英语读写结合写作试题效度验证：以广东省英语高考考题为例

　　本研究依托Messick的效度整体观，从构念效度的实质和构念效度的外推力两个方面入手，为广东省高考英语读写结合写作题型收集效度证据。 本研究运用多个研究工具、从多角度收集了理论和实证证据。分析发现，考生完成梗概和回应性议论文的写作过程有所不同，由于梗概写作的内容构建比回应性议论文写作复杂，所以计划在梗概写作中显得相对重要；相应地，回应性议论文在语言产出上要求相对高一些，因此，考生更重视对回应性议论文的监控。

暂缺《英语读写结合写作试题效度验证：以广东省英语高考考题为例》作者简介

Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Rationale of the Present Study
1.1.1 General Background of the Present Study
1.1.2 Relevant Studies on Text-BasedWriting Tasks
1.2 Key Research Questions
1.3 Definitions of Key Terms
1.4 Contents of the Book
1.5 Summary
Chapter 2 Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Writing Assessment: A Historical View
2.3 Orientation to English Teaching Objectives and NMET(GD)
2.3.1 The Curriculum and the Teaching Objectives
2.3.2 An Introduction to Writing Tests in NMET(GD)
2.4 Theoretical Conceptualization of Text-Based Writing
2.4.1 The Reading Perspective
2.4.2 The Writing Perspective
2.4.3 The Integrated Perspective
2.5 Conceptualization of Text-Based Writing Test Tasks
2.5.1 Advantages of Text-Based Writing Tasks
2.5.2 Problems with Text-Based Writing Tasks
2.6 Factors Influencing Students' Text-Based Writing Performance
2.6.1 The Task Factors
2.6.2 The Individual Factors
2.6.3 The Writing Process
2.7 Textual Measures of Text-Based Writing
2.7.1 Content
2.7.2 Organization
2.7.3 Language
2.8 Important Validation Research on Text'Based Writing Tests
2.9 Theory of Validity and Validation
2.9.1 Messick's Unitary Validity Concept
2.9.2 Validation Procedures in General
2.10 Summary
Chapter 3 Theoretical Framework
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Text-Based Writing Revisited
3.2.1 Definition of Text-Based Writing Construct
3.2.2 The Text-Based Writing Process Model
3.3 Task Complexity of Summary and Response Argumentation
3.4 Measures of Writing Products ~
3.4.1 Language
3.4.2 Content and Coherence
3.5 Validation Process of the Present Study
3.5.1 The Blend of Validity Evidence of the Present Study
3.5.2 Validation Procedures in Action
3.6 Restatement of Research Questions
3.7 Summary
Chapter 4 Methodology
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Participants
4.2.1 Student Participants
4.2.2 Instructors and Experts
4.2.3 Raters
4.3 Research Design
4.4 Instruments and Materials
4.4.1 Instructors' Attitude Questionnaire
4.4.2 Experts' Questionnaires
4.4.3 The Writing Task
4.4.4 The Coding Scheme for Students' Writings
4.4.5 The Rating Rubrics
4.4.6 Pilot Studies of Test Administration，Rating and Textual Coding
4.4.7 Students' Writing Process Questionnaire
4.4.8 The Interview
4.4.9 Instructors' Test-Preparation Questionnaire
4.5 Data Collection Procedures
4.5.1 Data Collection Procedures of the Instructors' Questionnaires
4.5.2 Data Collection Procedures of the Experts' Questionnaires
4.5.3 Collection of Student Data
4.6 Data Preparations
4.6.1 Numeric Data Generation
4.6.2 Data Entry and Missing Data Handling
4.7 Data Analyses
4.8 Summary
Chapter 5 Results
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Preliminary Data Analyses
5.2.1 Reliability Concerns of the Instruments
5.2.2 Validity of Questionnaires
5.2.3 Tests of Normality of the Rating Scores
5.3 Results for Research Question 1
5.3.1 Findings of Experts' Questionnaire Data
5.3.2 Findings of Instructors' Questionnaire Data
5.3.3 Findings of Students' Questionnaire Data
5.3.4 Sub-Conclusion
5.4 Results for Research Question 2
5.4.1 Results for Research Question 2: the Writing Process Perspective
5.4.2 Results for Research Question 2: the Writing Product Perspective
5.4.3 Sub-Conclusion
5.5 Results for Research Question 3
5.5.1 Results for Research Question 3 ~ Attitude and Acceptability Aspects
5.5.2 Results for Research Question 3 : Reliability and Rasch Analysis Aspects
5.5.3 Results for Research Question 3 : Test Score Aspect
5.5.4 Results for Research Question 3 : Textual Coding Data Aspect
5.5.5 Sub-Conclusion
5.6 Summary
Chapter 6 Discussions
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Evidence for the Substantive Aspect of Construct Validity
6.2.1 Match of the Construct. Explanation of Reliable Variance
6.2.2 An Anatomy of the Construct in Relation to the Task Further Explanation of Reliable Variance
6.3 Evidence for the Generalizability Aspect of Construct Validity
6.3.1 Generalizability: Suitability
6.3.2 Generalizability: More Evidence
6.4 General Discussion
6.5 Summary
Chapter 7 Conclusions
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Major Findings of the Present Study
7.3 Implications of the Present Study
7.3.1 Theoretical Implications
7.3.2 Assessment and Pedagogical Implications
7.4 Limitations of the Present Study
7.5 Directions for Further Studies
7.6 Summary
References
Appendix
Appendix A The Text-Based Writing Task
Appendix B The Cited Phrases for Textual Coding
Appendix C Cohesive Ties for Textual Coding
Appendix D Experts' Questionnaire One
Appendix E Instructors' Attitude Questionnaire
Appendix F Experts' Questionnaire Two
Appendix G The Rating Rubrics
Appendix H Instructors' Test-Preparation Questionnaire
Appendix I The Rating Plan
Appendix J Students' Writing Process Questionnaire
Appendix K Students' Interview Outline
Appendix L Examinee Measurement Report of Rasch Analysis
Appendix M Communalities of Factor Analysis
Appendix N Excerpts of the Interview
Appendix O Graphic Examples of Textual Coding