| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,000,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,000,000)
Fiscal Year 1996: ¥800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000)
Fiscal Year 1995: ¥300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥300,000)
Fiscal Year 1994: ¥900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥900,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
The goal of this research is to investigate the relation between patterns of expression and procedures for evaluation of Japanese summaries. We analyzed similarities, differences and relevant factors based on a comparison of the patterns of expression used in the summaries of two bikatugata 'main point final' argumentative essays by non-native foreign students and native Japanese university students and evaluations of these essays by teachers of Japanese as a foreign language (JFL), teachers of Japanese as the national language (Japanese) and Japanese university students. Based on these results, we determined principles for writing summaries of Japanese argumentative essays and drew the follwing conclusions related to the writing and evaluation of summaries written in Japanese.
1. Based on an analysis of the patterns of expression used to combine essential parts of the original essays we showed that while summaries written by native Japanese students tended to be written in the same mai
… More
n point final structure as the original essays, some of the summaries written by foreign students varied from this structure and had were problems related to content and expression.
2. There was a correlation between the patterns of expression used in the summaries and the evaluations made by the JFL teachers, Japanese teachers and Japanese university students. The more similar the patterns of expression used in a summary were to the original essay, the higher the evaluation and vice versa, the less similar, the lower the evaluation.
3. The average of the Japanese teachers'evaluations of summaries written by Japanese university students tended to be slightly higher than the average of the JFL teachers'evaluation of summaries written by non-native foreign students. A similar tendency was observed in Japanese university students'evaluations of the summaries written by these two groups of students.
4. The patterns of expressions used in the summaries related to the evaluation given and the categories used to evaluate the summaries by the JFL and Japanese teachers. In general, summaries were rated higher when they included (1) the conclusion and main points of the original essays, (2) did not have particular examples or opinions of the summary writer of content that was not included in the original essays, and (3) had well-organized connectives, cohesion, and discourse structure. We view these features as principles and techniques for "good" summary writing.
5. The Japanese teachers based their evaluation of summaries written by native Japanese students primarily on conciseness and ability to express the discourse structure. In contrast, JFL teachers' evaluations of summaries written by non-native foreign students focused on correctness of content and words, grammar, characters, etc.
6. The rating that JFL teachers gave for "good" summaries written by non-native foreign students was higher and the rating they gave for "bad" summaries was lower than that given by Japanese teachers and this was statistically significant as indicated by the stndard error of the mean.
Topics for future study include further investigation of the nature of evaluation by increasing the number of evaluators so that more statistically significant patterns can be found. We also plan to use this future study as a basis evaluators so that more statistically significant patterns can be found. We also plan to use this future study as a basis for determining more ideal categories of evaluation. Less
|
