Linguist review of draft items revealed communication problems with terminology and imprecisely reasoned attitude statements¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 1969 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 1972: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on an ERIC document (a report, conference paper or thesis). It is kept because a design page cites it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Comments on the 150 first-edition statements revealed two main communication problems: non-uniform use of terms such as grammar, accepted, standard and nonstandard, and attitude statements that are not precisely reasoned, such as incomplete comparisons. → Frogner 1969

Evidence¶

Frogner 1969¶

Frogner, Ellen A. (1969). Using the Language Inquiry as a Teaching Device. Illinois State-Wide Curriculum Study Center in the Preparation of Secondary English Teachers (ISCPET). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED034768

q1 · i? · design · r2

This is the author's developmental account of the linguists' comments on the first edition of 150 statements. She illustrates the second problem with Item 14, called a double-headed monster by a reviewer, and Item 71, whose comparison is not completed; problems were more frequent in the first edition than the second.

"Two main problems in communication were revealed at that time, one of them being the matter of such terms as grammar, accepted and acceptable, standard and nonstandard or substandard."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Treatment version significantly affects student attitudes, with the lean program most negative and no-practice next — related
• Reviewer free-text comments identified synthetic voice, slide–narration reveal timing, and slide layout as the main remaining quality issues — related