Towards Improved Assessment of L2 Collocation Knowledge

IF 1.4 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Language Assessment Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-04-25 DOI:10.1080/15434303.2021.1908295
Senyung Lee, Sun-young Shin
{"title":"Towards Improved Assessment of L2 Collocation Knowledge","authors":"Senyung Lee, Sun-young Shin","doi":"10.1080/15434303.2021.1908295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Multiple test tasks are available for assessing L2 collocation knowledge. However, few studies have investigated the characteristics of a variety of recognition and recall tasks of collocation simultaneously, and most research on L2 collocations has focused on verb-noun and adjective-noun collocations. This study investigates (1) the relative informativeness of different tasks for assessing L2 collocation knowledge and (2) the effect of collocation type on learners’ scores on collocation tasks. Four tasks were developed based on an extensive review of research on L2 collocations: a sentence writing task, fill-in-the-blank task, multiple-choice task, and Yes/No acceptability judgment task. Each task targeted 64 English collocations, including verb-noun, adjective-noun, adverb-adjective, and adverb-verb collocations. Four groups of adult ESL learners representing different levels of academic English literacy (n = 205) completed the tasks. An item response theory analysis showed that the sentence writing and fill-in-the-blank-tasks had similar difficulty and discriminating power, the eight-option multiple-choice task had the highest discriminating power, and the Yes/No judgment task had the lowest difficulty and discriminating power. The type of collocation did not have a significant effect on learners’ scores when collocation frequency was held constant, regardless of task and learners’ level of academic English literacy.","PeriodicalId":46873,"journal":{"name":"Language Assessment Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15434303.2021.1908295","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Assessment Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2021.1908295","RegionNum":2,"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: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Multiple test tasks are available for assessing L2 collocation knowledge. However, few studies have investigated the characteristics of a variety of recognition and recall tasks of collocation simultaneously, and most research on L2 collocations has focused on verb-noun and adjective-noun collocations. This study investigates (1) the relative informativeness of different tasks for assessing L2 collocation knowledge and (2) the effect of collocation type on learners’ scores on collocation tasks. Four tasks were developed based on an extensive review of research on L2 collocations: a sentence writing task, fill-in-the-blank task, multiple-choice task, and Yes/No acceptability judgment task. Each task targeted 64 English collocations, including verb-noun, adjective-noun, adverb-adjective, and adverb-verb collocations. Four groups of adult ESL learners representing different levels of academic English literacy (n = 205) completed the tasks. An item response theory analysis showed that the sentence writing and fill-in-the-blank-tasks had similar difficulty and discriminating power, the eight-option multiple-choice task had the highest discriminating power, and the Yes/No judgment task had the lowest difficulty and discriminating power. The type of collocation did not have a significant effect on learners’ scores when collocation frequency was held constant, regardless of task and learners’ level of academic English literacy.
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
二语搭配知识评价的改进
摘要多个测试任务可用于评估二语搭配知识。然而,很少有研究同时调查各种搭配的识别和回忆任务的特征,大多数关于二语搭配的研究都集中在动名词和形容名词搭配上。本研究考察了(1)评估二语搭配知识的不同任务的相对信息性;(2)搭配类型对学习者搭配任务得分的影响。在广泛回顾二语搭配研究的基础上,开发了四项任务:句子写作任务、填空任务、多项选择任务和是/否可接受性判断任务。每项任务针对64种英语搭配,包括动名词、形容名词、副词形容词和副词动词搭配。四组代表不同学术英语素养水平的成年ESL学习者(n=205)完成了任务。项目反应理论分析表明,填空题和填空题的难度和辨别力相似,八项选择题的辨别力最高,是/否判断题的难度或辨别力最低。当搭配频率不变时,无论任务和学习者的学术英语素养水平如何,搭配类型对学习者的成绩都没有显著影响。
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
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
Argument-Based Validation in Testing and Assessment The Diagnosis of Writing in a Second or Foreign Language The Role of Gazing Behaviors in Navigating Paired Role-Play Interactional Competence Assessment Tasks Twenty Years of Language Assessment Quarterly: An Interview with LAQ Founder Antony Kunnan Fundamental Considerations in Technology Mediated Language Assessment
×
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