VALUTARE TESTI REGOLATIVI ATTRAVERSO LA SCALA DELL’ADEGUATEZZA FUNZIONALE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54103/2037-3597/29102Abstract
Questo lavoro riporta i risultati di uno studio condotto presso il Centro Linguistico di Ateneo dell’Università degli Studi di Roma Tre. L’obiettivo dello studio è valutare gli aspetti funzionali delle produzioni scritte di studenti Marco Polo al termine di un corso di italiano L2 tenutosi in modalità task-supported (Ellis et al., 2016). Per poter misurare e valutare questi aspetti della comunicazione scritta, è stata utilizzata la scala di valutazione dell’adeguatezza funzionale (AF), elaborata da Kuiken & Vedder (Vedder, 2012; Kuiken & Vedder 2014; Vedder, 2016) e da loro testata su testi argomentativi di studenti olandesi apprendenti di italiano e di spagnolo LS presso l’Università di Amsterdam. Questo studio, invece, testa la scala dell’AF sull’information gap task e valuta il prodotto dei task scritti su un profilo di studenti diverso da quelli dello studio modello. La misurazione dell’affidabilità della scala si basa su indici statistici. I risultati ottenuti confermano l’affidabilità della scala, con nuovi dati relativi alla forza delle correlazioni tra i descrittori che la compongono.
Assessing regulatory texts through the functional adequacy scale
This paper reports the findings of a study carried out at the Centro Linguistico di Ateneo of the Università degli Studi di Roma Tre. The aim of the study is to assess the functional aspects of Marco Polo students’ written productions at the end of an Italian L2 course conducted in a task-supported mode (Ellis et al., 2016). In order to measure and assess these aspects of written communication, the Functional Adequacy (AF) rating scale developed by Kuiken & Vedder (Vedder, 2012; Kuiken & Vedder 2014; Vedder, 2016) and tested by them on argumentative texts of Dutch learners of Italian and Spanish LS at the University of Amsterdam was used. The present study, on the other hand, tests the AF scale on the information gap task and evaluates the product of the writing tasks on a different profile of students than in the model study. The measurement of the reliability of the scale is based on statistical indices. The results obtained confirm the reliability of the scale, with new data on the strength of the correlations between its descriptors.
Downloads
Riferimenti bibliografici
Alanen R., Huhta A., Tarnanen M. (2010), “Designing and assessing L2 writing tasks across CEFR proficiency levels”, in Bartning I., Martin M., Vedder I. (eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research, Eurosla Monographs Series, 1, pp. 21-56.
Bachman L. (1990), Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Byalistok E. (1994), “Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency”, in Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 2, pp. 157-168.
Canale M., Swain M. (1980), “Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing”, in Applied Linguistics, 1, pp. 1-7.
Cohen J. (1988), Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
De Jong N., Steinel M. P., Florijn A. F., Schoonen R., Hulstijn J. H. (2012a), “The effect of task complexity on functional adequacy, fluency and lexical diversity in speaking performances of native and non-native speakers”, in Housen A., Kuiken F., Vedder I. (eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency. Investigating complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 121-142.
De Jong N. H., Steinel M. P., Florijn A. F., Schoonen R., Hulstijn J. H. (2012b), “Facets of speaking proficiency”, in Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 1, pp. 5-34.
Ellis R. (2003), Task-based Language Learning and Teaching, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Faone S., Pagliara F. (2017), How to assess L2 information-gap tasks through Functional Adequacy rating scales, paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Task – Based Language Teaching, Barcellona April 19-21, 2017.
Foster P., Skehan P. (1996), “The influence of planning and task type on second language performance”, in Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, pp. 299-323.
Grice H. P. (1975), “Logic and conversation”, in Cole P., Morgan J. L. (eds.) Speech acts, Academic Press, New York, pp. 41-58.
Hismanoglu M. (2011), “An investigation of ELT students’ intercultural communicative competence in relation to linguistic proficiency, overseas experience and formal instruction”, in International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35, 6, pp. 805-817.
Housen A., Kuiken F. (2009), “Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language acquisition”, in Applied linguistics, 30, 4, pp. 461-473.
Knoch U. (2009), “Diagnostic assessment of writing: A comparison of two rating scales”, in Language Testing, 26, 2, pp. 275-304.
Kuiken F., Vedder I. (2011), “Task complexity and linguistic performance in L2 writing and speaking: The effect of mode”, in Robinson P. (ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 91-104.
Kuiken F., Vedder I. (2014), “Raters’ decisions, rating procedures and rating scales”, in Language testing, 31, 3, pp. 279-284.
Kuiken F., Vedder I. (2016), “Functional adequacy: Towards a new rating scale”, in Language Testing, 34, 3, pp. 321-336.
Kuiken F., Vedder I., Gilabert R. (2010), “Communicative adequacy and linguistic complexity in L2 writing”, in Bartning I., Martin M., Vedder I. (eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research, Eurosla Monographs Series, 1, pp. 81-100.
Ingrassia M. (2014), “La didattica del Task in un corso di italiano L2 per studenti sinofoni. in ItalianoLinguaDue, 6, 2, pp. 379-399:
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/promoitals/article/view/4706.
Lania E., Mastrocesare D., Rossi V. (2017), “I Task con studenti Marco Polo Turandot al Cla di Roma Tre: pratiche didattiche contro vecchi stereotipi e implicazioni culturali”, in Bagna C., Chiapedi N., Salvati L., Scibetta A., Visigalli M. (a cura di), La lingua italiana per studenti internazionali: aspetti linguistici e didattici, OL3 srl, Perugia, pp. 91-97.
McNamara T., Roever C. (2007), Testing: The social dimension, Blackwell Publishing, Malden (MA).
Nunan D. (1989), Designing tasks for the communicative classroom, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Nunan D. (2004), Task-Based Language Teaching, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Oxford R. L. (1990), Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know, Heinle & Heinle, Boston.
Pallotti G. (2009), “CAF: Defining, Refining and Differentiating constructs”, in Applied Linguistics, 30, 4, pp. 590-601.
Prabhu N. S. (1987), Second Language Pedagogy, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Searle J. R. (1969), “Indirect speech acts”, in Syntax and Semantics, 3, pp. 59-82.
Upshur J. A., Turner C. E. (1995), “Constructing rating scales for second language tests”, in ELT Journal, 49, 1, pp. 3-12.
Vedder I. (2012), “Adeguatezza comunicativa e complessità linguistica in italiano L2 e italiano L1: la valutazione delle produzioni scritte di nativi e non nativi”, in Bernini G., Lavinio C., Valentini A., Voghera M. (a cura di), Competenze e formazione linguistiche. In memoria di Monica Berretta. Atti dell’XI Congresso dell’Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata, Guerra Edizioni, Perugia, pp. 9-11.
Vedder I. (2016), “Il ruolo dell’adeguatezza funzionale nelle produzioni scritte in lingua seconda. Proposta per una scala di valutazione”, in Vedder I., Santoro E. (a cura di), Pragmatica e interculturalità in italiano lingua seconda, Franco Cesati Editore, Firenze, pp. 68-79.
Dowloads
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2025 Francesca Pagliara
Questo lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Condividi allo stesso modo 4.0.
