IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v9y2016i2p102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Raters Judge Spoken Vocabulary?

Author

Listed:
  • Hui Li

Abstract

The aim of the study was to investigate how raters come to their decisions when judging spoken vocabulary. Segmental rating was introduced to quantify raters’ decision-making process. It is hoped that this simulated study brings fresh insight to future methodological considerations with spoken data. Twenty trainee raters assessed five Chinese students’ monologic texts on vocabulary in this study. Both segmental rating and overall rating were retrieved from the raters. Rasch analysis suggested variation between raters in their judgment of vocabulary, although consistency was found in general. Besides, there was a mismatch between candidates’ vocabulary scores and their lexical statistics. The raters’ decision-making process was generally cumulative.

Suggested Citation

  • Hui Li, 2016. "How Do Raters Judge Spoken Vocabulary?," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(2), pages 102-102, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:2:p:102
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/56351/30161
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/56351
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:2:p:102. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.