第二语言学术写作产品、过程和自我调节策略使用的诊断性评估:比较维度

IF 1.4 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Language Assessment Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-04-25 DOI:10.1080/15434303.2021.1903470
Qin Xie, Yuqing Lei
{"title":"第二语言学术写作产品、过程和自我调节策略使用的诊断性评估:比较维度","authors":"Qin Xie, Yuqing Lei","doi":"10.1080/15434303.2021.1903470","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This research conducted diagnostic assessment of problems in first-year undergraduates’ English academic papers and tracked potential sources of the problems to the writing process and strategy use. Data collected include 339 term papers and interviews with 17 students. The samples were manually error tagged and marked against a detailed diagnostic checklist. The resultant textual features were then compared between two subgroups of Chinese students in the sample, namely, those graduating from local schools in Hong Kong (LS) and those coming from the mainland and sojourning in Hong Kong (MS). The analyses found both groups had the poorest performance in source integration and vocabulary use. LS used simpler words and made more grammatical errors, whereas MS attempted sophisticated vocabulary more successfully and used a wider variety of words and sentence structures. The difficulties they experienced, however, were rather similar, residing mainly at the researching, planning and formulating stages. Action control theory was introduced to interpret the self-regulatory strategies they adopted to cope with perceived difficulties during the writing process. Strategies to control goals, control resources, and control cognitive load were found to be the most typical. While these strategies could reduce their difficulties, only some seemed also to help with performance. A conceptual framework is proposed at the end to link writing products, process and self-regulatory control strategies as evidenced in the study. Four diagnoses are drawn with suggestions for practice and further research.","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/10.1080/15434303.2021.1903470","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Assessment of L2 Academic Writing Product, Process and Self-regulatory Strategy Use with a Comparative Dimension\",\"authors\":\"Qin Xie, Yuqing Lei\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15434303.2021.1903470\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This research conducted diagnostic assessment of problems in first-year undergraduates’ English academic papers and tracked potential sources of the problems to the writing process and strategy use. Data collected include 339 term papers and interviews with 17 students. The samples were manually error tagged and marked against a detailed diagnostic checklist. The resultant textual features were then compared between two subgroups of Chinese students in the sample, namely, those graduating from local schools in Hong Kong (LS) and those coming from the mainland and sojourning in Hong Kong (MS). The analyses found both groups had the poorest performance in source integration and vocabulary use. LS used simpler words and made more grammatical errors, whereas MS attempted sophisticated vocabulary more successfully and used a wider variety of words and sentence structures. The difficulties they experienced, however, were rather similar, residing mainly at the researching, planning and formulating stages. Action control theory was introduced to interpret the self-regulatory strategies they adopted to cope with perceived difficulties during the writing process. Strategies to control goals, control resources, and control cognitive load were found to be the most typical. While these strategies could reduce their difficulties, only some seemed also to help with performance. A conceptual framework is proposed at the end to link writing products, process and self-regulatory control strategies as evidenced in the study. Four diagnoses are drawn with suggestions for practice and further research.\",\"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/10.1080/15434303.2021.1903470\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Language Assessment Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2021.1903470\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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 Assessment Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2021.1903470","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: 6

摘要

摘要本研究对本科一年级英语学术论文中存在的问题进行了诊断性评估,并从写作过程和策略使用两个方面追踪问题的潜在来源。收集的数据包括339篇学期论文和对17名学生的访谈。根据详细的诊断清单,对样品进行手动错误标记和标记。然后比较样本中两组中国学生的文本特征,即从香港本地学校毕业的学生(LS)和来自大陆并在香港逗留的学生(MS)。分析发现,两组学生在资源整合和词汇使用方面表现最差。LS使用更简单的单词,犯更多的语法错误,而MS更成功地尝试了复杂的词汇,使用了更多种类的单词和句子结构。然而,他们所经历的困难是相当相似的,主要存在于研究、规划和制订阶段。本文引入动作控制理论来解释他们在写作过程中为应对感知困难而采取的自我调节策略。目标控制策略、资源控制策略和认知负荷控制策略最为典型。虽然这些策略可以减少他们的困难,但似乎只有一些策略也有助于他们的表现。最后提出了一个概念框架,将写作产品、过程和自我调节控制策略联系起来。提出了四种诊断方法,并对实践和进一步研究提出了建议。
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
Diagnostic Assessment of L2 Academic Writing Product, Process and Self-regulatory Strategy Use with a Comparative Dimension
ABSTRACT This research conducted diagnostic assessment of problems in first-year undergraduates’ English academic papers and tracked potential sources of the problems to the writing process and strategy use. Data collected include 339 term papers and interviews with 17 students. The samples were manually error tagged and marked against a detailed diagnostic checklist. The resultant textual features were then compared between two subgroups of Chinese students in the sample, namely, those graduating from local schools in Hong Kong (LS) and those coming from the mainland and sojourning in Hong Kong (MS). The analyses found both groups had the poorest performance in source integration and vocabulary use. LS used simpler words and made more grammatical errors, whereas MS attempted sophisticated vocabulary more successfully and used a wider variety of words and sentence structures. The difficulties they experienced, however, were rather similar, residing mainly at the researching, planning and formulating stages. Action control theory was introduced to interpret the self-regulatory strategies they adopted to cope with perceived difficulties during the writing process. Strategies to control goals, control resources, and control cognitive load were found to be the most typical. While these strategies could reduce their difficulties, only some seemed also to help with performance. A conceptual framework is proposed at the end to link writing products, process and self-regulatory control strategies as evidenced in the study. Four diagnoses are drawn with suggestions for practice and further research.
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
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