教材可读性评价指标的可行性研究

IF 0.9 4区 文学 N/A LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics Pub Date : 2019-05-03 DOI:10.35869/VIAL.V0I16.92
Pascual Cantos Gómez, Ángela Almela Sánchez Lafuente
{"title":"教材可读性评价指标的可行性研究","authors":"Pascual Cantos Gómez, Ángela Almela Sánchez Lafuente","doi":"10.35869/VIAL.V0I16.92","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Readability indices have been widely used in order to measure textual difficulty. They can be useful for the automatic classification of texts, especially in language teaching. Among other applications, they allow for the previous determination of the difficulty level of texts without the need of reading them through. The aim of this research is twofold: first, to examine the degree of accuracy of the six most commonly used readability indices, and second, to present a new optimized measure. The main problem is that these readability indices may offer disparity, and this is precisely what has motivated our attempt to unite their potential. A discriminant analysis of all the variables under examination has enabled the creation of a much more precise model, improving the previous best results by 15%. Furthermore, errors and disparities in the difficulty level of the analyzed texts have been detected.","PeriodicalId":42598,"journal":{"name":"Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Readability indices for the assessment of textbooks: a feasibility study in the context of EFL\",\"authors\":\"Pascual Cantos Gómez, Ángela Almela Sánchez Lafuente\",\"doi\":\"10.35869/VIAL.V0I16.92\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Readability indices have been widely used in order to measure textual difficulty. They can be useful for the automatic classification of texts, especially in language teaching. Among other applications, they allow for the previous determination of the difficulty level of texts without the need of reading them through. The aim of this research is twofold: first, to examine the degree of accuracy of the six most commonly used readability indices, and second, to present a new optimized measure. The main problem is that these readability indices may offer disparity, and this is precisely what has motivated our attempt to unite their potential. A discriminant analysis of all the variables under examination has enabled the creation of a much more precise model, improving the previous best results by 15%. Furthermore, errors and disparities in the difficulty level of the analyzed texts have been detected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42598,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35869/VIAL.V0I16.92\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vial-Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35869/VIAL.V0I16.92","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

可读性指标被广泛用于衡量文本的难易程度。它们可以用于文本的自动分类,特别是在语言教学中。在其他应用程序中,它们允许预先确定文本的难度级别,而无需通读它们。本研究的目的是双重的:第一,检查六个最常用的可读性指标的准确性程度,第二,提出一个新的优化措施。主要的问题是,这些可读性指数可能会带来差异,而这正是促使我们尝试统一它们的潜力的原因。对所有被检查的变量进行判别分析,可以创建一个更精确的模型,将之前的最佳结果提高15%。此外,在分析文本的难度水平上发现了错误和差异。
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
Readability indices for the assessment of textbooks: a feasibility study in the context of EFL
Readability indices have been widely used in order to measure textual difficulty. They can be useful for the automatic classification of texts, especially in language teaching. Among other applications, they allow for the previous determination of the difficulty level of texts without the need of reading them through. The aim of this research is twofold: first, to examine the degree of accuracy of the six most commonly used readability indices, and second, to present a new optimized measure. The main problem is that these readability indices may offer disparity, and this is precisely what has motivated our attempt to unite their potential. A discriminant analysis of all the variables under examination has enabled the creation of a much more precise model, improving the previous best results by 15%. Furthermore, errors and disparities in the difficulty level of the analyzed texts have been detected.
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
2.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
How complex is professional academic writing? A corpus-based analysis of research articles in 'hard' and 'soft' disciplines Collaborative writing and patterns of interaction in young learners: The interplay between pair dynamics and pairing method in LRE production Metaphors set in motion in the context of L2 academic spoken discourse An analysis of language anxiety in English and Basque-Medium Instruction: A study with primary school students Computational analysis of adjuncts in ASD-STE100 for the NLP parser ARTEMIS
×
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