Is the variation in syntactic complexity features observed in argumentative essays produced by B1 level EFL learners in Finland and Pakistan attributable exclusively to their L1?

IF 4.2 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Assessing Writing Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100839
Ghulam Abbas Khushik
{"title":"Is the variation in syntactic complexity features observed in argumentative essays produced by B1 level EFL learners in Finland and Pakistan attributable exclusively to their L1?","authors":"Ghulam Abbas Khushik","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100839","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study has explored the syntactic complexity features of English learners at the B1 Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (CoE, 2001) level from both Pakistan and Finland. The learners in question were taught English as a Foreign Language (EFL) using different pedagogical methods. This study took into account various factors including the learners' proficiency level, age, and grade, as well as variations in their native language. To assess the impact of the learners' native language and pedagogical methods on syntactic complexity features, twelfth grade EFL students from Upper-Secondary schools in both nations were given identical instructions and time limits to complete an English academic essay on the same topic. The study utilized L2 syntactic complexity analyzer (L2SCA) to extract fourteen syntactic complexity features, and Mann-Whitney U Tests were used to analyze the differences in the syntactic complexity features between the two groups. The study has revealed significant differences between Finnish and Pakistani EFL learners due to variations in their native language and the effects of pedagogical methods on syntactic complexity features. The implications of this study extend to language testing and assessment, the CEFR framework, and pedagogy in both Finland and Pakistan.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000321/pdfft?md5=4346b93938ba0697c15284a2baa8cd72&pid=1-s2.0-S1075293524000321-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessing Writing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000321","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study has explored the syntactic complexity features of English learners at the B1 Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (CoE, 2001) level from both Pakistan and Finland. The learners in question were taught English as a Foreign Language (EFL) using different pedagogical methods. This study took into account various factors including the learners' proficiency level, age, and grade, as well as variations in their native language. To assess the impact of the learners' native language and pedagogical methods on syntactic complexity features, twelfth grade EFL students from Upper-Secondary schools in both nations were given identical instructions and time limits to complete an English academic essay on the same topic. The study utilized L2 syntactic complexity analyzer (L2SCA) to extract fourteen syntactic complexity features, and Mann-Whitney U Tests were used to analyze the differences in the syntactic complexity features between the two groups. The study has revealed significant differences between Finnish and Pakistani EFL learners due to variations in their native language and the effects of pedagogical methods on syntactic complexity features. The implications of this study extend to language testing and assessment, the CEFR framework, and pedagogy in both Finland and Pakistan.

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
在芬兰和巴基斯坦的 B1 级 EFL 学习者撰写的议论文中观察到的句法复杂性特征差异是否完全归因于他们的母语?
本研究探讨了来自巴基斯坦和芬兰的欧洲共同语言参考标准(CEFR)(CoE,2001 年)B1 级英语学习者的句法复杂性特征。这些学习者使用不同的教学方法将英语作为外语(EFL)学习。这项研究考虑了各种因素,包括学习者的水平、年龄和年级,以及他们母语的差异。为了评估学习者的母语和教学方法对句法复杂性特征的影响,研究人员给两国高中十二年级的 EFL 学生提供了相同的指导和时间限制,让他们完成一篇关于同一主题的英语学术论文。研究利用 L2 句法复杂性分析器(L2SCA)提取了 14 个句法复杂性特征,并采用曼-惠特尼 U 检验分析了两组学生在句法复杂性特征方面的差异。该研究揭示了芬兰和巴基斯坦 EFL 学习者之间因母语差异而产生的显著差异,以及教学方法对句法复杂性特征的影响。这项研究对芬兰和巴基斯坦的语言测试和评估、CEFR 框架和教学法都有影响。
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
Assessing Writing
Assessing Writing Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
17.90%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Assessing Writing is a refereed international journal providing a forum for ideas, research and practice on the assessment of written language. Assessing Writing publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges concerning writing assessments of all kinds, including traditional (direct and standardised forms of) testing of writing, alternative performance assessments (such as portfolios), workplace sampling and classroom assessment. The journal focuses on all stages of the writing assessment process, including needs evaluation, assessment creation, implementation, and validation, and test development.
期刊最新文献
A comparative study of voice in Chinese English-major undergraduates’ timed and untimed argument writing The impact of task duration on the scoring of independent writing responses of adult L2-English writers A structural equation investigation of linguistic features as indices of writing quality in assessed secondary-level EMI learners’ scientific reports Validating an integrated reading-into-writing scale with trained university students Understanding the SSARC model of task sequencing: Assessing L2 writing development
×
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