Students' voices in the evaluation of their written summaries: Empowerment and democracy for test takers?

Language Testing

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 539-572

  Yu, Guoxing ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 42649103058     PISSN: 02655322     EISSN: 14770946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0265532207080780     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Afflerbach, P.P. 1990: The influence of prior knowledge on expert readers' main idea construction strategies. Reading Research Quarterly 25: 31-46.
2. Alderson, J.C. 1996: The testing of reading. In Nuttall, C., editor, Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. London: Heinemann.
3. Alderson, J.C. 2000: Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Alderson, J.C., Clapham, C. and Wall, D. 1995: Language test construction and evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Axelrod, J. 1975: Getting the main idea is still the main idea. Journal of Reading 18: 383-87.
6. Bachman, L.F. 1990: Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Bachman, L.F. and Palmer, A.S. 1996: Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Bachman, L.F., Davidson, F., Ryan, K. and Choi, I.-C. 1995: An investigation into the comparability of two tests of English as a foreign language: The Cambridge-TOEFL comparability study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Balajthy, E. and Weisberg, R. 1990: Transfer effects of prior knowledge and use of graphic organizers on college developmental readers' summarization and comprehension of expository text. National Reading Conference Yearbook 39: 339-45.
10. Barnwell, D. 1989: "Naïve" native speakers and judgments of oral proficiency in Spanish. Language Testing 6: 152-63.
11. Basham, C.S. 1987: Summary writing as cultural artifact. Fairbanks, AK: Cross Cultural Communications, University of Alaska.
12. Bensoussan, M. and Kreindler, I. 1990: Improving advanced reading comprehension in a foreign language: Summaries vs. Short-answer questions. Journal of Research in Reading 13: 55-68.
13. Bernhardt, E.B. 1991: Reading development in a second language: Theoretical, empirical, and classroom perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
14. Birenbaum, M. 1996: Assessment 2000: Towards a pluralistic approach to assessment. In Birenbaum, M. and Dochy, F.R.J., editors, Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning processes, and prior knowledge. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 3-29.
15. Boyd, K. and Davies, A. 2002: Doctors' orders for language testers: The origin and purpose of ethical codes. Language Testing 19: 296-322.
16. Brown, A.L., Campione, J.C. and Day, J.D. 1981: Learning to learn: On training students to learn from texts. Educational Researcher 10: 14-24.
17. Brown, A.L. and Day, J.D. 1983: Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22: 1-14.
18. Brown, A.L., Day, J.D., and Jones, R.S. 1983: The development of plans for summarizing texts. Child Development 54: 968-79.
19. Brown, A.L. and Smiley, S.S. 1978: The development of strategies for studying text. Child Development 49: 1076-88.
20. Bueckendorf, J.M. 1992: Comparative assessment of reading comprehension: Using multiple-choice and written summary formats with narrative and expository texts. Unpublished EdD thesis, University of Missouri, St Louis.
21. Byrd, M. 1985: Age differences in the ability to recall and summarize textual information. Experimental Aging Research 11: 87-91.
22. Cohen, A.D. 1993: The role of instructions in testing summarizing ability. In Douglas, D. and Chapelle, C., editors, A new decade of language testing research. Washington, DC: TESOL, 132-59.
23. Cohen, A.D. 1994: English for academic purposes in Brazil: The use of summary tasks. In Hill, C. and Parry, K., editors, From testing to assessment: English as an international language. London: Longman, 174-204.
24. Cohen, J. 1988: Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25. Connor, U. and McCagg, P. 1983: Cross-cultural differences and perceived quality in written paraphrases of English expository prose. Applied Linguistics 4: 259-68.
26. Corder, S.P. 1973: Interpretive procedures: Seeing, reading and understanding discourse. In Anderson, R., editor, New dimensions in second language acquisition research. Rowley, MS: Newbury House.
27. Courchêne, R. and Bayliss, D. 1995: Summary cloze: What is it? What does it measure? In Courchene, R., Burger, S., Cornaire, C., LeBlanc, R., Paribakht, S. and Seguin, H., editors, Twenty-five years of second language teaching at the University of Ottawa. Ottawa: Second Language Institute, University of Ottawa, 305-27.
