Post hoc evaluation of analytic rating scales for improved functioning in the assessment of interactive L2 speaking ability
Clicks: 316
ID: 22102
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Improving Quality
0.0
/100
Combines engagement data with AI-assessed academic quality
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
82.7
/100
314 views
253 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Abstract
Abstract This study was designed to determine how well existing analytic rating scales functioned in the assessment of low- to mid-proficiency Japanese university students’ interactive English speaking ability when engaged in small group discussions. Many-facet Rasch measurement (MFRM) was employed to evaluate the quality of adapted rating scales for complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF), interaction, and communicative effectiveness. The video-recorded performances of 64 participants who completed 10-min group discussion tasks at the beginning and end of their first semester of university study were independently rated by four experienced raters using 9-point rating scales and the resulting scores were subjected to many-facet Rasch measurement (MFRM). Although the scores demonstrated acceptable fit to the Rasch model, closer inspection of the data using Linacre’s (J Appl Meas 3:85–106, 2002a) guidelines for post hoc evaluation of rating scale category quality revealed multiple problems with the 9-point scales and suggested four major revisions were likely to improve the scales for use in this context. The resulting five 5-point rating scales developed through these revisions were then used by the same raters to reassess the same task performances. The 5-point rating scale data was then subjected to the same manner of MFRM analyses and found to demonstrate notably improved functioning and quality.
| Reference Key |
mcdonald2018postlanguage
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | McDonald, Kurtis; |
| Journal | language testing in asia |
| Year | 2018 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.