The challenge of validation: assessing the performance of a test of productive vocabulary

Full text not archived in this repository.

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Fitzpatrick, T. and Clenton, J. (2010) The challenge of validation: assessing the performance of a test of productive vocabulary. Language Testing, 27 (4). 537- 554. ISSN 0265-5322 doi: 10.1177/0265532209354771

Abstract/Summary

This paper assesses the performance of a vocabulary test designed to measure second language productive vocabulary knowledge.The test, Lex30, uses a word association task to elicit vocabulary, and uses word frequency data to measure the vocabulary produced. Here we report firstly on the reliability of the test as measured by a test-retest study, a parallel test forms experiment and an internal consistency measure. We then investigate the construct validity of the test by looking at changes in test performance over time, analyses of correlations with scores on similar tests, and comparison of spoken and written test performance. Last, we examine the theoretical bases of the two main test components: eliciting vocabulary and measuring vocabulary. Interpretations of our findings are discussed in the context of test validation research literature. We conclude that the findings reported here present a robust argument for the validity of the test as a research tool, and encourage further investigation of its validity in an instructional context

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/33235
Identification Number/DOI 10.1177/0265532209354771
Refereed Yes
Divisions No Reading authors. Back catalogue items
Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Literature and Languages > English Language and Applied Linguistics
Publisher Sage
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar