YOZMA NUTQNI BAHOLASH JARAYONIDAGI O‘QITUVCHILARNING KOGNITIV VA AFFEKTIV OMILLARI VA BAHOLASHDA YUZAGA KELADIGAN MUAMMOLAR
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65164/kphds496Keywords:
ESL yozma nutqi, baholash subyektivligi, baholash rubrikasi, kognitiv omillar, affektiv omillar, o‘qituvchilar treningi, baholash izchilligi.Abstract
Mazkur maqolada ikkinchi til sifatida ingliz tili (ESL) yozma nutqini baholash
jarayonida o‘qituvchilar subyektivligi va baholash izchilligiga ta’sir etuvchi omillar tadqiq etiladi.
Toshkent amaliy fanlar universiteti o‘qituvchilari faoliyati misolida o‘tkazilgan tahlillar shuni
ko‘rsatadiki, baholash jarayonida lingvistik aniqlikka haddan tashqari urg‘u berish va baholash
rubrikalarini turlicha talqin qilish asosiy muammolardan hisoblanadi. Tadqiqotda baholash sifatini
oshirishda kognitiv (bilim va tahlil) va affektiv (shaxsiy munosabat va qarashlar) omillarning o‘rni
ilmiy jihatdan asoslab berilgan. Shuningdek, maqolada o‘qituvchilarning professional rivojlanishi,
rubrika asosidagi maxsus treninglar va o‘zaro akademik muhokamalarning baholashdagi
tarafkashlikni kamaytirishdagi ahamiyati yoritilgan. Konseptual xarakterga ega ushbu ish yozma
nutqni baholash tizimini standartlashtirish va mahalliy sharoitga moslashtirish bo‘yicha ilmiy
metodik tavsiyalar beradi.
References
1. Barkaoui, K. (2010a). Do ESL essay raters' evaluation criteria change with experience? A mixed
method, cross-sectional study. Tesol Quarterly, 44, 310-357.
2. Weigle, S. C. (2009). Assesing Writing. (C. J. Alderson, & B. Lyle F, Penyunt.) UK: Cambridge
University Press.
3. Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2014a). Raters' decisions, rating procedures and rating scales. Language
Testing, 31(3), 279-284.
4. Joe, J., Harmes, J., & Hickerson, C. (2011). Using verbal report to explore rater perceptual
processes in scoring: a mixed method application to oral communication assessent. Assessment
in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18, 239-259.
5. Lovorn, M. G., & Rezaei, A. R. (2011). Assessing the assessment: Rubrics training for pre-service
and new in-service teachers. Practical Assessment, Reseach & Evaluation, 1-18.
6. Attali, Y. (2016). A comparison a newly-trained and experienced raters on a standardized writing
assessment. Language Testing, 33(1), 99-115. Lim, G. (2011). The development and maintenance
of rating quality in performance writing assessment: A longitudinal study of new and experienced
raters. Language Testing, 28(4), 543-560.
7. Feruza Akbarovna Ramazonova. (2025). Self-Assessment and Peer-Assessment of Language
Learning. CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS, 6(05), 18–21.
https://doi.org/10.37547/pedagogics-crjp-06-05-04
8. Ghanbari, B., Barati, H., & Moinzadeh, A. (2012). Problematizing rating scales in EFL academic
writing assessment: voices from iranian context. English Language Teaching, 5(8), 76-90.
107 Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2014a). Raters' decisions, rating procedures and rating scales. Language Testing, 31(3),
279-284.
108 Sinprajakpol, S. (2004). Teachers' believe about language learning and teaching: the relationship between believes and
practice. Buffalo: University of New York.
255
9. Trace, J., Meier, V., & Janssen, G. (2016, October). "I can see that": developing shared rubric
category interpretation through score negotiation. Assessing Writing, 30(3), 32-43.
10. Trace, J., Janssen, G., & Meier, V. (2017). Measuring the impact of rater negotiation in writing
performance assessment. Language Testing, 34, 3-22.
11. Kim, S., & Lee, H. (2015). Exploring rater behaviors during a writing assessment discussion.
English Teaching, 70(1), 97-121.
12. Royal-Dawson, L., & Baird, J. (2009). Is teaching experience necessary for reliable scoring of
extended English question? Educational Measurement: Issue and Practice, 28, 2-8.
13. Hirvela, A. B. (2007). Writing scholar as teacher educator: exploring writing teacher education.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 125-128.
14. Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2014a). Raters' decisions, rating procedures and rating scales. Language
Testing, 31(3), 279-284.
15. Sinprajakpol, S. (2004). Teachers' believe about language learning and teaching: the relationship
between believes and practice. Buffalo: University of New York.
