讀寫任務(wù)中策略運用對測試效果的影響研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-03 14:01
【摘要】：近年來,越來越多的大學(xué)分班考試和大型測試機構(gòu)開始采用綜合寫作任務(wù)測試學(xué)生的學(xué)術(shù)寫作能力。綜合寫作任務(wù)是一種將寫作和閱讀或聽力結(jié)合起來的寫作任務(wù)類型。與傳統(tǒng)獨立寫作任務(wù)相比,該任務(wù)類型被認(rèn)為能更真實地反映學(xué)術(shù)寫作活動,即能更好地測試學(xué)生的學(xué)術(shù)寫作能力。但是,綜合寫作任務(wù)是否能真正有效評估和區(qū)分學(xué)生的學(xué)術(shù)寫作水平,就有必要對其進(jìn)行效度驗證。因此,許多研究英語寫作測試和開發(fā)方面的專家學(xué)者以及一些二語寫作方面的教師,開始將注意力集中到綜合寫作任務(wù)實用性上。其中,最多的是對綜合寫作任務(wù)構(gòu)念效度的研究。有許多研究致力于比較不同任務(wù)類型(獨立寫作和綜合寫作)下作文文本特征,寫作分?jǐn)?shù)以及寫作過程之間的差異：有的研究了閱讀能力和策略在讀寫任務(wù)中的作用；有的研究了寫作過程中話語合成的過程。然而,對測試環(huán)境下綜合讀寫任務(wù)中策略運用的研究卻很少見。因此,為了更全面的了解考生的讀寫寫作過程及其策略運用情況,在上述研究的基礎(chǔ)上,本研究提出了三個研究問題：(1)考生在讀寫任務(wù)中策略運用的本質(zhì)是什么?(2)讀寫任務(wù)策略運用和測試分?jǐn)?shù)的關(guān)系是什么?(3)高分?jǐn)?shù)考生和低分?jǐn)?shù)考生在策略運用上有什么區(qū)別?本文通過策略調(diào)查問卷,有聲思維和訪談收集考生參與讀寫任務(wù)過程中的策略活動,運用因子分析和結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型方法探討了這些策略活動的本質(zhì)以及其對寫作效果的影響,從而進(jìn)一步研究綜合讀寫任務(wù)的構(gòu)念,為該任務(wù)類型提供一定的效度證明。為了解答上述研究問題,共有109名非英語專業(yè)中國大學(xué)生參與了本研究實驗的數(shù)據(jù)收集。這些學(xué)生包含本科生和研究生。本研究實驗基本分為兩個環(huán)節(jié),在第一環(huán)節(jié)中,要求99名學(xué)生限時完成一個讀寫任務(wù)測試,并且寫作結(jié)束后,隨即填寫了寫作調(diào)查問卷。在實驗第二環(huán)節(jié),運用有聲思維和訪談方法收集了10名學(xué)生的寫作過程,目的是全面探析學(xué)生的策略運用以及比較高低分?jǐn)?shù)考生間策略運用的差異。通過實驗,研究者收集了所有參與者的作文,策略問卷,有聲思維寫作過程和訪談的錄音。然后,從文章內(nèi)容,語言運用和組織結(jié)構(gòu)對所有作文進(jìn)行了分析性評分,目的是探究策略運用對學(xué)生作文具體哪些方面起到了何種作用。接著,根據(jù)一定的策略分類標(biāo)準(zhǔn),對有聲思維和訪談數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行了轉(zhuǎn)錄并標(biāo)注為具體的策略活動。在數(shù)據(jù)分析階段,本研究首先運用一。系列的探索性因子分析和驗證性因子分析探討了考生在讀寫任務(wù)中的策略運用的潛在結(jié)構(gòu),接著運用結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型探索了考生策略運用和寫作分?jǐn)?shù)之間的相關(guān)關(guān)系,最后運用定性分析方法計算了有聲思維和訪談數(shù)據(jù)中的策略活動的頻率和百分比,并對比了高分?jǐn)?shù)學(xué)生和低分?jǐn)?shù)學(xué)生間策略使用的差異,最終概括出學(xué)生在讀寫任務(wù)中的一個策略使用框架,同時對定量分析的結(jié)果給予了一定的解釋和補充。結(jié)果表明在讀寫測試任務(wù)中,學(xué)生的策略運用結(jié)構(gòu)是比較復(fù)雜多面的,既有閱讀策略,也有寫作技巧；既包含認(rèn)知,元認(rèn)知以及情感策略,也包含考生的一些個人應(yīng)試技巧,例如,套用寫作模板,抄襲閱讀材料等：既包含挑選,組織,記憶,和翻譯等直接策略,也包括評價,監(jiān)控,自我激勵,降低焦慮等間接策略�？偟膩碚f,讀寫測試任務(wù)中,策略運用結(jié)構(gòu)包含四個維度,即認(rèn)知策略,元認(rèn)知策略,情感策略以及應(yīng)試技巧。其中,除了應(yīng)試技巧外,認(rèn)知,元認(rèn)知和情感策略三者之間有明顯的相關(guān)關(guān)系,元認(rèn)知策略對考生的認(rèn)知和情感活動有一定的監(jiān)控和評價作用,對考生認(rèn)知策略和情感策略的運用有著直接且積極的影響。認(rèn)知策略和情感策略高度相關(guān),互相影響。其次,在策略運用和寫作效果的關(guān)系方面,研究發(fā)現(xiàn)元認(rèn)知策略通過認(rèn)知策略和情感策略間接地影響考生的寫作效果；而認(rèn)知策略的運用對寫作效果有著直接且積極的作用,但是這種作用不是太明顯。情感策略直接或間接地影響考生的寫作效果。然而,考生的個人應(yīng)試技巧對其寫作效果有著明顯的消極作用。最后,有聲思維和訪談的數(shù)據(jù)分析表明不同水平學(xué)生之間策略的選擇及其運用效果是有差異的。高分?jǐn)?shù)學(xué)生傾向于運用較為多樣化、概括類的策略種類；而低分?jǐn)?shù)學(xué)生則使用一些較為單一且具體的策略。高分?jǐn)?shù)考生會較多地運用計劃策略,評估策略等元認(rèn)知策略,而分?jǐn)?shù)較低考生則過多地運用重復(fù)策略,復(fù)讀策略和翻譯策略等認(rèn)知策略。此外,研究還發(fā)現(xiàn)考生寫作分?jǐn)?shù)的高低和策略運用的數(shù)量無關(guān),而和策略的選擇及運用效果相關(guān)。最后,基于口頭表達(dá)的數(shù)據(jù)分析結(jié)果,本研究提出一個有關(guān)讀寫任務(wù)策略運用模式的框架,試圖對二語學(xué)術(shù)寫作指導(dǎo)提供一定的借鑒作用。綜上所述,本研究結(jié)果會對二語寫作,尤其是學(xué)術(shù)寫作的學(xué)習(xí),教學(xué),測試以及研究方面有一定的啟示。本研究結(jié)果對二語寫作和學(xué)術(shù)寫作的啟示主要體現(xiàn)在三個方面。從理論角度看,本研究探討了綜合讀寫任務(wù)的構(gòu)念效度,研究結(jié)果驗證了讀寫任務(wù)的效度,表明讀寫任務(wù)不僅測試了考生的寫作能力,同時考察了他們的閱讀能力,概括綜合信息的能力。而這些能力恰好是學(xué)術(shù)寫作中所需的能力,因此,讀寫任務(wù)的測試分?jǐn)?shù)在一定程度上能發(fā)映出考生的學(xué)術(shù)寫作水平。高校和大型測試機可以采用讀寫任務(wù)來考察學(xué)生的學(xué)術(shù)寫作能力。在實際運用方面,本研究調(diào)查了考生在讀寫任務(wù)中所使用的具體策略及其與寫作分?jǐn)?shù)的關(guān)系。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)不同二語水平的考生在策略運用上存在差異,并且不同的策略對寫作分?jǐn)?shù)的貢獻(xiàn)也不同。不論是指導(dǎo)學(xué)術(shù)寫作的教師還是參與學(xué)術(shù)寫作的學(xué)生,本研究結(jié)果都將對學(xué)術(shù)寫作策略的教學(xué)和學(xué)習(xí)提供一定的參考。在方法論方面,在數(shù)據(jù)收集層面,本研究不僅采用問卷方法調(diào)查了考生使用的策略,還運用有聲思維法和訪談方法全面充分地記錄了考生參與整個讀寫任務(wù)的過程及其看法；在分析方法層面,本研究采用結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型,探索性因子分析及驗證性因子分析,探討了考生在讀寫任務(wù)中策略運用的特征結(jié)構(gòu),分析了策略運用和寫作分?jǐn)?shù)之間的相關(guān)關(guān)系。結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型能有效地分析出潛在因子和其可觀察變量,以及多個潛在因子之間的關(guān)系。這也為今后語言測試領(lǐng)域試題任務(wù)的效度論證研究提供了一個新的分析方法。同大多數(shù)策略研究和結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型的研究一樣,本研究也存在一些局限性。例如,由于二語學(xué)習(xí)策略在學(xué)術(shù)界至今沒有一個統(tǒng)一的分類標(biāo)準(zhǔn),因此,在策略問卷的制定以及有聲思維轉(zhuǎn)錄的方面,存在一定的主觀因素,有些策略的轉(zhuǎn)錄存在一定的重合。此外,對于運用結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型作為主要分析方法的研究來說,受試的數(shù)量還是相對較少的,這就在一定程度上影響模型的穩(wěn)定性和研究結(jié)果的概括性。因此,在今后的研究中,需要運用較大樣本量的數(shù)據(jù)以及定制更全面、更詳細(xì)、更科學(xué)的策略調(diào)查問卷。
