第二語言學習與測驗領域的研究統合與後設分析研究
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2014-09-??
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
英語學系
Department of English, NTNU
Department of English, NTNU
Abstract
研究統合與後設分析研究能有效整合文獻結果，以釐清某個學術領域的已知／未知為何，並累積該領域的知識。本文旨在綜觀第二語言學習與測驗領域之研究統合與後設分析研究現況。在文中，我們比較統合分析模式與傳統文獻探討（例如，敘述分析法與傳統投票法）的差異、描述質性與量化研究統合方法、也報導一種不採用顯著性檢定，僅統計各類研究數量的量化研究統合法。接著，我們討論了研究統合法的優點（例如，透明度、效果量、調節變項分析）與其限制（例如，蘋果和橘子的比較、研究品質問題、檔櫃問題或出版偏差）。最後，我們回顧Norris andOrtega (2006) 針對統合分析所提出的四項需克服的挑戰（報導不一致、研究品質不一、有研究非以英語撰寫、以及質性與量化統合研究的統整）以及這些問題至今的處理狀態。根據我們的分析觀察，雖然這些問題逐漸改善，但仍未完全的解決。
Research synthesis and meta-analysis are useful techniques for summarizing studies to understand what is known/unknown and to accumulate knowledge in an academic domain. In this paper, we attempt to provide an overview of the status quo of research synthesis and meta-analysis in second language learning and testing. We compare research synthesis with traditional methods of literature review (i.e., narrative and vote-counting methods), describe qualitative and quantitative research syntheses, and report a quantitative synthetic approach that simply counts the number of studies for each category without using any statistical significance. Also included are the strengths (e.g., transparency, effect sizes, moderator variable analysis) and limitations (e.g., apples-and-oranges, study quality, and file-drawer problems) of research synthesis. Finally, we review whether and how the four challenges Norris and Ortega (2006) raised for synthesists to overcome have been since addressed (i.e., reporting inconsistency, study quality, non-English-language studies, and integration of qualitative and quantitative syntheses). We find that while steady progress has been made, these challenges have not yet been fully handled.
Research synthesis and meta-analysis are useful techniques for summarizing studies to understand what is known/unknown and to accumulate knowledge in an academic domain. In this paper, we attempt to provide an overview of the status quo of research synthesis and meta-analysis in second language learning and testing. We compare research synthesis with traditional methods of literature review (i.e., narrative and vote-counting methods), describe qualitative and quantitative research syntheses, and report a quantitative synthetic approach that simply counts the number of studies for each category without using any statistical significance. Also included are the strengths (e.g., transparency, effect sizes, moderator variable analysis) and limitations (e.g., apples-and-oranges, study quality, and file-drawer problems) of research synthesis. Finally, we review whether and how the four challenges Norris and Ortega (2006) raised for synthesists to overcome have been since addressed (i.e., reporting inconsistency, study quality, non-English-language studies, and integration of qualitative and quantitative syntheses). We find that while steady progress has been made, these challenges have not yet been fully handled.