区分学生写作能力的语言特征与CEFR水平

IF 3.6 1区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS Applied Linguistics Pub Date : 2023-09-22 DOI:10.1093/applin/amad054
Hong Ma, Jinglei Wang, Lianzhen He
{"title":"区分学生写作能力的语言特征与CEFR水平","authors":"Hong Ma, Jinglei Wang, Lianzhen He","doi":"10.1093/applin/amad054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A substantive body of research has been revolving around the linguistic features that distinguish different levels of students’ writing samples (e.g. Crossley and McNamara 2012; McNamara et al. 2015; Lu 2017). Nevertheless, it is somewhat difficult to generalize the findings across various empirical studies, given that different criteria were adopted to measure language learners’ proficiency levels (Chen and Baker 2016). Some researchers suggested using the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe 2001) as the common standard of evaluating and describing students’ proficiency levels. Therefore, the current research intends to identify the linguistic features that distinguish students’ writing samples across CEFR levels by adopting a machine-learning method, decision tree, which provides the direct visualization of decisions made in each step of the classification procedure. The linguistic features that emerged as predicative of CEFR levels could be employed to (i) inform L2 writing instruction, (ii) track long-term development of writing ability, and (iii) facilitate experts’ judgment in the practice of aligning writing tests/samples with CEFR.","PeriodicalId":48234,"journal":{"name":"Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Linguistic Features Distinguishing Students’ Writing Ability Aligned with CEFR Levels\",\"authors\":\"Hong Ma, Jinglei Wang, Lianzhen He\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/applin/amad054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A substantive body of research has been revolving around the linguistic features that distinguish different levels of students’ writing samples (e.g. Crossley and McNamara 2012; McNamara et al. 2015; Lu 2017). Nevertheless, it is somewhat difficult to generalize the findings across various empirical studies, given that different criteria were adopted to measure language learners’ proficiency levels (Chen and Baker 2016). Some researchers suggested using the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe 2001) as the common standard of evaluating and describing students’ proficiency levels. Therefore, the current research intends to identify the linguistic features that distinguish students’ writing samples across CEFR levels by adopting a machine-learning method, decision tree, which provides the direct visualization of decisions made in each step of the classification procedure. The linguistic features that emerged as predicative of CEFR levels could be employed to (i) inform L2 writing instruction, (ii) track long-term development of writing ability, and (iii) facilitate experts’ judgment in the practice of aligning writing tests/samples with CEFR.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amad054\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amad054","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大量的研究围绕着区分不同水平学生写作样本的语言特征展开(例如,Crossley和McNamara,2012;McNamara等人2015;鲁2017)。然而,鉴于采用了不同的标准来衡量语言学习者的熟练程度,在各种实证研究中推广这些发现有些困难(Chen和Baker,2016)。一些研究人员建议使用欧洲通用语言参考框架(CEFR)(欧洲委员会,2001年)作为评估和描述学生熟练程度的通用标准。因此,目前的研究旨在通过采用机器学习方法决策树来识别区分不同CEFR级别学生写作样本的语言特征,决策树可以直接可视化分类过程中每一步的决策。作为CEFR水平的表语出现的语言特征可以用来(i)为二语写作教学提供信息,(ii)跟踪写作能力的长期发展,以及(iii)在将写作测试/样本与CEFR相结合的实践中促进专家的判断。
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
Linguistic Features Distinguishing Students’ Writing Ability Aligned with CEFR Levels
A substantive body of research has been revolving around the linguistic features that distinguish different levels of students’ writing samples (e.g. Crossley and McNamara 2012; McNamara et al. 2015; Lu 2017). Nevertheless, it is somewhat difficult to generalize the findings across various empirical studies, given that different criteria were adopted to measure language learners’ proficiency levels (Chen and Baker 2016). Some researchers suggested using the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe 2001) as the common standard of evaluating and describing students’ proficiency levels. Therefore, the current research intends to identify the linguistic features that distinguish students’ writing samples across CEFR levels by adopting a machine-learning method, decision tree, which provides the direct visualization of decisions made in each step of the classification procedure. The linguistic features that emerged as predicative of CEFR levels could be employed to (i) inform L2 writing instruction, (ii) track long-term development of writing ability, and (iii) facilitate experts’ judgment in the practice of aligning writing tests/samples with CEFR.
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
Applied Linguistics
Applied Linguistics LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Applied Linguistics publishes research into language with relevance to real-world problems. The journal is keen to help make connections between fields, theories, research methods, and scholarly discourses, and welcomes contributions which critically reflect on current practices in applied linguistic research. It promotes scholarly and scientific discussion of issues that unite or divide scholars in applied linguistics. It is less interested in the ad hoc solution of particular problems and more interested in the handling of problems in a principled way by reference to theoretical studies.
期刊最新文献
‘Mentor, friend, teacher, and learner’: The beauty, opportunities, and challenges of heritage speakers as heritage language educators Processing Pronouns of Address in a Job Interview in French and German Back to Basics in Measuring Lexical Diversity: Too Simple to Be True L2 Pragmatic Development in Constructing and Negotiating Contextual Meanings The Discourse of Digital Activism: A Linguistic Analysis of Calls for Action Concerning the Fashion Revolution
×
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