英语专业四、八级考试阅读理解测试内容效度研究（1997-2008）
|
摘要
英语专业四、八级考试(TEM)是一项由国家教育委员会主办、已执行将近二十年的尺度参照性标准化考试。2005年,该考试在考试形式和考试内容上进行了改革,其中阅读部分不再区分仔细阅读和快速阅读,TEM4和TME8阅读测试时间分别由30分钟和40分钟减少到25分钟和30分钟。邹申(1997)对1993-1996年TEM阅读理解部分的内容效度进行了研究,之后对该部分历时的内容效度研究比较缺乏。本文从以下三个方面探讨1997-2008年TEM阅读理解部分的内容效度:TEM阅读理解与相应教学大纲和考试大纲的吻合程度、改革前后TEM阅读理解的考查内容对比、TEM4和TEM8阅读理解之间的考查内容对比。
基于Bachman & Palmer的任务特点框架,并结合英语专业教学大纲和TEM考试大纲中对阅读理解部分的要求,以及TEM阅读理解部分本身的实际特点,本文提出一个更具操作性的阅读测试内容效度评估框架。该框架涉及场景、测试说明、文本输入、预期回答、文本输入与预期回答之间的关系五个方面。本文依照这一框架对1997-2008年改革前后TEM阅读理解部分的97篇仔细阅读篇章、110篇快速阅读篇章和相应的560个问题进行了分析。
研究结果表明,1997-2008年TEM阅读理解部分的内容效度较高,抽样具有代表性,测试到了英语专业教学大纲和TEM考试大纲规定的内容。具体表现为:1) TEM阅读理解的大部分特点与相应教学大纲和考试大纲比较符合,比如,体裁多样;题材广泛;长度和阅读速度与相应教学大纲、考试大纲比较符合;难度适宜;所考阅读技能覆盖面广。2)改革前后TEM阅读理解部分的变化体现了相应教学大纲和考试大纲的变化,改革后更加注重考生综合运用能力的考查,比如,阅读技能的覆盖面更加广泛。3) TEM8阅读理解部分在考查内容方面难度明显高于TEM4,体现了相应教学大纲和考试大纲对不同级别测试的难度要求,具体体现在文章长度、阅读速度、易读度等方面。
但是,分析中也发现一些问题,如TEM4和TEM8阅读理解篇章的话题都过于集中,大部分为社会与文化;改革后的TEM8阅读理解长度远低于考试大纲的要求。
最后,本文根据研究结果为以后TEM阅读理解试题的命制、英语专业教学和学习提供一些参考性建议。
TEM is criterion-referenced proficiency test and has been in operation nation-wide for nearly twenty years. In 2005, TEM4 and TEM8 have undergone some changes in test format and content. Zou Shen (1997) has conducted a validation study on TEM from 1993 to 1996. Since then, few longitudinal content validity study of reading comprehension in TEM is conducted. Therefore, this thesis will assess the content validity of reading comprehension in TEM from 1997 to 2008 with reference to the following three questions: 1) to what extent do the reading comprehension parts of TEM4 and TEM8 meet the requirements in the teaching and testing syllabuses? 2) what are the differences in TEM reading comprehension before and after the innovation? 3) what are the differences between reading comprehension parts of TEM4 and TEM8?
Based on Bachman & Palmer’s framework of task characteristics, the author puts forward a revised framework for validating reading comprehension with the help of the teaching and testing syllabuses and combining with the characteristics of TEM reading comprehension part. The revised framework includes the setting, the test rubrics, the input, the expected response, and the relationship between input and expected response. In terms of the five characteristics in the revised framework, the thesis has examined 24 TEM papers, including 97 careful reading passages, 110 fast reading passages and 560 question items.
Results show that TEM reading comprehension has a high content validity. It can be manifested in the following three aspects: 1) most characteristics of reading passages in TEM meet the requirements in the relevant teaching and testing syllabuses, such as the adoption of different types of genre, the wide coverage of topics, the appropriate difficulty, etc. 2) the changes of TEM reading comprehension parts after the innovation manifest the changes of the requirements in the teaching and testing syllabuses. 3) reading comprehension parts of TEM8 are more difficult than those in TEM4, which reflects the different requirements of the teaching and testing syllabuses to different bands.
At last, some implications for both test designers and English major teachers and learners are put forward.
