Post on 28-Sep-2020
01/03/15
1
Measuring writing proficiency Effect of genre on the generalizability of writing scores
Conference ‘Writing research across borders’ Renske Bouwera, Anton Béguinb, Ted Sandersa & Huub van den Bergha
a Utrecht University b Institute for Educational Measurement (Cito), Arnhem
Via Invoegen | Koptekst en
Voettekst invoegen Subafdeling
<2spaties>|<2spaties>T
itel van de presentatie
1
March 1, 2015
Measurement problems
• Effects of the rater: – Raters differ in leniency/severity
• Effects of the task: – Tasks differ in level of difficulty
à Problem: It’s hard to determine student’s writing ability based on quality ratings of only one written text.
March 1, 2015 3
Generalizability theory
Text quality score = Writing skill + Measurement error For reliable assessments: keep the measurement error as
small as possible
4
Raters Tasks Unexplained
How many tasks and raters?
Writing assessment: at least 5 tasks & 3 raters Primary, secondary & higher education Type of tasks assigned to students differ across studies • Persuasive texts (van Weijen, 2009) • Persuasive and functional texts (Schoonen, 2005) • Persuasive texts and filling in forms (van den Bergh, 1989)
à Is generalization of similar texts warranted across genres?
5
Research question
How can we make valid and reliable decisions about writing proficiency of students at the end of primary education (11/12 years old)?
• How many tasks and raters are necessary for the assessment?
• What is the influence of genre?
6
01/03/15
2
Method
Participants 67 students (grade 6) from 3 different primary schools
Material 4 genres: formal letters, narratives, persuasive and personal texts 3 texts on different topics for each genre Rating procedure 3 raters for each text (raters are student teachers) Global ratings using a benchmark
7
Results I
Source Variance in % Students
Genre
Students * Genre
Task within genre
Students * Task
Raters Interaction students*task*genre*rater & unexplained variance
8
Results I
Source Variance in % Students 9,98
Genre
Students * Genre
Task within genre
Students * Task
Raters Interaction students*task*genre*rater & unexplained variance
9
Results I
Source Variance in % Students 9,98
Genre 11,42
Students * Genre 4,01
Task within genre 1,71
Students * Task 19,13
Raters 18,05 Interaction students*task*genre*rater & unexplained variance
35,71
10
Results II Number of tasks within one genre
11
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1 2 3 4 5
Gen
eral
izab
ility
coe
ffic
ien
t
Formal letters
1 rater
2 raters
3 raters
4 raters
5 raters
Tasks 12
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1 2 3 4 5
Different tasks
1 rater
2 raters
3 raters
4 raters
5 raters
tasks 0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1 2 3 4 5
Gen
eral
izab
ility
coe
ffic
ien
t
Similar tasks
Results III Effect of genre on the generalizability
01/03/15
3
13
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1 2 3 4 5
Formal letters
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1 2 3 4 5
Narratives
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1 2 3 4 5
Persuasive texts
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1 2 3 4 5
Personal texts
Results IV Differences between genres
It is possible to determine how well young students write, but: ① Let them write multiple texts, rated by multiple raters.
② If tasks in the writing assessment are very similar, decisions about writing ability should be limited to writing in that specific genre.
14
Conclusion: how to measure writing proficiency?
Questions or suggestions?
For more information: www.schrijfproject.nl Twitter @schrijfproject E-mail i.r.bouwer@uu.nl
Overzicht taken per genre Formal letter
Argumentative text
Adventure story
Personal narrative
Collection of toys at a supermarket
Pros and cons of a smoking ban
Adventure on a sports field
Personal experience about being frightened
Collection of stamps for musical tickets
Pros and cons of a candy prohibition
Adventure about a forest-fire
Personal experience about being catched
Collection of points on wraps of chocolate for a music CD
Pros and cons of telling tales about somebody
Adventure about poison
Personal experience about being home alone
16