Linguistic, cultural and substantive patterns in L2 writing: A qualitative illustration of MisLevy’s sociocognitive perspective on assessment

Tan, Tony Xing; Fan, Xiaojun; Braunstein, Lauren B.; Lane‐Holbert, Mark

doi:10.1016/j.asw.2021.100574

Cited by 7 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These distinctions result in unique histories, needs, interests, experiences, and linguistic backgrounds that affect diverse groups of students in terms of their writing behaviors and performance. This assertion is supported by Graham’s (2018) writer(s)-within-community model and other scholarly studies (e.g., Fan et al, 2019; Lindsey & Crusan, 2011; Tan et al, 2022). Consequently, our study includes students’ demographic characteristics as controlling variables, going beyond linguistic and register-related factors, to account for the influence of sociocultural and linguistic differences on actual writing scores.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Writing Quality Predictive Modeling: Integrating Register-Related Factors

Wang,

Troia

2023

Written Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the degree to which register knowledge, register-specific motivation, and diverse linguistic features are predictive of human judgment of writing quality in three registers—narrative, informative, and opinion. The secondary purpose is to compare the evaluation metrics of register-partitioned automated writing evaluation models in three conditions: (1) register-related factors alone, (2) linguistic features alone, and (3) the combination of these two. A total of 1006 essays ( n = 327, 342, and 337 for informative, narrative, and opinion, respectively) written by 92 fourth- and fifth-graders were examined. A series of hierarchical linear regression analyses controlling for the effects of demographics were conducted to select the most useful features to capture text quality, scored by humans, in the three registers. These features were in turn entered into automated writing evaluation predictive models with tuning of the parameters in a tenfold cross-validation procedure. The average validity coefficients (i.e., quadratic-weighed kappa, Pearson correlation r, standardized mean score difference, score deviation analysis) were computed. The results demonstrate that (1) diverse feature sets are utilized to predict quality in the three registers, and (2) the combination of register-related factors and linguistic features increases the accuracy and validity of all human and automated scoring models, especially for the registers of informative and opinion writing. The findings from this study suggest that students’ register knowledge and register-specific motivation add additional predictive information when evaluating writing quality across registers beyond that afforded by linguistic features of the paper itself, whether using human scoring or automated evaluation. These findings have practical implications for educational practitioners and scholars in that they can help strengthen consideration of register-specific writing skills and cognitive and motivational forces that are essential components of effective writing instruction and assessment.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Writing Quality Predictive Modeling: Integrating Register-Related Factors

Wang,

Troia

2023

Written Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, some examinees in East Asia, who have not attended Western-style high schools, will likely respond differently than examinees from South Africa or [more differently still] the United States. And stylistic differences will also differ within these populations depending on a wide range of cultural and social norms and expectations (e.g., rules/expectations with respect to humility), all mediated by who the respondent perceives to be the intended audience (Tan et al, 2022). To articulate the writing ability construct in such a way that privileges responses, which reflect the cultural norms and rules of engagement of White elite Americans will inevitably result in inaccurate (and typically deficit-oriented) interpretations about what other populations know and are able to do.…”

Section: Construct Articulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Our validity looks like justice. Does yours?

Randall,

Poe,

Slomp

et al. 2023

Language Testing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Educational assessments, from kindergarden to 12th grade (K-12) to licensure, have a long, well-documented history of oppression and marginalization. In this paper, we (the authors) ask the field of educational assessment/measurement to actively disrupt the White supremacist and racist logics that fuel this marginalization and re-orient itself toward assessment justice. We describe how a justice-oriented, antiracist validity (JAV) approach to validation processes can support assessment justice efforts, specifically with respect to language assessment. Relying on antiracist principles and critical quantitative methodologies, a JAV approach proposes a set of critical questions to consider when gathering validity evidence, with potential utility for language testers.

show abstract

“…From the perspective of cultural factors, there are some issues caused by cultural difference. Cultural differences can also affect Chinese students' English argumentative writing (Roose, 2022;Tan et al, 2021). The cultural context in which students are raised significantly shapes their perceptions, values, and communication styles, all of which impact their writing abilities (Roose, 2022;Tan et al, 2021).…”

Section: Issues With Chinese Efl Undergraduate Students' English Argu...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cultural differences can also affect Chinese students' English argumentative writing (Roose, 2022;Tan et al, 2021). The cultural context in which students are raised significantly shapes their perceptions, values, and communication styles, all of which impact their writing abilities (Roose, 2022;Tan et al, 2021). In Chinese culture, it is often valued to present ideas in a more indirect or implicit manner, which can clash with the direct and explicit nature of English argumentative writing ( Fan & See, 2022;Tan et al, 2021;Yang, 2022).Chinese students may rely heavily on personal opinions or general statements without providing sufficient evidence or critical analysis ( Fan & See, 2022;Pei et al, 2017;Roose, 2022).…”

Section: Issues With Chinese Efl Undergraduate Students' English Argu...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of Flipped Classroom Model on English Argumentative Writing Performance Among Chinese EFL Undergraduate Students

Dan,

Noordin,

binti Ahmad

et al. 2023

IJARBSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The utilization of the Flipped Classroom Model has gained prominence as an innovative approach to enhancing educational outcomes. This study explores its application within the realm of English argumentative writing among Chinese EFL (English as a Foreign Language) undergraduate students. The research delves into the intersection of modern pedagogical methods and language skill development, investigating how the Flipped Classroom Model impacts argumentative writing performance. By combining pre-class content consumption and interactive in-class activities, the model aims to foster deeper engagement, critical thinking, and self-directed learning. This study examines the motivations, strengths, and challenges associated with this integration and evaluates its contributions to students' academic and personal growth. This conceptual paper aims to explore the potential of the utilization of the Flipped Classroom Model for cultivating proficient argumentative writing skills in Chinese EFL undergraduate students and provide teaching instructions for using the Flipped Classroom Model for EFL learners in English argumentative writing classrooms.

show abstract

Linguistic, cultural and substantive patterns in L2 writing: A qualitative illustration of MisLevy’s sociocognitive perspective on assessment

Cited by 7 publications

References 51 publications

Writing Quality Predictive Modeling: Integrating Register-Related Factors

Writing Quality Predictive Modeling: Integrating Register-Related Factors

Our validity looks like justice. Does yours?

Utilization of Flipped Classroom Model on English Argumentative Writing Performance Among Chinese EFL Undergraduate Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About