28. Cronbach, L.J., Linn, R.L., Brennan, R.L. and Haertel, E. 1995: Generalizability analysis for educational assessment. Los Angeles: UCLA's Center for the Study of Evaluation & National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
29. Crowley, E. 1987: The relationship between ability to summarize and field independence or dependence. Unpublished PhD thesis, Illinois State University.
30. Cumming, A., Rebuffot, J. and Ledwell, M. 1989: Reading and summarizing challenging texts in first and second languages. Reading and Writing. An Interdisciplinary Journal 2: 201-19.
31. Davies, A. 2003: The native speaker: Myth and reality. Clevedon, Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
32. Deville, C. and Chalhoub-Devile, M. 1993: Modified scoring, traditional item analysis and Sato's caution index used to investigate the reading recall protocol. Language Testing 10: 117-32.
33. Douglas, D. 2001: Language for specific purposes assessment criteria: Where do they come from? Language Testing 18: 171-85.
34. Douglas, D. and Myers, R. 2000: Assessing the communication skills of veterinary students: Whose criteria? In Kunnan, A., editor, Fairness and validation in language assessment: Selected papers from the 19th language testing research colloquium. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press with University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate, 60-81.
35. ETS 2002: LanguEdge™ Courseware Handbook for Scoring Speaking and Writing. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
36. Garner, R. 1982: Efficient text summarization: Costs and benefits. Journal of Educational Research 75: 275-79.
37. Grenz, S.J. 1996: A primer on postmodernism. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.
38. Hare, V.C. and Borchardt, K.M. 1984: Direct instruction of summarization skills. Reading Research Quarterly 20: 62-78.
39. Head, M.H., Readence, J.E. and Buss, R.R. 1989: An examination of summary writing as a measure of reading comprehension. Reading Research & Instruction 28: 1-11.
40. Hill, K. 1997: Who should be the judge? The use of non-native speakers as raters on a test of English as an international language. In Huhta, A., Kohonen, V., Kurki-Suonio, L. and Luoma, S., editors, Current developments and alternatives in language assessment. Tampere: Universities of Tampere and Jyväskylä.
41. Huhta, A. and Randell, E. 1996: Multiple-choice summary: A measure of text comprehension. In Cumming, A. and Berwick, R., editors, Validation in language testing. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 94-110.
42. Jacoby, S. and McNamara, T.F. 1999: Locating competence. English for Specific Purposes 18: 213-41.
43. Johns, A.M. 1985: Summary protocols of "underprepared" and "adept" university students: Replications and distortions of the original. Language Learning 35: 495-517.
44. Johns, A.M. and Mayes, P. 1990: An analysis of summary protocols of university ESL students. Applied Linguistics 11: 253-71.
45. Kiewit, S.F. 1997: The relationship of prior background knowledge to the summarization skills of developmental college students. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Akron.
46. Kintsch, W. 1974: The representation of meaning in memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47. Kintsch, W. and Kozminsky, E. 1977: Summarizing stories after reading and listening. Journal of Educational Psychology 69: 491-99.
48. Kintsch, W. and van Dijk, T.A. 1978: Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review 85: 363-94.
49. Kobayashi, M. 2002: Method effects on reading comprehension test performance: Text organization and response format. Language Testing 19: 193-220.
50. Kuckartz, U. 1998: winMAX: Scientific text analysis for the social sciences (Version 98 Pro). Berlin: VERBI Software-Consult-Research GmbH (Germany).
51. Lado, R. 1961: Language testing: The construction and use of foreign language tests. A teacher's book. London: Longman.
52. Lado, R. 1986: Analysis of native speaker performance on a cloze test. Language Testing 3: 130-46.
53. McNamara, T. 2001: Language assessment as social practice: Challenges for research. Language Testing 18: 333-49.
54. Mast, C.O. 1988: The effects of cognitive styles on summarization of expository text. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of North Texas.
55. Meyer, B.J.F. 1975: The organization of prose and its effects on memory. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
56. Mills, C.B., Diehl, V.A., Birkmire, D.P. and Mou, L.C. 1993: Procedural text: Predictions of importance ratings and recall by models of reading comprehension. Discourse Processes 16: 279-315.
