This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mochida, k. Articles by Harrington, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Yes/No test as a measure of receptive vocabulary knowledge

The University of Queensland

Michael Harrington

The University of Queensland, mwharr{at}uq.edu.au

Performance on the Yes/No test (Huibregtse et al., 2002) was assessed as a predictor of scores on the Vocabulary Levels Test (VLT), a standard test of receptive second language (L2) vocabulary knowledge (Nation, 1990). The use of identical items on both tests allowed a direct comparison of test performance, with alternative methods for scoring the Yes/No test also examined (Huibregtse et al., 2002). Overall, performance on both tests by English L2 university students (n - 36) was similar. Mean test accuracy on the various Yes/No methods ranged from 76-82%, comparable to VLT performance at 83%. However, paired t-tests showed the scoring methods used to correct raw hit performance increased the difference between the Yes/No test and criterion VLT scores to some degree. All Yes/No scores were strong predictors of VLT performance, regardless of method used, r = .8. Raw hit rate was the best predictor of VLT performance, due in part to the >5% false alarm rate. The low false alarm rate may be due to the participants, drawn primarily from non-Latin alphabet first languages (L1s), and the nature of the instructions. The results indicate the Yes/No test is a valid measure of the type of L2 vocabulary knowledge assessed by the VLT, with implications for classroom application.

Language Testing, Vol. 23, No. 1, 73-98 (2006)
DOI: 10.1191/0265532206lt321oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?