期刊文献+

以“听读后写”为特点的医务英语写作测试评分量表研究

A study on the validity of the rating scale in a medical English writing test
下载PDF
导出
摘要 语言测试中的行为测试常和专门用途英语测试相结合。本研究设计了一项模拟现实交际任务的医务英语写作行为测试:考生扮演医生的角色并完成对某位患者的诊断过程,在获得相关信息的基础上撰写英文病历书,测试形式以"听读后写"为特点,测试具有真实性。评分量表兼顾语言技能和基于特定工作的行业技能,体现现实交际任务的评价准则。三个评分分项分别为语言运用水平、对病情的理解和把握情况、病历书的结构和逻辑。评分结果分析表明,该量表具有较好的信度和效度。该测试的任务形式和评分量表都独具特色,对类似的专门用途英语测试的开发和研究具有一定的借鉴意义。 Language performance test is usually associated with assessing of English for Specific Purposes. In this study,a medical English writing test is designed,in which the candidates are required to take the roles of doctors,to complete the process of diagnosis and then to write the formal case records based on the information about the patient. This test is of authenticity and features the format of writing after listening and reading. The rating scale of this test takes the elements of language proficiency, professional skills and assessing criteria for doctors' jobs in reality into consideration. Three dimensions,language performance proficiency,understanding and mastery of the patient's condi-tion and the structure and logic of case record, are included in the rating scales. The analysis of the rating results shows that the rating scale has good validity and acceptable reliability. The test,characterized by its distinctive test format and rating scale, provides reference for designing and validating similar tests of English for Specific Purposes.
出处 《外语测试与教学》 2018年第1期12-18,共7页 Foreign Language Testing and Teaching
基金 2016年教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“新TEM-8写作测试评分量表建构研究”(编号16YJC740029)阶段性成果之一,“第四届全国外语测试学术研讨会”宣读论文
关键词 行为测试 医务英语写作测试 评分量表 信度与效度 performance test medical English writing test rating scale validity and reliability
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献31

  • 1Bardovi-Harlig, K. & B. Hartford. 1993. Refining the DCTs: Comparing open questionnaires and dialogue completion tests[J]. Pragmatics and Language Learning 4:143-165. 被引量:1
  • 2Blum-Kulka, S. & E. Olshtain. 1984. Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP) [J]. Applied Linguistics 5(3) : 197-213. 被引量:1
  • 3Bond, T. G. & C. M. Fox. 2001. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences[ M ]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbarm Associates. 被引量:1
  • 4Bonk,W.J.& G.J. Ockey.2003.A many-facet Rasch analysis of the second language group oral discussion task[J]. Language Testing 20(1) : 89-110. 被引量:1
  • 5Enochs, K. & S. Yoshitake-Strain. 1999. Evaluating six measures of EFL learners' pragmatic competence [J]. JALT Journal 21(1) : 29-50. 被引量:1
  • 6Fowler, J. F., Jr.1993. Survey Research Methods (2nd ed.) [M]. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 被引量:1
  • 7Groves,R.1996.How do we know what we think they think is really what they think? EA]. In N.Schwarz & S.Sudman(eds.),Answering Questions: Methodology for Determining Cognitive and Communicative Processes in Survey Research [ C ].San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 389-402. 被引量:1
  • 8Hudson, T., E. Detmer & J. D. Brown. 1992. A Framework for Testing Cross-Cultural Pragmatics [M].Honolulu: Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawai'i at Manoa. 被引量:1
  • 9Hudson, T., E. Detmer & J. D. Brown. 1995. Developing Prototypic Measures of Cross-Cultural Pragmatics[M]. Honolulu: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa. 被引量:1
  • 10Johnston, B., G. Kasper & S. Ross. 1998. Effect of rejoinders in production questionnaires [J]. Applied Linguistics 19(2) : 157-182. 被引量:1

共引文献45

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部