성인의 쓰기 능력 평가 결과 분석

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze and discuss the results of the evaluation of language competence for the general public 2013, focusing on writing skills. This thesis informed the result of evaluation of language competence of writing skills and the meaning of the result. The participants are 1,500 people who were selected from the adult population of Korea by a two-stage stratified sampling and cluster sampling method. The primary criteria for stratification are sex, age, and region size, and the secondary criteria are vocational and educational variables, which are based on the soft allocation method. The test items comprised a writing invitation, a descriptive writing and an argumentative writing for half-hour test. The following three elements were selected as the evaluation criteria: contents (50%), organization (30%), and expression (20%). Professional researchers visited the participants and held one-on-one test. The participants’ performances were classified into four levels: good, normal, basic, and below basic. This was done to interpret the results of the scoring grade, which had been divided according to the cut-score obtained through consultations with experts in the Modified Angoff method. Overall, the participants’ writing skill levels were assessed as good (3.6%), normal (21.7%), basic (55.3%), and below basic (18.4%); this performance is generally quite poor. When the participants were grouped by variables and ranked according to their writing skills, people in their 20s, 30s, were higher than people in their 40s, 50s. By region size, the order is metropolitan area > small town. The ranking by occupation shows mental workers and others (including students) are higher than manual workers. Then, the ranking by education shows university students and above are higher than high school graduates and middle school graduates. But it makes no difference between men and women. The participants’ poor writing skills could have been the result in inadequate educational practices for writing and a lack of adult education for rhetorical writing. Based on this discussion, we propose the following several tasks. First, in the area of language skills assessment, writing skills for Korean adults should be defined in greater detail. Second, natural writing situations should be configured to improve voluntary participation. Third, a large-scale writing assessment environment should be configured to improve the validity and reliability of the evaluation. Finally, practical educational programs should be developed to improve writing skills for adults.