COMPARING EXAMINEE ATTITUDES TOWARD COMPUTER- ASSISTED AND OTHER ORAL PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENTS
COMPARING EXAMINEE ATTITUDES TOWARD COMPUTER- ASSISTED AND OTHER ORAL PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENTS
复制标题
比较考生对计算机辅助和其他口语能力评估的态度
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2001
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
V. Malabonga
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dorry M. Kenyon;V. Malabonga
本文报道了一项研究的结果，考生的态度反应采取不同形式的口语水平评估在三种语言：西班牙语，阿拉伯语和中文。本研究采用录音模拟口语能力测试（SOPI）和计算机化口语能力测试仪（COPI）对55名学生进行测试。此外，参加西班牙语研究的24名学生接受了面对面的英语教学顾问委员会（ACTFL）口语能力面试（OPI）。参与者是在大学学习语言课程的研究生和本科生。考试的顺序是基于自我和教师评估的熟练程度和学习目标语言的经验。每次测试后，学习者完成了一份关于他们对该测试的态度和看法的六个方面的Likert问卷。在完成所有测试和问卷后，他们被要求直接在这六个方面比较两个技术中介测试。本文介绍了考生对这些问卷的回答，主要集中在两个技术中介测试之间的差异。结果发现，自适应性质的COPI允许的难度水平的评估任务，以更适当地匹配考生的熟练程度。这导致考生，特别是那些在较低的熟练程度，觉得COPI是不太难比SOPI。在大多数其他方面，这两项测试的评分相似。对于西班牙学生来说，这两个技术中介测试的评分与OPI相似，尽管OPI在他们看来更能衡量现实生活中的口语技能。考生对一个适应性的、计算机管理的口语水平评估的反应如何？本文报告考生对计算机化口语水平测试仪（COPI）原型的看法。COPI是由应用语言学中心（CAL; http://www.cal.org）在美国教育部国际研究计划的研究资助下开发的。COPI是为西班牙语、阿拉伯语和汉语开发的，它是对1985年由CAL开发的磁带中介模拟口语能力面试（SOPI）的改编（Clark，1988）。COPI研究项目的主要目标是通过给予考试者更多的考试情境的各种特性的控制和通过增加评分者在考试中的评分效率来检验使用多时间数据计算机技术来提高SO PI的效果。该项目比较了CO PI和美国外语教学委员会（ACTFL ; http://www.actfl.org）之间针对西班牙语的机械和自动化功能、评级功能和自动化功能的检查，以及COPI和SO PI针对西班牙语、中文和阿拉伯语的检查。这是对COPI、SOPI和OPI的重要比较。
This article reports the results of a study of examinee attitudinal reactions to taking different formats of oral proficiency assessments across three languages: Spanish, Arabic, and Chinese. All 55 students in the study were administered both the tape-mediated Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview (SOPI) and a new Computerized Oral Proficiency Instrument (COPI). In addition, the 24 students participating in the Spanish study were administered the face-to-face A me ric an Counc il on the T ea ching of For e ign L angua ge s (ACTFL) Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI). Participants were graduate and undergraduate students taking language courses at their universities. The order of test administration was based on self- and teacher-assessed proficiency levels and experience in learning the target language. After each test, the learners completed a Likert questionnaire on six aspects of their attitudes towards and perceptions of that test. After finishing all tests and questionnaires, they were requested to compare the two technologymediated tests directly on those six aspects. This article presents the examinees' responses on those questionnaires, focusing primarily on differences between the two technology-mediated tests. It was found that the adaptive nature of the COPI allowed the difficulty level of the assessment task to be matched more appropriately to the proficiency level of the examinee. This led examinees, particularly those at the lower proficiency levels, to feel the COPI was less difficult than the SOPI. In most other aspects, the two tests were rated similarly. For the Spanish students, the two technology-mediated tests were rated similarly to the OPI, though the OPI appeared to them to be a better measure of real-life speaking skills. How do examinees react to an adaptive, computer-administered oral proficiency assessment? This article reports on examinee perspectives towards a prototype of the Computerized Oral Proficiency Instrument (COPI). The COPI was developed by the Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL; http://www.cal.org) under a research grant from the International Research and Studies Program of the United States Department of Education. Developed for Spanish, Arabic, and Chinese, the COPI is an adaptation of the tape-mediated Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview (SOPI), originally developed at CAL in 1985 (Clark, 1988). The primary goal of the COPI research project was to examine the effects of using multime dia c omputer tec hnology to e nha nc e the SO PI by giving examine es more contr ol over va rious a spe cts of the testing situa tion a nd by inc r ea sing ra ter s' ef fic ie nc y in scoring the test. The projec t c ompa r ed e xamine e per for ma nc e a nd af fe c t, a nd ra ter e f ficie nc y a nd a f fe ct, betw ee n the CO PI a nd the A me r ic an Counc il on the T ea ching of For e ign L angua ge s ( ACTFL ; http://www.actfl.org) O ra l Prof ic ie ncy I nte rview ( O PI ) f or Spa nish, a nd the COPI a nd SO PI for Spa nish, Chinese , and A ra bic . T his a rtic le compa re s e xa minee r ea ctions to the COPI , the SOPI , and the OPI.