1887
Volume 2, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2666-1748
  • E-ISSN: 2666-1756
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study aims to investigate whether a short training, during which a group of native Italian university students used the scale for Functional Adequacy (FA) developed by Kuiken and Vedder (2017) to assess texts written by their peers and their own texts, lead them to improve their L1 writing skills. The participants were assigned to an experimental ( = 15) and a control group ( = 15). A pre-test / treatment / post-test design was adopted. Results showed that the participants in the experimental condition benefited from the instructional treatment, but the gains they had in comparison to the control group were not statistically significant.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/task.21011.nuz
2022-06-20
2022-08-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andorno, C.
    (2014) Una semplice informalità? Le e-mail di studenti a docenti universitari come apprendistato di registri formali. InM. Cerruti, E. Corino, & C. Onesti (Eds.), Lingue in contesto. Studi di linguistica e glottodidattica sulla variazione diafasica (pp. 13–32). Edizioni Dell’Orso.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Caffi, C.
    (1991) Aspetti pragmatici e testuali delle introduzioni a tesi di laurea e specializzazione in materie scientifiche. InC. Lavinio, & A. Sobrero (Eds.), La lingua degli studenti universitari (pp. 71–98). La Nuova Italia.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cortés Velásquez, D., & Nuzzo, E.
    (2017) Assessing L1 functional adequacy: Can we use the same scale as for L2?Paper presented at theSeventh International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching, Barcelona, April 19–21.
  4. Del Bono, F.
    (2017) Aspetti pragmatici nella valutazione di testi scritti: Uno studio dell’adeguatezza funzionale in italiano L2. Unpublished MA dissertation, Roma Tre University.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Faone, S., Pagliara, F., & Vitale, G.
    (2017) How to assess L2 information-gap tasks through functional adequacy rating scales. Paper presented at theSeventh International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching, Barcelona, April 19–21.
  6. Fiorentino, G.
    (2015) Aspetti problematici del discorso accademico: Un’analisi dei riassunti delle tesi di laurea. Cuadernos de Filología Italiana, 22, 263–284. 10.5209/rev_CFIT.2015.v22.50961
    https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_CFIT.2015.v22.50961 [Google Scholar]
  7. James, L. R., Demaree, L. G., & Wolf, G.
    (1984) Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85–98. 10.1037/0021‑9010.69.1.85
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85 [Google Scholar]
  8. Jameson, D. A.
    (2007) Literacy in decline: Untangling the evidence. Business Communication Quarterly, 70, 16–33. 10.1177/1080569906297923
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569906297923 [Google Scholar]
  9. Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I.
    (2014) Rating written performance: What do raters do and why?Language Testing, 31(3), 329–348. 10.1177/0265532214526174
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214526174 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2017) Functional adequacy in L2 writing. Towards a new rating scale. Language Testing, 34(3), 321–336. 10.1177/0265532216663991
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532216663991 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2018) Assessing functional adequacy of L2 performance in a task-based approach. InN. Taguchi, & Y. Kim (Eds.), Task-based approaches to teaching and assessing pragmatics (pp. 265–285). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.10.11kui
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.10.11kui [Google Scholar]
  12. Lavinio, C., & Sobrero, A.
    (1991) La lingua degli studenti universitari. La Nuova Italia.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. LeBreton, J. M., Burgess, J. R. D., Kaiser, R. B., Atchley, E. K. P., & James, L. R.
    (2003) The restriction of variance hypothesis and interrater reliability and agreement: Are ratings from multiple sources really dissimilar?Organizational Research Methods, 6(1), 80–128. 10.1177/1094428102239427
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428102239427 [Google Scholar]
  14. May, G. L., Thompson, M. A., & Hebblethwaite, J.
    (2012) A process for assessing and improving business writing at the MBA level. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(3), 252–270. 10.1177/1080569912441822
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569912441822 [Google Scholar]
  15. Nuzzo, E., & Bove, G.
    (2020) Assessing functional adequacy across tasks: A comparison of learners’ and native speakers’ written texts. EuroAmerican Journal of Applied Linguistics and Languages. 10.21283/2376905X.12.175
    https://doi.org/10.21283/2376905X.12.175 [Google Scholar]
  16. Orrù, P.
    (2019) Misurare l’adeguatezza funzionale in testi scritti di apprendenti di italiano L2. Italiano LinguaDue11(1), 45–58. 10.13130/2037‑3597/443
    https://doi.org/10.13130/2037-3597/443 [Google Scholar]
  17. Orrù, P., & Foti, E.
    (2020) Valutare coerenza e coesione in produzioni scritte di apprendenti L2: Un confronto tra i giudizi dei valutatori e i descrittori delle scale per l’adeguatezza funzionale. InE. Nuzzo, E. Santoro, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Valutazione e misurazione delle produzioni orali e scritte in italiano lingua seconda (pp. 83–92). Franco Cesati.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Pagliara, F.
    (2017) Valutare l’adeguatezza funzionale in produzioni scritte di studenti Marco Polo. Paper presented at theconference Dieci anni di didattica dell’italiano a studenti cinesi. Risultati, esperimenti, proposte, Siena (Italy), October 6–7.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2018) L’analisi dei bisogni nel TBLT: Un caso di studio sull’italiano come lingua della comunicazione accademica. InD. Cortés Velásquez, & E. Nuzzo (Eds.), Il task nell’insegnamento delle lingue. Percorsi tra ricerca e didattica al CLA di Roma Tre (pp. 77–104). Roma TrE-Press. romatrepress.uniroma3.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/1801-3589-1-SM.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (2021) La competenza pragmatica nelle interazioni con i professori universitari: Un confronto tra studenti parlanti nativi e parlanti non nativi di italiano. Doctoral dissertation. Roma Tre University.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Perin, D.
    (2013) Literacy skills among academically underprepared students. Community College Review, 41(2), 118–136. Retrieved fromwww.tandfonline.com/loi/ucrl20. 10.1177/0091552113484057
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552113484057 [Google Scholar]
  22. Piemontese, E.
    (2000) (Ed.)., I bisogni linguistici delle nuove generazioni. La Nuova Italia.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Pinto, M. A., Iliceto, P.
    (2007) TAM-3 Test di abilità metalinguistiche n.3. Fascia adolescente-adulta. Carocci.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Prada, M.
    (2009) Le competenze di scrittura e le interazioni comunicative attraverso lo scritto: Problemi e prospettive per una didattica della scrittura. Italiano LinguaDue1, 232–278. 10.13130/2037‑3597/443
    https://doi.org/10.13130/2037-3597/443 [Google Scholar]
  25. Vedder, I.
    (2016) Il ruolo dell’adeguatezza funzionale nelle produzioni scritte in lingua seconda: Proposta per una scala di valutazione. InE. Santoro, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Pragmatica e interculturalità in italiano lingua seconda (pp. 79–92). Franco Cesati.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/task.21011.nuz
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/task.21011.nuz
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error