本研究以讀寫結(jié)合寫作任務(wù)為測試工具(該測試項目效度已在相關(guān)文獻中得以驗證),所收集數(shù)據(jù)包括:受試寫作文本、問卷調(diào)查、有聲思維及回溯性訪談錄音。本研究的創(chuàng)新之處體現(xiàn)在:1)本研究推導(dǎo)、驗證EFL綜合性寫作測試項目受試策略運用框架,從多個維度探討受試認知策略、元認知策略和意義建構(gòu)策略使用及其對讀寫能力的影響,在語言測試領(lǐng)域具有一定的創(chuàng)新價值;2)本研究在相關(guān)理論框架和前人研究基礎(chǔ)之上構(gòu)建讀寫任務(wù)認知策略、元認知策略、意義構(gòu)建策略調(diào)查工具,并通過實證研究對其進行信度、效度的檢驗,使其具備較強的可操作性,這對于探究綜合性英語寫作測試與教學(xué)中受試如何使用策略,教師如何以此為基礎(chǔ)進行有效反饋提供了有益借鑒。
1997-2001 西北師范大學(xué) 獲學(xué)士學(xué)位(英語語言文學(xué)專業(yè));
2001-2004 蘭州大學(xué) 碩士研究生 (英語語言文學(xué)專業(yè));
2012-2015 上海外國語大學(xué) 博士研究生(英語語言文學(xué)專業(yè));
2004年至今任職于上海第二工業(yè)大學(xué)外國語學(xué)院。
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 Rationale for the study
1.2 Significance of the study
1.3 Outline of the study
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Mental operations in writing
2.1.1 Cognitive operations in writing
2.1.2 Metacognition
2.1.3 Metacognitive strategies in writing
2.2 Constructivist discourse synthesis
2.2.1 Organizing
2.2.2 Selecting
2.2.3 Connecting
2.3 Studies on integrated tasks
2.3.1 Merits and problems of integrated writing tasks
2.3.2 Product-focused studies of integrated test tasks ...
2.3.3 Process-focused studies of integrated test tasks ...
2.4 Elicitation of strategy use
2.4.1 Self-scoring questionnaires
2.4.2 Interviews
2.4.3 Think-aloud protocols
2.4.4 Journals
2.5 Research hypothesis and research questions
2.5.1 Research hypothesis
2.5.2 Research questions
CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 A mixed-method approach——triangulation
3.2 Participants
3.2.1 Participants of the quantitative study
3.2.2 Participants of the qualitative study
3.3 Data collection
3.3.1 Measurement instruments
3.3.2 Questionnaire data
3.3.3 Think Aloud Protocols
3.3.4 Follow-up interviews
3.4 Data analysis
3.4.1 MFRM analysis of test scores
3.4.2 Factor analysis of questionnaire data
3.4.3 TAP data analysis
3.5 Summary
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS
4.1 Multi-Faceted Rasch measurement
4.1.1 The vertical rulers
4.1.2 Examinee measurement report
4.1.3 Raters' rating quality
4.1.4 Item measurement report
4.1.5 Summary
4.2 Item-level questionnaire data analyses
4.2.1 The meaning-constructing strategy use questionnaire
4.2.2 The metacognitive strategy use questionnaire
4.2.3 The cognitive strategy use questionnaire
4.3 Confirmatory factor analysis
4.4 Qualitative data analyses
4.4.1 Meaning-constructing strategy use
4.4.2 Metacognitive strategy use
4.4.3 Cognitive strategy use
4.4.4 Summary
4.5 Summary of the chapter
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION
5.1 Nature of subjects' reported strategy use
5.1.1 Meaning-constructing strategy use
5.1.2 Metacognitive strategy use
5.1.3 Cognitive strategy use
5.2 Differences in strategy use across performance levels
5.2.1 Subjects' source use
5.2.2 Metacogntive strategy use
5.2.3 Cognitive strategy use
5.3 Summary
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION
6.1 Summary of the main findings
6.2 Implications
6.2.1 Theoretical implications
6.2.2 Pedagogical implications
6.2.3 Methodological implications
6.3 Limitations
6.4 Future research directions
APPENDIX
REFERENCES
INDEX
POSTSCRIPT