英语阅读测试中的偏差性研究
|
摘要
关于测试的偏差性的研究历来都属研究的重点,引起测试产生偏差的因素也备受学术界的关注。对于这些因素的研究有助于确认导致不同背景的两组测试者所体现出的不同的测试结果的原因:是能力的差别还是考试本身的特性导致了系统性的考试差异。本研究旨在调查藏族学生英语阅读测试中存在的潜在性的偏差。阅读是衡量学生英语能力的重要指标,如果阅读测试受到某些与考试构念无关的因素的干扰,其测试的结果就不能客观的体现测试者的语言能力。考试的题型以及外语阅读考试中所采用的语言被认为是可能引起分数差别的两个因素。鉴于测试界对多项选择题型提出的质疑,本研究采用了一种新的试题模式——多选题结合总结题型共同测试阅读能力。出于对阅读测试中所采用的语言的考虑,本研究选取了藏族学生作为研究对象。由于语言是藏族学生与汉族学生之间一个显著的差异,所以藏族学生为研究少数民族语言是否会引起测试偏差提供了良好的样本。
以往对于偏差的研究多集中于对测试工具的分析上,本研究不仅仅局限与此,而是结合了心理测量学和社会文化学的方法以多种语言和多元文化为背景来研究测试的偏差。从心理测量学的方法入手,本文采用了定量和定性的研究方法。PETS阅读原文以及翻译后的阅读理解题,问卷调查和访谈成为了研究的工具。从社会文化学的角度出发,本文试图用中国的语言政策和少数民族教育以及实践的经验来解释以上研究工具所得出的结论。
基于全面的研究方法,本研究的结论应可以为研究者们提供较为丰富的研究资料。虽然研究并未发现藏语引起的测试偏差,本文却丰富了关于偏差的讨论,也让我们向更好地理解该课题方向迈进了一步。作者由衷地希望对藏族学生个案的研究能够引发学者们对中国少数民族事务的关注。由于本研究的局限性,结论也欠代表性。因此,今后的研究可以用整个中国的少数民族教育作为背景,发展丰富的关于偏差性研究的理论和方法。
The issue of test bias has been an active area of research for decades. Growing interest has been in the factors that might give rise to bias. The investigation of the causes of bias helps to identify whether the differences in test performance between two population groups are the result of genuine differences in ability or the characteristics of test that have systematically different effects on persons in different groups. This paper aims at making a study on the potential bias in English reading test for Tibetan students. Reading serves as a crucial part to evaluate students’language competence. If the reading test is contaminated by combined factors that are irrelevant to the construct of the test, the scores of the reading test can not be meaningfully interpreted as a manifestation of the test taker’s language ability. The type of response of the reading test and the language used to assess reading comprehension in a foreign language are considered as two of the factors that may work to inflate score differences between two population groups. In view of the skepticism towards the validity of the multiple choice questions (MCQs) test format, the present study adopted a new test format—MCQs plus summarization to test reading comprehension. As to the language aspect of the reading test, Tibetan ethnic group provides a perfect example to verify whether indigenous language is one of the factors that creates test bias, because one striking difference between Tibetan nationality and Han majority is the language.
Instead of being confined to the analyses of testing instruments that the previous researches had focused on, this study has incorporated the psychometric approaches as well as the socio-cultural approaches to touch upon the complex issue of test bias within a broad multilingual and multicultural context. From psychometric approaches, both quantitative and qualitative methods were employed. Two reading tests which were composed of the original passages and translated reading comprehension questions of PETS reading subtests, the questionnaires and the interviews were conducted to detect the artifacts of bias. From socio-cultural approaches, further investigation of China’s language policy, minority education and practice for Tibetan nationality has helped to explain the reasons for the results of the tests, questionnaire survey and interviews.
