scholarly journals Dependency distance measures in assessing L2 writing proficiency

2022 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 100603
Author(s):  
Jinghui Ouyang ◽  
Jingyang Jiang ◽  
Haitao Liu
System ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 80 ◽  
pp. 176-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Garner ◽  
Scott Crossley ◽  
Kristopher Kyle

2021 ◽  
pp. 100787
Author(s):  
Ting Huang ◽  
Rasmus Steinkrauss ◽  
Marjolijn Verspoor

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 280-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kátia R Monteiro ◽  
Scott A Crossley ◽  
Kristopher Kyle

Abstract Lexical items that are encountered more frequently and in varying contexts have important effects on second language (L2) development because frequent and contextually diverse words are learned faster and become more entrenched in a learner’s lexicon (Ellis 2002a, b). Despite evidence that L2 learners are generally exposed to non-native input, most frequency and contextual diversity metrics used in L2 research represent what is produced by native speakers of English. This study develops and tests indices of lexical frequency and contextual diversity based on L2 output. The L2 indices were derived from an L2 English learner adult corpus that contained three sub-corpora based on language levels (i.e. low, medium, and high). These indices were used to predict human scores of 480 independent essays from the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). First language (L1) indices reported by the Tool for the Automatic Analysis of Lexical Sophistication (TAALES) were also calculated. Three regression analyses were run to predict human scores using L2 indices, L1 indices, and combined indices. The results suggested that the L2 model explained a greater amount of variance in the writing scores and that the L2 model was statistically superior to the L1 model. The findings also suggested that contextual diversity indices are better predictors of writing proficiency than lexical frequency for both the L2 and the L1 models. Finally, an index from the lower level learner sub-corpus was found to be the strongest predictor. The findings have important implications for the analysis of L2 writing in that the L2 benchmarks are more predictive than the L1 benchmarks. These findings could extend human and machine scoring approaches as well as help explain L2 writing quality.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeid Raoofi ◽  
Massoud Binandeh ◽  
Saifullah Rahmani

This paper reports on an investigation into the relationship between writing strategy use and L2 writing proficiency. Although research into language learning strategies is extensive, only a few studies have addressed L2 writing strategies of university students. 312 undergraduate students learning English as a second language took a writing proficiency test and completed a writing strategy questionnaire. The results of the study showed that the participants generally had a relatively high level of ESL writing strategy use. It was also found that Effort regulation strategy and metacognitive strategy were reported as the first and second most frequently used writing strategies respectively, while social strategy was reported as the least frequently used category. The results also showed that students with high writing abilities reported a significantly higher level of writing strategy use compared with those who had intermediate or low writing proficiency. It was found that students with higher writing ability reported using significantly more metacognitive, cognitive, affective and effort regulation strategies than those with lower writing proficiency. The discussion of the results, implications for language classroom and writing instruction are articulated. Limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are also presented.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document