基于Bachman & Palmer的任务特点框架,并结合英语专业教学大纲和TEM考试大纲中对阅读理解部分的要求,以及TEM阅读理解部分本身的实际特点,本文提出一个更具操作性的阅读测试内容效度评估框架。该框架涉及场景、测试说明、文本输入、预期回答、文本输入与预期回答之间的关系五个方面。本文依照这一框架对1997-2008年改革前后TEM阅读理解部分的97篇仔细阅读篇章、110篇快速阅读篇章和相应的560个问题进行了分析。
研究结果表明,1997-2008年TEM阅读理解部分的内容效度较高,抽样具有代表性,测试到了英语专业教学大纲和TEM考试大纲规定的内容。具体表现为:1) TEM阅读理解的大部分特点与相应教学大纲和考试大纲比较符合,比如,体裁多样;题材广泛;长度和阅读速度与相应教学大纲、考试大纲比较符合;难度适宜;所考阅读技能覆盖面广。2)改革前后TEM阅读理解部分的变化体现了相应教学大纲和考试大纲的变化,改革后更加注重考生综合运用能力的考查,比如,阅读技能的覆盖面更加广泛。3) TEM8阅读理解部分在考查内容方面难度明显高于TEM4,体现了相应教学大纲和考试大纲对不同级别测试的难度要求,具体体现在文章长度、阅读速度、易读度等方面。
但是,分析中也发现一些问题,如TEM4和TEM8阅读理解篇章的话题都过于集中,大部分为社会与文化;改革后的TEM8阅读理解长度远低于考试大纲的要求。
最后,本文根据研究结果为以后TEM阅读理解试题的命制、英语专业教学和学习提供一些参考性建议。
TEM is criterion-referenced proficiency test and has been in operation nation-wide for nearly twenty years. In 2005, TEM4 and TEM8 have undergone some changes in test format and content. Zou Shen (1997) has conducted a validation study on TEM from 1993 to 1996. Since then, few longitudinal content validity study of reading comprehension in TEM is conducted. Therefore, this thesis will assess the content validity of reading comprehension in TEM from 1997 to 2008 with reference to the following three questions: 1) to what extent do the reading comprehension parts of TEM4 and TEM8 meet the requirements in the teaching and testing syllabuses? 2) what are the differences in TEM reading comprehension before and after the innovation? 3) what are the differences between reading comprehension parts of TEM4 and TEM8?
Based on Bachman & Palmer’s framework of task characteristics, the author puts forward a revised framework for validating reading comprehension with the help of the teaching and testing syllabuses and combining with the characteristics of TEM reading comprehension part. The revised framework includes the setting, the test rubrics, the input, the expected response, and the relationship between input and expected response. In terms of the five characteristics in the revised framework, the thesis has examined 24 TEM papers, including 97 careful reading passages, 110 fast reading passages and 560 question items.
Results show that TEM reading comprehension has a high content validity. It can be manifested in the following three aspects: 1) most characteristics of reading passages in TEM meet the requirements in the relevant teaching and testing syllabuses, such as the adoption of different types of genre, the wide coverage of topics, the appropriate difficulty, etc. 2) the changes of TEM reading comprehension parts after the innovation manifest the changes of the requirements in the teaching and testing syllabuses. 3) reading comprehension parts of TEM8 are more difficult than those in TEM4, which reflects the different requirements of the teaching and testing syllabuses to different bands.
At last, some implications for both test designers and English major teachers and learners are put forward.
引文
[1] Alderson, J. C., Clapham, C., & Wall, D. (1995). Language test construction and evaluation. Cambridge: CUP.
[2] Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: CUP
[3] Alderson, J. C., & Urquhart, A. H. (1985). The effect of students' academic discipline on their performance on ESP reading tests. Language Testing, 2 (2), 192-204.
[4] American Psychological Association. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
[5] Angello, L. M. (2003). A behavioral validation of curriculum-based measurement: effects of task demand and context on oral reading rate across time. Doctor dissertation of Lehigh university.
[6] Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: OUP.
[7] Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: OUP.
[8] Braten, I., & Stromoso, H. (2003). A longitudinal think-aloud study of spontaneous strategic processing during the reading of multiple expository texts. Reading and Writing, 16, 195-218.
[9] Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language: An approach based on the analysis of conversational English. Cambridge: CUP.
[10] Carrel, P. L. (1988). Interactive text processing: Implications for ESL/second language reading classrooms. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading. Cambridge: CUP.
[11] Chen Yan. (2007). A study of the content validity of NETEM reading comprehension. M. A. thesis of Southwest Jiaotong University.
[12] Chihara, T., Sakurai, T., & Oller, J. W. (1989). Background and culture as factors in EFL reading comprehension. Language Testing, 6 (2), 143-151.
