《TEM和TOEEL考试内容效度对比研究》王涛著|(epub+azw3+mobi+pdf)电子书下载

图书名称：《TEM和TOEEL考试内容效度对比研究》

【作　者】王涛著

【页 数】 226

【出版社】 天津：天津科学技术出版社 , 2018.04

【ISBN号】978-7-5576-5035-3

【价 格】38.00

【分 类】大学英语水平考试-考试-内容-研究-TOEFL

【参考文献】 王涛著. TEM和TOEEL考试内容效度对比研究. 天津：天津科学技术出版社, 2018.04.

《TEM和TOEEL考试内容效度对比研究》内容提要：

本书作者对TEM和TOEFL两项测试的内容效度进行对比研究，分析了两种考试不同的命题思路和侧重内容，不仅对语言测试本学科领域的理论构建与实践探索具有重要意义，而且对推动我国语言测试国际化、促进我国语言测试研究达到世界一流水平具有开拓性意义。

《TEM和TOEEL考试内容效度对比研究》内容试读

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Research Background

At present,TEM(4&8)(Test for English Majors-Band 4 Band 8),TOEFL (Test ofEnglish as a Foreign Language)are the most influential English proficiency tests in China.TEM4,TEM8 and TOEFL share many characteristics,such as similar candidates (mainlycollege students),similar purposes(mainly for the assessment of overall English proficiencyand for the study in college environment),similar size (of an extremely large scale),similartest structure(consisting of at least three subtests:reading,listening and writing),etc.

Among English proficiency tests,TOEFL is the one with the longest history,operatingfrom 1964.TOEFL claims to provide a test that is as objective as possible so that apart fromwriting tasks,tasks in the other parts adopt the sole format of MCQ (Multiple Choice

Questions).TEM,available from 1978,is claimed to develop largely under the influence ofAmerican TOEFL,thus inevitably sharing some advantages and disadvantages of TOEFL.

Around the year 2016 when the author began writing this book,TEM4,TEM8 and TOEFL allclaimed to adopt new versions in the near future as a reform effort.This turning pointprovides a natural and appropriate moment for a summary of the previous construction efforts(including merits and demerits)of TEM4,TEM8 and TOEFL.

Owing to the popularity and impact of TEM and TOEFL,their lately used papers,specimen tests,or sample tests that are issued by influential organizations are easily accessible,as compared to some less influential tests.That supplies the author with sufficient testsamples as an accurate representative of tests in TEM and TOEFL.

In the field of English as a foreign language testing,much has been written on validity,that is,what to test and how to test.Nevertheless,Messick(1992)points to the fact that ".many test makers acknowledge a responsibility for providing general validity evidence of theinstrumental value of the test but very few do it".This validity evidence of the instrumentalvalue plays a crucial role in supporting the inferences made from scores during the validationprocess.Messick's validation framework has been used by later researchers (Guerrero 2000;

TEM和TOEFL考试内容效度对比研究

Hasselgren 2000),but serious problems in implementation can be noted.We lack an empirical,comprehensive and operationalizable framework to validate tests of national or world-wideimportance.We lack instruments and procedures for applying the validation framework tohigh-stakes tests,and we lack different perspectives from which to examine"the relationshipsbetween the testing instrument and the construct(s)it (the test)attempts to measure"(Weir2005)or to establish the evidence to support particular interpretations on or inferences fromthe scores of a test.

In the field of non-first-language test,research has been conducted (Bridgeman

Carlson 1983;The TEM Testing Center 1997;Hamp-Lyons Kroll 1997;Cumming et al.2000;Hyland 2002;Weigle 2002)into various tests,e.g.,IELTS (International English

Language Testing System),TOEFL(Test of English as a Foreign Language),GRE(Graduate

Record Examination),TEM (Test for English Majors)used at tertiary level to assess testvalidity in English,an essential skill,of course,for those wishing to pursue postgraduatestudies.The assessment of English proficiency test also clearly entails the establishment of aframework or model with effective instruments to validate tests to measure students'Englishproficiency at tertiary level.