Based on a comprehensive way of probing into the issue, the conclusions that the present study has reached might be able to furnish the researchers with an enriched understanding of language testing for ethnic groups. Although test bias in English reading test has not been found arising from Tibetan students’indigenous language, this study has contributed to the discussion of test bias and it has taken us one step closer to a better understanding of the complexity of this issue. It is also hoped that a case study on Tibetan nationality will give voice to the issues related to the ethnic minority in China. Yet in the light of the limitations of present study, it is less powerful in generalization. Therefore, the future studies are expected to develop theories and methodologies to enrich the understanding of test bias within the broad Chinese minority education context.
以往对于偏差的研究多集中于对测试工具的分析上,本研究不仅仅局限与此,而是结合了心理测量学和社会文化学的方法以多种语言和多元文化为背景来研究测试的偏差。从心理测量学的方法入手,本文采用了定量和定性的研究方法。PETS阅读原文以及翻译后的阅读理解题,问卷调查和访谈成为了研究的工具。从社会文化学的角度出发,本文试图用中国的语言政策和少数民族教育以及实践的经验来解释以上研究工具所得出的结论。
基于全面的研究方法,本研究的结论应可以为研究者们提供较为丰富的研究资料。虽然研究并未发现藏语引起的测试偏差,本文却丰富了关于偏差的讨论,也让我们向更好地理解该课题方向迈进了一步。作者由衷地希望对藏族学生个案的研究能够引发学者们对中国少数民族事务的关注。由于本研究的局限性,结论也欠代表性。因此,今后的研究可以用整个中国的少数民族教育作为背景,发展丰富的关于偏差性研究的理论和方法。
The issue of test bias has been an active area of research for decades. Growing interest has been in the factors that might give rise to bias. The investigation of the causes of bias helps to identify whether the differences in test performance between two population groups are the result of genuine differences in ability or the characteristics of test that have systematically different effects on persons in different groups. This paper aims at making a study on the potential bias in English reading test for Tibetan students. Reading serves as a crucial part to evaluate students’language competence. If the reading test is contaminated by combined factors that are irrelevant to the construct of the test, the scores of the reading test can not be meaningfully interpreted as a manifestation of the test taker’s language ability. The type of response of the reading test and the language used to assess reading comprehension in a foreign language are considered as two of the factors that may work to inflate score differences between two population groups. In view of the skepticism towards the validity of the multiple choice questions (MCQs) test format, the present study adopted a new test format—MCQs plus summarization to test reading comprehension. As to the language aspect of the reading test, Tibetan ethnic group provides a perfect example to verify whether indigenous language is one of the factors that creates test bias, because one striking difference between Tibetan nationality and Han majority is the language.
Instead of being confined to the analyses of testing instruments that the previous researches had focused on, this study has incorporated the psychometric approaches as well as the socio-cultural approaches to touch upon the complex issue of test bias within a broad multilingual and multicultural context. From psychometric approaches, both quantitative and qualitative methods were employed. Two reading tests which were composed of the original passages and translated reading comprehension questions of PETS reading subtests, the questionnaires and the interviews were conducted to detect the artifacts of bias. From socio-cultural approaches, further investigation of China’s language policy, minority education and practice for Tibetan nationality has helped to explain the reasons for the results of the tests, questionnaire survey and interviews.
Based on a comprehensive way of probing into the issue, the conclusions that the present study has reached might be able to furnish the researchers with an enriched understanding of language testing for ethnic groups. Although test bias in English reading test has not been found arising from Tibetan students’indigenous language, this study has contributed to the discussion of test bias and it has taken us one step closer to a better understanding of the complexity of this issue. It is also hoped that a case study on Tibetan nationality will give voice to the issues related to the ethnic minority in China. Yet in the light of the limitations of present study, it is less powerful in generalization. Therefore, the future studies are expected to develop theories and methodologies to enrich the understanding of test bias within the broad Chinese minority education context.
引文
Alderson, J. C. & Urquhart, A. H. The Effect of Students’Academic Discipline on Their Performance on ESP Reading Rests [J]. Language Testing, 1985, 2 (2): 192-204.