[13] Ding Wangdao, et al. (1994). A handbook of writing. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[14] Dong Manxia. (2007). Content validity study on reading comprehension tests of NMET. M. A. thesis of Chongqing University.
[15] Fries, C. C. (1963). Linguistics and reading. New York: Rinehart and Winston.
[16] Goodman, G. S. (1967). Reading: a psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the reading specialist, 4, 126-135.
[17] Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. In F. J. Kavanagh & G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by Ear and by Eye. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
[18] Grellet, F. (1981). Developing reading skills. Cambridge: CUP.
[19] Hale, G. A. (1988). Student major field and text content: interactive effects on reading comprehension in the Test of English as a Foreign Language. Language Testing, 5 (1), 49-61.
[20] Harris, D. P. (1969). Testing English as a second language. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[21] Heaton, J. B. (2000). Writing English language tests. Beijing: Beijing Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[22] Henning, G. (1987). A guide to language testing: Development, Evaluation and Research. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[23] Hou Yanping. (2005). Assessing reading by a model of task characteristics in content validation—evaluating the reading part of TEM4 (2000-2002). M. A. thesis of Shanghai International Studies University.
[24] Huang Xinxin. (2006). Effects of different response formats on reading comprehension test performance. M. A. thesis of Shanghai Jiaotong University..
[25] Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: CUP.
[26] Ingram, E. (1977). Basic Concepts in Testing. In Allen, J. P. B. and Davis, A. (Eds.), Testing and Experimental Methods. Oxford: OUP.
[27] Ito, A. (2004). Two types of translation tests: their reliability and validity. System, 32, 395-405.
[28] Jafarpur, A. (1987). The short-context technique: an alternative for testing reading comprehension. Language Testing, 4 (2), 195-220.
[29] Jang E. E. (2005). A validity narrative: effects of reading skills diagnosis on teaching and learning in the context of NG TOEFL. Thesis for doctor’s degree of University of Illinois.
[30] Jin Yan (2002). The development and validation of the advanced English reading test. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.
[31] Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundation of behavior research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
[32] Kelly, T. L. (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. New York: New World Book Company.
[33] Kinneavy, J. L. (1971). A theory of discourse: the aims of discourse. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
[34] Kobayashi, M. (2002). Method effects on reading comprehension test performance: text organization and response format. Language Testing, 19 (2), 193-220.
[35] Lado, R. (1961). Language testing. London: Longman.
[36] Lau, K., & Chan, D. W. (2007). The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on Chinese reading comprehension among Hong Kong low achieving students. Reading and Writing, 20, 833-857.
[37] Lennon, R. T. (1962). What can be measured? Reading Teacher, (15), 326-337.
[38] Liu Chunwei. (2002). Testing theories and the TEM4 practice. M. A. thesis of Dalian University of Foreign Languages.
[39] Messick, S. A. (1988). The once and future issues of validity: assessing the meaning and consequences of measurement. In H. Wainer and H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test Validity. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[40] Messick, S.A. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 13-103). New York: Macmillan.
[41] Messick, S. A. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-9.
[42] Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: CUP.
[43] Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K. A., & Manis, F. R. (2007). A longitudinal analysis of English language learners’word decoding and reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 20, 691-719.
[44] Nuttall, C. (1982). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
[45] Parel, R. (2004). The impact of lexical inferencing strategies on second language reading proficiency. Reading and Writing, 17, 847-873.
[46] Perkins, K. (1992). The effect of passage and topical structure types on ESL reading comprehension difficulty. Language Testing, 9 (2), 163-172.
[47] Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2003). Longman dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[48] Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S.Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[49] Rupley, W., & Willson, V. L. (1996). Content, domain, and world knowledge: relationship to comprehension of narrative and expository text. Reading and Writing, 8, 419-432.
[50] Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2003). Bilingual oral reading fluency and reading comprehension: the case of Arabic/Hebrew(L1)—English (L2) readers. Reading and Writing, 16, 717-736.
[51] Shohamy, E. (1984). Does the testing method make a difference? The case of reading comprehension. Language Testing, 1 (2), 147-170.
[52] Sovik, N., Arntzen, O., & Samuelstuen, M. (2000). Eye movement parameters and reading speed—a study of oral and silent reading performances of twelve-year-old children. Reading and writing, 13: 237-255.
[53] Taboada, A., Tonks, S. M, Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 22, 85-106.