57. Moore, T. 1997: From text to note: Cultural variation in summarization practices. Prospect 12: 54-63.
58. Nuttall, C. 1996: Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann.
59. Penny, J., Johnson, R.L. and Gordon, B. 2000: The effect of rating augmentation on inter-rater reliability: An empirical study of a holistic rubric. Assessing Writing 7: 143-64.
60. Pollitt, A. and Hutchinson, C. 1987: Calibrating graded assessments: Rasch partial credit analysis of performance in writing. Language Testing 4: 72-92.
61. Riley, G.L. and Lee, J.F. 1996: A comparison of recall and summary protocols as measures of second language reading comprehension. Language Testing 13: 173-89.
62. Rivard, L.P. 2001: Summary writing: A multi-grade study of French-immersion and Francophone secondary students. Language, Culture and Curriculum 14: 171-86.
63. Rosenau, P.M. 1992: Post-modernism and the social sciences: Insights, inroads and intrusions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
64. Sarig, G. 1989: Testing meaning construction: Can we do it fairly? Language Testing 6: 77-94.
65. Savignon, S. 2003: Teaching English as communication: A global perspective. World Englishes 22: 55-66.
66. Sawaki, Y. 2003: A comparison of summarization and free recall as reading comprehension tasks in web-based assessment of Japanese as a foreign language. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles.
67. Schnotz, W. 1983: On the influence of text organization on learning outcomes. In Rickheit, G. and Bock, M., editors, Psycholinguistic studies in language processing. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 152-81.
68. Scott, M.L., Stansfield, C.W. and Kenyon, D.M. 1996: Examining validity in a performance test: The listening summary translation exam (LSTE) - Spanish version. Language Testing 13: 83-109.
69. Shi, L. 2001: Native- and nonnative-speaking EFL teachers' evaluation of Chinese students' English writing. Language Testing 18: 303-25.
70. Shohamy, E. 1984: Does the testing method make a difference? The case of reading comprehension. Language Testing 1: 147-70.
71. Stansfield, C.W., Wu, W.M. and van der Heide, M. 2000: A job-relevant listening summary translation exam in Minnan. In Kunnan, A.J., editor, Fairness and validation in language assessment: Selected papers from the 19th LTRC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press with University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate, 177-200.
72. Stevens, J. 2002: Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
73. Taylor, L.B. 1996: An investigation of text-removed summary completion as a means of assessing reading comprehension. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.
74. The New Encyclopaedia Britannica: Macropaedia: Knowledge in Depth 1992: 15th edition, Vol. 18: pp. 87-88.
75. Turner, C.E. and Upshur, J. A. 2002: Rating scales derived from student samples: Effects of the scale maker and the student sample on scale content and student scores. TESOL Quarterly 36: 49-70.
76. Urquhart, A.H. and Weir, C.J. 1998: Reading in a second language: Process, product and practice. London: Longman.
77. van Dijk, T.A. and Kintsch, W. 1977: Cognitive psychology and discourse: Recalling and summarizing stories. In Dressler, W.U., editor, Current trends in textlinguistics. New York: de Gruyter, 61-80.
78. van Dijk, T.A. 1983: Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
79. Wade, S.E., Buxton, W.M. and Kelly, M. 1999: Using think-alouds to examine reader-text interest. Reading Research Quarterly 34: 194-216.
80. Weir, C.J. 1993: Understanding and developing language tests. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International.
81. Wenger, E. 1998: Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
82. Winograd, P.N. 1984: Strategic difficulties in summarizing texts. Reading Research Quarterly 19: 404-25.
83. Wolf, D.F., Bixby, J., Glenn, J.I. and Gardener, H. 1991: To use their minds well: Investigating new forms of student assessment. Review of Research in Education 17: 31-74.
84. Yu, G. 2005: Towards a model of using summarization tasks as a measure of reading comprehension. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Bristol.
85. Zuck, L.V. and Zuck, J.G. 1984: The main idea: Specialist and non-specialist judgements. In Ulijn, J. and Pugh, A., editors, Reading for professional purposes: Studies and practices in native and foreign languages. London: Heinemann, 130-35.