A comparative study of composing processes in reading- and graph-based writing tasks
- PDF / 278,470 Bytes
- 20 Pages / 595.22 x 842 pts (A4) Page_size
- 18 Downloads / 174 Views
Volume two, Issue three
July 2012
A comparative study of composing processes in reading- and graph-based writing tasks HUI-CHUN YANG Department of English Instruction, National Hsinchu University of Education, Hsinchu, Taiwan Bio Data: Hui-Chun Yang has a Ph.D. from The University of Texas at Austin and has been an instructor of English in the United States and Taiwan. She also had excellent opportunities to teach English to students at the primary, secondary, and post-secondary levels. She is currently an Assistant Professor at National Hsinchu University of Education in Taiwan. Her specializations include language assessment, second language reading and writing, and learner training. Abstract The study compares EFL writers’ processes in composing readingbased writing (RW) and graph-based writing (GW) tasks developed for a university English proficiency exam. Think-aloud protocols and interviews of ten university-level nonnative English-speaking writers were collected to explore writers’ composing processes. The results revealed that both types of the tasks require global comprehension of source texts as well as integrative manipulation of available information for writing. Some differences, however, existed across tasks and writers of varying score levels, with the RW tasks eliciting a more interactive and facilitative process than the GW tasks for the higher scoring writers. These results suggested that these tasks might measure different aspects of academic writing ability. Several considerations of the task constructs should apply in properly determining their use in a language test. The findings could be used to provide insights into the nature of RW and GW tasks and contribute to the validity of source-based writing tasks. Keywords: writing assessments, integrated-tasks, reading-based writing, graph-based writing Introduction The ability to integrate sources into writing has been considered important for academic success (Campbell, 1990; Leki & Carson, 1997). Therefore, a plethora of university assignments have involved writing from multiple sources (Horowitz, 1986; Kirkland & Saunders, 1991). In the same vein, writing tasks requiring writers to compose from language input (e.g., reading passages, lectures) or visual input (e.g., graphs, charts, diagrams) have also been increasingly incorporated into the 33 | P a g e
Language Testing in Asia
Volume two, Issue three
July 2012
assessment batteries of a number of language tests (e.g., Test of English as a Foreign Language – TOEFL, Canadian Academic English Language Assessment – CAEL, International English Language Testing System – IELTS, General English Proficiency Test – GEPT) as a means to increase test fairness (Feak & Dobson, 1996; Read, 1990) and foster positive washback effects on learning and teaching (Cumming, Grant, Mulcahy-Ernt, & Powers, 2004; Fox, 2004). Despite their widespread acceptance, criticisms have been leveled against the use of such tasks due to the fact that they may introduce a source of construct irrelevant variance into the asse
Data Loading...
