Comparison of the use of tense shift in subgroup I

Subgroup I comprises the 25 students with the highest scores on the diagnostic test: 9 NP students and 16 IB students.

Table 8.9 shows that in the first set of compositions, the ‘all English’ IB students used a higher mean MTSh (~16.1) than the NP students (~14). If compared to the overall means (see Table 8.1), the initial mean ratios found in subgroup I are higher for both groups, the difference being biggest for the IB students. As compared to the results for their first set of compositions, the NP students showed an increased mean MTSh ratio in the third set. Still, that ratio is slightly lower than the corresponding mean MTSh for the IB students, who reached the NP students’ final level already in their first set of compositions. Moreover, both groups showed an increase in the second set of compositions. Table 8.10 shows that for the NP students, the increase amounts to ~4.4. However, neither that increase nor any other changes over time in subgroup I are statistically significant.

Table 8.9 Comparison of mean MTSh ratios in subgroup I

NP IB mean diff. p

mean C1 13.95 16.09 2.14 0.448

mean C2 18.30 17.92 0.38 0.883

mean C3 15.64 16.31 0.67 0.789

n (NP) = 9, n (IB) = 16, C = composition

Table 8.10 Paired mean differences between the NP and IB mean MTSh ratios in subgroup I paired mean diff. C1-C2 p C1-C2 paired mean diff. C2-C3 p C2-C3 paired meandiff. C1-C3 p C1-C3 NP 4.35 0.287 -2.66 0.305 1.69 0.538 IB 1.83 0.254 -1.61 0.541 0.22 0.924 n (NP) = 9, n (IB) = 16, C = composition

Table 8.9 shows that in subgroup I there is an initial mean difference of ~2.1 between the MTSh of the NP and IB students, due to a higher ratio of MTSh among the IB students. As a result of the NP students’ increasing figure over time, the mean difference is as small as ~0.7 measurement units in the third set

of compositions. However, all differences may be due to chance since statistical significance is not reached.

Next, the focus is restricted solely to motivated tense shift due to the use of direct speech, the proportion of DS MTSh. Table 8.11 shows that there are only rather small differences between the groups. It is obvious that the use of direct speech accounts for a larger part of the motivated tense shifts in the first set of compositions than in the last two, and the fact that the MTSh either stayed level or increased in the last two compositions must mean that there had been a change in the way students used tense shift. Moreover, the IB students’ third set of compositions contained a remarkably low mean proportion of DS MTSh. In fact, it is the second lowest figure in all the subgroups. Interestingly, in these same compositions, there is still a high mean ratio of MTSh. This suggests that, although the IB students in subgroup I did not increase their ratio of MTSh over time, their narrative structure changed. A lower ratio of shifts between the past and the present due to direct speech means that there must be a higher ratio of other kinds of tense shift.

Table 8.11 Comparison of mean DS MTSh proportions in subgroup I

NP IB

mean C1 4.40 4.11

mean C2 2.18 3.26

mean C3 2.64 1.29

n (NP) = 9, n (IB) = 16, C = composition

Next, we shift our focus to random tense shift. Table 8.12 shows that the mean RTSh ratios in subgroup I are low, only between ~1.2 and ~2.4. Initially, the NP students showed a slightly higher mean RTSh than the IB students, but, as we can see in Table 8.13, the two groups’ ratios level up in the subsequent two compositions. In effect, the initially lower ratios among the IB students could be an indication of earlier language maturity. Moreover, the low ratio of RTSh prevailing in the last two compositions suggests that those mistakes need not necessarily be the result of poor knowledge of the implications of tense shift, but could be the result of careless mistakes. However, none of the changes that were found are statistically significant.

Table 8.12 Comparison of mean RTSh ratios in subgroup I

NP IB mean diff. p

mean C1 2.41 1.22 1.19 0.270

mean C2 1.77 1.55 0.22 0.733

mean C3 1.16 1.37 0.21 0.795

Table 8.13 Paired mean differences between the NP and IB mean RTSh ratios in subgroup I paired mean diff. C1-C2 p C1-C2 paired mean diff. C2-C3 p C2-C3 paired meandiff. C1-C3 p C1-C3 NP -0.64 0.590 -0.61 0.288 -1.25 0.262 IB 0.33 0.590 -0.18 0.808 0.15 0.685 n (NP) = 9, n (IB) = 16, C = composition

Next, we continue by comparing the mean RTSh ratios of the two groups. Table 8.12 shows how the initial difference, caused by a slightly lower use of random tense shift in the IB group, was reduced over time. Consequently, the results for the two groups are similar in the second and third sets of compositions. No statistically significant differences are reached.

To summarise and discuss the findings for subgroup I, the IB students’ mean ratio of MTSh was higher than that of the NP students. Over time, the difference tended to become smaller, following upon an increase among the NP students while the IB students remained at their initial level. The fact that the IB students’ results stayed level over time might be explained by a change in narrative structure, since, in the third set of compositions, these students made very little use of direct speech. This, in its turn, suggests that the tense shifts that were indeed made are of a subtler kind. Another explanation could be that there is some kind of limit as to the use of tense shift in a text. It is possible that, at some point, coherence is no longer helped, but rather hindered by an excessive use of tense shift, unless it is called for e.g. by an extensive use of direct speech. It should also be noted that the highest MTSh of both groups was found in the second set of compositions. Possibly, this could be an effect of the students having lost interest in the study in the third set of compositions, causing them to put in less of an effort in the last composition than in the two preceding ones. Another possibility would be that the topic of the second composition prompted the students to use more tense shifts. In the case of random tense shift, the IB students again tended to keep up their initial results, starting out at a fairly low mean ratio of RTSh and then remaining at that level over time. The NP students, on the other hand, used a decreasing mean ratio of RTSh over time. In the third set of compositions their mean RTSh was low and similar to that of the IB students. In all, this suggests that in subgroup I, the NP students very quickly reached the same level of skill concerning the use of tense shift as the IB students.