American Psychological Association. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing [S]. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, 1985.
Ammon, M. S. Patterns of Performance among Bilingual Children Who Score Low in Reading [A]. S. Goldman & H. Trueba (eds.). Becoming Literate in English as a Second Language [C]. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1987.71-106.
Auerbach, E. R. Reexamining English Only in the ESL Classroom [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1993, 27 (1).
Axelrod, J. Getting the Main Idea is still the Main Idea [J]. Journal of Reading, 1975, 18 (5):383–387.
Bachman, L. F. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. The Construct Validation of the FSL Oral Interview [J]. Language Learning, 1981, 31 (1):67-86.
Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. Language testing in practice [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Badeng Nima. Problems Related to Bilingual Education in Tibet [J]. Chinese Education and Society, 2001, 34 (2):91-102.
Banks, J. A. An Introduction to Multicultural Education [M]. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2002.
Banks, J. A. Cultural Diversity and Education: Foundations, Curriculum, and Teaching [M]. 5th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2006.
Barnett, M. More Than Meets the Eyes [M]. NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989.
Bensoussan, M. & Kreindler, I. Improving Advanced Reading Comprehension in a Foreign Language: Summaries vs. Short-Answer Questions [J]. Journal of Research in Reading, 1990, 13 (1):55–68.
Berk, R. A. Institution [A]. R. A. Berk, (ed.). Handbook of Methods for Detecting ItemBias [C]. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982.
Bernnett, R. E. On the Meanings of Constructed Response [A]. R. E. Bennett & W. C. Ward (eds.). Construction versus Choice in Cognitive Measurement: Issues in Constructed Response, Performance Testing, and Portfolio Assessment [C]. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1993.1-27.
Block, E. The Comprehension Strategies of Second Language Readers [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1986, 20 (3):463-494.
Clothey, R. China’s Minorities and State Preferential Policies: Expanding Opportunities? [Z]. Paper presented as the Comparative International Education Society Conference.
Washington D. C., 2001. Retrieved October 10, 2008, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED453139 Cohen, A. D. In Which Language do/should Multilinguals Think? [J]. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 1995, 8:99-113.
Corbeil, G. Exploring the Effects of First- and Second-Language Proficiency on Summarizing in French as a Second Language [J]. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2000, 3 (1-2):35-62.
Cronbach, L. J. Validity [A]. R. L. Thorndike (ed.). Educational measurement [C]. 2nd ed. Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education, 1971.443-597.
Cronbach, L. J. Construct Validation after Thirty Years [A]. R. L. Linn (ed.). Intelligence: Measurement, Theory and Public Policy [C]. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 1988.147-171.
Dermody, M. M. & Speaker, R. B. Jr. Reciprocal Strategy Training in Prediction, Clarification, Question Generating and Summarization to Improve Reading Comprehension [J]. Reading Improvement, 1999, 36 (1):16–23.
Educational Testing Service. Legal Issues in Testing [Z]. ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests, Measurement and Evaluation. Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service (Eric No. ED289884), 1985.
Eels, K., Davis, A. Havighurst, R. J. Herrick, V. E., & Tyler, R. W. (eds.). Intellectual and Cultural Differences: A Study of Cultural Learning and Problem-Solving [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951.
Ford, D. Y. Intelligence Testing and Cultural Diversity: Pitfalls and Promises [Z]. Storrs,CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut, 2005.
Frisby, C. L. Culture and Cultural Differences [A]. Sandoval, Jonathan et al, (eds.). Test Interpretation and Diversity: Achieving Equity in Assessment [C]. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, 1998.
García, G. E. Bilingual Children’s Reading [A]. M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, D. Pearson & R. Barr (eds.). Handbook of reading research [C]. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000, (3):163-179.
Gok Hoch Seng & Fatimah Hashim. Use of L1 in L2 Reading Comprehension among Tertiary ESL Learners [J]. Reading in a Foreign Language, 2006, 18 (1):29-54.
