영어 쓰기 평가 기준에 대한 재고
Reconsideration of Rating Criteria of English Writing Test
2
조회
0
다운로드
9
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The rating criteria of English Writing in Korea have been mostly developed by foreign countries, including the US and the UK. It is very common to accept and use them without careful consideration of the suitability for Korean students. This research examined the differences of the rating process between native English speaker (NES) and non-native English speaker (NNES) with 6 writing samples from university students. It investigated the raters’ decision-making behaviors through the think-aloud method while they were evaluating the writing samples holistically. The raters’ rating behaviors were also examined by the survey, interview, and observation. It was found that both groups of raters considered task completion and grammatical accuracy as the most important rating criteria. This study suggests, based on the results of this study, further research on the development of more valid and practical rating criteria that could fit better for Korean contexts.
Abstract
The rating criteria of English Writing in Korea have been mostly developed by foreign countries, including the US and the UK. It is very common to accept and use them without careful consideration of the suitability for Korean students. This research examined the differences of the rating process between native English speaker (NES) and non-native English speaker (NNES) with 6 writing samples from university students. It investigated the raters’ decision-making behaviors through the think-aloud method while they were evaluating the writing samples holistically. The raters’ rating behaviors were also examined by the survey, interview, and observation. It was found that both groups of raters considered task completion and grammatical accuracy as the most important rating criteria. This study suggests, based on the results of this study, further research on the development of more valid and practical rating criteria that could fit better for Korean contexts.
참고문헌 (22)
- 김현주, "영어 말하기 평가의 채점과정 연구", 영어영문학연구, 49(4), pp.169~186 (2007), 한국중앙영어영문학회
- 나성민, "중학교 영어 작문 채점 현황 파악 및 채점 기준 개발에 관한 연구-편지쓰기를 중심으로", 석사, pp.2001
- 신동일, "한국의 영어평가학 1 - 시험개발편" (2003), 한국문화사
- 이영식, "영어 작문 평가에 대한 채점 신뢰도에 대한 분석", 영어교육, 52(1), pp.221~241 (1998)
- 이영식, "영어 작문 평가에 대한 채점자 훈련의 원리", 영어교육, 55(2), pp.201~217 (2000)
- 이주연, "한국 고등학교 영어 교사들의 영어 작문 평가 기준에 대한 인식과 평가 과정", 석사, pp.2008
- 임병빈, "영어교육평가방법" (2005), 경문사
- 전지현, "영어 말하기 평가에 대한 학습자 인식 연구", 응용언어학, 26(1), pp.57~89 (2010), 한국응용언어학회
- 조숙진, "영어 쓰기평가 지침서 개발 사례연구", 석사, pp.2004
- 최연희, "영어쓰기교육론-원리와 적용" (2009), 한국문화사
- Brown, A., "The effect of rater variables in the development of an occupation specific language performance test", Language Testing, 12(1), pp.1~15 (1995)
- Cumming, A, "Scoring TOEFL essays and TOEFL 2000 prototype tasks: An investigation into raters’ decision making, and development of a preliminary analytic framework" (2001)
- Hamp-Lyons, L., "Assessing second language writing in academic contexts" (1991), Ablex
- Herman, J., "A Practical Guide to Alternative Assessment" (1992), Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
- Hughes, A., "Testing for language teachers" (1989), Cambridge University Press
- Kobayashi, H., "Factors affecting composition evaluation in an EFL context: Cultural rhetorical pattern and readers’ background", Language Learning, 46(3), pp.397~437 (1996)
- Lumley, T., "Rater characteristics and rater bias: Implication for training", Language Testing, 12, pp.54~71 (1995)
- Scharton, M., "The politics of validity. in: Assessment of writing: Politics, policies, practices", pp.53~75 (1996), The Modern Language Association of America
- Shi, L., "Native-and nonnative-speaking EFL teachers’ evaluation of Chinese Students’s English writing", Language Testing, 18(3), pp.303~325 (2001)
- Thorndike, E. L., "A constant error in psychological ratings", Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, pp.469~477 (1920)
- Weigle, S. C., "Assessing writing" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- Whimbey, A., "Teaching critical thinking and analytical reasoning in project SOAR", Journal of Reading, 24, pp.5~10 (1980)