Scholarlink

<p>This study aimed to develop a diagnostic test for measuring Japanese university students’ productive knowledge of lexical bundles based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Lexical bundles, such as <i>to conclude</i> and <i>as a result</i>, play crucial roles in academic writing, yet their acquisition and use notably vary across second-language (L2) English learners’ proficiency levels. Understanding these variations is essential for tailoring instruction in English for academic purposes. This study employed widely accepted CEFR criteria to create a test of lexical bundles divided into three levels (A2, B1, and B2 in proficiency order) and evaluated their difficulty, semantic transparency, and functional characteristics. The 30-item test was administered to 209 university students who self-reported their proficiency levels. Results showed that semantically transparent bundles (e.g., <i>the fact that</i>) were accessible to the lowest-level examinees (A2), while semantically opaque and less frequent discourse bundles (e.g., <i>in turn</i>) were more challenging and effective at distinguishing examinees across adjacent levels, namely, B1 from A2, and B2 from B1, respectively. These findings indicate that the test accurately identifies differences in proficiency and highlights the importance of semantic transparency and input frequency in learning lexical bundles. This study offers insights into diagnostic assessment and teaching practice for academic writing.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Developing a CEFR-based diagnostic test to assess Japanese university students’ productive knowledge of lexical bundles

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月16日

查看全文
  • Ryo Sawaguchi

摘要

This study aimed to develop a diagnostic test for measuring Japanese university students’ productive knowledge of lexical bundles based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Lexical bundles, such as to conclude and as a result, play crucial roles in academic writing, yet their acquisition and use notably vary across second-language (L2) English learners’ proficiency levels. Understanding these variations is essential for tailoring instruction in English for academic purposes. This study employed widely accepted CEFR criteria to create a test of lexical bundles divided into three levels (A2, B1, and B2 in proficiency order) and evaluated their difficulty, semantic transparency, and functional characteristics. The 30-item test was administered to 209 university students who self-reported their proficiency levels. Results showed that semantically transparent bundles (e.g., the fact that) were accessible to the lowest-level examinees (A2), while semantically opaque and less frequent discourse bundles (e.g., in turn) were more challenging and effective at distinguishing examinees across adjacent levels, namely, B1 from A2, and B2 from B1, respectively. These findings indicate that the test accurately identifies differences in proficiency and highlights the importance of semantic transparency and input frequency in learning lexical bundles. This study offers insights into diagnostic assessment and teaching practice for academic writing.