Green, D. R. & Draper, J. F. Exploratory Studies of Bias in Achievements Tests [Z]. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association (ERIC No. 070794). Honolulu, Hawaii, 1972.
Grisay, A. Translation Procedures in OECD/PISA 2000 International Assessment [J]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (2):225-240.
Gronlund, N. E. Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching [M]. New York: Macmillan, 1985.
Hambleton, R. K. Issues, Designs and Technical Guidelines for Adapting Tests in Multiple Languages [A]. R. K. Hambleton, P. Merenda & C. Spielberger (eds.). Adapting Educational and Psychological Tests for Cross-Cultural Assessment [C]. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, in press.
Hamdan, J. & Diab, T. Using Arabic in Testing Reading Comprehension in English [R]. Document reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. ERIC No. ED435196, 1997.
Harrington, G. M. Intelligence Tests May Favor the Majority Groups in a Population [J]. Nature, 1975, 258:708-709.
Harrington, G. M. An Experimental Model of Bias in Mental Testing [A]. C. R. Reynolds & R. T. Brown (eds.). Perspectives on Bias in Mental Testing [C]. New York: Plenum Press, 1984.
Harrington, G. M. Two Forms of Minority–Group Test Bias as Psychometric Artifacts with an Animal Model [J]. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 1988, 102:400-407.
Hickman, J. A. & Reynolds, C. R. Are Race Differences in Mental Test Scores an Artifact of Psychometric Methods? A Test of Harrington’s Experimental Model [J]. The Journal of Special Education, 1986-87, 20:409-430.
Hilliard, Asa G., III (Ed). Testing African American Students: Special Reissue of the Negro Educational Review [M]. Chicago: Third World Press, 1995.
Hudson, T. Theoretical Perspectives on Reading [J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 18, Foundations of Second Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998: 43-59.
Hughes, A. Testing for Language Teachers [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Janzen, J. Teaching Strategic Reading [J]. TESOL Journal, 1996, 6 (1):6-9.
Jensen, A. R. Bias in Mental Testing [M]. New York: The Free Press, 1980.
Jiménez, R. T., García, G. E. & Pearson, P. D. The Reading Strategies of Bilingual Latina/o Students who are Successful English Readers: Opportunities and Obstacles [J]. Reading Research Quarterly, 1996, 31 (1):90-112.
Jin, T. Negotiating Contexts: A Case Study of a Tibetan Boarding Class in Inland China from a Tibetan Learner’s Perspective [D]. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of master of education. University of Manitoba, Canada, 2007.
Johns, A. M. Summary Protocols of‘Underprepared’and‘Adept’University Students: Replications and Distortions of the Original [J]. Language Learning, 1985, 35 (4):495-517.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing [S]. Washington D.C.: American Educational Research Association, 1999.
Kern, R. G. The Role of Mental Translation in Second Language Reading [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1994, 16:441-461.
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. Toward a Model of Text Comprehension and Production [J]. Psychological Review, 1978, 85 (5):363–394.
Lee, J. F. On the Use of the Recall Task to Measure L2 Reading Comprehension [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1986, 8 (2):201-211.
Macqueen, J. & Mendelovits, J. PISA Reading: Cultural Equivalence in a Cross-Cultural Study [J]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (2):208-224.
Martinez, E. A. & Godev, C. B. Should Reading Comprehension be Tested in the Target or the Native Language? A Pilot Study [R]. Document reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Eric No. ED390288, 1994.
Mehrens, W. A. & Popham, W. J. How to Evaluate the Legal Defensibility of High-Stakes Tests [J]. Applied Measurement in Education, 1992, 5:265-283.
Messick, S. A. Test Validity and the Ethics of Assessment [J]. American Psychologist, 1980, 35:1012-27.
Messick, S. A. Validity [A]. R. L. Linn (ed.). Educational Measurement [C]. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1989.13-103.
