高校英语专业阅读测试难度研究

出版时间：2011-4  出版社：河北大学出版社  作者：侯艳萍  页数：175  

内容概要

　　《高校英语专业阅读测试难度研究：基于任务特征的分析》的主要目的有两个，一是确定可能对TEM-4阅读理解任务难度水平产生影响的主要任务特征有哪些；二是明确这些系统变化的任务特征的共同构念和测量属性，以及对任务难度的具体影响程度有多大，从而明确在多大程度上可以由这些任务特征去预测任务难度。

作者简介

侯艳萍：博士、讲师，历任英语专业四、八级阅卷人。2004年和2009年分别获得上海外国语大学硕士学位和博士学位，师从上海外国语大学博士生导师邹申教授(全国高等学校外语专业教学指导委员会测试办公室负责人)，专门学习英语语言测试。2008年1月至8月美国加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校(UCLA)访学，研究英语语言测试。

书籍目录

Acknowledgements
Abstract
摘要
List of Acronyms
List of Tables and Figures
Chapter One Introduction
  1.1 Research background
  1.2 Rationale for the study
  1.3 Purpose of the study
  1.4 Research questions
  1.5 Significance of the study
  1.6 Layout of the dissertation
  1.7 Chapter summary
Chapter Two -Literature Review
  2.1 The nature of reading
  2.2 Models of the reading process
    2.2.1 Bottom-up model
    2.2.2 Top-down model
    2.2.3 Interactive model
    2.2.4 Schema theory
    2.2.5 Bruer's cognitive model of reading process
  2.3 Different modes of reading
  2.4 Factors affecting reading comprehension
    2.4.1 Reader attributes
    2.4.2 Skill factors
    2.4.3 Text characteristics
    2.4.4 Method effects
  2.5 Reading tasks
    2.5.1 Definitions of task
      2.5.1.1 Language learning task
      2.5.1.2 Language using task
      2.5.1.3 Language assessment task
      2.5.1.4 Definition of reading task in this dissertation
    2.5.2 Task difficulty dimensions
      2.5.2.1 Robinson's model of task complexity
      2.5.2.2 Skehan's model of task difficulty
      2.5.2.3 An operational linguistic model of task difficulty
      2.5.2.4 ‘Sources of variation' from Bachman's perspective
    2.5.3 Exploration into multiple-choice reading task difficulty
      2.5.3.1 Readability studies
      2.5.3.2 Other approaches
      2.5.3.3 Interpretation of reading task difficulty in this
research
  2.6 Chapter summary
Chapter Three Research Methodology
  3.1 A proposed framework for TEM-4 reading task difficulty
analysis
    3.1.1 Introduction to the framework
    3.1.2 Profile of new framework
    3.1.3 Definitions and explanations of key terms
  3.2 Research questions
  3.3 Research instruments
    3.3.1 Rating instrument
    3.3.2 Research materials
  3.4 Participants
    3.4.1 Instrument raters
    3.4.2 Test takers
  3.5 Data collection
    3.5.1 Rated variables
    3.5.2 Counted variables
    3.5.3 Mathematically calculated variables
    3.5.4 Data preparation and management
  3.6 Data analysis procedures
    3.6.1 Reliability of ratings
    3.6.2 Descriptive statistical analysis
    3.6.3 Pair-wise correlation
    3.6.4 Exploratory factor analyses (EFA)
    3.6.5 Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA)
    3.6.6 Multiple regression (MR)
  3.7 Chapter summary
Chapter Four Results and Discussions
  4.1 Reliability of ratings
  4.2 Descriptive statistics of reading test in TEM-4 2005 and 2006
  4.3 Standardization of the 85 variables
  4.4 Pair-wise correlation
  4.5 Exploratory factor analyses
  4.6 Confirmatory factor analyses
  4.7 Multiple regression
  4.8 Chapter summary
Chapter Five Conclusions
  5.1 Summary of findings
  5.2 Theoretical implications
  5.3 Methodological implications
  5.4 Implications for language testing practice
  5.5 Limitations of the study
  5.6 Suggestions for further research
  5.7 Chapter summary
Referenees
Appendix A Rating instrument for TEM-4 reading characteristics
Appendix B T score descriptive statistics for task characteristic
variables
Appendix C Pair-wise correlations between item difficulty and
reading task characteristic variables
Appendix D Reading comprehension section of the 2005 TEM-4
Appendix E Reading comprehension section of the 2006 TEM-4

章节摘录

　　Assessment plays an integral role in contemporary educational practice, and its use is ubiquitous across all formal education contexts. Teachers and students devote a large proportion of time to preparing and taking tests, and most of what test takers, test designers, and test users know about what students are learning comes from the interpretation of the test scores. If used properly, tests can help improve instruction and curriculum, increase standardization, and challenge students to reach their highest potential. Increasingly, practitioners including ad-ministers as well as teachers are expected to understand the principles of assessment and to engage in sound assessment practices.　　Despite this ubiquity, what constitutes a good or appropriate assessment in education has proven to be a highly contentious question, the answers to which have ranged considerably depending on the purposes, uses, users, and contexts. Some researchers have promoted distinct qualities for educational assessments, including for example, a focus on the feedback potential of classroom-based assessments, the clarity of objectives and relevance for instructional decision making of criterion-referenced and curriculum-based assessments, or precision of standard setting plus ability description of proficiency tests. What is always missing from the qualities discussed above is the right handling of the task difficulty, a lack of understanding of which would deny the appropriate interpretation of test scores unless it is well understood and properly set, especially in a high stakes test. 　　……