Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:58:03.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2008

William C. Hall
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Literacy (i.e., the state of being literate) produces change both in individuals and in social groups (Akinnaso 1981, Ong 1982). Change through literacy may be realized in incresased skills and reasoning abilities, may be called improvement, and may be measured against established norms, or it many be measured by changed attitudes, belief systems, and cultural patterns (cf., Bendor-Samuel 1980).

Type
Applied Aspects
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 4 , March 1983 , pp. 148 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

UNANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aaron, R., Seaton, H., and Moore, D.. 1980. Analysis of the Estes Scale for assessing the reading attitude of minority students. Reading improvement. 17.2.100–103.Google Scholar
Akinnaso, F. 1981. The consequences of literacy in pragmatic and theoretical perspectives. Anthropology and eduction quarterly 12.3.163–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basile, D. 1981. Improving student writing through reliable testing. Reading improvement. 18.3.210–213.Google Scholar
Bendor-Samuel, M. 1980. Mother-tongue literacy programmes in Ghana. Journal of multilingual and multicultural development. 1.4.321–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, G. 1979. Encouraging students to read with comprehension. Read. 14.1.7–9. [Example from Papua New Guinea.]Google Scholar
Cotterell, P. 1978. Testing grammatical constructions and programs. Notes on literacy. 25.39–46. [Occasional paper published by the Summer Institute of Linguistics. This issue uses examples from Ethiopia.]Google Scholar
Crone, C. 1977. Evaluation: Autopsy or checkup? Reports, 15.3–10. [Special issue on evaluation, updated reprint, September 1980].Google Scholar
Cziko, G. 1981. Evaluation of the local languages literacy project in the southern Sudan: First impact evaluation report. Mimeo. [Available from Center for Applied Linguistics.]Google Scholar
Elijah, D. and Legenza, A.. 1980. Teacher rankings, readiness tests, and socioeconomic status. Reading improvement. 17.1.10–13.Google Scholar
Eller, W. and Farr, R.. 1977. Consumer awareness in testing reading. In Wanat, S. (ed.) Issues in evaluating reading. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. 28–40. [ Papers in Applied Linguistics, Linguistics and Reading Series: 1.]Google Scholar
Evans, P. 1979. Some ideas on testing and comprehension. Read. 14.1.13–15. [Example from Papua New Guinea.]Google Scholar
Feitelson, D. (ed.) 1978. Cross-cultural perspectives on reading and reading research. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Golub, J. 1983. Characteristics of students'; classroom talk surrounding the assignment, production and evaluation of a writing task. Seattle: University of Washington. Ph.D. diss.Google Scholar
Goodman, K. and Goodman, Y.. 1980. Linguistics, psycholinguistics and the teaching of reading: An annotated bibliography. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Gudschinsky, S. 1978. Testing your primer and your teaching. Read. 13.2.30–38.Google Scholar
Hare, V. 1982. Preassessment of topical knowledge: A validation and an extension. Journal of reading behavior. 14.1.77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, J. 1979. Progression of difficulty in comprehension of questions. Read. 14.1.10–12.Google Scholar
Hunter, G. 1976. Testing literacy materials. Nova lit. 4.2.3–7. [Reprinted in Read 13.2.39–42. 1978. Examples from Mexico.]Google Scholar
MacGinitie, W. 1973. What are we testing? In MacGinitie, W. (ed.) Assessment problems in reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 35–43.Google Scholar
McCaffery, J. 1977. The forum: Report faults in kiosk. Reports. 15.20.21. [Special issue on evaluation, updated reprint, 09 1980.]Google Scholar
McDermott, R. 1977. The cultural context of learning to read. In. Wanat, S. (ed.) Issues in evaluting reading. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. 10–18. [Papers in Applied Linguistics, Linguistics and Reading Series: 1.]Google Scholar
Memory, D., Powell, G., and Callaway, B.. 1980. A study of the assessment characteristics of Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests. Reading improvement. 17.1.48–52.Google Scholar
Merritt, J. 1979. The importance of vaild assessment. In Raggett, M., Tutt, C., and Raggett, P. (eds.) Assessment and testing of reading: Problems and Practices. London: Ward Lock Educational. 195–203.Google Scholar
Moyle, D. 1979. Informal testing of reading needs. In Raggett, M., Tutt, C., and Raggett, P. (eds.) Assessment and testing of reading: Problems and Practices. London: Ward Lock Educational. 70–84.Google Scholar
Ong, W. J., S.J. 1982. Orality and literary: The technologizing of the word. New York: Methuen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otto, W. 1973. Evaluating instruments for assessing needs and growth in reading. In MacGinitie, W. (ed.) Assessment problems in reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 14–20.Google Scholar
Price, D. 1979. Some ideas on testing comprehension. Read. 14.1.5–6. [Example from Papua New Guinea.]Google Scholar
Pumfrey, P. 1979. Which test? In Raggett, M., Tutt, C., and Raggett, P. (eds.) Assessment and testing of reading: Problems and practices. London: Ward Lock Educational. 25–42.Google Scholar
Raggett, M., Tutt, C., and Raggett, P. (eds.) 1979. Assessment and testing of reading: Problems and practices. London: Ward Lock Educational.Google Scholar
Rogers, C. 1982. Assessing the reading process when women read advertiesments. Reading improvement. 19.2.114–116.Google Scholar
Rust, J., Wood, J. Jr, and Wilson, W.. 1982. Local norms and two-year reliability for the Slingerland Tests. Reading improvement. 19.1.6–9.Google Scholar
Shafer, R. (ed.) 1979. Applied linguistics and reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Singer, H. (1977). IQ is and is not related to reading. In Wanat, S. (ed.) Issues in evaluating reading. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. 43–55. [Papers in Applied Linguistics, Linguistics and Reading Series: 1.]Google Scholar
Wanat, S. 1977a. Criteria for eveluating readiness: “When is a child intelligent enought to read?” In Wanat, S. (ed.) Issues in evaluating reading. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. 19–27. [Papers in Applied Linguistics, Linguistics and Reading Series: 1.]Google Scholar
Wanat, S. (ed.) 1977c. Issues in evaluating reading. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. [Papers in Applied Linguistics, Linguistics and Reading Series: 1.]Google Scholar
Whelan, M. and Griffing, C. 1982. Test bias inherent in instruments discriminate against Blacks. Reading improvement. 19.1.39–43.Google Scholar