IMPLEMENTING INTEGRATED FORMAT IN ASSESSING READING COMPREHENSION: A CASE OF VIETNAMESE EFL LEARNERS
Main Article Content
Abstract
The present study evaluates the effect of test format on the performance of reading comprehension, which is the integrated format. Unlike the separation of text and test questions into two sections in the split format, the main modification of the integrated format is that the relevant text is integrated with test questions in each reading task. Through the comparison between learners’ performance in the two test formats, this study tests the hypothesis that the overall test performance and task performance in the integrated format are higher than performance in the split format. Drawn on score data of 20 Vietnamese EFL learners, findings from the study showed no effect of test format on the overall test performance and marginally significant effect of test format on task performance. A further analysis on relevant aspects of test design is to be discussed.
Article Details
Keywords
cognitive load theory, split format, integrated format, reading comprehension
References
Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364–373. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.61.5.1
Carlson, S. E., Seipel, B., & McMaster, K. (2014). Development of a new reading comprehension assessment: Identifying comprehension differences among readers. Learning and Individual Differences, 32, 40-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.003
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and instruction, 8(4), 293-332. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2
Crossley, S. A., Skalicky, S., Dascalu, M., McNamara, D. S., & Kyle, K. (2017). Predicting text comprehension, processing, and familiarity in adult readers: New approaches to readability formulas. Discourse Processes, 54(5-6), 340-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1296264
Ferrer, A., Vidal-Abarca, E., Serrano, M. A., & Gilabert, R. (2017). Impact of text availability and question format on reading comprehension processes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 51, 404-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.10.002
Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical Language Testing. Hodder Education.
Huynh, C. M. H. (2015). Split-attention in reading comprehension: A case of English as a foreign/second language. In 6th International Conference on TESOL (pp. 1-12).
Kamhi, A. G., & Catts, H. W. (2017). Epilogue: Reading comprehension is not a single ability - Implications for assessment and instruction. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 48(2), 104-107. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_LSHSS-16-0049
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1986). Reading disability research: An interactionist perspective. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 111-136. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543056001111
Mizumoto, A., Ikeda, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2016). A comparison of cognitive processing during cloze and multiple-choice reading tests using brain activation. ARELE: Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 27, 65-80. https://doi.org/10.20581/arele.27.0_65
Palincsar, A. M., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension - fostering and comprehension - monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
Pearson, P. D., & Cervetti, G. N. (2017). The roots of reading comprehension instruction. In S. E. Israel (Ed.), Handbook on reading comprehension (2nd ed., p. 12-56). The Guilford Press.
Richter, T. (2015). Validation and comprehension of text information: Two sides of the same coin. Discourse Processes, 52(5-6), 337-355. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1025665
Richter, T., & Maier, J. (2017). Comprehension of multiple documents with conflicting information: A two-step model of validation. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 148-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1322968
Ross, S., & Hua, T. F. (1994). An approach to gain score dependability and validity for criterion-referenced language tests. In The 6th Annual Language Testing Research Colloquium (pp. 1-28). Educational resources information center.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205
Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
Weir, C. J. (2005). Language Testing and Validation. Macmillan.
Wixson, K. K. (2017). An interactive view of reading comprehension: Implications for assessment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in schools, 48(2), 77-83. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_LSHSS-16-0030
Yeung, A. S., Jin, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Cognitive load and learner expertise: Split-attention and redundancy effects in reading with explanatory notes. Contemporary educational psychology, 23(1), 1-21.
Carlson, S. E., Seipel, B., & McMaster, K. (2014). Development of a new reading comprehension assessment: Identifying comprehension differences among readers. Learning and Individual Differences, 32, 40-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.03.003
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and instruction, 8(4), 293-332. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2
Crossley, S. A., Skalicky, S., Dascalu, M., McNamara, D. S., & Kyle, K. (2017). Predicting text comprehension, processing, and familiarity in adult readers: New approaches to readability formulas. Discourse Processes, 54(5-6), 340-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1296264
Ferrer, A., Vidal-Abarca, E., Serrano, M. A., & Gilabert, R. (2017). Impact of text availability and question format on reading comprehension processes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 51, 404-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.10.002
Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical Language Testing. Hodder Education.
Huynh, C. M. H. (2015). Split-attention in reading comprehension: A case of English as a foreign/second language. In 6th International Conference on TESOL (pp. 1-12).
Kamhi, A. G., & Catts, H. W. (2017). Epilogue: Reading comprehension is not a single ability - Implications for assessment and instruction. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 48(2), 104-107. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_LSHSS-16-0049
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1986). Reading disability research: An interactionist perspective. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 111-136. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543056001111
Mizumoto, A., Ikeda, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2016). A comparison of cognitive processing during cloze and multiple-choice reading tests using brain activation. ARELE: Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 27, 65-80. https://doi.org/10.20581/arele.27.0_65
Palincsar, A. M., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension - fostering and comprehension - monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
Pearson, P. D., & Cervetti, G. N. (2017). The roots of reading comprehension instruction. In S. E. Israel (Ed.), Handbook on reading comprehension (2nd ed., p. 12-56). The Guilford Press.
Richter, T. (2015). Validation and comprehension of text information: Two sides of the same coin. Discourse Processes, 52(5-6), 337-355. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1025665
Richter, T., & Maier, J. (2017). Comprehension of multiple documents with conflicting information: A two-step model of validation. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 148-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1322968
Ross, S., & Hua, T. F. (1994). An approach to gain score dependability and validity for criterion-referenced language tests. In The 6th Annual Language Testing Research Colloquium (pp. 1-28). Educational resources information center.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205
Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
Weir, C. J. (2005). Language Testing and Validation. Macmillan.
Wixson, K. K. (2017). An interactive view of reading comprehension: Implications for assessment. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in schools, 48(2), 77-83. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_LSHSS-16-0030
Yeung, A. S., Jin, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Cognitive load and learner expertise: Split-attention and redundancy effects in reading with explanatory notes. Contemporary educational psychology, 23(1), 1-21.