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

Abstract

Abstract

This study looks at the correlation between functional adequacy (FA), holistically assessed, and analytic linguistic measures, in a corpus of texts written by Italian monolingual and multilingual primary school pupils. Texts were first evaluated using the FA rating scales by Kuiken and Vedder (20172018), plus one for Coherence & Cohesion from the CEFR (Council of Europe, 2001′). They were then coded for a number of features directly bearing on FA and its subdimensions. Results show correlations between holistic scores and analytic measures, such as those between Content and the number of words or secondary idea units ( = .59 / .65). Others were less strong, yet going in the expected direction, e.g. more ambiguous referential expressions were negatively correlated to Comprehensibility. Correlations were generally stronger for monolingual than for multilingual children.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/task.21014.pal
2022-06-20
2022-08-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bartning, I., Martin, M., & Vedder, I.
    (Eds.) (2010) Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research. European Second Language Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Biber, D., Gray, B., & Staples, S.
    (2016) Predicting patterns of grammatical complexity across language exam task types and proficiency levels. Applied Linguistics, 37(5), 639–668. 10.1093/applin/amu059
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu059 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K.
    (1972) Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 717–726. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(72)80006‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80006-9 [Google Scholar]
  4. Council of Europe
    Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Council of Europe.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Covington, M., & McFall, J.
    (2010) Cutting the Gordian knot: The Moving-Average Type–Token Ratio (MATTR). Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 17(2), 94–100. 10.1080/09296171003643098
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09296171003643098 [Google Scholar]
  6. Crossley, S.
    (2020) Linguistic features in writing quality and development: An overview. Journal of Writing Research, 11(3), 415–443. 10.17239/jowr‑2020.11.03.01
    https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2020.11.03.01 [Google Scholar]
  7. De Jong, N., Steinel, M. P., Florijn, A. F., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H.
    (2012) The effect of task complexity on functional adequacy, fluency and lexical diversity in speaking performances of native and non-native speakers. InA. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency – Investigating complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 121–142). John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.32.06jon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.06jon [Google Scholar]
  8. Douglas, D.
    (1994) Quantity and quality in speaking test performance. Language Testing, 11(2), 125–144. 10.1177/026553229401100203
    https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229401100203 [Google Scholar]
  9. Durrant, P., & Durrant, A.
    (2022) Appropriateness as an aspect of lexical richness: What do quantitative measures tell us about children’s writing?Assessing Writing, 51, 100596. 10.1016/j.asw.2021.100596
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100596 [Google Scholar]
  10. Fox, J., & Bouchet-Valat, M. [Google Scholar]
  11. Fulcher, G.
    (1996) Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction. Language Testing, 13(2), 208–238. 10.1177/026553229601300205
    https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229601300205 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2015) Re-examining language testing: A philosophical and social enquiry. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315695518
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315695518 [Google Scholar]
  13. Grömping, U.
    (2006) Relative importance for linear regression in R: The Package relaimpo. Journal of Statistical Software, 17(1), 1–27. 10.18637/jss.v017.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v017.i01 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2015) Variable importance in regression models. WIREs Computational Statistics, 7(2), 137–152. 10.1002/wics.1346
    https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.1346 [Google Scholar]
  15. Gu, L., & Hsieh, C.-N.
    (2019) Distinguishing features of young English language learners’ oral performance. Language Assessment Quarterly, 16(2), 180–195. 10.1080/15434303.2019.1605518
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1605518 [Google Scholar]
  16. Guiraud, P.
    (1954) Les caractères statistiques du vocabulaire. Essai de méthodologie. Presses Universitaires de France.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Hulstijn, J. H., Schoonen, R., De Jong, N. H., Steinel, M. P., & Florijn, A.
    (2012) Linguistic competences of learners of Dutch as a second language at the B1 and B2 levels of speaking proficiency of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Language Testing, 29(2), 203–221. 10.1177/0265532211419826
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532211419826 [Google Scholar]
  18. Iwashita, N., Brown, A., McNamara, T., & O’Hagan, S.
    (2008) Assessed levels of second language speaking proficiency: How distinct?Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 24–49. 10.1093/applin/amm017
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm017 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kersten, K.
    (2009) Verbal inflections in L2 child narratives. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Khushik, G. A., & Huhta, A.
    (2020) Investigating syntactic complexity in EFL learners’ writing across Common European Framework of Reference Levels A1, A2, and B1. Applied Linguistics, 41(4), 506–532. 10.1093/applin/amy064
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy064 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I.
    (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]
  22. (2018) Assessing functional adequacy of L2 performance in a task-based approach. InN. Taguchi & Y. Kim (Eds.), Task-Based Language Teaching (pp. 266–285). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.10.11kui
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.10.11kui [Google Scholar]
  23. Kuiken, F., Vedder, I., & Gilabert, R.
    (2010) Communicative adequacy and linguistic complexity in L2 writing. InI. Bartning, M. Martin, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research (pp. 81–100). European Second Language Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lahuerta Martínez, A. C.
    (2018) Analysis of syntactic complexity in secondary education EFL writers at different proficiency levels. Assessing Writing, 35, 1–11. 10.1016/j.asw.2017.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2017.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  25. Larson-Hall, J.
    (2016) A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS and R, 2nd edition. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Lee, Y. Y., & Ventura, S.
    (2017) Lindia. Automated Linear Regression Diagnostic. https://cran.r-project.org/package=lindia
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lindeman, R. H., Merenda, P. F., & Gold, R. Z.
    (1980) Introduction to bivariate and multivariate analysis. Scott, Foresman and Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Norman, G.
    (2010) Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. 10.1007/s10459‑010‑9222‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y [Google Scholar]
  29. Olinghouse, N. G., & Wilson, J.
    (2013) The relationship between vocabulary and writing quality in three genres. Reading and Writing, 26(1), 45–65. 10.1007/s11145‑012‑9392‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-012-9392-5 [Google Scholar]
  30. Pallotti, G.
    (2009) CAF: Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 590–601. 10.1093/applin/amp045
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp045 [Google Scholar]
  31. Pallotti, G., Borghetti, C., & Rosi, F.
    (2021) Insegnare a scrivere nella scuola primaria. Caissa.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Révész, A., Ekiert, M., & Torgersen, E. N.
    (2016) The effects of complexity, accuracy, and fluency on communicative adequacy in oral task performance. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 828–848. 10.1093/applin/amu069
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu069 [Google Scholar]
  34. Roessingh, H., Nordstokke, D., & Colp, M.
    (2019) Unlocking academic literacy in Grade 4: The role of handwriting. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 35(2), 65–83. 10.1080/10573569.2018.1499160
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2018.1499160 [Google Scholar]
  35. Savignon, S. J.
    (2018) Communicative competence. InJ. I. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (pp. 1–7). John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0047
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0047 [Google Scholar]
  36. Zenker, F., & Kyle, K.
    (2021) Investigating minimum text lengths for lexical diversity indices. Assessing Writing, 47, 100505. 10.1016/j.asw.2020.100505
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100505 [Google Scholar]
  37. Skar, G. B., Lei, P.-W., Graham, S., Aasen, A. J., Johansen, M. B., & Kvistad, A. H.
    (2021) Handwriting fluency and the quality of primary grade students’ writing. Reading and Writing. 10.1007/s11145‑021‑10185‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10185-y [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/task.21014.pal
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/task.21014.pal
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): assessment; functional adequacy; primary school pupils; text quality measures; writing
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