[54] Upshur, J.A. (1971). Productive communication testing: a progress report. In G. Perren and J.L.M. Trim (Eds.), Applications in Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP.
[55] Weir, C. J. (1993). Understanding and developing language tests. New York: Prentice Hall.
[56] Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[57] Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: OUP.
[58] Wood, R. B. (2001). Assessment and testing: a survey of research. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[59] Yan Shenghong. (2004). A computerized-assisted readability study. M .A. thesis of Chongqing University.
[60] Zhang Yi. (2006). Validation study of translation items in national entrance test of English for MA/MS candidates. M. A. thesis of Wuhan University of Technology.
[61] Zou Shen. (1997). TEM validation study. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[62] Zhou Yuemei. (2004). Exploration into comparability of two national EFL tests (CET-6 and TEM-4) in China. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[63] Zhu Yuefeng. (2003). TEM4 validation study. M .A. thesis of Zhejiang University.
[64]高等学校英语专业基础阶段英语教学大纲制订组(1989).《高等学校英语专业基础阶段英语教学大纲》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[65]高等学校英语专业英语教学大纲工作小组(1990).《高等学校英语专业高年级英语教学大纲》.北京:外语教学与研究出版社.
[66]高等学校外语专业教学指导委员会英语组(2000).《高等学校英语专业英语教学大纲》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[67]《高等学校英语专业英语教学大纲》词汇表编写组(2004).《英语专业四、八级词汇表》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[68]高校英语专业四级考试大纲修订小组(1997).《高校英语专业四级考试大纲(修订版)》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[69]高校英语专业四级考试大纲修订小组(2004).《高校英语专业四级考试大纲(2004年新版)》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[70]高校英语专业八级考试大纲修订小组(1997).《高校英语专业八级考试大纲(修订版)》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[71]高校英语专业八级考试大纲修订小组(2004).《高校英语专业八级考试大纲(2004年新版)》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[72]辜向东,关晓仙(2003). CET阅读测试与大学英语阅读材料易读度抽样研究.《西安外国语学院学报》.第3期: 39-42.
[73]辜向东,李志芳,张书奎(2009).大学英语四级考试快速阅读部分内容效度研究.《西南民族大学学报(人文社科版)》.第1期: 258-263.
[74]辜向东,王秋艳(2008).高考英语全国卷与各省市自主命题卷阅读理解试题内容效度分析.《考试研究》.第3期: 102-114.
[75]何莲珍(2000).认知与阅读理解测试.《外语研究》.第2期: 54-64.
[76]矫永芹(2008).英语专业八级阅读试卷内容与结构效度的评析.《山东工商学院学报》.第6期: 121-123.
[77]金艳,吴江(1997).“内省法”在阅读理解测试研究中的应用.《外语界》.第4期: 56-59.
[78]金艳,吴江(1998).以内省法检验CET阅读理解测试的效度.《外语界》.第2期: 47-52.
[79]李俊,葛俊丽(2002).论英语阅读测试的内容效度问题.《浙江工业大学学报(社会科学)》.第6期: 603-609.
[80]李筱菊(1997).《语言测试科学与艺术》.长沙:湖南教育出版社.
[81]李雪林(2008).我国外语在学人数近5000万.文汇报. 2008-3-30(2).
[82]刘凌(2008). TEM-4阅读理解内容效度分析.《安徽工业大学学报(社会科学版)》.第6期: 115-117.
[83]卢晓仙(2008). TEM8阅读理解测试内容效度分析.《三峡大学学报(人文社会科学版)》.第1期: 99-101.
[84]汪顺玉(2006).语言测试构念效度研究—以2005年TEM8客观试题跨群体构念一致分析为例.上海外国语大学博士论文.
[85]杨惠中& Weir, C. J.(1998).《大学英语四、六级考试效度研究》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[86]邹申,张艳莉,周越美(2002).阅读测试中题目类型、策略与分数的关系—TEM4考试阅读项目的答题效度研究.《外语与外语教学》.第5期: 19-22.
[2] Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: CUP
[3] Alderson, J. C., & Urquhart, A. H. (1985). The effect of students' academic discipline on their performance on ESP reading tests. Language Testing, 2 (2), 192-204.
[4] American Psychological Association. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
[5] Angello, L. M. (2003). A behavioral validation of curriculum-based measurement: effects of task demand and context on oral reading rate across time. Doctor dissertation of Lehigh university.
[6] Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: OUP.
[7] Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: OUP.
[8] Braten, I., & Stromoso, H. (2003). A longitudinal think-aloud study of spontaneous strategic processing during the reading of multiple expository texts. Reading and Writing, 16, 195-218.