[Abstract]:In recent years, more and more university classified examinations and large-scale testing institutions have begun to test students'academic writing ability with comprehensive writing tasks, a type of writing task that combines writing with reading or listening. However, it is necessary to verify the validity of the comprehensive writing task in assessing and distinguishing students'academic writing ability. Therefore, many experts and scholars who study the testing and development of English writing and some teachers who teach second language writing are involved. Many studies have been devoted to comparing the differences in text characteristics, writing scores and writing process between different task types (independent writing and comprehensive writing). Some have studied reading ability and writing process. The role of strategies in reading and writing tasks and the process of discourse synthesis in writing have been studied. However, few studies have been conducted on the use of strategies in comprehensive reading and writing tasks under the test environment. Three research questions: (1) What is the nature of strategy use in reading and writing tasks? (2) What is the relationship between strategy use in reading and writing tasks and test scores? (3) What is the difference between high-score candidates and low-score candidates in strategy use? By using factor analysis and structural equation model, this paper explores the nature of these strategies and their effects on writing, and further studies the structure of the integrated reading and writing task, providing some validity proof of the task type. In the first part, 99 students were asked to complete a reading and writing task test in time. After writing, they filled out a writing questionnaire. In the second part of the experiment, they used voice thinking and interview. The purpose of this study is to explore the strategies used by students and compare the differences between high and low score candidates. Through the experiment, the researchers collected the compositions of all participants, questionnaires on strategies, the process of thinking aloud and the recording of interviews. The purpose of this study is to find out which aspects of the students'compositions are affected by the use of strategies. Then, according to certain criteria of strategy classification, the data of audio thinking and interviews are transcribed and labeled as specific strategies. A series of exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to explore the potential structure of the candidates'strategy use in reading and writing tasks. Then the structural equation model was used to explore the correlation between the candidates' strategy use and their writing scores. Finally, the frequency of strategy activities in audio thinking and interview data was calculated by qualitative analysis. The results show that the structure of students'strategy use is more complex in the reading and writing test task. There are both reading strategies and writing skills, including cognitive, metacognitive and emotional strategies, as well as some individual test-taking skills, such as writing templates and plagiarism of reading materials: both direct strategies such as selection, organization, memory, and translation, and indirect strategies such as evaluation, monitoring, self-motivation and anxiety reduction. Generally speaking, the structure of strategy use in reading