首页> 外文期刊>Educational Assessment >Not Read, but Nevertheless Solved? Three Experiments on PIRLS Multiple Choice Reading Comprehension Test Items
【24h】

Not Read, but Nevertheless Solved? Three Experiments on PIRLS Multiple Choice Reading Comprehension Test Items

机译:未读,但已解决? PIRLS多项选择阅读理解测试项目的三个实验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Multiple-choice (MC) reading comprehension test items comprise three components: text passage, questions about the text, and MC answers. The construct validity of this format has been repeatedly criticized. In three between-subjects experiments, fourth graders (N 1 = 230, N 2 = 340, N 3 = 194) worked on three versions of MC items from the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study 2001 reading comprehension test with relevant components successively deleted: a??original versiona?? (text, questions, MC-answers), a??version without texta?? (questions, MC-answers), a??version without text and without questionsa?? (only MC-answers). Answering correctly the MC items became more difficult as the relevant information was eliminated. In the two narrative fictional texts presented, the students' performance of the version without text was not better than chance. Conversely in the informational (fictional) text, the students' performance of the version without text was better than chance. In the third condition, students' performance was never better than chance.View full textDownload full textRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; var addthis_config = {"data_track_addressbar":true,"ui_click":true}; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2012.735921
机译:多项选择(MC)阅读理解测试项目包括三个组成部分:文本段落,有关文本的问题和MC答案。这种格式的构造有效性已被反复批评。在三个受试者之间的实验中,四年级学生(N 1 = 230,N 2 = 340,N 3 = 194)处理了三个版本“国际阅读素养研究进展2001”阅读理解测试中的MC项(包括相关组成部分)被删除:“原始版本a” (文本,问题,MC-答案),“无文本版本”? (问题,MC-答案),“无文字且无问题的版本a”? (仅MC-答案)。由于消除了相关信息,正确回答MC项目变得更加困难。在呈现的两种叙事小说中,学生在没有文字的情况下的表现并不比偶然好。相反,在信息性(虚构性)文本中,学生在没有文本的情况下的表现要好于偶然性。在第三个条件下,学生的表现永远不会比偶然好。查看全文下载全文相关的变量,digg,google,more“,发布号:” ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b“}; var addthis_config = {“ data_track_addressbar”:true,“ ui_click”:true};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2012.735921

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号