强制选择任务对写作知识的有效测量:使用学生写作测试知识的初步数据

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Writing Research Pub Date : 2023-03-28 DOI:10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.06
Gary Troia, Frank Lawrence, Julie Brehmer, Kaitlin Glause, Heather Reichmuth
{"title":"强制选择任务对写作知识的有效测量:使用学生写作测试知识的初步数据","authors":"Gary Troia, Frank Lawrence, Julie Brehmer, Kaitlin Glause, Heather Reichmuth","doi":"10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Much of the research that has examined the writing knowledge of school-age students has relied on interviews to ascertain this information, which is problematic because interviews may underestimate breadth and depth of writing knowledge, require lengthy interactions with participants, and do not permit a direct evaluation of a prescribed array of constituent knowledge elements. For these reasons, our goal in this study is to report the development, piloting, and field testing, using a sample of 335 students from grades 4 and 5, of four alternate versions of a writing knowledge assessment—the Student Knowledge of Writing Test (SKOWT)—that uses forced-choice responses to evaluate students’ knowledge of writing processes, genre elements, and linguistic features of written language. All versions of the SKOWT demonstrated adequate internal consistency reliability and construct validity based on exploratory factor analyses following deletion of some items. In addition, there was acceptable predictive criterion validity based on associations of SKOWT scores with subtests from the Test of Written Language-4 and measures of narrative, opinion, and informative essay quality. We discuss how the SKOWT might be used in future research and educational practice.","PeriodicalId":45632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Writing Research","volume":"278 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficient measurement of writing knowledge with forced-choice tasks: Preliminary data using the student knowledge of writing tests\",\"authors\":\"Gary Troia, Frank Lawrence, Julie Brehmer, Kaitlin Glause, Heather Reichmuth\",\"doi\":\"10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.06\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Much of the research that has examined the writing knowledge of school-age students has relied on interviews to ascertain this information, which is problematic because interviews may underestimate breadth and depth of writing knowledge, require lengthy interactions with participants, and do not permit a direct evaluation of a prescribed array of constituent knowledge elements. For these reasons, our goal in this study is to report the development, piloting, and field testing, using a sample of 335 students from grades 4 and 5, of four alternate versions of a writing knowledge assessment—the Student Knowledge of Writing Test (SKOWT)—that uses forced-choice responses to evaluate students’ knowledge of writing processes, genre elements, and linguistic features of written language. All versions of the SKOWT demonstrated adequate internal consistency reliability and construct validity based on exploratory factor analyses following deletion of some items. In addition, there was acceptable predictive criterion validity based on associations of SKOWT scores with subtests from the Test of Written Language-4 and measures of narrative, opinion, and informative essay quality. We discuss how the SKOWT might be used in future research and educational practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Writing Research\",\"volume\":\"278 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Writing Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.06\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Writing Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

许多调查学龄学生写作知识的研究都依赖于访谈来确定这些信息,这是有问题的,因为访谈可能低估了写作知识的广度和深度,需要与参与者进行长时间的互动,并且不允许对规定的一系列组成知识要素进行直接评估。基于这些原因,我们在本研究中的目标是报告写作知识评估的开发、试点和现场测试,使用来自4年级和5年级的335名学生作为样本,使用四种替代版本的写作知识评估-学生写作知识测试(SKOWT) -使用强制选择回答来评估学生对写作过程、体裁元素和书面语言特征的知识。基于探索性因素分析,所有版本的SKOWT在删除一些项目后都表现出足够的内部一致性、信度和结构效度。此外,基于SKOWT分数与书面语言测试-4的子测试以及叙事、观点和信息性文章质量测量的关联,有可接受的预测标准效度。我们讨论了如何在未来的研究和教育实践中使用SKOWT。
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
Efficient measurement of writing knowledge with forced-choice tasks: Preliminary data using the student knowledge of writing tests
Much of the research that has examined the writing knowledge of school-age students has relied on interviews to ascertain this information, which is problematic because interviews may underestimate breadth and depth of writing knowledge, require lengthy interactions with participants, and do not permit a direct evaluation of a prescribed array of constituent knowledge elements. For these reasons, our goal in this study is to report the development, piloting, and field testing, using a sample of 335 students from grades 4 and 5, of four alternate versions of a writing knowledge assessment—the Student Knowledge of Writing Test (SKOWT)—that uses forced-choice responses to evaluate students’ knowledge of writing processes, genre elements, and linguistic features of written language. All versions of the SKOWT demonstrated adequate internal consistency reliability and construct validity based on exploratory factor analyses following deletion of some items. In addition, there was acceptable predictive criterion validity based on associations of SKOWT scores with subtests from the Test of Written Language-4 and measures of narrative, opinion, and informative essay quality. We discuss how the SKOWT might be used in future research and educational practice.
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
Journal of Writing Research
Journal of Writing Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
16
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Writing Research is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes high quality theoretical, empirical, and review papers covering the broad spectrum of writing research. The Journal primarily publishes papers that describe scientific studies of the processes by which writing is produced or the means by which writing can be effectively taught. The journal is inherently cross-disciplinary, publishing original research in the different domains of writing research. The Journal of Writing Research is an open access journal (no reader fee - no author fee).
期刊最新文献
Book review | Technology in second language writing: Advances in composing, translation, writing pedagogy and data-driven learning Fleshing out your text: How elaboration and contextualization moves differentially predict writing quality Thinking outside the box: Senior scientists’ metacognitive strategy knowledge and self-regulation of writing for science communication Synthesis Writing in Science Orientation Classes: An Instructional Design Studio Advancing Civics-specific Disciplinary Writing in the Elementary Grades issue
×
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