and writing test includes four dimensions, namely, cognitive strategy, metacognitive strategy, affective strategy and test-taking skills. Cognitive and affective strategies are highly correlated and interact with each other. Secondly, in terms of the relationship between the use of strategies and the effect of writing, the study finds that metacognitive strategies indirectly influence the writing effect of examinees through cognitive and affective strategies. The use of cognitive strategies has a direct and positive effect on the writing effect, but the effect is not obvious. Emotional strategies directly or indirectly affect the writing effect of the examinees. However, the examinees'individual test-taking skills have a significant negative effect on their writing effect. Finally, the data analysis of the voice thinking and interviews shows that the effect is not obvious. High-score students tend to use more diversified and generalized strategies, while low-score students use more single and specific strategies. In addition, the study also found that the level of writing scores was not related to the number of strategies used, but to the choice of strategies and the effect of strategies used. Finally, based on the results of the oral data analysis, this study proposed a strategy-based approach to reading and writing tasks. To sum up, the findings of this study will shed light on the study, teaching, testing and research of second language writing, especially academic writing. The implications of the findings of this study for second language writing and academic writing are mainly reflected in three aspects. From the angle of view, this study explores the constructive validity of the comprehensive reading and writing task, and the results verify the validity of the reading and writing task. Colleges and universities and large-scale test machines can use reading and writing tasks to examine students'academic writing ability. The results of this study will provide some references for the teaching and learning of academic writing strategies. In terms of methodology, at the level of data collection, This study not only investigated the strategies used by candidates by questionnaires, but also fully recorded the process and opinions of candidates participating in the whole reading and writing task by means of voice thinking and interviews. On the analysis method level, this study used structural equation model, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis to explore candidates. The structural equation model can effectively analyze the relationship between the potential factors and their observable variables, as well as the relationship between multiple potential factors. It also provides a basis for the validity study of test questions in the field of language testing in the future. As with most strategies and structural equation models, there are some limitations in this study. For example, since there is no uniform classification criterion for SLA learning strategies in academic circles, there are some subjective factors and some strategies in the formulation of the strategy questionnaire and the transcription of thinking through voice. In addition, the number of subjects is relatively small for the study using the structural equation model as the main analysis method, which affects the stability of the model and the generality of the research results to a certain extent. Develop a more comprehensive, detailed and scientific strategy questionnaire.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：H05
本文編號：2220178
