Making each point count: Revising a local adaptation of the Jacobs et al. (1981) ESL COMPOSITION PROFILE rubric

IF 2.2 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Language Testing Pub Date : 2023-12-30 DOI:10.1177/02655322231217979
Yu-Tzu Chang, Ann Tai Choe, Daniel Holden, Daniel R. Isbell
{"title":"Making each point count: Revising a local adaptation of the Jacobs et al. (1981) ESL COMPOSITION PROFILE rubric","authors":"Yu-Tzu Chang, Ann Tai Choe, Daniel Holden, Daniel R. Isbell","doi":"10.1177/02655322231217979","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this Brief Report, we describe an evaluation of and revisions to a rubric adapted from the Jacobs et al. (1981) ESL COMPOSITION PROFILE, with four rubric categories and 20-point rating scales, in the context of an intensive English program writing placement test. Analysis of 4 years of rating data (2016–2021, including 434 essays) using many-facet Rasch measurement demonstrated that the 20-point rating scales of the Jacobs et al. rubric functioned poorly due to (a) questionably small distinctions in writing quality between successive score categories and (b) the presence of several disordered categories. We reanalyzed the score data after collapsing the 20-point scales into 4-point scales to simulate a revision to the rubric. This reanalysis appeared promising, with well-ordered and distinct score categories, and only a trivial decrease in person separation reliability. After implementing this revision to the rubric, we examined data from recent administrations (2022–2023, including 93 essays) to evaluate scale functioning. As in the simulation, scale categories were well-ordered and distinct in operational rating. Moreover, no raters demonstrated exceedingly poor fit using the revised rubric. Findings hold implications for other programs adopting/adapting the PROFILE or a similar rubric.","PeriodicalId":17928,"journal":{"name":"Language Testing","volume":" 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Testing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322231217979","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this Brief Report, we describe an evaluation of and revisions to a rubric adapted from the Jacobs et al. (1981) ESL COMPOSITION PROFILE, with four rubric categories and 20-point rating scales, in the context of an intensive English program writing placement test. Analysis of 4 years of rating data (2016–2021, including 434 essays) using many-facet Rasch measurement demonstrated that the 20-point rating scales of the Jacobs et al. rubric functioned poorly due to (a) questionably small distinctions in writing quality between successive score categories and (b) the presence of several disordered categories. We reanalyzed the score data after collapsing the 20-point scales into 4-point scales to simulate a revision to the rubric. This reanalysis appeared promising, with well-ordered and distinct score categories, and only a trivial decrease in person separation reliability. After implementing this revision to the rubric, we examined data from recent administrations (2022–2023, including 93 essays) to evaluate scale functioning. As in the simulation, scale categories were well-ordered and distinct in operational rating. Moreover, no raters demonstrated exceedingly poor fit using the revised rubric. Findings hold implications for other programs adopting/adapting the PROFILE or a similar rubric.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
让每一分都有价值:修订雅各布斯等人(1981 年)的英语写作概貌评分标准的地方改编版
在本简要报告中,我们介绍了对改编自雅各布斯等人(1981 年)的 ESL COMPOSITION PROFILE 的评分标准的评估和修订情况,该评分标准有四个评分类别和 20 点评分量表,适用于强化英语课程写作分级测试。使用多方面拉施测量法对 4 年(2016-2021 年,包括 434 篇作文)的评分数据进行分析后发现,雅各布斯等人评分标准的 20 分评分量表功能不佳,原因在于:(a)连续评分类别之间的写作质量差别太小,令人质疑;(b)存在多个无序类别。为了模拟对评分标准的修订,我们将 20 分的评分标准简化为 4 分的评分标准,并对评分数据进行了重新分析。重新分析的结果显示,评分类别井然有序、各具特色,人称分离信度仅略有下降。在对评分标准进行修订后,我们检查了最近几次考试(2022-2023 年,包括 93 篇文章)的数据,以评估量表的功能。与模拟结果一样,量表类别井然有序,且在操作评分时各具特色。此外,没有任何评分者在使用修订后的评分标准时表现出极差的匹配度。研究结果对其他采用/调整 PROFILE 或类似评分标准的项目具有启示意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Language Testing
Language Testing Multiple-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
9.80%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Language Testing is a fully peer reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles on language testing and assessment. It provides a forum for the exchange of ideas and information between people working in the fields of first and second language testing and assessment. This includes researchers and practitioners in EFL and ESL testing, and assessment in child language acquisition and language pathology. In addition, special attention is focused on issues of testing theory, experimental investigations, and the following up of practical implications.
期刊最新文献
Can language test providers do more to support open science? A response to Winke Considerations to promote and accelerate Open Science: A response to Winke Evaluating the impact of nonverbal behavior on language ability ratings Sharing, collaborating, and building trust: How Open Science advances language testing Open Science in language assessment research contexts: A reply to Winke
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1