1 / 81

Diagnosing reading in a second or foreign language: reading problem or language problem?

Diagnosing reading in a second or foreign language: reading problem or language problem? Old questions, new answers? J Charles Alderson Lancaster University. Outline. The question: transfer or threshold? Some answers New answers: diagnostic testing DIALUKI current research

taylor
Download Presentation

Diagnosing reading in a second or foreign language: reading problem or language problem?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Diagnosing reading in a second or foreign language: reading problem or language problem? Old questions, new answers? J Charles Alderson Lancaster University

  2. Outline • The question: transfer or threshold? • Some answers • New answers: diagnostic testing • DIALUKI current research • Further research?

  3. Transfer or threshold? • Transfer: Poor reading in SFL is due to poor reading in the L1 • Therefore, improve L1 reading and transfer will happen • Poor reading in SFL is due to insufficient knowledge of SFL • Therefore, improve SFL knowledge • BUT is there a threshold above which L1 reading might transfer?

  4. Some answers Correlations between L1 and SFL reading Role of vocabulary vs grammar in SFL reading Two thresholds: below which and above which Role of background and subject knowledge Other factors?

  5. Test purposes Proficiency Achievement Progress Placement Aptitude Diagnosis

  6. Diagnosis NOT Proficiency NOT Achievement NOT Progress NOT Placement NOT Aptitude All the above could yield useful diagnostic information HOWEVER, better is diagnosis by design

  7. Diagnosis • Focus on learners’ strengths and weaknesses; on their prediction, even explanation • Very under-developed and under-theorised in language testing and teaching • Diagnosis requires a better understanding of language abilities than is currently the case • Need to define constructs both theoretically and operationally.

  8. Questions about Diagnosis Why are there so few diagnostic tests? High stakes vs low stakes vs no stakes? How to do diagnosis? How do teachers diagnose? What are the characteristics of a diagnostic test?

  9. Tentative principles of diagnosis • A diagnostic test should be designed to be diagnostic. • Diagnostic tests should be specifically focused. • Diagnostic tests should be based on a clear construct or theoretical understanding of the condition to be diagnosed. • Diagnosis should relate to some possible future treatment, if available. • The envisaged intervention should be teachable or learnable.

  10. Characteristics of diagnostic language tests • Focus more on weaknesses than on strengths • Can-Not-Do statements instead of Can-Dos • Provide immediate results, or results as little delayed as possible after test-taking • Enable a detailed analysis and report of responses to items or tasks • Give detailed feedback which can be acted upon • Lead to remediation in further instruction • Typically low-stakes or no-stakes

  11. Characteristics of diagnostic language tests • Involve little anxiety or other affective barriers to optimum performance • Based on content which has been covered in instruction, or which will be covered shortly, • OR based on some theory of language development, preferably a detailed theory rather than a global theory • Informed by SLA research, or more broadly by applied linguistic theory as well as research • Less ‘authentic’ than proficiency or other tests

  12. Characteristics of diagnostic language tests • More likely to be discrete-point than integrative, or more focussed on specific elements than on global abilities • More likely to focus on language than on language skills • More likely to focus on ’low-level’ language skills than higher-order skills which are more integrated • Likely to be enhanced by being computer-based

  13. dialangweb.lancaster.ac.uk

  14. What is needed is theoretically-grounded empirical research into diagnosis

  15. Research into diagnosis and diagnostic testing (of reading) Collaboration between Lancaster and Jyväskylä Collaboration

  16. DIALUKI: Diagnosing reading in a second and foreign language • Research project 2010-2015: work in progress • Can different L1 and L2 measures predict difficulties in SFL R/W ? • How does SFL proficiency in R/W develop in psycholinguistic and linguistic terms? • Which features or combinations of features characterise different CEFR proficiency levels? • Cooperation between language testers, other applied linguists and psychologists (L1 reading)

  17. DIALUKI: Diagnosing reading in a second and foreign language • Informants • Finnish-speaking learners of English as FL • primary school 4th grade (age 10) • lower secondary school, 8th grade (age 14) • gymnasium (academically oriented upper secondary school), 2nd year students (age 17) • Russian-speaking learners of Finnish as SL • primary school (3-6th grade) • lower secondary school (7-9th grade) • From 111 schools around Finland

