A Comparison of Distractor Selection among Proficiency Levels in Reading Tests: A Focus on Summarization Processes in Japanese EFL Learners

Autor/inn/en	Terao, Takahiro; Ishii, Hidetoki
Titel	A Comparison of Distractor Selection among Proficiency Levels in Reading Tests: A Focus on Summarization Processes in Japanese EFL Learners
Quelle	In: SAGE Open, 10 (2020) 1, (14 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Terao, Takahiro)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	2158-2440
DOI	10.1177/2158244020902087
Schlagwörter	Comparative Analysis; English (Second Language); Second Language Instruction; Second Language Learning; Language Proficiency; Undergraduate Students; Writing Skills; Generalization; Language Tests; Writing Tests; Foreign Countries; Error Patterns; Test Items; Item Analysis; Raw Scores; Inferences; Japan + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? English as second language; English; Second Language; Englisch als Zweitsprache; Fremdsprachenunterricht; Zweitsprachenerwerb; Language skill; Language skills; Sprachkompetenz; Writing skill; Schreibfertigkeit; Language test; Sprachtest; Writing test; Schreibtest; Ausland; Fehlertyp; Test content; Testaufgabe; Itemanalyse; Inference; Inferenz
Abstract	This study aimed to compare selection patterns of distractors (incorrect options) according to test taker proficiency regarding Japanese students' summarization skills of an English paragraph. Participants included 414 undergraduate students, and the test comprised three summarization process types--deletion, generalization, and integration. Within the questions, which represented summary candidates for a final version of a test, distractors were created reflecting typical student errors related to each summarization process. Six distractor types were tested. Results showed that distractors that were missing important information for the summary functioned well for determining low-, middle-, and high-proficiency students regarding deletion items. For generalization items, both distractor types, those containing examples and those with inappropriate superordinates, were attractive for low- and middle-proficiency students. Regarding integration items, it was found that distractors missing the author's viewpoint in the summary were more attractive only for less-proficient students. Several tips to guide future item writing are provided. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01