Instmohrnal effects of imput on second language acguisitihn and computerized adaptive tests

1999年的研究调查了(1)哪种类型的教学可能最有效地使英语学习者在自发产生测试中（重新）形成语法；(2)是否可以在经典测试理论（CTT）和项目反应理论（IRT）之间观察到结果的统计差异。60名日本英语大学学生被要求用口头或书面的方式自发地描述图片。4个班级根据治疗方式分为A、B、C、D 4个不同的实验组。结果表明：(1)C组治疗1个月的疗效优于其他治疗。(2)当学习者接受正向输入时，外显元语言信息的提供比重复的提供更有效。(3)当正向输入是重复的时候，明确的元语言信息对学习者的（再）结构并不是必不可少的。所有四个实验组都获得了可测量的教学效益。D组的学习者有更多的机会和时间来监督他们在写作方面的表现。(5)考试形式（口试和笔试）没有统计学差异。(6) CTT与IRT无统计学差异。在课堂环境中，IRT模型实际上可以与CTT模型同等使用。2000年的一项研究调查了计算机化适应测试（CAT）是否能成功地应用于英语环境下的实际语言测试，并检验了CAT和纸笔测试（PPT）在个人能力评估方面的异同。日本大学一年级的学生参与了这项研究。结果表明，CAT估计的个人能力参数与PPT相似，CAT给受试者的项目数量比PPT少，并且CAT比PPT程序少50%的项目可靠地测量了学习者的英语水平。总体结果表明，在每学期开始进行英语分班测试时，CAT程序将是有用的。少

The 1999 study investigated(1) what type of instruction may be most effective in enabling EFL learners (re) formulate their grammar on spontaneous production tests and(2) whether statistical differences of the results may be observed between the classical test theory(CTT) and the item response theory (IRT). 60 Japanese EFL university students were asked to describe pictures spontaneously in either oral or written modes. The four classes were assigned to four different experimental groups(Groups A, B, C, and D) according to the type of treatment. Results showed that(1)Group C proved to be more effective for one month than the other treatments. (2) When the learners received positive input, the provision of explicit metalinguistic information was more effective than that of repetition. (3) When positive input was given with repetition, explicit metalinguistic in formation was not indispensable to learners' (re)structuring. (4) All four experimental groups gained measurable instructional … More benefit. The learners in Group D had more opportunities and time for monitoring their performance in writing than in speaking. (5) The test modality (oral vs written test)did not cause any statistical difference. (6)No statistically significant difference was discovered between CTT and IRT. One can use IRT models practically on an equal footing with CTT in classroom settings.The 2000 study investigated whether a computerized adaptive test(CAT) would successfully apply to practical language tests in EFL environments, and examined the similarities differences in person ability estimation between CAT and a pencil-and-paper test(PPT). Japanese university first-year students participated in the study. The results showed CAT estimated similar person ability parameters as PPT, that the number of items given to the subjects became smaller in CAT than PPT, and that CAT reliably measured learners' English proficiency with 50% fewer items than the PPT procedure. The overall results imply that the CAT procedure will be useful when an English placement test is administered at the beginning of each semester. Less