任务型语言测试中的任务难度研究
2009-12
上海外语教育出版社
罗少茜
421
“任务”被认为是评价学习者语言运用能力的有效工具，但如何确定任务的难度却一直是个悬而未决的问题。本书在收集大量相关数据的基础上，系统研究了这一课题，构建了以“输入—信息处理—输出”为核心的任务难度分析框架，并利用一系列综合因素对测试任务进行难度分析。这一研究为分析语言测试中的任务难度提供了可靠的理论依据，为测试者选择任务提供了分析的模板。本书对于如何进行任务型语言评价研究具有较高的参考价值。
Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 The Nature of the Problem 1.2 Defining the Problem 1.3 Purpose of Investigations 1.4 Significance of the Study 1.5 Organization of ThesisChapter2 English Teaching and Language Testing in China 2.1 English Education in China 2.1.1 Student Population 2.1.2 Teacher Resources 2.1.3 Instructional Time for Language Learning 2.1.4 Management System 2.1.5 Textbooks and Teaching Resources 2.1.6 Trends of Development 2.2 Communicative Language Teaching and the National English Curriculum Standards 2.2.1 Communicative Language Teaching 2.2.2 The National English Curriculum Standards 2.3 Current Problems in English Teaching in Schools 2.3.1 The Curriculum Objectives and Language Assessment 2.3.2 Curriculum, Teaching and Testing: Problems 2.4 Task-Based Approaches to the Problems 2.4.1 Task-Based Language Teaching: Challenges 2.4.2 Task-BasedAssessment 2.5 SummaryChapter 3 Literature Review: Language Testing, Task-Based Assessment, and Task Difficulty 3.1 Language Testing: Issues and Problems 3.2 Communicative Language Testing 3.2.1 Basic Issues 3.2.2 Commtmicative Tests: Models 3.3 Task-Based Approaches and Performance Assessment 3.3.1 Some Research Questions in Task-Based Approaches 3.3.2 Task-Based Approaches to Testing 3.3.3 Cognitive Dimensions: Information-ProcessingApproaches 3.3.4 Implications for Language Assessment 3.4 Assessing Task Difficulty 3.4.1 Defining Task Difficulty 3.4.2 Sequencing Tasks: Rationale and Task Difficulty Factors 3.4.3 Designing Tasks 3.5 Task Difficulty Matrix 3.5.1 The Norris-Brown et aL's Studies 3.5.2 Problematizing Norris et al 's Matrix 3.6 Rater Training and Objective Measures 3.6.1 Task Difficulty Matrix: Rater Training 3.6.2 Measuring Task Performance: The Discourse Analysis MeasuresChapter 4 Research Methods 4.1 Research Design 4.2 Method 4.2.1 Participants 4.2.2 Effective Tasks 4.2.3 Establishing the Difficulty of Tasks 4.2.4 Qualitative Analyses 4.2.5 Rater Training 4.2.6 Measuring Student Written Performance 4.3 Data Summary and Data Analysis 4.3.1 TBAReliability 4.3.2 TBA Validity 4.3.3 Data AnalysisChapter 5 Task Difficulty Matrix I: Evolving the IPO Task Difficulty Matrix 5.1 Application of Norris et aL's Matrix 5.1.1 Study One: Application of Norris et al.'s Matrix 5.1.2 Studies Two, Three, and Four: Applications of the Norris et al.'s Matrix 5.2 The Input-Processing-Output Task Difficulty Matrix 5.2.1 Establishing the Matrix: Input-Processing--Output by Content-Form-Support 5.2.2 Study Five: Applying the IPO-CFS Task Difficulty Framework 5.2.3 StudySix: Refining the Task Difficulty Framework : IPOby Extended CFS 5.2.4 Study Seven : Refining the Task Difficulty Frarnework : IPO by Extended CFS 5.2.5 Self-Report Written Data 5.2.6 Study Eight: Refining the Task Difficulty Framework:Integrated IPO by ILPS 5.3 Task Difficulty Component Analysis 5.3.1 Component Analysis and the Refined IPO Matrix 5.3.2 StudyNine: Refining the Task Difficulty Framework : IPOby Reduced ILPS 5.3.3 StudyTen: Refining the Task Difficulty Framework : IPOby Reduced ILPSChapter 6 IPO Task Difficulty Matrix II: Dimensions and Components 6.1 The Construction of the Task Difficulty Matrix 6.1.1 Definitions of Dimensions and Their Characteristics 6.1.2 Definitions of the Task Components in Operational Terms 6.2 ACompadson between Brown etal.'s Matrix and the IPO Task Difficulty Matrix 6.2.1 Similarities 6.2.2 Differences 6.3 The Original Research Questions 6.3.1 Research Question 1 6.3.2 Research Question 2 6.3.3 Research Question 3 6.3.4 Research Question 4 6.4 SummaryChapter 7 Rater Training for IPO Task Difficulty Matrix 7.1 Rationale 7.2 Study 11: A Pilot Study for Rater Training 7.2.1 Materials and Raters 7.2.2 Procedures 7.2.3 Results 7.3 Study 12: Establishing Expert Ratings 7.3.1 Tasks and Instruments 7.3.2 Experts and Procedures 7.3.3 Results 7.4 Study 13: Rater Training 7.4.1 Raters and Materials 7.4.2 Procedures 7.4.3 Results 7.5 Discussion and Implications 7.5.l Discussion: Rater Training and Standardization 7.5.2 Implications for the Rater TrainingChapter 8 Discourse Measures for Student Performance 8.1 Research Methods 8.1.1 Participants 8.1.2 Writing Tasks 8.1.3 Task Instructions and Formats 8.1.4 Discourse Analysis Measures 8.1.5 Setting and Procedures 8.2 Results and Analysis 8.2.1 Discourse Measure Results 8.2.2 Discourse Measure Correlations 8.2.3 Analytical Rating Results and Discourse Measures 8.2.4 Students' Perceptions of the Writing Tasks 8.3 Discussions and Impact of Conditions on Discourse Measures 8.4 ConclusionsChapter 9 Conclusions and Implications 9.1 Summary of Research Findings 9.2 Implications, Reflections, and Future Research 9.2.1 Tasks and Task-Based Assessment 9.2.2 Language Teaching and Learning 9.2.3 Reflections and Limitations 9.2.4 Suggestions for Future Research 9.3 ConclusionsReferencesAppendices
