Zhong wen jiao shi de zuo wen pi gai guo cheng he ce lüe yun yong =: The composition marking process of Chinese language teachers and their adoption of strategies

Ph.D.Based on theories on English composition rating process and rating strategy adoption, this study aims to investigate eight in-service Chinese language teachers regarding their composition marking process and marking strategy adoption and explore the differences and similarities as revealed by experienced and less experienced teachers through think aloud protocols and interviews. Factors affecting teachers’ marking process and adoption of strategies are also discussed.Findings show that the composition marking process was comprised of three main phases, namely “Interpretation Stage”, “Judgment Stage” and “Decision Making Stage”, which can be further divided into ten sub-stages of “planning”, “reading”, “comprehending”, “detecting”, “diagnosing”, “feedback”, “rationale”, “review”, “commenting” and “scoring”. Besides, the teachers mainly adopted three kinds of marking strategies: “Interpretation Strategies”, “Judgment Strategies” and “Problem-solving Strategies”. In encountering difficulties during marking, the six problem-solving strategies teachers usually adopted include “re-reading”, “pausing”, “delaying”, “questioning”, “simplified correction”, and “ignoring”.It is also found that the experienced teachers obviously knew better how to form an initial impression and were seldom distracted by error correction in the planning stage. Less experienced teachers usually skipped the initial procedure, and, relying heavily on reading-focus interpretation strategies in the interpretation stage, seldom made effective use of meaning construction focus interpretation strategies for deep level comprehension, rendering their focusing on the lexical level of error correction. Wrong correction and error omission are observed.Interviews data also indicates that experienced teachers in adopting scoring goal judgment strategies tend to employ categorizing strategies more frequently than less experienced teachers, probably because of their past experience as raters of public examination papers. Regarding interpersonal goal judgment strategies, the experienced teachers tended to employ the strategy of praising, while less experienced teachers preferred mitigating strategies in writing end comments.Upon encountering difficulties during the marking process, less experienced teachers merely reread the essay to for evidence to arrive at a conclusion, buying time to diagnose some surface level errors. When they encountered problems they could not handle, they tended to employ delay as a strategy. Such phenomena were much less frequent among the experienced teachers, who tended much more to adopt rereading and pausing to evaluate macro problems in composition.Apart from teaching experience, this study highlights a number of factors that influence teacher’s marking process as well as their strategy adoption, namely school factor, pedagogical factor, teacher factor and student factor. This study also attempts to link the findings to the conception of writing assessment of Chinese language teachers, so as to bring out the implications for future research and teacher education.本研究主要以英文作文評卷過程和策略運用的理論為基礎，向8位現職香港中學中文科教師進行發聲思考和多次訪談，探究他們的作文批改過程和策略運用，找出資深和淺年資教師的異同。影響老師在批改過程和策略運用的原因也會兼論。研究結果印證，作文批改過程是由三大階段構成，分別是「詮釋階段」、「判斷階段」和「決策階段」。這三個階段可以劃分為「計劃」、「細讀」、「理解」、「偵察」、「診斷」、「回饋」、「佐證」、「複核」、「總評」和「打分」十項工序。在批改過程中，教師運用的策略主要有三類：「詮釋策略」、「判斷策略」和「解難策略」。在批改途中遇到困難時，中文教師常用的六種解難策略包括：翻看、停頓、押後、自我提問、略改和擱置。本研究另一發現是，資深老師在動筆批改前明顯比淺年資老師多懂得運用預覽策略去建立文章的初步印象，期間甚少分心去改錯。淺年資老師多略過批改前的計劃工序，再加上他們在詮釋階段，多只依賴閱讀導向的詮釋策略，甚少懂得運用建構文義導向策略去作出深層次的理解，乃使他們往後只專注字詞層面的改錯工作，且有錯改、漏改的情況。在評分導向的判斷策略方面，資深中文老師運用入品法的次數比淺年資者多。原因跟他們曾經擔任公開考試的評卷員有關。在人際關係導向判斷策略方面，資深者多採用讚賞策略，淺年資者則多運用淡化策略去寫總評。在批改途中遇到困難時，淺年資老師只會通過翻看前文去為自己尚未肯定的診斷找證據；利用停頓的時間去診斷一些表層語誤；當遇上不能駕馭的寫作問題，淺年資老師多運用延遲策略，押後處理。上述情況在資深中文教師的批改過程較少出現。他們運用翻看和停頓去評價立意、主題等宏觀寫作問題的次數最多。除了教師的年資外，本研究更反映中文教師在作文批改過程和策略運用的異同是受到學校、教學、教師和學生因素影響。本研究亦嘗試把研究結果連繫到香港中文教師對作文評估的概念，能為後續研究者、寫作教師和師資培訓人員帶來啟示。梁詩明 .Parallel title from added title page."2018年11月"Thesis Ph.D. Chinese University of Hong Kong 2019.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 381-392).Abstracts in English and Chinese.Title from PDF title page (viewed on August 3, 2020).Liang Shiming