درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Validation is an important enterprise especially when a test is a high stakes one. Demographic variables like gender and field of study can affect test results and interpretations. Differential Item Functioning (DIF) is a way to make sure that a test does not favor one group of test takers over the others. This study investigated DIF in terms of gender in the reading comprehension subtest (35 items) of a high stakes test using a three-step logistic regression procedure (Zumbo, 1999). The participants of the study were 3,398 test takers, both males and females, who took the test in question (the UTEPT) as a partial requirement for entering a PhD program at the University of Tehran. To show whether the 35 items of the reading comprehension part exhibited DIF or not, logistic regression using a three step procedure (Zumbo, 1999) was employed. Three sets of criteria of Cohen’s (1988), Zumbo’s (1999), and Jodin and Girel’s (2001) were selected. It was revealed that, though the 35 items show “small” effect sizes according to Cohen’s classification, they do not display DIF based on the other two criteria. Therefore, it can be concluded that the reading comprehension subtest of the UTEPT favors neither males nor females.

Among the linguistic resources for creating grammatical metaphor, nominalization rewords processes and properties metaphorically as nouns within the experiential metafunction of language. Following Halliday's (1998a) classification of grammatical metaphor, the current study investigated nominalization exploited in an English applied linguistics textbook and its corresponding Persian translation. Selection of these textbooks was motivated by consulting 10 ELT professors. Analysis started by identifying nominalization instances and recurrent patterns of nominalization in the books through adopting a mixed approach. The frequency of nominal expressions was counted, and eventually chi-square was run to find out the probable significance of nominalization use in English and Persian academic text samples. The quantitative differences in using nominalization turned out to be significant, and results revealed variations in the ranking patterns of nominalization in both texts. Qualities as entities tended to recur more in English than in Persian. However, the noun to noun modifier was frequently exploited in the Persian translation. The similarities in the employment of nominalization patterns might reflect the awareness of both the author and the translator of the role of metadiscourse markers in scientific texts. The main reason for the differences lies in the matter that knowledge is realized in different languages. The findings of this study have implications for textbook writers, English for Academic Purposes students, and translators.