Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 2010年至2017年英語科國中基測與會考克漏字測驗分析
Analysis of the Cloze Test Items in English Basic Competence Test and Comprehensive Assessment Program from 2010 to 2017作者 彭凡家
Peng, Fan-Chia貢獻者 尤雪瑛
Yu, Hsueh-Ying
彭凡家
Peng, Fan-Chia關鍵詞 克漏字測驗
國中教育會考
國中基本學力測驗
Cloze test
Basic competence test
Comprehensive assessment program日期 2018 上傳時間 27-Aug-2018 15:06:07 (UTC+8) 摘要 對台灣國中生而言,2001年實施至2013年的國中基本學力測驗以及2014年開始實施的國中教育會考,是兩項重要的高中入學考試。其中,英文閱讀測驗題組中每年會有二篇的克漏字測驗,克漏字測驗能夠測驗受試者英文學習的整合能力,且在台灣被廣泛地使用於各項考試中,本研究主要目的在於:(1)研究從2010年至2017年基測與會考的克漏字試題主要測驗了哪些語言能力; (2)分析這8年的克漏字試題分別在基測與會考中測驗的能力為何,以及討論其相同與相異之處。本研究使用Jonz (1990)的克漏字分類法為其研究工具以探討其分類結果。本研究結果顯示:(1) 2010年至2017年基測與會考著重於受試者要能找出跨越句子與句子間文本線索的能力; (2) 2010至2013年的基測,著重於檢視受試者時態句法的能力; (3) 2014至2017年的會考,著重於檢視受試者篇章結構的能力。根據本研究發現,筆者針對未來研究方向及教學實務提出了建議。關鍵字:克漏字測驗、國中教育會考、國中基本學力測驗
AbstractTo every ninth-grade student of junior high school, the Basic Competence Test (BCT) from 1999 to 2013 and the Comprehensive Assessment Program (CAP) from 2014 are the two most important senior high school entrance examinations. Among the reading tests of both exams, two of them are the cloze tests. The cloze test targets at measuring the candidates’ performances on the integrated ability in language, and it is widely used in the different testing contexts in Taiwan. The research thus aims to investigate: (1) from 2010 to 2017, what kind of language knowledge in the cloze tests were measured in BCT and CAP, and (2) the similarities and differences of the cloze item types tested and designed in BCT and CAP. To achieve the purpose, this research analyzed the cloze items in BCT and CAP in the past 8 years, and Jonz’s taxonomy was utilized as the instrument to classify the target test items.The analysis results of the present study are shown as follows: (1) the primary language knowledge tested from 2010 to 2017 was about the higher-order knowledge that focused on the ability to integrate the contextual clues across sentential level; (2) the most frequently-tested items in BCT was the syntactic knowledge in tense; and (3) the most frequently-measured item in CAP was the textual relationship in discourse. Based on the findings of this research, the researcher yielded suggestions for the future research and implications for teaching.Key words: cloze test, Basic Competence Test, Comprehensive Assessment Program參考文獻 ReferencesAlderson, J. C. (1979). The cloze procedure and proficiency in English as aforeign language. TESOL Quarterly, 13(2), 219-227.Alderson, J. C. (1980). Native and nonnative speaker performance on clozetests. Language Learning, 20, 59-76.Alderson, J.C. (2005). Assessing reading. (5th ed). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity. Press.Bachman, L. F. (1982). The trait structure of cloze test scores. TESOL Quarterly,16(1), 61-70.Bachman, L. F. (1985). Performance on cloze with fixed-ratio and rationaldeletions. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 535-556.Bailey, K. M. (1998). Learning about language assessment: Dilemmas, decisions,and directions. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Bensoussan, M. (1990). Redundancy and the cohesion cloze. Journal ofResearch in Reading, 13, 18-17.Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to languagepedagogy. (2nd ed.). NY: Longman.Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematicapproach to program design. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Brown, J. D. (2005). Testing in language programs: A comprehensive guide toEnglish language assessment. NY: McGraw-Hill.Chang, W. C. (1994). A brief analysis of the principles for constructing clozeitems. Newsletter for Teaching the Humanities and Social Studies, 5(4),69-80.Chavez-Oller, M. A., Chihara, T., Weaver, K. A., & Oller, J. W. (1994). When arecloze items sensitive to constraints across sentences? LanguageLearning, 35(2), 181-206.Chou, S. Y. (2009). A Study of Cloze Test Items in Scholastic Aptitude EnglishTest and Department Required English Test. Unpublished master’sthesis, National Chung Cheng University, Taipei, Taiwan.Chen, W. Y. (2008). The relationship between the rational cloze test and thediscourse structure test. Unpublished master’s thesis, National TaiwanNormal University, Taipei, Taiwan.Cheng, H. Y. (2007). A study of the cohesion items in the cloze tests of SAT andAST. