Your English writing platform
Free sign upExact(1)
To estimate the classification proficiency, we performed internal cross-validation, using out-of-bag (OOB) samples, and external validation, using an independent test set.
Similar(59)
Secondly, we present a cross-classification of proficiency levels in PISA and German NA which showed a rather strong relationship of ρ = .65 (95% CI.59 .70).
The central ideas behind this endeavor were (1) to localize non-native speakers on a scale for native speakers, and (2) to attempt a cross-classification of proficiency levels from two different frameworks for language proficiency.
We found a systematic shift in the classifications of proficiency levels of the two scales: Most students on a certain German NA level scored at the corresponding or at a lower level on the PISA scale.
Table 1 shows the types of reflection for indicators of transformation, defined as content, process or premise in Mezirow's Transformative Learning Theory [ 60].> Global Spirit scores ranged between 2.67 and 4.67 (M = 3.73, SD.5), which is mid way between the proficiency classification of beginner and competent [ 52].
We could show a systematic shift in proficiency classifications which indicates that a student needs to be more proficient in order to reach the correspondent level on the PISA scale.
How are the proficiency classifications of German NA and PISA as well as corresponding political implications linked to each other?
The linking of two proficiency classifications, one for non-native speakers and one for native speakers, is a novel approach in language assessment research.
The fact that EFL proficiency classifications seem to be predictive for this goal has positive implications for the validity and relevance of German National Educational Standards.
It is important to bear in mind that due to measurement sampling error the classification of students into proficiency levels is inevitably deficient (Betebenner et al. 2008).
There are two different models of proficiency level classifications that correspond to these two frameworks.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.
Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com