Morita, N. Negotiating Participation and Identity in Second Language Academic Communities [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2004, 38 (4):573-603.
National People’s Congress. Articles in the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China Concerning Ethnic Minority Education [Z]. Chinese Education and Society, 1999, 32 (5):20-22.
National People’s Congress, People’s Republic of China. The Constitution of the People's Republic of China, 1982 [Z]. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 1983.
Nitko, A. J. Educational Tests and Measurement: An Introduction [M]. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983.
Nuttall, C. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language [M]. Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann, 1996.
OECD. Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills: the PISA 2000 Assessment of Reading, Mathematical and Scientific Literacy [Z]. Paris: OECD, 2000.
Office for Civil Rights. The Use of Tests as Part of High-Stakes Decision-Making for Students: A Resource Guide for Educators and Policy-Makers [Z]. Washington, D. C.: Author, 2000.
Paulston, C. B., & Heidemann, K. Language Policies and the Education of Linguistic Minorities [A]. T. Ricento (ed.). An Introduction to Language Policy: Theory and Method [C]. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.292-310.
Postiglione, G. A. State Schooling and Ethnicity in China: The Rise of Demise ofMulticulturalism? [Z]. Paper presented as XIV World Congress of Sociology. Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 1998. Retrieved September 28, 2008, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED427100.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics [Z]. 2nd ed. Harlow: Longman, 1992.
Samuda, R. J., Feuerstein, R., Kaufman, A. S., Lewis, J. E. & Sternberg, R. J. Advances in Cross-Cultural Assessment [M]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.
Sangay, L. Education Rights for Tibetans in Tibet and India [A]. J.D. Montgomery (ed.). Human Rights: Positive Policies in Asia and the Pacific Rim [C]. Hollis, NH: Hollis Publishing Company, 1998.285-307.
Schellenberg, S. J. Test Bias or Cultural Bias: Have We Really Learned Anything? [Z]. Paper presented as part of the symposium“The Achievement Gap: Test Bias or School Structures?”. San Diego, California, 2004.
Scheuneman, J. Exploration of Causes of Bias in Test Items [R]. GRE Board Professional Report. Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ. (GREB No. 81-21P), 1985.
Seidlhofer, B. Summary Judgments: Perspectives on Reading and Writing [J]. Reading in a Foreign Language, 1990, 6 (2):413-424.
Shepard, L. A. The Centrality of Test Use and Consequences for Test Validity [J]. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 1997, 16 (2):5-8.
Shohamy, E. Dose the Test Method Make a Difference? The Case of Reading Comprehension [J]. Language Testing, 1984, 1 (2):147-170.
Sireci, S. G. & Allalouf, A. Appraising Item Equivalence across Multiple Languages and Cultures [J]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (2):148-166.
Smith, C. B. Does It Help to Write about Your Reading? [J]. Journal of Reading, 1988, 32 (3): 276–285.
Spolksy, B. Language Testing: The Problem of Validation [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1968, 2: 88-94.
Stanfield, C. W. Translation and adaptation in public education in the USA [J]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (2):189-207.
Upton, T. A. First and Second Language Use in Reading Comprehension Strategies of Japanese ESL Students [J]. TESL-EJ, 1997, 3 (1).
US Congress. Goals 2000: Educate America Act [Z]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1994a.103–227.
Improving America’s Schools Act [Z]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1994b.103–382.
No Child Left Behind Act [Z]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2002.107–110.
van Dijk, T. A. & Kintsch, W. (eds.). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension [M]. New York: Academic Press, 1983.
Ventry, I. M. & Schiavetti, N. Evaluation Research in Speech Pathology and Audiology [M]. NJ: Addison Wesley Publishing Company, 1980.
Weir, C. J. Communicative Language Test [M]. Herfordshire: Prentice Hall International (UK.) Ltd., 1990.
Yu, G. Reading to Summarize in English and Chinese: A Tale of Two Languages? [J]. Language Testing, 2008, 25 (4):521-551.