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei,Taiwan.Dale, E. & Chall, J. (1948). A formula for predicting readability. EducationalResearch Bulletin, 27, 11-20.Dastjerdi, H. V., & Talebinezhad, M. R. (2006). Chain-processing deletionprocedure in cloze: A discourse perspective. Language Testing, 23, 58-72.Dick, W., Carey, J. O., & L. Carey. (2000). The systemtic design of instruction.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Educational.Dupuis, M. M. (1980). The cloze procedure as a predictor of comprehension inliterature. Journal of Education Research, 74(1), 27-33.Flech, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32,221-233.Greene, B.B. (2001). Testing reading comprehension of theoretical discoursewith cloze. Journal of Research in Reading, 24(1), 82-98.Hadley, A. M. (2000). Teaching language in context. (3rd ed.). Boston: Heinle &Heinle.Halliday, M. A. K., & Hassan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Heaton, J. B. (1998). Writing English language tests. NY: Longman.Hinofotis, F. B., & Snow, B. G. (1978). An alternative cloze testing procedure:Multiple-choice format. In J. W. Oller & K. Perkins (Eds.), Research inlanguage testing. Massachusetts: Newbury House.Huang, L. (1992). A feasibility study of using the revised cloze test as a measureof reading comprehension. Proceedings of the eighth conference onEnglish teaching and learning in the R.O.C. (pp. 305-332). Taipei: Crane.Huang, T. S. (1994). A qualitative analysis of the JCEE English tests. Taipei:Crane.Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. (2nd). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.Ito, A. (2004). Two types of translation tests: Their reliability and validity.System, 32,395-405.Jonz, J. (1990). Another turn in the conversation: What does cloze measure?TESOL Quarterly, 24(1), 61-81Keshavarz, M. H., & Salimi, H. (2007). Collocational competence and cloze testperformance: A study of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal ofApplied Linguistics, 17, 81-92Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. Toward a model of text comprehension andproduction. Psychological Review, 1978, 85, 363-394.Klein-Braley, C. 1997. C-Test in the context of reduced redundancy testing: anappraisal. Language Testing 14: 47-84.Kolers, P. A. Some modes of representation. In P. Pliner, L. Krames, and T.Alloway (Eds.), Communication and effect: language and thought. NewYork: Academic Press, 1973.Lee, S. H. (2008). Beyond reading and proficiency assessment: The rationalcloze procedure as stimulus for integrated reading, writing, andvocabulary instruction and teacher-student interaction in ESL. System,36, 642-660.Markman, P. L. (1985). Rational deletion cloze and global comprehension inGerman. Language Learning, 35, 423-430.McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. BiochemiaMedica, 22(3), 276-282.Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. LanguageTesting, 13, 241-256.Miller, M. J., DeWitt, J. E., McCleeary, E. M., & O’Keefe, K. J. (2009). Applicationof the cloze procedure to evaluate comprehension and demonstraterewriting of pharmacy educational materials. Annals ofPharmacotherapy, 43, 650-657Oller, J. W. (1979). Language tests at school. London: Longman.Nicholls, A & Nicholls, S. (1972). Developing a curriculum: a practical guide.London: Allen and Unwin.Panackal, A. A. & Heft, C. S. (1978). Cloze technique and multiple choicetechnique: Reliability and validity. Educational and PsychologicalMeasurement. 38, 917-932.Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2003). Approaches and methods in languageteaching. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sasaki, M. (2000). Effects of cultural schemata on students’ test-takingprocesses for cloze tests: A multiple data source approach. LanguageTesting, 17(1), 85-114.Shanahan, T., Kamil, M. L., & Tobin, A. W. (1982). Cloze as a measure ofintersentential comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(2), 229-255.Schmitt, M. C., & Sha, S. (2009). The developmental nature of meta-cognitionand the relationship between knowledge and control over time. Journalof Research in Reading, 32, 254-271Sharp, A. (2009). Reading comprehension in two cultures. International Journalof Learning, 16, 281-292.Spolsky, B. (1996). Measured words: The development of objective languagetesting. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Storey, P. (1997). Examining the test-taking process: A cognitive perspective onthe discourse cloze test. Language Testing, 14, 214-231.Stuart, W., & Eve, K. (2009). The effects of vocabulary learning on collocationand meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 55-77.Taylor, W. L. (1953). Cloze procedure: A new tool for measuring readability.Journalism Quarterly, 30, 415-433.Taylor, W. L. (1956). Present developments in the use of the cloze procedure.Journalism Quarterly, 33, 42-48.Tyler, R. W. (2010). