitive processes involved in their rating writing practice. Purpose. Accordingly, this research attempted to explore how the rating experience of L2 raters might affect their rating of integrated and independent writing tasks. Methods. To pursue this aim, 13 experienced and 14 novice Iranian raters were selected through criterion sampling. After attending a training course on rating writing tasks, both groups produced introspective verbal protocols while they were rating integrated and independent writing tasks which were produced by an Iranian EFL learner. The verbal protocols were recorded and transcribed, and their content was analyzed by the researchers. Results. The six extracted major themes from the content analysis included content, formal requirement, general linguistic range, language use, mechanics of writing, and organization. The results indicated that the type of writing task (integrated vs. independent) is a determining factor for the number of references experienced and novice raters made to the TOEFL-iBT rating rubric. Further, the raters’ rating experience determined the proportions of references they made. Yet, the proportional differences observed between experienced and novice raters in their references were statistically significant only in terms of language use, mechanics of writing, organization, and the total. Conclusion. The variations in L2 raters’ rating performance on integrated and independent writing tasks emphasize the urgency of professional training to use and interpret the components of various rating writing scales by both experienced and novice raters. nced and novice raters. 
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Language and Education
Journal of Language and Education Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
33
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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