American Psychological Association. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing [S]. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, 1985.
Ammon, M. S. Patterns of Performance among Bilingual Children Who Score Low in Reading [A]. S. Goldman & H. Trueba (eds.). Becoming Literate in English as a Second Language [C]. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1987.71-106.
Auerbach, E. R. Reexamining English Only in the ESL Classroom [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1993, 27 (1).
Axelrod, J. Getting the Main Idea is still the Main Idea [J]. Journal of Reading, 1975, 18 (5):383–387.
Bachman, L. F. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. The Construct Validation of the FSL Oral Interview [J]. Language Learning, 1981, 31 (1):67-86.
Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. Language testing in practice [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Badeng Nima. Problems Related to Bilingual Education in Tibet [J]. Chinese Education and Society, 2001, 34 (2):91-102.
Banks, J. A. An Introduction to Multicultural Education [M]. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2002.
Banks, J. A. Cultural Diversity and Education: Foundations, Curriculum, and Teaching [M]. 5th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2006.
Barnett, M. More Than Meets the Eyes [M]. NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989.
Bensoussan, M. & Kreindler, I. Improving Advanced Reading Comprehension in a Foreign Language: Summaries vs. Short-Answer Questions [J]. Journal of Research in Reading, 1990, 13 (1):55–68.
Berk, R. A. Institution [A]. R. A. Berk, (ed.). Handbook of Methods for Detecting ItemBias [C]. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982.
Bernnett, R. E. On the Meanings of Constructed Response [A]. R. E. Bennett & W. C. Ward (eds.). Construction versus Choice in Cognitive Measurement: Issues in Constructed Response, Performance Testing, and Portfolio Assessment [C]. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1993.1-27.
Block, E. The Comprehension Strategies of Second Language Readers [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1986, 20 (3):463-494.
Clothey, R. China’s Minorities and State Preferential Policies: Expanding Opportunities? [Z]. Paper presented as the Comparative International Education Society Conference.
Washington D. C., 2001. Retrieved October 10, 2008, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED453139 Cohen, A. D. In Which Language do/should Multilinguals Think? [J]. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 1995, 8:99-113.
Corbeil, G. Exploring the Effects of First- and Second-Language Proficiency on Summarizing in French as a Second Language [J]. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2000, 3 (1-2):35-62.
Cronbach, L. J. Validity [A]. R. L. Thorndike (ed.). Educational measurement [C]. 2nd ed. Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education, 1971.443-597.
Cronbach, L. J. Construct Validation after Thirty Years [A]. R. L. Linn (ed.). Intelligence: Measurement, Theory and Public Policy [C]. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 1988.147-171.
Dermody, M. M. & Speaker, R. B. Jr. Reciprocal Strategy Training in Prediction, Clarification, Question Generating and Summarization to Improve Reading Comprehension [J]. Reading Improvement, 1999, 36 (1):16–23.
Educational Testing Service. Legal Issues in Testing [Z]. ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests, Measurement and Evaluation. Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service (Eric No. ED289884), 1985.
Eels, K., Davis, A. Havighurst, R. J. Herrick, V. E., & Tyler, R. W. (eds.). Intellectual and Cultural Differences: A Study of Cultural Learning and Problem-Solving [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951.
Ford, D. Y. Intelligence Testing and Cultural Diversity: Pitfalls and Promises [Z]. Storrs,CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut, 2005.
Frisby, C. L. Culture and Cultural Differences [A]. Sandoval, Jonathan et al, (eds.). Test Interpretation and Diversity: Achieving Equity in Assessment [C]. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, 1998.
García, G. E. Bilingual Children’s Reading [A]. M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, D. Pearson & R. Barr (eds.). Handbook of reading research [C]. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000, (3):163-179.
Gok Hoch Seng & Fatimah Hashim. Use of L1 in L2 Reading Comprehension among Tertiary ESL Learners [J]. Reading in a Foreign Language, 2006, 18 (1):29-54.