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.Viera, A. J. & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: thekappa statistic. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360-363.Wittrock, M. C. Reading as a generative process. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 1975, 67, 484-489.Wu, H. L. (2002). Rational cloze: Item-generation approaches and constructvalidity. English Teaching and Learning, 26(4), 85-106.Yang, T. H. (1996). Fundamental considerations in the test, with specialreference to its use in EFL testing in Taiwan. Sun Yat-sen Journal ofHumanities, 4, 57-77. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
英語教學碩士在職專班
1009510201資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1009510201 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 尤雪瑛 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Yu, Hsueh-Ying en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 彭凡家 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Peng, Fan-Chia en_US dc.creator (作者) 彭凡家 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Peng, Fan-Chia en_US dc.date (日期) 2018 en_US dc.date.accessioned 27-Aug-2018 15:06:07 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 27-Aug-2018 15:06:07 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 27-Aug-2018 15:06:07 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G1009510201 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/119614 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 英語教學碩士在職專班 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 1009510201 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 對台灣國中生而言,2001年實施至2013年的國中基本學力測驗以及2014年開始實施的國中教育會考,是兩項重要的高中入學考試。其中,英文閱讀測驗題組中每年會有二篇的克漏字測驗,克漏字測驗能夠測驗受試者英文學習的整合能力,且在台灣被廣泛地使用於各項考試中,本研究主要目的在於:(1)研究從2010年至2017年基測與會考的克漏字試題主要測驗了哪些語言能力; (2)分析這8年的克漏字試題分別在基測與會考中測驗的能力為何,以及討論其相同與相異之處。本研究使用Jonz (1990)的克漏字分類法為其研究工具以探討其分類結果。本研究結果顯示:(1) 2010年至2017年基測與會考著重於受試者要能找出跨越句子與句子間文本線索的能力; (2) 2010至2013年的基測,著重於檢視受試者時態句法的能力; (3) 2014至2017年的會考,著重於檢視受試者篇章結構的能力。根據本研究發現,筆者針對未來研究方向及教學實務提出了建議。關鍵字:克漏字測驗、國中教育會考、國中基本學力測驗 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) AbstractTo every ninth-grade student of junior high school, the Basic Competence Test (BCT) from 1999 to 2013 and the Comprehensive Assessment Program (CAP) from 2014 are the two most important senior high school entrance examinations. Among the reading tests of both exams, two of them are the cloze tests. The cloze test targets at measuring the candidates’ performances on the integrated ability in language, and it is widely used in the different testing contexts in Taiwan. The research thus aims to investigate: (1) from 2010 to 2017, what kind of language knowledge in the cloze tests were measured in BCT and CAP, and (2) the similarities and differences of the cloze item types tested and designed in BCT and CAP. To achieve the purpose, this research analyzed the cloze items in BCT and CAP in the past 8 years, and Jonz’s taxonomy was utilized as the instrument to classify the target test items.The analysis results of the present study are shown as follows: (1) the primary language knowledge tested from 2010 to 2017 was about the higher-order knowledge that focused on the ability to integrate the contextual clues across sentential level; (2) the most frequently-tested items in BCT was the syntactic knowledge in tense; and (3) the most frequently-measured item in CAP was the textual relationship in discourse. Based on the findings of this research, the researcher yielded suggestions for the future research and implications for teaching.Key words: cloze test, Basic Competence Test, Comprehensive Assessment Program en_US dc.description.tableofcontents TABLE OF CONTENTSAcknowledgements………………………iiiTable of Contents …………………ivList of Tables …………………………vList of Figures ………………………viChinese Abstract ……………………viiEnglish Abstract ……………………viiiChapter One: Introduction……………………1Background and Motivation……………………1Significance of the Study……………………4Chapter Two: Literature Review……………5Testing and Assessment in Curriculum……………5Approaches to Language Testing……………6The Development of Cloze Test……………8Measurement of the Readability……………8Measurement of the Reading Comprehension……………9Types of Modified Cloze Tests……………10What Kind of Language Skill Does Cloze Measure?