  18. DIALUKI: Three major studies • Study 1 (2010/2011) • A cross-sectional study with 3 x 200 + 250 students. • Exploring the value of a range of L1 & L2 measures in predicting L2 reading & writing, in order to select the best predictors for further studies. • Study 2(2011 – ongoing) • Longitudinal, 2-3 years. • The development of literacy skills, and the relationship of this development to the diagnostic measures • Study 3 (2012/13) • Several training / experimental studies, each a few weeks in length. • Morphological awareness, extensive reading, vocabulary learning strategies, phonological awareness, strategies in reading and writing

  19. Dependent variable: reading in English as FL

  20. Independent / predictor variables 1 – Cognitive / psycholinguistic measures

  21. Indep 2 Motivation & (Background)

  22. Independent / predictor variables 3 – Linguistic measures

  23. Study 1 – Dependent variable • Reading in a foreign language (English) • DIALANG reading test of English (2 levels), 30 items; linked with the CEFR levels • Pearson Test of English (PTE) General, 25 operational reading items; linked with the CEFR • 4th grade: Pearson Test of English for Young Learners • Our measure of reading in English is based on Rasch analyses (with Winsteps software) that combines DIALANG and Pearson items

  24. Study 1 – Independent variables 1 Cognitive measures • Backwards digit span in L1 and FL • Rapid recognition of words in L1 and FL • Rapid word list reading in L1 and FL • Rapid automatised naming in L1 and FL • Non-word reading in L1 and FL • Non-word spelling in L1 • Non-word repetition in L1 and FL • Phoneme deletion in L1 and FL • Common unit in L1 and FL

  25. DIALUKI Study One Example Instruments

  26. Cognitive and psycholinguistic tasks (1)Rapidly presented words * * * d a y # ¤ &

  27. Cognitive and psycholinguistic tasks (2) • RAN Rapid Automatized Naming L1 and FL • Mixed stimuli: • numbers, letters and colours (L1) • numbers, objects and colours (FL)

  28. You will hear a series of numbers digits and your task is to repeat aloud but backwards the numbers you heard First you will hear an example NOW EVERYBODY CLOSE YOUR EYES AND LISTEN

  29. Backward digit span working memory test in L1 and FL

  30. L2 1. hast 6. tegwop 2. mosp 7. molsmit 3. prab 8. twamket 4. gromp 9. hinshink 5. trolb 10. kipthirm Non-word reading task

  31. You will hear a pair of words with one sound in common to the pair. Repeat that sound First you will hear an example NOW EVERYBODY CLOSE YOUR EYES.

  32. L2 1. mip – pank 5. madast – wordle 2. skey – twisp 6. prinkle – mapgom 3. brang – peb 7. sloskon – nagar 4. kelpit – membro 8.larsk – mambron Common Unit task

  33. You will hear a word and then a sound. Repeat the word without that sound First you will hear an example NOW EVERYBODY CLOSE YOUR EYES.

  34. L2 1. kisP – kis 6. stanseRt – stanset 2. Drant – rant 7. dockOAn – dockn 3. Apren – pren 8. pronaTE – prona 4. balraS – balra 9. driggLE – drigg 5. Nolcrid – olcrid 10. norCH – nor Phoneme deletion task

  35. Study 1 – Independent variables 2 Linguistic measures • Size of L1 Vocabulary: DIALANG VSPT • Size of FL Vocabulary: Schmitt et al VST • Segmentation in L1: Divide up continuous text • Segmentation in FL: Divide up continuous text • Listening in FL: Dictation • Reading in L1: PISA and ALLU test • Self-assessment in reading L1: CEFR Can-Dos • Self-assessment in reading FL: CEFR Can-Dos

  36. Segmentation task in L2 (4th graders’ version) Example: |thepigsweresohappytheysangthissong| |the|pigs|were|so|happy|they|sang|this|song| Task: |sothenextdaythethreelittlepigslefthomethefirstpigmadeahomefromstrawthesecondpig| |madeahomefromsticksbutthethirdpigwascleverhemadehishomefrombricksonedaythebig| |badwolfcametothestrawhouseheknockedonthedoor|

