Exact(13)
The integrated task of tracking and recognition is formulated as a maximum a posteriori estimation problem.
On the integrated task, the participants made comparatively fewer revisions during the first segment of text production.
Based on the cost analysis, the integrated task involved the most cost ($451.00), followed by the paired task ($402.00) and the summary task ($309.00).
As shown in Appendix A, the most time-consuming task (in terms of total hours) in the proficiency test was the integrated task, followed by the narrative task and then the independent task; for both achievement tests, the integrated task was also the most time-consuming task, followed by the paired task and the summary task.
As for the Bridge level test, the mean score was highest for the paired task (M = 9.42, SD = 1.81), followed by the summary task (M = 8.39, SD = 1.50) and the integrated task (M = 8.37, SD = 1.67).
The integrated task, on the other hand, requires examinees to use information from a range of academic texts (for reading) or consultations and student interactions (for listening) as the basis for creating monologic discourse using rhetorical/pragmatic functions.
Similar(47)
Despite the budgetary caveats of the integrated tasks, we decided to keep them in our tests.
The results suggested that students revised differently on each of the integrated tasks.
As mentioned earlier, the integrated tasks ask students to read/listen to information from two sources and answer a prompt that requires integrating information from the two sources.
Locating or creating these sources takes more time than creating a prompt for the independent or paired tasks, and administering the integrated tasks requires more time since students have to listen and read additional input.
The results revealed that the integrated tasks were more demanding for most students, which resulted in longer pause times, higher revision numbers and lower text production rates (measured in number of words in the final texts per minute of writing time).
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