Advertisement

Japanese Language Learning and the Rasch Model

  • Kazuyo Taguchi
Part of the Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects book series (EDAP, volume 4)

Abstract

This study attempted to evaluate outcome of foreign language teaching by measuring the reading and writing proficiency achieved by students studying Japanese as a second language in six different year levels from year 8 to the first of university in the classroom setting. In order to measure linguistic gains across six years, it was necessary, firstly, to define operationally what reading and writing proficiency was; and secondly, to create measuring instruments, and, thirdly, to identify? suitable statistical analysis procedures.

The study sought to answer the following research questions: Can reading and writing performance in Japanese as a foreign language be measured?; and Does reading and writing performance in Japanese form a single dimension on a scale?

The participants of this project were drawn from one independent school and two universities, while the instruments used were the routine tests produced and marked by the teachers. The estimated test scores of the students calculated indicated that the answers to all research questions are in the affirmative. In spite of some unresolved issues and limitations the results of the study indicated a possible direction and methods to commence an evaluation phase of foreign language teaching. The study also identified the Rasch model as not only robust measuring tools but also as capable of identifying grave pedagogical issues that should not be ignored.

Key words

linguistic performance learning outcomes person estimates item estimates measures of growth pedagogical implications 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

8. References

  1. Adams, R. & S-T Khoo (1993) QUEST: The Interactive test analysis system. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  2. Asian languages and Australia’s economic future. A report prepared for COAG on a proposed national Asian languages/studies strategies for Australian schools. [Rudd Report] Canberra: AGPS (1994).Google Scholar
  3. Bachman, L. & Palmer, A.S. (1996) Language testing in practice: Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bachman, L. (1990) Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bejar, I.I. (1983) Achievement testing: Recent advances. Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publication.Google Scholar
  6. Brossell, G. (1983) Rhetorical specification in essay examination topics. College English, (45) 165–174.Google Scholar
  7. Carroll, J.B. (1975) The teaching of French as a foreign language in eight countries. International studies in evaluation V. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
  8. Clarke, M.A. (1988) The short circuit hypothesis of ESL reading — or when language competence interferes with reading performance In P. Carrell, J. Devine & D. Eskey (Eds.).Google Scholar
  9. Eckhoff. B. (1983) How reading affects children’ writing. Language Arts, (60) 607–616.Google Scholar
  10. Elder, C. & Iwashita, N. (1994) Proficiency Testing: a benchmark for language teacher education. Babel, (29) No. 2.Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, C.J., & Braun, G. (1982) Story schemata: Metatextual aid to reading and writing. In J.A. Niles & L.A. Harris (Eds.). New inquiries in reading research and instruction. Rochester, N. Y.: National Reading Conference.Google Scholar
  12. Hamp-Lyons, L, (1989) Raters respond to rhetoric in writing. In H. Dechert & G. Raupach. (Eds.). Interlingual processes. Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
  13. Iwashita, N. and C. Elder (1997) Expert feedback: Assessing the role of test-taker reactions to a proficiency test for teachers of Japanese. In Melbourne papers in Language Testing, (6) 1. Melbourne: NLLIA Language Testing Research Centre.Google Scholar
  14. Kaplan, A. (1964) The Conduct of inquiry. San Francisco, California. Chandler.Google Scholar
  15. Keeves, J. & Alagumnalai, S. (1999) New approaches to measurement. In G. Masters, & J, Keeves. (Eds.).Google Scholar
  16. Keeves, J. (Ed.) (1997) (2nd edt.) Educational research, methodology, and measurement: An international handbook. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  17. Krashen, S. (1982) Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  18. Language teachers: The pivot of policy: The supply and quality of teachers of languages other than English. 1996. The Australian Language and Literacy Council (ALLC). National Board of Employment, Education and Training. Canberra: AGPS.Google Scholar
  19. Leal, R. (1991) Widening our horizons. (Volumes One and Two). Canberra: AGPS.Google Scholar
  20. McNamara, T. (1996) Measuring second language performance. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  21. Nicholas, H. (1993) Languages at the crossroads: The report of the national inquiry into the employment and supply of teachers of languages other than English. Melbourne: The National Languages & Literacy Institute of Australia.Google Scholar
  22. Nunan, D. (1988) The learner-centred curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Rasch, G. (1960) Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedagogiske Institut.Google Scholar
  24. Rudd, K.M. (Chairperson) (1994) Asian languages and Australian economic future. A report prepared for the Council of Australian Governments on a proposed national Asian languages/ studies strategies for Australian schools. Queensland: Government Printer.Google Scholar
  25. Scarino, A. (1995) Language scales and language tests: development in LOTE. In Melbourne papers in language testing, (4) No. 2. 30–42. Melbourne: NLLIA.Google Scholar
  26. Shaw, P & Li, E.T. (1997) What develops in the development of second — language writing? Applied Linguistics, 225–253.Google Scholar
  27. Silva. T. (1990) Second language composition instruction: developments, issues, and directions in ESL. In Kroll (Ed.). (1990).Google Scholar
  28. Swain, M. (1985) ‘Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development’. In S. Gass, S. & C. Madden (Eds.). Input in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  29. Taguchi, K. (2002) The linguistic gains across seven grade levels in learning Japanese as a foreign language. Unpublished EdD desertation, Flinders University: South Australia.Google Scholar
  30. Umar, J. (1987) Robustness of the simple linking procedure in item banking using the Rasch model. (Doctorial dissertation, University of California: Los Angeles).Google Scholar
  31. Weiss, D. J. & Yoes, M.E. (1991) Item response theory. in R. Hambieton, & J. Zaal. (Eds.). Advances in educational and psychological testing: Theory and applications. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  32. Wilkinson, A. (1983) Assessing language development: The Credition Project. In A. Freedman, I. Pringle, & I. Yalden (Eds.). Learning to write: First language/ second language. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  33. Wingersky, M. S., & Lord, F. (1984) An investigation of methods for reducing sampling error in certain IRT procedures. Applied Psychology Measurement, (8) 347–64.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kazuyo Taguchi
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University of AdelaideAdelaide
  2. 2.Flinders UniversityAdelaide

Personalised recommendations