  37. Vocabulary Levels Test2000-frequency level example _____ game _____ winning _____ being born Each level test consists of 10 such sets of words sampled from the particarfrequency band (definitions easier than the target words) 1 birth 2 dust 3 operation 4 row 5 sport 6 victory

  38. Study 1 – Independent variables 3 Motivation measures Iwaniec Motivation Questionnaire • Anxiety • English Self-concept • Instrumentality • Intrinsic Interest • Motivational Intensity • Parental Encouragement • Self-regulation

  39. ENGLISH SELF-CONCEPT • Compared to other students, I'm good at English • I have always done well in English. • Studying English is easy for me. • I get good marks in English. • I learn English quickly. • I’m better at English than most of my classmates.

  40. Independent variables: Students • How much homework do you normally do during a normal school day? • Not at all • Half an hour or less a day • From half an hour to an hour a day • 1–2 hours a day • Over 2 hours a day • How do you feel about reading in your free time? • I like reading a lot • I like reading somewhat • I don’t like reading

  41. Compulsory school Vocational school or institute Gymnasium Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree a) Child’s mother 1 2 3 4 5 b) Child’s father 1 2 3 4 5 Working Retired Student Housewife/ husband Unemployed a) Child’s mother 1 2 3 4 5 b) Child’s father 1 2 3 4 5 Independent variables: Parents Parents’ education Parents’ occupation

  42. Spearman rank-order correlation 4th grade learners, n = 182 .357 8th grade learners, n = 186 .405 Gymnasium learners, n = 193 .388 Relationship between reading in L1 and FL

  43. Adjusted R Square % variance First variable Second variable Third variable Fourth variable 4th Grade .192 19% Rapidly presented words in English (.375) Rapid naming of colours etc in English (-.367) 8th Grade .294 29% Rapid naming of colours etc in English (.509) Backward digit span in English (.336) Rapidly presented words in English (.289) Gym .317 31% Rapid naming of colours etc in English (-.476) Backwards digit span in English (.377) Reading word list in Finnish (.046) Rapidly presented words in English (.245) Relationship between cognitive measures and FL reading

  44. Dependent variable Adjusted R Squared % variance 1st IV 2nd IV 3rd IV 4th IV 5th IV 4th Grade Pearson Young Learners Test in English .494 49% Size of English vocab (.664) L1 Finnish Reading (ALLU) (.403) English dictation (.602) 8th Grade Pearson General + DIALANG Medium .650 65% Size of English vocab (.740) L1 Finnish Reading (PISA) (.403) English dictation (.670) Size of Finnish vocab (.282) Self assessment of English reading (.272) Gym Pearson General + DIALANG Advanced .692 69% English dictation (.795) Size of English vocab (.747) LI Finnish Reading (PISA) (.418) Relationship between linguistic measures and FL reading

  45. Stepwise multiple regression analysis, linguistic, cognitive and motivation variables

  46. Definition of reading ability • Poor reader = one 1 standard deviation or more below the mean on the reading measure • Medium reader = between minus one standard deviation and plus one standard deviation on the reading measure • Strong reader = one standard deviation or above on the reading measure

  47. Cross-tabulation, Gymnasium learners Total Strong FL readers Medium FL readers Weak FL readers Strong L1 readers 14 33 4 51 Medium L1 readers 20 80 16 116 Weak L1 readers 0 17 9 26 Total 34 130 29 193 Relationship between reading in L1 and FL

  48. Finnish English Significant differences between weak readers and strong readers Backwards digit span*** Phoneme deletion* Common unit** Backwards digit span*** Rapid word reading** Word list reading* Rapid automatised naming*** Non-word reading*** Non-word repetition** Phoneme deletion*** No significant difference Rapid word reading Word list reading Rapid automatised naming Non-word spelling Non-word reading Non-word repetition Common unit Relationship between reading ability and cognitive measures, Gymnasium

More Related