评估ELF学生在大专阶段的口语能力

Fadiel Mohammed Musa
{"title":"评估ELF学生在大专阶段的口语能力","authors":"Fadiel Mohammed Musa","doi":"10.24113/IJOHMN.V7I3.229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study was conducted at a Sudanese university in 2021 at the end of the semester to find out the areas caused problems of speech production. The research paper seeks to answer the question: What area/s of speaking is problematic to students? Fortysix undergraduate students in first year, who were majored in the English programme involved in the test. The total population was hundred students. Analytic rubrics were used for collecting data. Tuan (2014, p. 2) states that analytic rubric“… accesses the examinee’s specific strengths and weaknesses and identifies the particular components of speaking discourse that an examinee needs to develop”. Five explicit criteria were used to test participants; i.e.: grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, cohesion and fluency. The test was conducted by two instructors who gave appropriate marks under each of five rubrics (Table 1 below). The test contents comprised some pictures and topics to speak about. Bar charts were utilized to compare and measure marks obtained by students in analytic rubrics, where each rubric was measured individually. The results revealed that students were weak in all five areas (grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, cohesion and fluency).The highest marks were gained in pronunciation, count 25%, while the lowest marks were obtained in vocabulary, 15% from the total mark allocated for this item. The results conveyed that, this group of participants was weak in all aspects that needed for speech production compared with their level (2nd year undergraduates).","PeriodicalId":384851,"journal":{"name":"International Journal online of Humanities","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating ELF Students’ Speaking Skill at Tertiary Level\",\"authors\":\"Fadiel Mohammed Musa\",\"doi\":\"10.24113/IJOHMN.V7I3.229\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study was conducted at a Sudanese university in 2021 at the end of the semester to find out the areas caused problems of speech production. The research paper seeks to answer the question: What area/s of speaking is problematic to students? Fortysix undergraduate students in first year, who were majored in the English programme involved in the test. The total population was hundred students. Analytic rubrics were used for collecting data. Tuan (2014, p. 2) states that analytic rubric“… accesses the examinee’s specific strengths and weaknesses and identifies the particular components of speaking discourse that an examinee needs to develop”. Five explicit criteria were used to test participants; i.e.: grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, cohesion and fluency. The test was conducted by two instructors who gave appropriate marks under each of five rubrics (Table 1 below). The test contents comprised some pictures and topics to speak about. Bar charts were utilized to compare and measure marks obtained by students in analytic rubrics, where each rubric was measured individually. The results revealed that students were weak in all five areas (grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, cohesion and fluency).The highest marks were gained in pronunciation, count 25%, while the lowest marks were obtained in vocabulary, 15% from the total mark allocated for this item. The results conveyed that, this group of participants was weak in all aspects that needed for speech production compared with their level (2nd year undergraduates).\",\"PeriodicalId\":384851,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal online of Humanities\",\"volume\":\"73 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal online of Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24113/IJOHMN.V7I3.229\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal online of Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24113/IJOHMN.V7I3.229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该研究于2021年学期末在苏丹一所大学进行,目的是找出导致语音产生问题的领域。这篇研究论文试图回答这样一个问题:学生说话的哪个方面有问题?46名英语专业的一年级本科生参与了测试。学生总数为100人。数据收集采用分析规则。Tuan (2014, p. 2)指出,分析性标题“……获取考生的具体优势和劣势,并确定考生需要发展的口语话语的特定组成部分”。五个明确的标准用于测试参与者;即:语法、词汇、发音、衔接和流利。测试由两名教师进行,他们在五个标准下分别给出适当的分数(见表1)。测试内容包括一些图片和话题。柱状图用于比较和测量学生在分析分类中获得的分数,其中每个分类都是单独测量的。结果显示,学生在五个方面(语法、词汇、标点、衔接和流利性)都很弱。发音得分最高,占25%,词汇得分最低,占该项目总分的15%。结果表明,与二年级学生相比,这组学生在言语产生所需的各个方面都很弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evaluating ELF Students’ Speaking Skill at Tertiary Level
This study was conducted at a Sudanese university in 2021 at the end of the semester to find out the areas caused problems of speech production. The research paper seeks to answer the question: What area/s of speaking is problematic to students? Fortysix undergraduate students in first year, who were majored in the English programme involved in the test. The total population was hundred students. Analytic rubrics were used for collecting data. Tuan (2014, p. 2) states that analytic rubric“… accesses the examinee’s specific strengths and weaknesses and identifies the particular components of speaking discourse that an examinee needs to develop”. Five explicit criteria were used to test participants; i.e.: grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, cohesion and fluency. The test was conducted by two instructors who gave appropriate marks under each of five rubrics (Table 1 below). The test contents comprised some pictures and topics to speak about. Bar charts were utilized to compare and measure marks obtained by students in analytic rubrics, where each rubric was measured individually. The results revealed that students were weak in all five areas (grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, cohesion and fluency).The highest marks were gained in pronunciation, count 25%, while the lowest marks were obtained in vocabulary, 15% from the total mark allocated for this item. The results conveyed that, this group of participants was weak in all aspects that needed for speech production compared with their level (2nd year undergraduates).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Establishing Relationship between Emotional Prosody and Affective Pragmatics Hegemonising Post-Humanism and the Future of Education Is it a Curse or a Blessing? Black Elk’s Attitude towards his Vision in Neihardt Black Elk Speaks Mangrove the Head of an Intricate Joint Family Immortal Mahakali and Her Mortal Critics
×
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