| 1 |
Quantifying lexical usage: vocabulary pertaining to ecosystems and the environment
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Don't turn a deaf ear: a case for assessing interactive listening
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
The effect of HVP training in vowel perception on bilingual speech production
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
The UK Communicative Development Inventories: Words and Gestures
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
The impact of time allowances in an EAP reading-to-write argumentative essay assessment
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
L2 writers' revisions in a computer-based academic English writing test task: a keystroke logging study
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
A thesis submitted to the University of Bedfordshire, in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy ; This study investigated the revision patterns and purposes of forty native Urdu speaking English L2 writers in a computer-based academic English writing test task. The chosen writers were divided into a more successful and less successful group based on the score obtained in the given IELTS academic writing task 2. A keystroke logging program Inputlog recorded each writing session including all revisions, and it could be re-played after the session. From the recorded sessions, idea or meaning related revisions were further investigated. The writers were shown these revisions immediately after the session as a stimulus, and verbal protocols were obtained to investigate their revision purposes. The revisions obtained from keystroke logging program were analysed using a revision taxonomy based on Stevenson, Schoonen and Glopper (2006) and Lindgren and Sullivan (2006) studies. Findings suggested that in general, both groups focused on form revisions more than the concept revisions. But, more successful writers made conceptual revisions more than form revisions. Also, more successful writers revised larger text chunks, such as clause, sentence and paragraph. Both the groups reported seven revision purposes; however, eighth category 'writers did not remember' also emerged from the data. The seven revision purposes included clarity, explicitness or emphasis, coherence, hedging, modify an idea, eliminate an idea, creating a new global content unit and making text reader-friendly. However, more successful writers expressed more awareness of their revision purposes than less successful writers. The findings of this study have theoretical, pedagogical and methodological implications, particularly in the Urdu L1 context. These findings provide empirical evidence about the revision patterns and purposes of L2 writers which may be useful for the teachers or instructors teaching English writing to L2 writers, particularly to the Urdu speaking English L2 writers. They can use these findings to help them improve their writing skills by focusing on the revisions. However, future research in this area is suggested.
|
|
Keyword:
keystroke logging; L2 writers; more successful and less successful writers; revision patterns; revision purposes; Subject Categories::Q110 Applied Linguistics; Urdu L1
|
|
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10547/624939
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 8 |
Text-independent speaker identification using vowel formants
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
How much does test-takers’ listening proficiency matter in oral interview tests?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
The impact on candidates of examiner interventions in oral interview tests
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
Fostering the future: the micro-educational impact of a language assessment course
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 15 |
Investigating the cognitive validity of EAP reading-into-writing test tasks: a pilot study
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 16 |
Task parallelness: investigating the difficulty of two spoken narrative tasks
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 17 |
Examiner interventions in oral interview tests: what are the listening demands they make upon candidates?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 18 |
Working for washback from university entrance tests in Japan
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 19 |
Assessment of candidates' interactional competence using group oral tests
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 20 |
Interactional competence in the workplace: challenges and opportunities
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
