The Relationship between Risk taking and Self-assessment of EFL Learners in Writing Ability

Bu çalışma yabancı dil olarak EFL ingilizce öğrencilerin yazma becerilerinde risk alma ve kendinideğerlendirme arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektedir. Sonunda 31 lise öğrencisi Kiany ve Pournia (2006) geliştirmiş olduğu Eysenckin girişkenlik ölçeğine göre hazırlanmış risk alma anketini doldururlar. Yanıtlara göre öğrenciler, yüksek risk alıcılar ve az risk alıcılar olmak üzere iki gruba ayrıldı. Onlara bir dene- me yazmaları ve de kendi yazım becerilerini değerlendirmek için bir konu başlığı verildi. Öğrencilerinyazılarını sadece doğru cümle kurulumunu değerlendiren iki ölçücü seçildi. Bu çalışmanın amacı öğrencilerin akademik hayatıyla sosyal yaşamda risk olmalarını incelediği için, öğrencilerin dilbilgisi, kelimebilgisi ya da diğer dil becerileri değerlendirilmemiştir. Elde edilen verileri değerlendirmek için, istatistikişlemleri olarak Pearson Correlation Coefficient ve Varianceın çoklu analizi MANOVA kullanılmıştır.Sonuçlar risk alma ve kendini değerlendirme arasında önemli bir ilişki olmadığını gösterdi. Diğer bir deyişle, yüksek risk alıcılar ve az risk alıcılar kendi yazılarını değerlendirmede benzerdi. Çok risk alıcılaryazılarında birleşik cümle, yeni yapı ve diğerlerinin kullanımı gibi alanlarda herhangi risk göstermemiştir.Araştırmanın sonuçları metinde detaylı tartışılmaktadır.

Yabancı Dil Olarak EFL İngilizce Öğrencilerin Yazma Becerilerinde Risk Alma ve Kendini Değerlendirme Arasındaki İlişki

The present study investigates the relationship between risk-taking and self-assessment of EFLlearners in writing ability. To this end, 31 Iranian senior students completed a risk-taking questionnairebased upon the Venturesomeness subscale of Eysenck s IVE modified by Kiany and Pournia (2006), torate their risk-taking levels. Based on their answers, the students were divided into two groups: high risk- takers and low risk-takers. They were then given a topic about which to write an essay and also to assesstheir writing skills. Two intra-raters were chosen to rate the students' writings based on just the correctstructure of essay writing, not grammar or word correction or other details since the aim of study was toinvestigate students' risk-taking in their academic life in comparison to their social life. To analyse theobtained data, Pearson Correlation Coefficient and Multi-variance Analysis of Variance (MANOVA)were used as statistical procedures. The results did not show any significant relationship between risk- taking and students' self-assessment in writing. In other words, the high risk-takers and low risk-takerswere the same in assessing their writings. Also high risk-takers did not show any risks in their writings,such as using complicated sentences, new structures, and so forth. The implications of the study arefurther discussed.