……………15Relevant Research on Cloze Test in Taiwan……………17BCT and CAP……………18BCT……………19CAP……………19Chapter Three: Methodology……………21Materials……………21Instrument……………22Modification of Jonz`s Subcategories……………27Data Analysis……………35Chapter Four: Results and Discussion……………39Results of the Five Categories……………39The Results of Jonz’s 37 Subtypes in BCT and CAP……………44The Distribution of Jonz’s 5 Categories in Each Year of BCT and CAP……………49Results of the Distribution of Jonz’s 37 Subtypes in BCT and CAP……………53Chapter Five: Conclusion……………59Summary of the Major Findings……………59Implications……………61Limitations and Suggestions……………62References……………63Appendix A……………67Appendix B……………68Appendix C……………71Appendix D……………76Appendix E……………77 zh_TW dc.format.extent 1730701 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1009510201 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 克漏字測驗 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 國中教育會考 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 國中基本學力測驗 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Cloze test en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Basic competence test en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Comprehensive assessment program en_US dc.title (題名) 2010年至2017年英語科國中基測與會考克漏字測驗分析 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Analysis of the Cloze Test Items in English Basic Competence Test and Comprehensive Assessment Program from 2010 to 2017 en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ReferencesAlderson, J. C. (1979). The cloze procedure and proficiency in English as aforeign language. TESOL Quarterly, 13(2), 219-227.Alderson, J. C. (1980). Native and nonnative speaker performance on clozetests. Language Learning, 20, 59-76.Alderson, J.C. (2005). Assessing reading. (5th ed). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity. Press.Bachman, L. F. (1982). The trait structure of cloze test scores. TESOL Quarterly,16(1), 61-70.Bachman, L. F. (1985). Performance on cloze with fixed-ratio and rationaldeletions. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 535-556.Bailey, K. M. (1998). Learning about language assessment: Dilemmas, decisions,and directions. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Bensoussan, M. (1990). Redundancy and the cohesion cloze. Journal ofResearch in Reading, 13, 18-17.Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to languagepedagogy. (2nd ed.). NY: Longman.Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematicapproach to program design. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Brown, J. D. (2005). Testing in language programs: A comprehensive guide toEnglish language assessment. NY: McGraw-Hill.Chang, W. C. (1994). A brief analysis of the principles for constructing clozeitems. Newsletter for Teaching the Humanities and Social Studies, 5(4),69-80.Chavez-Oller, M. A., Chihara, T., Weaver, K. A., & Oller, J. W. (1994). When arecloze items sensitive to constraints across sentences? LanguageLearning, 35(2), 181-206.Chou, S. Y. (2009). A Study of Cloze Test Items in Scholastic Aptitude EnglishTest and Department Required English Test. Unpublished master’sthesis, National Chung Cheng University, Taipei, Taiwan.Chen, W. Y. (2008). The relationship between the rational cloze test and thediscourse structure test. Unpublished master’s thesis, National TaiwanNormal University, Taipei, Taiwan.Cheng, H. Y. (2007). A study of the cohesion items in the cloze tests of SAT andAST. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei,Taiwan.Dale, E. & Chall, J. (1948). A formula for predicting readability. EducationalResearch Bulletin, 27, 11-20.Dastjerdi, H. V., & Talebinezhad, M. R. (2006). Chain-processing deletionprocedure in cloze: A discourse perspective. Language Testing, 23, 58-72.Dick, W., Carey, J. O., & L. Carey. (2000). The systemtic design of instruction.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Educational.Dupuis, M. M. (1980). The cloze procedure as a predictor of comprehension inliterature. Journal of Education Research, 74(1), 27-33.Flech, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32,221-233.Greene, B.B. (2001). Testing reading comprehension of theoretical discoursewith cloze. Journal of Research in Reading, 24(1), 82-98.Hadley, A. M. (2000). Teaching language in context. (3rd ed.). Boston: Heinle &Heinle.Halliday, M. A. K., & Hassan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Heaton, J. B. (1998). Writing English language tests. NY: Longman.Hinofotis, F. B., & Snow, B. G. (1978). An alternative cloze testing procedure:Multiple-choice format. In J. W. Oller & K. Perkins (Eds.), Research inlanguage testing. Massachusetts: Newbury House.Huang, L. (1992). A feasibility study of using the revised cloze test as a measureof reading comprehension. Proceedings of the eighth conference onEnglish teaching and learning in the R.O.C. (pp. 305-332). Taipei: Crane.Huang, T. S. (1994). A qualitative analysis of the JCEE English tests. Taipei:Crane.Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. (2nd). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.Ito, A. (2004). Two types of translation tests: Their reliability and validity.System, 32,395-405.Jonz, J. (1990). Another turn in the conversation: What does cloze measure?TESOL Quarterly, 24(1), 61-81Keshavarz, M. H., & Salimi, H. (2007). Collocational competence and cloze testperformance: A study of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal ofApplied Linguistics, 17, 81-92Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. Toward a model of text comprehension andproduction. Psychological Review, 1978, 85, 363-394.Klein-Braley, C. 1997. C-Test in the context of reduced redundancy testing: anappraisal. Language Testing 14: 47-84.Kolers, P. A. Some modes of representation. In P. Pliner, L. Krames, and T.Alloway (Eds.), Communication and effect: language and thought. NewYork: Academic Press, 1973.Lee, S. H. (2008). Beyond reading and proficiency assessment: The rationalcloze procedure as stimulus for integrated reading, writing, andvocabulary instruction and teacher-student interaction in ESL. System,36, 642-660.Markman, P. L. (1985). Rational deletion cloze and global comprehension inGerman. Language Learning, 35, 423-430.McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. BiochemiaMedica, 22(3), 276-282.Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. LanguageTesting, 13, 241-256.Miller, M. J., DeWitt, J. E., McCleeary, E. M., & O’Keefe, K. J. (2009). Applicationof the cloze procedure to evaluate comprehension and demonstraterewriting of pharmacy educational materials. Annals ofPharmacotherapy, 43, 650-657Oller, J. W. (1979). Language tests at school. London: Longman.Nicholls, A & Nicholls, S. (1972). Developing a curriculum: a practical guide.London: Allen and Unwin.Panackal, A. A. & Heft, C. S. (1978). Cloze technique and multiple choicetechnique: Reliability and validity. Educational and PsychologicalMeasurement. 38, 917-932.Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2003). Approaches and methods in languageteaching. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sasaki, M. (2000). Effects of cultural schemata on students’ test-takingprocesses for cloze tests: A multiple data source approach. LanguageTesting, 17(1), 85-114.Shanahan, T., Kamil, M. L., & Tobin, A. W. (1982). Cloze as a measure ofintersentential comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(2), 229-255.Schmitt, M. C., & Sha, S. (2009). The developmental nature of meta-cognitionand the relationship between knowledge and control over time. Journalof Research in Reading, 32, 254-271Sharp, A. (2009). Reading comprehension in two cultures. International Journalof Learning, 16, 281-292.Spolsky, B. (1996). Measured words: The development of objective languagetesting. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Storey, P. (1997). Examining the test-taking process: A cognitive perspective onthe discourse cloze test. Language Testing, 14, 214-231.Stuart, W., & Eve, K. (2009). The effects of vocabulary learning on collocationand meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 55-77.Taylor, W. L. (1953). Cloze procedure: A new tool for measuring readability.Journalism Quarterly, 30, 415-433.Taylor, W. L. (1956). Present developments in the use of the cloze procedure.Journalism Quarterly, 33, 42-48.Tyler, R. W. (2010). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.Viera, A. J. & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: thekappa statistic. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360-363.Wittrock, M. C. Reading as a generative process. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 1975, 67, 484-489.Wu, H. L. (2002). Rational cloze: Item-generation approaches and constructvalidity. English Teaching and Learning, 26(4), 85-106.Yang, T. H. (1996). Fundamental considerations in the test, with specialreference to its use in EFL testing in Taiwan. Sun Yat-sen Journal ofHumanities, 4, 57-77. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/THE.NCCU.ETMA.003.2018.A07 -