IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v11y2018i11p98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Item Types: Their Effect on the Sensitivity of Multiple-Choice Cloze Tests

Author

Listed:
  • Abby Deng-Huei Lee

Abstract

To evaluate the sensitivity of multiple-choice cloze (MCC) tests that use different types of items—syntactic, semantic, and connective—to assess reading ability, 170 English as a foreign language (EFL) students in a vocational college in Taiwan were recruited. The students were divided into two groups (level A and level B) based on their scores on 4 classroom reading comprehension tests. Both groups then took 9 MCC tests that included a total of 50 cloze questions. Connective items were most sensitive for assessing reading ability. Research results and pedagogical applications are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Abby Deng-Huei Lee, 2018. "Item Types: Their Effect on the Sensitivity of Multiple-Choice Cloze Tests," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(11), pages 1-98, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:11:y:2018:i:11:p:98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/0/0/37146/37299
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/0/37146
    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:11:y:2018:i:11:p:98. 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.