检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:张春青[1] ZHANG Chunqing
机构地区:[1]浙江外国语学院
出 处:《语言测试与评价》2024年第1期84-97,115,116,共16页Language Testing and Assessment
摘 要:写作自动评阅越来越受到教师和研究者的关注,但目前对自动评阅的学习者反馈投入的研究却非常欠缺。本研究从形成性评估理论出发,从修改行为、认知策略和情感反应三个角度,分析了两位大学生使用iWrite英语写作教学与评阅系统时的写作反馈和刺激回忆数据。研究发现,iWrite能够给出分数、语言和结构等多方面的反馈。学生依据反馈对作文相关部分进行了修改和替换,并在此过程中自行纠正了自己发现的问题;在修改过程中,学生运用了各类认知和元认知策略;学生认可反馈的及时性和准确性。从形成性评估角度看,在反馈投入中,学生对学习目标和成功标准的理解发挥重大作用,反馈的准确度和精细度等因素影响学生的情感投入。Automated writing evaluation(AWE)garners increasing attention from teachers and researchers,but scant attention is given to AWE feedback engagement.This case study investigated two college students’feedback engagement using iWrite from three interconnected dimensions—behavioral,cognitive,and emotional—from a formative assessment perspective.Data were collected from two sources:AWE feedback on each assignment and a retrospective interview with the students.Feedback on language,content,structure and coherence as well as scores was provided and students corrected the errors and substituted the problematic words.In revision,the students themselves also did revision according to the requirements of the task.Various types of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies were employed and the students were mostly positive about AWE feedback.The students’understanding of learning goals and success criteria played a pivotal role in their engagement with feedback and the accuracy and granularity affected the emotional engagement with feedback.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.189.185.100