It is not until recently that a comprehensive and operationalizable validation frameworkfor validating academic writing tests (AWT),along with the frameworks for validating tests oflistening,reading,speaking in terms of theory-based validity,context validity,markerreliability/scoring validity,consequential validity,and criterion-related validity,has beenproposed by Weir(2005).There is still,nevertheless,a lack of relevant effective instrumentsand procedures based on such a framework and a comparison of validity between TEM and

TEFOL.

In China,there are now nation-wide Tests for English Majors at Band 4 and Band 8(TEM4 and TEM8)at tertiary level in both of them administered according to specificationsof the ELT Syllabus for English Majors in Higher Education.

TEM4 was initiated in 1990 and TEM8 in 1991.From 1993 onwards,SISU(Shanghai

International Studies University)assumed the sole responsibility for producing both TEM4and TEM8 papers.For both TEM4 and TEM8,all the test-takers are non-native Englishmajors in colleges and universities.The number of participants has increased greatly in recentyears,along with the education development in China (with about 126,000 participants inTEM4 and 56,000 in TEM8 in 2003;159,000 in TEM4 and 78,000 in TEM8 in 2004;195,000

2

Chapter 1 Introduction

in TEM4 and 98,000 in TEM8 in 2005).The results of the TEM tests are used for graduationpurposes although not all the English majors in all universities or colleges are required toparticipate in TEM8 as a compulsory test.In addition,TOEFL tests are widely taken asinternational tests for those intending to pursue postgraduate programs,but are notcompulsory for undergraduate students.In addition,all students need to write a dissertation inEnglish as a prerequisite for graduation.However,few studies have been conducted tovalidate either the essay in TEM 4 and TEM8 or the university graduation dissertation aseffective instruments in terms of their theory-,content-,scoring-,consequential-andcriterion-related validity.

This study attempts to carry out this task by developing and/or piloting instruments andprocedures to compare the content validity between TEM4&8 and TOEFL in writing andreading in China.

The processes of this study can be mainly divided into three stages:

1)Review the language testing literature on validity and validation frameworks withdetailed parameters for test validity;

2)Develop and/or pilot relevant instruments and procedures for applying the validationframework to the existing TEM 4&8 and TOEFL;

3)Apply validation instruments and procedures to compare the validity of TEM 4&8 andTOEFL to investigate the extent to which they are valid measures and how some of theinstruments are related to the abilities the test attempts to measure.

1.2 Research Purpose

This book aims to conduct an evaluation of the quality of reading subtests in TEM 4&8and TOEFL based on a comparative analysis of a series of critical facets of tests.Since testquality is largely determined by validity and reliability,the comparative analysis will look intopotential errors of validity and reliability (especially those concerned with content validity,instrument-related reliability,and parallel or alternate forms reliability)within the three testsso as to raise constructive suggestions for improvement in this respect.

The comparison is to be conducted from two aspects-critical characteristics of readingtexts and reading questions,and on two dimensions-horizontally (without reference to time)and vertically (with reference to the time of testing).Based on such a framework,statisticaldata are to be obtained,from which objective information concerning the quality of the two

3

TEM和TOEFL考试内容效度对比研究

tests.The findings from the relevant information then are assumed to have implications forvarious people concerned with reading testing,such as test designers,teachers,learners andprospective test takers.Of particular interest to this book is the provision of relevant anduseful information for TEM test designers responsible for the reading subtests so that thequality of reading tests in TEM4 and TEM8 can be enhanced in the future.

1.3 Research Methodology

Reading subtests of TEM 4&8 and TOEFL are subjects of this book.To ensure therepresentativeness of the data to be collected for analysis,a wide sampling effort is made toset up a sufficiently large test bank.The test bank includes reading-related sections of 20consecutive versions of the each of the three tests,making up 80 versions of reading subtestsaltogether.They are Reading Comprehension sections of TOEFL tests,Reading

Comprehension sections and alternative integrative testing sections (Short Answer Questions/

Translation/Cloze/Error Correction)of TEM4 and TEM8 tests,and Reading sections ofTOEFL tests (used tests,specimen tests,and sample tests issued by authoritative publisherslike Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press in Beijing,influential training centerslike Longman/Global TOEFL Corporation,etc).The tests within the test bank are in thee-form so as to make it easier and more convenient for statistical counting and rechecking.

