How do raters understand rubrics for assessing L2 interactional engagement? A comparative study of CA- and non-CA-formulated performance descriptors
How do raters understand rubrics for assessing L2 interactional engagement? A comparative study of CA- and non-CA-formulated performance descriptors
复制标题
评估者如何理解评估 L2 互动参与度的标准？
DOI：
10.58379/jciw3943
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Greer
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Erica Sandlund;T. Greer
虽然成对的学生讨论测试在EFL的背景下，往往使用广泛的描述符的标题进行评分，另一种方法通过广泛的书面描述的视频记录的示例性情况下，在每个性能水平构建标题。会话分析（CA）具有悠久的历史，深刻的描述性观察的互动，是一个合适的工具，构建这样的范例为基础的规则，但在多大程度上是非CA专家教师评分员能够解释CA分析，以评估测试？本研究探讨了这个问题，通过比较两个成对的EFL讨论测试，使用基于范例的标题，一个写的CA专家和其他EFL测试建设者不专门在CA。完整的数据集包括测试录音（大学水平的日本英语学习者和中学水平的瑞典英语学习者）和教师评分者的互动录音。我们的分析重点是如何有经验的语言教育工作者认为参与，同时讨论他们的评级的视频记录的测试谈话的范例和描述性的标题。这项研究突出了教师评分员在测试中展示他们对参与概念的理解的方式的差异，并展示了CA规则如何促进更emically接地评估。
While paired student discussion tests in EFL contexts are often graded using rubrics with broad descriptors, an alternative approach constructs the rubric via extensive written descriptions of video-recorded exemplary cases at each performance level. With its long history of deeply descriptive observation of interaction, Conversation Analysis (CA) is one apt tool for constructing such exemplar-based rubrics; but to what extent are non-CA specialist teacher-raters able to interpret a CA analysis in order to assess the test? This study explores this issue by comparing two paired EFL discussion tests that use exemplar-based rubrics, one written by a CA specialist and the other by EFL test constructors not specialized in CA. The complete dataset consists of test recordings (university-level Japanese learners of English, and secondary-level Swedish learners of English) and recordings of teacher-raters’ interaction. Our analysis focuses on ways experienced language educators perceive engagement while discussing their ratings of the video-recorded test talk in relation to the exemplars and descriptive rubrics. The study highlights differences in the way teacher-raters display their understanding of the notion of engagement within the tests, and demonstrates how CA rubrics can facilitate a more emically grounded assessment.
影响因子：
0.4
作者：
Yijin Wu;Wen Ma
通讯作者：
Yijin Wu;Wen Ma