This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Purpura, J. E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Investigating the effects of strategy use and second language test performance with high- and low-ability test takers: a structural equation modelling approach

Teachers College, Columbia University, jp248{at}columbia.edu

Implicit in the research on strategy use is the notion that high- and low-ability language learners utilize strategies differently and that these differences are related to differential performance; however, to date, no study has tested these assumptions statistically. This study uses structural equation modelling (SEM) to examine the relationships between strategy use and second language test performance (SLTP) with high- and low-ability test takers. 1,382 test takers were given strategy questionnaires and a language test, and separate baseline models of strategy use and SLTP were established for each group. These models were then estimated simultaneously with cross-group equality constraints imposed. The similarities and differences in this multi-group model provided the means for evaluating the viability of the parameter estimates across ability levels. The results showed that the metacognitive strategy use (MSU) and SLTP models produced almost identical factorial structures for each group, while the cognitive strategy use (CSU) models were somewhat different. Then, while some evidence of cross-group equivalence was observed, the cross-group tests of invariance could not be uniformly supported in the data; the effect of MSU on CSU was found to be variant across the groups, as was the effect of the retrieval processes on lexico-grammatical ability, suggesting that the variation in lexico-grammatical ability and reading ability stems from the test takers’ use of the retrieval processes in concert with the metacognitive strategies.

Language Testing, Vol. 15, No. 3, 333-379 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/026553229801500303


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Eckes and R. Grotjahn A closer look at the construct validity of C-tests Language Testing, July 1, 2006; 23(3): 290 - 325. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S.-K. Shin Did they take the same test? Examinee language proficiency and the structure of language tests Language Testing, January 1, 2005; 22(1): 31 - 57. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Phakiti A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance Language Testing, January 1, 2003; 20(1): 26 - 56. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. O'Sullivan Learner acquaintanceship and oral proficiency test pair-task performance Language Testing, July 1, 2002; 19(3): 277 - 295. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. F. Bachman Modern language testing at the turn of the century: assuring that what we count counts Language Testing, January 1, 2000; 17(1): 1 - 42. [Abstract] [PDF]