Читательская грамотность. Минск: рикз, 2020. 201 с
reflect on content and form
жүктеу/скачать 3,64 Mb. Pdf көрінісі
|
- Бұл бет үшін навигация:
- Box 3. Text availability and its impact on comprehension in the design of tasks
| reflect on content and form
tasks, difficulty is affected by the type of reflection or evaluation required (from least to most difficult with types of reflection being: connecting; explaining and comparing; hypothesising and evaluating); by the nature of the knowledge that the reader needs to bring to the text (a task is more difficult if the reader needs to draw on narrow, specialised knowledge rather than broad and common knowledge); by the relative abstraction and length of the text; and by the depth of understanding of the text required to complete the task. For assess quality and credibility tasks credibility and quality of a source can be conditioned by using text signals such as the explicitness of the source In multiple documents, corroborate/conflict/synthesize difficulty is conditioned on the number of texts, the dissimilarity of content (discrepancy in texts content/arguments), the dissimilarity of each of the physical presentation/structure of the sources (lack of parallelism in different source texts), the explicitness of the source information, and the degree of credibility of the source. 174 and the degree to which a text appears to be advertising or comes from a reputable source. Box 3. Text availability and its impact on comprehension in the design of tasks In the last decade, there has been some debate whether memory-based measures of reading comprehension, i.e. answering comprehension question while the text is not available to students after initial reading, might be a better indicator of students’ reading comprehension skills than questions with text availability. From a theoretical point of view, arguments can be made for both, with- and without-text availability questions. Answering comprehension questions with a text might be more ecologically valid because many reading settings (especially in the digital age) potentially allow the reader to refer back to the text. In addition, if the text is not available to students, their performance on the comprehension questions might be confounded with their memory skills, i.e. their ability to remember the content of the text. On the other hand, answering comprehension questions without text availability is also a common reading situation (e.g. commenting on a newspaper article over lunch that has been read in the morning) and might be less confounded by students’ motivational and test taking strategies. Empirically, recent studies (Ozuru et al., 2007; Schroeder, 2011) do provide some evidence that comprehension questions without text availability might indeed be more sensitive to the quality of the processes that are executed while students are reading a text and the strength of the resulting memory representation. At the same time, however, both kinds of measures are highly correlated and are thus difficult to dissociate empirically. At present, therefore, there is not enough evidence that justifies any major changes in the way PISA is administered. However, it is encouraged to include further measures in the analysis, e.g. time on task, time of initial reading of a text, etc., in order to further explore this issue. жүктеу/скачать 3,64 Mb. Достарыңызбен бөлісу:
|