Green, D. R. & Draper, J. F. Exploratory Studies of Bias in Achievements Tests [Z]. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association (ERIC No. 070794). Honolulu, Hawaii, 1972.
Grisay, A. Translation Procedures in OECD/PISA 2000 International Assessment [J]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (2):225-240.
Gronlund, N. E. Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching [M]. New York: Macmillan, 1985.
Hambleton, R. K. Issues, Designs and Technical Guidelines for Adapting Tests in Multiple Languages [A]. R. K. Hambleton, P. Merenda & C. Spielberger (eds.). Adapting Educational and Psychological Tests for Cross-Cultural Assessment [C]. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, in press.
Hamdan, J. & Diab, T. Using Arabic in Testing Reading Comprehension in English [R]. Document reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. ERIC No. ED435196, 1997.
Harrington, G. M. Intelligence Tests May Favor the Majority Groups in a Population [J]. Nature, 1975, 258:708-709.
Harrington, G. M. An Experimental Model of Bias in Mental Testing [A]. C. R. Reynolds & R. T. Brown (eds.). Perspectives on Bias in Mental Testing [C]. New York: Plenum Press, 1984.
Harrington, G. M. Two Forms of Minority–Group Test Bias as Psychometric Artifacts with an Animal Model [J]. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 1988, 102:400-407.
Hickman, J. A. & Reynolds, C. R. Are Race Differences in Mental Test Scores an Artifact of Psychometric Methods? A Test of Harrington’s Experimental Model [J]. The Journal of Special Education, 1986-87, 20:409-430.
Hilliard, Asa G., III (Ed). Testing African American Students: Special Reissue of the Negro Educational Review [M]. Chicago: Third World Press, 1995.
Hudson, T. Theoretical Perspectives on Reading [J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 18, Foundations of Second Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998: 43-59.
Hughes, A. Testing for Language Teachers [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Janzen, J. Teaching Strategic Reading [J]. TESOL Journal, 1996, 6 (1):6-9.
Jensen, A. R. Bias in Mental Testing [M]. New York: The Free Press, 1980.
Jiménez, R. T., García, G. E. & Pearson, P. D. The Reading Strategies of Bilingual Latina/o Students who are Successful English Readers: Opportunities and Obstacles [J]. Reading Research Quarterly, 1996, 31 (1):90-112.
Jin, T. Negotiating Contexts: A Case Study of a Tibetan Boarding Class in Inland China from a Tibetan Learner’s Perspective [D]. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of master of education. University of Manitoba, Canada, 2007.
Johns, A. M. Summary Protocols of‘Underprepared’and‘Adept’University Students: Replications and Distortions of the Original [J]. Language Learning, 1985, 35 (4):495-517.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing [S]. Washington D.C.: American Educational Research Association, 1999.
Kern, R. G. The Role of Mental Translation in Second Language Reading [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1994, 16:441-461.
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. Toward a Model of Text Comprehension and Production [J]. Psychological Review, 1978, 85 (5):363–394.
Lee, J. F. On the Use of the Recall Task to Measure L2 Reading Comprehension [J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1986, 8 (2):201-211.
Macqueen, J. & Mendelovits, J. PISA Reading: Cultural Equivalence in a Cross-Cultural Study [J]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (2):208-224.
Martinez, E. A. & Godev, C. B. Should Reading Comprehension be Tested in the Target or the Native Language? A Pilot Study [R]. Document reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Eric No. ED390288, 1994.
Mehrens, W. A. & Popham, W. J. How to Evaluate the Legal Defensibility of High-Stakes Tests [J]. Applied Measurement in Education, 1992, 5:265-283.
Messick, S. A. Test Validity and the Ethics of Assessment [J]. American Psychologist, 1980, 35:1012-27.
Messick, S. A. Validity [A]. R. L. Linn (ed.). Educational Measurement [C]. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1989.13-103.
Morita, N. Negotiating Participation and Identity in Second Language Academic Communities [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2004, 38 (4):573-603.
