The effects of context-dependent and context-independent test design on Iranian EFL learners' performance on vocabulary tests

Mahmoud Abdi Tabari

doi:10.5294/4587

Authors

Mahmoud Abdi Tabari Author Oklahoma State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5294/4587

Keywords:

Examen dependiente del contexto, examen independiente del contexto, examen del vocabulario.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore on the role of context in vocabulary assessment. In addition, it was intended to determine how learners from almost different proficiency groups at the Intermediate level performed on two context-dependent and context-independent tests. The result of the research serves more about the best format for vocabulary assessment. In doing so, the performance of identical items on both the matching test (context-independent test) and the C-test (context-dependent test) was compared on English L2 university students (n=40). The result showed that all students performed slightly better on the matching test than the C-test. Therefore, Context did not play a major role in their performance in the C-test. Secondly, high intermediate learners performed much better on both test than the low Intermediate level. Hence, it can be concluded that higher ability learners use more context in response to items in the text than the lower one.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Mahmoud Abdi Tabari, Oklahoma State University

Mahmoud Abdi Tabari is the PhD student in Education at Oklahoma State University, USA, and a member of the Young Researchers' Club. He shows great interests in second language acquisition, second language writing, and vocabulary assessment.

References

REFERENCES

Babaii, E., & Ansari, H. (2001). The C-test: A valid operationalization of reduced redundancy principle. System, 29, 209-219.

Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental concepts in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bachman, L. F. (2000). Modern language testing at the turn of the century: Assuring that what we count counts. Language Testing Journal, 17, 1, 1-42.

Batia, L., Elder, C., Hill, K, & Congdon, P. (2004). Size and strength: Do we need both to measure vocabulary knowledge? Language Testing, 21, 2, 202-220.

Brown, J. D. (1985). Tailored cloze: Improved with classical item analysis technique. Language Testing, 4, 1, 19-31.

Brown, J. D. (1996). Testing in language programs. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.

Cameron, L. (2002). Measuring vocabulary size in English as an additional language. Language Testing Research, 6, 2, 145-173.

Chapelle, C. A., & Abraham, R. G. (1990). Cloze method: What difference does it make? Language Testing, 7, 2, 121-146.

Connelly, M. (1997). Using C-test in English with postgraduate students. Pergomon, 16, 2, 139-150.

De La Funente, M. J. (2002). Acquisition of L2 vocabulary: The role of input and output in the receptive and productive acquisition of words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Eckes, Th., & Grotjahn, R. (2006). A closer look at the construct validity of C-Tests. Language Testing, 23, 3, 291-319.

Farhadi, H., & Keramati, M. N. (1996). A text-driven method for the deletion procedure in cloze passages. Language Testing, 13, 1, 191- 207.

Hatch, E., & Farhady, H. (1981). Research design and Statistics for applied linguistics. Tehran: Rahnama Publication.

Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jafarpour, A. (1999). Can the C-test be improved with classical item analysis? System, 27, 79-89.

Klein-Braley, Ch., & Raatz, U. (1984). A survey of research on the C-test. Language Testing, 2, 1, 135-146.

Klein-Braley, Ch. (1997). C-tests in the context of reduced redundancy testing: An appraisal. Language Testing, 14, 1, 47-84.

Khoii, R., Fotovat Ahmadi, P., & Shokouhian, M. (2007). Reading for Ideas, I. Tehran: Rahnama Publication.

Khoii, R., Fotovat Ahmadi, P., & Shokouhian, M. (2007). Reading For Ideas, II. Tehran: Rahnama Publication.

Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z. (2004). Testing vocabulary knowledge; size, strength, and computer adaptiveness. Language Learning, 54, 3, 399-436.

Laufer, B., C., Hill, K., & Congdon, P. (2002). Size and Strength: Do we need both to measure vocabulary knowledge? Language Testing, 21, 202.

Meara, P. (2000). The rediscovery of vocabulary. Second Language Research, 18, 1.

Meara, P., & Buxton, B. (1983). An alternative to multiple choice vocabulary tests. Language Testing, 2, 3, 143-154.

Meara, P., & Fitzpatrick, T. (2000). Lex 30: An improved method of assessing productive vocabulary in an L2. System, 28, 3, 19-30.

Meara, P., & Nation, I. S. P. (2002). Vocabulary. In N. Schmitt (Ed). An introduction to applied linguistics. London: Arnold Press.

Nation, I. S. P. (1982). Beginning to learn foreign vocabulary: A review of the research. RELC Journal, 13, 14-22.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). A study of the most frequent Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies. Heinle: Heinle Publishers.

Perkin, K., & Lineville, S. (1984). A construct definition study of a standardized vocabulary test. Language Testing, 1, 2, 125-141.

Quian, D. D., & Schedle, M. (2004). Evaluation of an in-depth vocabulary knowledge measure for assessing reading performance. Language Testing, 21, 28.

Read, J. (1988). Measuring the vocabulary knowledge of second language learners. RELC Journal, 19, 12.

Read, J. (1993). The development of a new measure of L2 vocabulary knowledge. Language Testing Research, 10, 355-371.

Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Read, J., & Chapelle, C. A. (2001). A framework for second language measure for assessing reading performance. Language Testing, 21, 28.

Sasaki, M. (2000). Effects of cultural schemata on students' test taking processes for cloze tests: A multiple data source approach. Language Testing, 17, 1, 85-114.

Schmitt, N. (1999). The relationship between TOEFL vocabulary items and meaning, association, collocation and word-class knowledge. Language Testing, 16, 2, 189-216.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behavior of two new versions of the vocabulary level test. Language Testing, 18, 55.

Shitotsu, T., & Weir, C. J. (2007). The relative significance of vocabulary breath in the prediction of reading comprehension test performance. Language Testing, 12, 24-99.