|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Are C-tests valid measures for L2 vocabulary research?
Carol A. Chapelle
Iowa State University
Second language (L2) researchers (Singleton and Little, 1991) have sug gested that C-tests, developed as norm-referenced measures for proficiency and placement testing (Klein-Braley, 1985), can be used in L2 vocabulary research. This article illustrates how researchers can bring to bear essentials of measurement theory on L2 research by weighing validity justifications pertaining to use of the C-test method for vocabulary assessment in L2 research. Validity is defined using the predominant framework from current measurement theory (Messick, 1989) and its relevance for L2 research is explained. The cornerstone of the definition is construct validity, which requires a definition of the construct to be measured - interlanguage vocabulary (i.e., vocabulary ability). A theoretical definition of vocabulary ability is presented and used to consider justifications for and against interpreting C-test performance as indicative of vocabulary ability. On the basis of evidence concerning construct validity and utility as well as the consequences of interpretations, the potentials and limitations of the C-test method for L2 vocabulary research are identified.
Second Language Research, Vol. 10, No. 2,
157-187 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/026765839401000203
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
L. Jun Zhang and S. Bin Anual
The Role of Vocabulary in Reading Comprehension: The Case of Secondary School Students Learning English in Singapore
RELC Journal,
April 1, 2008;
39(1):
51 - 76.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Eckes and R. Grotjahn
A closer look at the construct validity of C-tests
Language Testing,
July 1, 2006;
23(3):
290 - 325.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. A. Chapelle, J. Jamieson, and V. Hegelheimer
Validation of a web-based ESL test
Language Testing,
October 1, 2003;
20(4):
409 - 439.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. McNamara
Book Review: Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Language testing in practice: designing and developing useful language tests
Language Testing,
October 1, 2003;
20(4):
466 - 473.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Read and C. A. Chapelle
A framework for second language vocabulary assessment
Language Testing,
January 1, 2001;
18(1):
1 - 32.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Davidson
Book Review: Standards for educational and psychological testing
Language Testing,
October 1, 2000;
17(4):
457 - 462.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. F. Bachman
Modern language testing at the turn of the century: assuring that what we count counts
Language Testing,
January 1, 2000;
17(1):
1 - 42.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Jafarpur
What's Magical About the Rule-of Two for Constructing C-Tests?
RELC Journal,
December 1, 1999;
30(2):
86 - 100.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Schmitt
The relationship between TOEFL vocabulary items and meaning, association, collocation and word-class knowledge
Language Testing,
April 1, 1999;
16(2):
189 - 216.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Laufer and P. Nation
A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability
Language Testing,
January 1, 1999;
16(1):
33 - 51.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