[Abstract]:In recent years, more and more university classified examinations and large-scale testing institutions have begun to test students'academic writing ability with comprehensive writing tasks, a type of writing task that combines writing with reading or listening. However, it is necessary to verify the validity of the comprehensive writing task in assessing and distinguishing students'academic writing ability. Therefore, many experts and scholars who study the testing and development of English writing and some teachers who teach second language writing are involved. Many studies have been devoted to comparing the differences in text characteristics, writing scores and writing process between different task types (independent writing and comprehensive writing). Some have studied reading ability and writing process. The role of strategies in reading and writing tasks and the process of discourse synthesis in writing have been studied. However, few studies have been conducted on the use of strategies in comprehensive reading and writing tasks under the test environment. Three research questions: (1) What is the nature of strategy use in reading and writing tasks? (2) What is the relationship between strategy use in reading and writing tasks and test scores? (3) What is the difference between high-score candidates and low-score candidates in strategy use? By using factor analysis and structural equation model, this paper explores the nature of these strategies and their effects on writing, and further studies the structure of the integrated reading and writing task, providing some validity proof of the task type. In the first part, 99 students were asked to complete a reading and writing task test in time. After writing, they filled out a writing questionnaire. In the second part of the experiment, they used voice thinking and interview. The purpose of this study is to explore the strategies used by students and compare the differences between high and low score candidates. Through the experiment, the researchers collected the compositions of all participants, questionnaires on strategies, the process of thinking aloud and the recording of interviews. The purpose of this study is to find out which aspects of the students'compositions are affected by the use of strategies. Then, according to certain criteria of strategy classification, the data of audio thinking and interviews are transcribed and labeled as specific strategies. A series of exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to explore the potential structure of the candidates'strategy use in reading and writing tasks. Then the structural equation model was used to explore the correlation between the candidates' strategy use and their writing scores. Finally, the frequency of strategy activities in audio thinking and interview data was calculated by qualitative analysis. The results show that the structure of students'strategy use is more complex in the reading and writing test task. There are both reading strategies and writing skills, including cognitive, metacognitive and emotional strategies, as well as some individual test-taking skills, such as writing templates and plagiarism of reading materials: both direct strategies such as selection, organization, memory, and translation, and indirect strategies such as evaluation, monitoring, self-motivation and anxiety reduction. Generally speaking, the structure of strategy use in reading and writing test includes four dimensions, namely, cognitive strategy, metacognitive strategy, affective strategy and test-taking skills. Cognitive and affective strategies are highly correlated and interact with each other. Secondly, in terms of the relationship between the use of strategies and the effect of writing, the study finds that metacognitive strategies indirectly influence the writing effect of examinees through cognitive and affective strategies. The use of cognitive strategies has a direct and positive effect on the writing effect, but the effect is not obvious. Emotional strategies directly or indirectly affect the writing effect of the examinees. However, the examinees'individual test-taking skills have a