[9] Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language: An approach based on the analysis of conversational English. Cambridge: CUP.
[10] Carrel, P. L. (1988). Interactive text processing: Implications for ESL/second language reading classrooms. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading. Cambridge: CUP.
[11] Chen Yan. (2007). A study of the content validity of NETEM reading comprehension. M. A. thesis of Southwest Jiaotong University.
[12] Chihara, T., Sakurai, T., & Oller, J. W. (1989). Background and culture as factors in EFL reading comprehension. Language Testing, 6 (2), 143-151.
[13] Ding Wangdao, et al. (1994). A handbook of writing. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[14] Dong Manxia. (2007). Content validity study on reading comprehension tests of NMET. M. A. thesis of Chongqing University.
[15] Fries, C. C. (1963). Linguistics and reading. New York: Rinehart and Winston.
[16] Goodman, G. S. (1967). Reading: a psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the reading specialist, 4, 126-135.
[17] Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. In F. J. Kavanagh & G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by Ear and by Eye. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
[18] Grellet, F. (1981). Developing reading skills. Cambridge: CUP.
[19] Hale, G. A. (1988). Student major field and text content: interactive effects on reading comprehension in the Test of English as a Foreign Language. Language Testing, 5 (1), 49-61.
[20] Harris, D. P. (1969). Testing English as a second language. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[21] Heaton, J. B. (2000). Writing English language tests. Beijing: Beijing Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[22] Henning, G. (1987). A guide to language testing: Development, Evaluation and Research. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[23] Hou Yanping. (2005). Assessing reading by a model of task characteristics in content validation—evaluating the reading part of TEM4 (2000-2002). M. A. thesis of Shanghai International Studies University.
[24] Huang Xinxin. (2006). Effects of different response formats on reading comprehension test performance. M. A. thesis of Shanghai Jiaotong University..
[25] Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: CUP.
[26] Ingram, E. (1977). Basic Concepts in Testing. In Allen, J. P. B. and Davis, A. (Eds.), Testing and Experimental Methods. Oxford: OUP.
[27] Ito, A. (2004). Two types of translation tests: their reliability and validity. System, 32, 395-405.
[28] Jafarpur, A. (1987). The short-context technique: an alternative for testing reading comprehension. Language Testing, 4 (2), 195-220.
[29] Jang E. E. (2005). A validity narrative: effects of reading skills diagnosis on teaching and learning in the context of NG TOEFL. Thesis for doctor’s degree of University of Illinois.
[30] Jin Yan (2002). The development and validation of the advanced English reading test. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.
[31] Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundation of behavior research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
[32] Kelly, T. L. (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. New York: New World Book Company.
[33] Kinneavy, J. L. (1971). A theory of discourse: the aims of discourse. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
[34] Kobayashi, M. (2002). Method effects on reading comprehension test performance: text organization and response format. Language Testing, 19 (2), 193-220.
[35] Lado, R. (1961). Language testing. London: Longman.
[36] Lau, K., & Chan, D. W. (2007). The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on Chinese reading comprehension among Hong Kong low achieving students. Reading and Writing, 20, 833-857.
[37] Lennon, R. T. (1962). What can be measured? Reading Teacher, (15), 326-337.
[38] Liu Chunwei. (2002). Testing theories and the TEM4 practice. M. A. thesis of Dalian University of Foreign Languages.
[39] Messick, S. A. (1988). The once and future issues of validity: assessing the meaning and consequences of measurement. In H. Wainer and H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test Validity. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[40] Messick, S.A. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 13-103). New York: Macmillan.
[41] Messick, S. A. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-9.
[42] Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: CUP.
[43] Nakamoto, J., Lindsey, K. A., & Manis, F. R. (2007). A longitudinal analysis of English language learners’word decoding and reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 20, 691-719.
[44] Nuttall, C. (1982). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
[45] Parel, R. (2004). The impact of lexical inferencing strategies on second language reading proficiency. Reading and Writing, 17, 847-873.
[46] Perkins, K. (1992). The effect of passage and topical structure types on ESL reading comprehension difficulty. Language Testing, 9 (2), 163-172.
[47] Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2003). Longman dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[48] Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S.Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[49] Rupley, W., & Willson, V. L. (1996). Content, domain, and world knowledge: relationship to comprehension of narrative and expository text. Reading and Writing, 8, 419-432.
[50] Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2003). Bilingual oral reading fluency and reading comprehension: the case of Arabic/Hebrew(L1)—English (L2) readers. Reading and Writing, 16, 717-736.