Most of the test materials have been cross-checked to ensure the correctness of the dataderived out of them in later analyses.To enable a vertical analysis later in the research,thereading subtests thus collected are listed in the chronological order with reference to the timeof test.Research methodology in the quantitative analyses includes manual counting as wellas statistic counting with the assistance of WORD and EXCEL software,and the electriccalculator.Most statistic counts have been conducted for at least twice per point so as to avoidoperation-related errors.

1.4 Layout of the book

This book is composed of seven chapters.Chapter 1,an introduction to the book,includes four sections:1)background,which explains the context from which the writing ofthis book derives;2)research purpose,which illustrates the objective and brief content of thisbook;3)research methodology,which discusses the scope of sampling subjects and themethods of data collection and qualitative analyses;and 4)the layout of the book,which

4

Chapter 1 Introduction

provides an overview of the organization of the book and a brief introduction to the content ofeach chapter.

Chapter 2 does a literature review that contains three broad sections-the basicdescription of TEM 4&8 and TOEFL,validity and validation,and the need for furtherresearch and theoretical foundations.The need for further research in this field is detectedthrough a literature review of the field of TEM testing as well as those fields concerned withTOEFL as a whole.The section of theoretical foundations explores into issues of feasibilityand necessity of the validity comparison between TEM and TOEFL,as well as criteria of testquality.The feasibility of reading testing provides a theoretical basis for the research of thisbook.The necessity of reading testing provides practical significance for the writing of thebook.Criteria of test quality,mainly reliability and validity,provide technical indexes whichgive the analyses in the book a solid theoretical edge.

Chapter 3 is a display and illustration of a proposed framework initiated by the authorconcerning various facets of reading tests for the conduct of quantitative comparisons ofreading tests among TEM 4&8 and TOEFL in Chapter 4.Before the presentation of theframework,a brief introduction to TEM 4&8 and TOEFL provides basic information,including the structure,weighting and techniques used in these influential standardized tests.

Within the second and third sections,the display and illustration of various facets of readingtests is composed of two parts-the illustration of critical facets of reading texts and theclassification of critical facets of reading questions.Critical facets of reading texts underdiscussion include text forms,text length,text readability,sentence length,percentage of longwords,and text topics.Critical facets of reading questions under illustration contain formatsof expected response and testing points in focus.

Chapter 4 is a display and analysis of the data collected through the conduct ofcomparisons of the series of facets of reading tests in TEM 4&8 and TOEFL in accordancewith the framework proposed in Chapter 3.The analysis is made from twodimensions-horizontally (without reference to time)and vertically (with regard to test time).

Chapter 5,summarizes the major findings in the previous chapter and providesimplications for test designers,teachers,learners and prospective test-takers.It also points outthe limitation of this research,calls on further research effort,and finally briefly restates themain research effort of this book.

Chapter 6,reports prototyping measures of TOEFL.In this part,we discuss the questions

5

TEM和TOEFL考试内容效度对比研究

that motivated research during this phase in terms of their relevance to the assumptionsunderlying inferences and warrants in the evolving interpretative argument.We describe thedesign and methodology of the central study.The data and responses collected in this studyprovided grist for many different analyses and for other studies.The findings of theseanalyses are reported here as they pertain to the inferences in the interpretative argument.Weconclude with a summary of how the results of these studies contributed to an emergingconsensus about the design of a new TOEFL.

Chapter 7 summarizes the TOEFL validity argument.These perspectives on validationhave been reflected throughout this book:The theoretical and empirical work pertaining to theTOEFL revision has been discussed in view of the evidence it provides for TOEFLinterpretation and use.However,the approach taken in this volume also contributes towardthe evolving conception of validation by presenting the research in terms of its role in aninterpretive argument (Kane,1992,2001,2004,2006).The point of organizing researcharound an interpretive argument is to make clear the intended interpretations and uses of testscores.In other words,the interpretive argument defines what the validity argument is about.

Before synthesizing the research,however,the role of the validity argument at this stage ofthe TOEFL's design needs to be clarified.

6

···试读结束···