National People’s Congress. Articles in the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China Concerning Ethnic Minority Education [Z]. Chinese Education and Society, 1999, 32 (5):20-22.
National People’s Congress, People’s Republic of China. The Constitution of the People's Republic of China, 1982 [Z]. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 1983.
Nitko, A. J. Educational Tests and Measurement: An Introduction [M]. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983.
Nuttall, C. Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language [M]. Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann, 1996.
OECD. Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills: the PISA 2000 Assessment of Reading, Mathematical and Scientific Literacy [Z]. Paris: OECD, 2000.
Office for Civil Rights. The Use of Tests as Part of High-Stakes Decision-Making for Students: A Resource Guide for Educators and Policy-Makers [Z]. Washington, D. C.: Author, 2000.
Paulston, C. B., & Heidemann, K. Language Policies and the Education of Linguistic Minorities [A]. T. Ricento (ed.). An Introduction to Language Policy: Theory and Method [C]. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.292-310.
Postiglione, G. A. State Schooling and Ethnicity in China: The Rise of Demise ofMulticulturalism? [Z]. Paper presented as XIV World Congress of Sociology. Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 1998. Retrieved September 28, 2008, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED427100.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics [Z]. 2nd ed. Harlow: Longman, 1992.
Samuda, R. J., Feuerstein, R., Kaufman, A. S., Lewis, J. E. & Sternberg, R. J. Advances in Cross-Cultural Assessment [M]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.
Sangay, L. Education Rights for Tibetans in Tibet and India [A]. J.D. Montgomery (ed.). Human Rights: Positive Policies in Asia and the Pacific Rim [C]. Hollis, NH: Hollis Publishing Company, 1998.285-307.
Schellenberg, S. J. Test Bias or Cultural Bias: Have We Really Learned Anything? [Z]. Paper presented as part of the symposium“The Achievement Gap: Test Bias or School Structures?”. San Diego, California, 2004.
Scheuneman, J. Exploration of Causes of Bias in Test Items [R]. GRE Board Professional Report. Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ. (GREB No. 81-21P), 1985.
Seidlhofer, B. Summary Judgments: Perspectives on Reading and Writing [J]. Reading in a Foreign Language, 1990, 6 (2):413-424.
Shepard, L. A. The Centrality of Test Use and Consequences for Test Validity [J]. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 1997, 16 (2):5-8.
Shohamy, E. Dose the Test Method Make a Difference? The Case of Reading Comprehension [J]. Language Testing, 1984, 1 (2):147-170.
Sireci, S. G. & Allalouf, A. Appraising Item Equivalence across Multiple Languages and Cultures [J]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (2):148-166.
Smith, C. B. Does It Help to Write about Your Reading? [J]. Journal of Reading, 1988, 32 (3): 276–285.
Spolksy, B. Language Testing: The Problem of Validation [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1968, 2: 88-94.
Stanfield, C. W. Translation and adaptation in public education in the USA [J]. Language Testing, 2003, 20 (2):189-207.
Upton, T. A. First and Second Language Use in Reading Comprehension Strategies of Japanese ESL Students [J]. TESL-EJ, 1997, 3 (1).
US Congress. Goals 2000: Educate America Act [Z]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1994a.103–227.
Improving America’s Schools Act [Z]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1994b.103–382.
No Child Left Behind Act [Z]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2002.107–110.
van Dijk, T. A. & Kintsch, W. (eds.). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension [M]. New York: Academic Press, 1983.
Ventry, I. M. & Schiavetti, N. Evaluation Research in Speech Pathology and Audiology [M]. NJ: Addison Wesley Publishing Company, 1980.
Weir, C. J. Communicative Language Test [M]. Herfordshire: Prentice Hall International (UK.) Ltd., 1990.
Yu, G. Reading to Summarize in English and Chinese: A Tale of Two Languages? [J]. Language Testing, 2008, 25 (4):521-551.