magazinelogo

The Educational Review, USA

ISSN Online: 2575-7946 ISSN Print: 2575-7938 CODEN: TERUBB
Frequency: monthly Email: edu@hillpublisher.com
Total View: 5471036 Downloads: 1156942 Citations: 855 (From Dimensions)
ArticleOpen Access http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2024.03.003

Documenting the Task Response Features of IELTS Writing Task 2, Band Scores 5-7 to Improve Teaching and Learning for Chinese Students Who Use IELTS Preparation Templates

Shanshan Liang

The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

*Corresponding author: Shanshan Liang

Published: April 28,2024

Abstract

Over the past thirty years, the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) exam has served as a gateway to the English-speaking world, assisting countless Chinese students in achieving their aspirations of studying abroad. China, with its vast population, many of whom are seeking overseas qualifications, is home to a multitude of IELTS learning and teaching centers. These centers offer a diverse range of IELTS learning resources and related methodologies, with template-oriented teaching and learning being dominant. However, the Task Response (TR) requirements in the IELTS academic written test state that IELTS is designed to assess students' writing ability and their level of English expression. This is an area neglected in the templates that students use for IELTS preparation. Accordingly, this paper aims to analyze significant differences in TR across various band score levels. Firstly, it will unpack the TR requirements of the IELTS Academic Writing Task 2. Then, it will examine the 13 sample scripts for Bands 5-7 from the Cambridge English series books to offer insights that can enhance learning and teaching of Task Response. The results reveal that the majority of Band 5 written answers are a) off-topic and b) contain illogical sequences, whereas the majority of Band 6 contain more complete, on-topic responses with acceptable logical reasoning, albeit with occasional unevenness in their construction. Meanwhile, Band 7 written answers feature comparatively high-quality conceptualization, structured concisely and cohesively. Thus, they are concise, with acceptable logical reasoning. This result implies that current Chinese templates for IELTS writing should be reoriented to focus on practicing and improving ideas, along with enhancing related expressions. Lastly, the researcher recommends using idea templates that assist students in showcasing their argumentation skills in IELTS teaching and learning in China. Further research will be needed to explore the generalizability and credibility of this early thesis.

Keywords

IELTS written Task 2, Task Response, Bands 5-7, Chinese templates, ideas and logic practice and improvement

References

Banerjee, J., Franceschina, F., & Smith, A. M. (2007). Documenting features of written language production typical at different IELTS band score levels. (Report No.7). International English Language Testing System (IELTS) Research Reports. 

Chappell, P., Bodis, A., & Jackson, H. (2015). Impact of teacher cognition and classroom practices on IELTS test preparation courses in the Australian ELICOS sector. (Report No.6). IELTS research reports online series. 

Coffin, C. (2004). Arguing about how the world is or how the world should be: the role of argument in IELTS tests. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3(3), 229-246. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158503000766.

Cotton, F., & Wilson, K. (2011). An investigation of examiner rating of coherence and cohesion in the IELTS Academic Writing Task 2. In IELTS Research Reports Volume 12, 2011 (pp. 1-76). Melbourne: IDP: IELTS Australia and British Council.

Crowhurst, M. (1990). Teaching and learning the writing of persuasive/argumentative discourse. Canadian Journal of Education, 15(4), 348-359. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ420801.

Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (2014). Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. Routledge.

He, L., & Shi, L. (2012). Topical knowledge and ESL writing. Language Testing, 29(3), 443-464.

Heigham, J., & Croker, R. (2009). Qualitative research in applied linguistics: a practical introduction. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Henderson, E., & Moran, K. (2010). The empowered writer: an essential guide to writing, reading & research. Don Mills, Ont: OUP Canada.

Henkemans, A. (2000). State-of-the-Art: The Structure of Argumentation. Argumentation, 14(4), 447-473. https://doi.org/10.1023/A: 1007800305762.

Hitchcock, D. (2017). On Reasoning and Argument: Essays in Informal Logic and on Critical Thinking. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53562-3.

Hongru, (2014). IELTS Templates—Easy to Learn and Easy to Pass. Waterpub.

IELTS. (2023). IELTS Writing Band Descriptors and Key Assessment Criteria. IELTS. Retrieved from https://ielts.org/news-and-insights/ielts-writing-band-descriptors-and-key-assessment-criteria.

Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (2008). Task response and text construction across L1 and L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(1), 7-29. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222645806_Task_response_and_text_construction_across_L1_and_L2_writing.

Lumley, T. (2002). Assessment criteria in a large-scale writing test: what do they really mean to the raters. Language Testing, 19(3), 246-276. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532202lt230oa.

Mickan, P. (2003). 'What's your score': An investigation into language descriptors for rating written performance. International English Language Testing System (IELTS) Research Reports 2003: Volume 5. Canberra: IELTS Australia. 

Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (2007). Introduction to academic writing. Pearson/Longman.

Shaw, S. & Falvey, P. (2008). The IELTS writing assessment revision project: Towards a revised rating scale. Research Reports, 1(1), 2-295. http://docplayer.net/41147256-The-ielts-writing-assessment-revision-project-towards-a-revised-rating-scale.html.

Slater, S., & Braverman, S. (2013). IELTS success formula academic: The complete practical guide to a top IELTS score. University of South Australia, Australia: Centre for English Language.

Weigle, S. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.

Wray, A., & Pegg, C. (2009). The effect of memorized learning on the writing scores of Chinese IELTS test-takers. In P. Thompson, (Eds.), International English Language Testing System: Vol. 9. Research Reports, (pp. 191-216). Australia, Canberra: British Council and IELTS Australia.

Yi Ming. (2020). The Role of IELTS Writing Templates in Exams. Qiao Yuan, (2), 58.

How to cite this paper

Documenting the Task Response Features of IELTS Writing Task 2, Band Scores 5-7 to Improve Teaching and Learning for Chinese Students Who Use IELTS Preparation Templates

How to cite this paper: Shanshan Liang. (2024). Documenting the Task Response Features of IELTS Writing Task 2, Band Scores 5-7 to Improve Teaching and Learning for Chinese Students Who Use IELTS Preparation Templates.The Educational Review, USA8(3), 355-362.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2024.03.003