significant negative effect on their writing effect. Finally, the data analysis of the voice thinking and interviews shows that the effect is not obvious. High-score students tend to use more diversified and generalized strategies, while low-score students use more single and specific strategies. In addition, the study also found that the level of writing scores was not related to the number of strategies used, but to the choice of strategies and the effect of strategies used. Finally, based on the results of the oral data analysis, this study proposed a strategy-based approach to reading and writing tasks. To sum up, the findings of this study will shed light on the study, teaching, testing and research of second language writing, especially academic writing. The implications of the findings of this study for second language writing and academic writing are mainly reflected in three aspects. From the angle of view, this study explores the constructive validity of the comprehensive reading and writing task, and the results verify the validity of the reading and writing task. Colleges and universities and large-scale test machines can use reading and writing tasks to examine students'academic writing ability. The results of this study will provide some references for the teaching and learning of academic writing strategies. In terms of methodology, at the level of data collection, This study not only investigated the strategies used by candidates by questionnaires, but also fully recorded the process and opinions of candidates participating in the whole reading and writing task by means of voice thinking and interviews. On the analysis method level, this study used structural equation model, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis to explore candidates. The structural equation model can effectively analyze the relationship between the potential factors and their observable variables, as well as the relationship between multiple potential factors. It also provides a basis for the validity study of test questions in the field of language testing in the future. As with most strategies and structural equation models, there are some limitations in this study. For example, since there is no uniform classification criterion for SLA learning strategies in academic circles, there are some subjective factors and some strategies in the formulation of the strategy questionnaire and the transcription of thinking through voice. In addition, the number of subjects is relatively small for the study using the structural equation model as the main analysis method, which affects the stability of the model and the generality of the research results to a certain extent. Develop a more comprehensive, detailed and scientific strategy questionnaire.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：H05
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條
1 張新玲;曾用強;;讀寫結(jié)合寫作測試任務(wù)在大型考試中的構(gòu)念效度驗證[J];解放軍外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報;2009年01期
2 高霄;;二語寫作質(zhì)量構(gòu)念效度的結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型分析[J];山東外語教學(xué);2009年06期
3 修旭東;肖德法;;英語寫作策略、八級寫作認(rèn)知過程及成績關(guān)系的結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型研究[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2006年06期
4 吳紅云 ,劉潤清;寫作元認(rèn)知結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型研究[J];現(xiàn)代外語;2004年04期
5 陳成輝;肖輝;;“聽說寫一體”寫作教學(xué)模式實驗研究:模因論的視角[J];外語界;2012年06期
6 張新玲;周燕;;任務(wù)類型對中國英語學(xué)習(xí)者寫作表現(xiàn)的影響[J];現(xiàn)代外語;2014年04期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條
1 姜蕾;大學(xué)英語課堂環(huán)境下讀寫結(jié)合寫作測試效度研究[D];上海外國語大學(xué);2011年
2 陳建林;外語教學(xué)測試構(gòu)念研究[D];上海外國語大學(xué);2013年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 唐文越;英語寫作焦慮與寫作策略的選擇對大學(xué)生寫作成果的影響[D];首都師范大學(xué);2012年
，本文編號：2220178
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/yuyanxuelw/2220178.html
最近更新
教材專著
