评价手语制作的挑战:瑞士德语手语形式回忆词汇测试的混合方法研究

IF 2.2 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Language Testing Pub Date : 2022-09-21 DOI:10.1177/02655322221122774
A. Batty, T. Haug, Sarah Ebling, Katja Tissi, Sandra Sidler-Miserez
{"title":"评价手语制作的挑战:瑞士德语手语形式回忆词汇测试的混合方法研究","authors":"A. Batty, T. Haug, Sarah Ebling, Katja Tissi, Sandra Sidler-Miserez","doi":"10.1177/02655322221122774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sign languages present particular challenges to language assessors in relation to variation in signs, weakly defined citation forms, and a general lack of standard-setting work even in long-established measures of productive sign proficiency. The present article addresses and explores these issues via a mixed-methods study of a human-rated form-recall sign vocabulary test of 98 signs for beginning adult learners of Swiss German Sign Language (DSGS), using post-test qualitative rater interviews to inform interpretation of the results of quantitative analysis of the test ratings using many-facets Rasch measurement. Significant differences between two expert raters were observed on three signs. The follow-up interview revealed disagreement on the criterion of correctness, despite the raters’ involvement in the development of the base lexicon of signs. The findings highlight the challenges of using human ratings to assess the production not only of sign language vocabulary, but of minority languages generally, and underscore the need for greater effort expended on the standardization of sign language assessment.","PeriodicalId":17928,"journal":{"name":"Language Testing","volume":"40 1","pages":"352 - 374"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenges in rating signed production: A mixed-methods study of a Swiss German Sign Language form-recall vocabulary test\",\"authors\":\"A. Batty, T. Haug, Sarah Ebling, Katja Tissi, Sandra Sidler-Miserez\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02655322221122774\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sign languages present particular challenges to language assessors in relation to variation in signs, weakly defined citation forms, and a general lack of standard-setting work even in long-established measures of productive sign proficiency. The present article addresses and explores these issues via a mixed-methods study of a human-rated form-recall sign vocabulary test of 98 signs for beginning adult learners of Swiss German Sign Language (DSGS), using post-test qualitative rater interviews to inform interpretation of the results of quantitative analysis of the test ratings using many-facets Rasch measurement. Significant differences between two expert raters were observed on three signs. The follow-up interview revealed disagreement on the criterion of correctness, despite the raters’ involvement in the development of the base lexicon of signs. The findings highlight the challenges of using human ratings to assess the production not only of sign language vocabulary, but of minority languages generally, and underscore the need for greater effort expended on the standardization of sign language assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Language Testing\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"352 - 374\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-21\",\"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/10.1177/02655322221122774\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Testing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322221122774","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

摘要

手语给语言评估师带来了特殊的挑战,包括手语的变异、定义不明确的引用形式,以及普遍缺乏标准制定工作,即使是在长期建立的生产性手语熟练度衡量标准中也是如此。本文通过对瑞士-德国手语(DSGS)初学成人的98个手势的人类评级形式回忆手势词汇测试的混合方法研究,解决并探讨了这些问题,使用测试后的定性评分者访谈,使用多方面的Rasch测量对测试评级的定量分析结果进行解释。两位专家评分者在三个体征上存在显著差异。后续采访显示,尽管评分者参与了符号基础词典的开发,但在正确性标准上存在分歧。研究结果强调了使用人类评级不仅评估手语词汇的产生,而且评估少数民族语言的产生所面临的挑战,并强调了在手语评估标准化方面需要付出更大努力。
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
Challenges in rating signed production: A mixed-methods study of a Swiss German Sign Language form-recall vocabulary test
Sign languages present particular challenges to language assessors in relation to variation in signs, weakly defined citation forms, and a general lack of standard-setting work even in long-established measures of productive sign proficiency. The present article addresses and explores these issues via a mixed-methods study of a human-rated form-recall sign vocabulary test of 98 signs for beginning adult learners of Swiss German Sign Language (DSGS), using post-test qualitative rater interviews to inform interpretation of the results of quantitative analysis of the test ratings using many-facets Rasch measurement. Significant differences between two expert raters were observed on three signs. The follow-up interview revealed disagreement on the criterion of correctness, despite the raters’ involvement in the development of the base lexicon of signs. The findings highlight the challenges of using human ratings to assess the production not only of sign language vocabulary, but of minority languages generally, and underscore the need for greater effort expended on the standardization of sign language assessment.
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
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