PDF

___

AlFallay, I. (2004). The Role of Some Selected Psychological and Personality Traits of the Rater in the Accuracy of Self- and Peer-Assessment. System, 32, 407-425.
Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting Learning and Achievement Through Self-Assessment. Theory into Practice, 48, 1, 12-19.
Bloom, L. Z. (1997). Why I (used to) Hate to Give Grades. College Comp osition and Communication, 48, 3, 360-371.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bardine, F., & Fulton, P. (2008). Analyzing the Benefits of Revision Memos During the Writing and Revision Process. The Clearing House, 81, 4, 149-54.
Blanche, P., & Merino, B. J. (1989). Self-Assessment of Foreign-Language Skills: Implications for Teachers and Researchers. Language Learning, 39, 313340.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How Peop le Learn. Washington, D.C., National Academy Press.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by p rincip les: An Interactive App roach to Language Pedagogy . New York: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2004). Language Assessment: Princip les and Classroom Practices. White Plains, New York: Longman.
Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (1989). Quantitative Studies of Student Self-Assessment in Higher Education: A Critical Analysis of Findings. Higher Education, 18 (5), 529-549.
Campillo, M. (2006). Acquisition and Transfer of a Writing Revision Strategy: A SelfRegulatory Analysis. The Humanities and Social Sciences, 17, 32-45.
Chanquoy, L., & Alamargot, D. (2002). Working memory and writing: Model evolution and research assessment (In French). In L 'Année Psychologique, 102.
Clifford, M. M., & Chou, F. (1991). Effects of payoff and task context on academic risk taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 499507.
Diltz, J. (2006). Words to voice: Three Approaches for Student Self Evaluation. Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 34, 1, 41-45.
Elbow, P. (1994). About Voice and Writing. In P. Elbow (Ed.) Landmark essays on voice and Writing 146-157. NJ: Hermagoras Press.
Elbow, P., & Belanoff, P. (1995). A Community of Writers: A Workshop Course in Writing. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Oxford.
Ely, C. M. (1986). An Analysis of Discomfort, Risk-Taking, Sociability, and Motivation in the L2 Classroom. Language Learning, 36 (1), 1-25.
Falchikov, N. (1986). Product Comparisons and Process Benefits of Collaborative Peer Group and Self- Assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 11, 146166.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1993). Self-Regulated Strategy Development: Helping Students with Learning Problems Develop as Writers. Elementary School Journal, 94, 169-181.
Graziano-King, J. (2007). Assessing Student Writing: The self-revised essay. Journal of Basic Writing, 26 (2), 73-92.
Hatch, E. & Farhady, H. (1982). Research Design and Statistics f or App lied Linguistics. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Rowley: Newbury House Publishers. Hayes, J. R. (1996). A New Framework for Understanding Cognition and Affect in Writing. In C. M. Levy, & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Diff erences, and App lications, 1-27. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Heilenman, L. K. (1990). Self-Assessment of Second Language Ability: The Role of Response Effects. Language Testing, 7, 174-201.
Herman, L. J., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winters, L. (1992). A Practical Guide to Alternative Assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Huerta-Mac´ıas, A. (1995). Alternative Assessment: Responses to Commonly Asked Guestions. TESOL Journal, 5, 8-11.
Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowsky, B. L. (1993). Handbook of Individual Diff erences, Learning and Instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A Model of Working Memory in Writing. Eds. C. M. Levy, & S. E. Ransdell, The science of writing, 57-71. OUP.
Kiany. G. R., & Pournia, Y. A. (2006). The Relationship Between Risk-Taking and the Syntactic Complexity and Grammatical Accuracy of the Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners Descriptive and Expository Writing. Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-ye Kharej i, 27 (Sp ecial issue, English) , 143-64.
Liu, M., & Jackson, J. (2008). An exploration of Chinese EFL Learners Unwillingness to Communicate and Foreign Language Anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 92 (1), 71-86.
Marlowe, B. A., & Page, M. L. (2005). Creating and Sustaining the Constructivist Classroom. Sage Publisher.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43-52.
McCarthy, P., Meier, S., & Rinderer, R. (1985). Self-Efficacy and Writing: A Different view of Self- Evaluation. College Comp osition and Communication, 36, 465-471.
Moghadasian-Rad, Z. (1994). The Role of Risk-taking in EFL Reading Comp rehension. An Unpublished MA Thesis. Tehran University. Iran.
Murray, D. M. (1982). Learning by Teaching. Montclair, New Jersey: Boynton/Cook.
Nicol, D., & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative Assessment and Self-Regulated Learning: A Model and Seven Principles of Good Feedback Practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 2, 199- 218.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Callaghan, A. (2004). Implementation of a Formative Assessment Model Incorporating Peer and Self Assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41, 3, 273-290.
Oscarson, M. (1989). Self-Assessment of Language Proficiency: Rationale and Applications. Language Testing, 6, 1-13.
Reiss, M. A. (1985). The good language learner: Another look. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 41, 511-523.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Dictionary of Language Teaching and App lied Linguistics. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
Ross, S. (2005). The Impact of Assessment Method on Foreign Language Proficiency Growth. App lied Linguistics, 26 (3), 317-342.
Sommers, N., & Saltz, L. (2004). The novice as expert: Writing the Freshman Year. College Comp osition and Communication, 56 (1), 124-49.
Stewart, D. C. (1972). The Authentic Voice: A Pre-Writing App roach to Student Writing. Dubuque, Iowa: Brown.
Vickers, C., & Ene, E. (2006). Grammatical Accuracy and Learner Autonomy in Advanced Writing. English Language Teaching Journal, 60, 2, 109-116.
Wen, W. P., & Clement, R. (2003). A Chinese Conceptualization of Willingness to Communicate in ESL. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 16 (1), 18-38.
Yancey, K. B. (1998). Ref lection in the Writing Classroom. Logan: Utah State University Press.