[51] Shohamy, E. (1984). Does the testing method make a difference? The case of reading comprehension. Language Testing, 1 (2), 147-170.
[52] Sovik, N., Arntzen, O., & Samuelstuen, M. (2000). Eye movement parameters and reading speed—a study of oral and silent reading performances of twelve-year-old children. Reading and writing, 13: 237-255.
[53] Taboada, A., Tonks, S. M, Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 22, 85-106.
[54] Upshur, J.A. (1971). Productive communication testing: a progress report. In G. Perren and J.L.M. Trim (Eds.), Applications in Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP.
[55] Weir, C. J. (1993). Understanding and developing language tests. New York: Prentice Hall.
[56] Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[57] Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: OUP.
[58] Wood, R. B. (2001). Assessment and testing: a survey of research. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[59] Yan Shenghong. (2004). A computerized-assisted readability study. M .A. thesis of Chongqing University.
[60] Zhang Yi. (2006). Validation study of translation items in national entrance test of English for MA/MS candidates. M. A. thesis of Wuhan University of Technology.
[61] Zou Shen. (1997). TEM validation study. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[62] Zhou Yuemei. (2004). Exploration into comparability of two national EFL tests (CET-6 and TEM-4) in China. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[63] Zhu Yuefeng. (2003). TEM4 validation study. M .A. thesis of Zhejiang University.
[64]高等学校英语专业基础阶段英语教学大纲制订组(1989).《高等学校英语专业基础阶段英语教学大纲》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[65]高等学校英语专业英语教学大纲工作小组(1990).《高等学校英语专业高年级英语教学大纲》.北京:外语教学与研究出版社.
[66]高等学校外语专业教学指导委员会英语组(2000).《高等学校英语专业英语教学大纲》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[67]《高等学校英语专业英语教学大纲》词汇表编写组(2004).《英语专业四、八级词汇表》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[68]高校英语专业四级考试大纲修订小组(1997).《高校英语专业四级考试大纲(修订版)》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[69]高校英语专业四级考试大纲修订小组(2004).《高校英语专业四级考试大纲(2004年新版)》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[70]高校英语专业八级考试大纲修订小组(1997).《高校英语专业八级考试大纲(修订版)》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[71]高校英语专业八级考试大纲修订小组(2004).《高校英语专业八级考试大纲(2004年新版)》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[72]辜向东,关晓仙(2003). CET阅读测试与大学英语阅读材料易读度抽样研究.《西安外国语学院学报》.第3期: 39-42.
[73]辜向东,李志芳,张书奎(2009).大学英语四级考试快速阅读部分内容效度研究.《西南民族大学学报(人文社科版)》.第1期: 258-263.
[74]辜向东,王秋艳(2008).高考英语全国卷与各省市自主命题卷阅读理解试题内容效度分析.《考试研究》.第3期: 102-114.
[75]何莲珍(2000).认知与阅读理解测试.《外语研究》.第2期: 54-64.
[76]矫永芹(2008).英语专业八级阅读试卷内容与结构效度的评析.《山东工商学院学报》.第6期: 121-123.
[77]金艳,吴江(1997).“内省法”在阅读理解测试研究中的应用.《外语界》.第4期: 56-59.
[78]金艳,吴江(1998).以内省法检验CET阅读理解测试的效度.《外语界》.第2期: 47-52.
[79]李俊,葛俊丽(2002).论英语阅读测试的内容效度问题.《浙江工业大学学报(社会科学)》.第6期: 603-609.
[80]李筱菊(1997).《语言测试科学与艺术》.长沙:湖南教育出版社.
[81]李雪林(2008).我国外语在学人数近5000万.文汇报. 2008-3-30(2).
[82]刘凌(2008). TEM-4阅读理解内容效度分析.《安徽工业大学学报(社会科学版)》.第6期: 115-117.
[83]卢晓仙(2008). TEM8阅读理解测试内容效度分析.《三峡大学学报(人文社会科学版)》.第1期: 99-101.
[84]汪顺玉(2006).语言测试构念效度研究—以2005年TEM8客观试题跨群体构念一致分析为例.上海外国语大学博士论文.
[85]杨惠中& Weir, C. J.(1998).《大学英语四、六级考试效度研究》.上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[86]邹申,张艳莉,周越美(2002).阅读测试中题目类型、策略与分数的关系—TEM4考试阅读项目的答题效度研究.《外语与外语教学》.第5期: 19-22.