臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

單字量跟語言學習一向有密不可分的關係，單字量在聽、說、讀、寫都扮演了重要的角色。單字的學習需要不斷地複習，要有效率地學習單字，學生需了解自己目前的單字量，才能將焦點放在符合自己程度的閱讀以及單字教材上。然而，目前並沒有針對台灣學生需求所設計的英語單字量測驗。
本研究以大考中心公布的6,840參考字彙表，設計一份英語單字量測驗，以潛在特質理論驗證此單字測驗的信度、效度以及試題品質。測驗共有180題，皆為四個選項的選擇題。並探討單字頻率與試題難度、鑑別度、猜測之間的關係。受試者為台中地區高一及高二的學生，共1,838人。
研究結果發現，由於整份試題具有良好的適合度，表示此份試題具有效度，同時也具有高信度(0.98)。高信度跟效度不只反映試題品質，同時也顯示選擇題是適合發展單字測驗的形式。單字頻率跟難度有明顯的關係，單字頻率越低，單字難度越難，而階層一到三的難度上升比階層三到六的難度劇烈。此現象顯示階層一到三的單字是學好單字的基礎，一旦學習者克服階層一到三的難關，就能夠利用大量閱讀與單字基模來學習更多的單字。另外，發現程度較差的受試者有猜答案的傾向，且偏好猜測B 與C這兩個中間選項。
從試題分析當中，發現題幹跟選項中字首字根的線索會對鑑別度造成影響，建議設計試題時需要特別注意。此現象也顯示學生有能力將單字基模中對字首字根的知識應用到新字上。

Vocabulary size is closely related to language learners’ overall proficiency. It correlates significantly with listening, speaking, reading and writing. Incorporating a word into one’s mental lexicon requires repetition. To acquire new vocabulary words effectively, a learner need to have a clear idea of his current vocabulary size to concentrate his efforts onto the reading and vocabulary learning material that fits his present vocabulary size. However, for now, no vocabulary size test is developed based on the Taiwanese learning context.
The present study is aimed to develop a vocabulary size test based on the 6,840 reference word list released by College Entrance Exam Center. The validity, reliability and test quality of the test in question are checked by the three-parameter logistic model of Latent Trait Theory. The test takes on the format of four-choice multiple choice questions, containing 180 items. The study also sets forth to explore the interaction between frequency levels and the difficulty, discrimination and pseudo-guessing parameters. Participants in this study are freshmen and sophomores from a senior high school in Taichung, totaling 1,838 subjects.
Findings revealed that the test in question exhibited satisfactory validity and reliability. Validity was supported by overall model fit and hierarchical difficulty along with the high reliability value (0.98). With validity and reliability established, the MC format was proven to be an appropriate format for vocabulary size test. Furthermore, it was found that the mean difficulty across frequency bands formed an upward nonlinear slope with the decrease of word frequency. The rise of difficulty from Level 1 to Level 3 was much steeper than that from Level 3 to Level 6. Such phenomenon revealed that the first three thousand words are the threshold for further vocabulary expansion. Once learners cross this threshold, they would be equipped with the ability to apply strategies such as extensive reading and word schema to acquire new words. On the other hand, it was found that lower-achievers are prone to take guesses and favor the distractors in the middle position. Content analysis suggests that clues in stems and distractors exert a certain influence on the discrimination power of items, which shows that learners are capable of transferring their word schema to unknown words.

CHINESE ABSTRACT i
ENGLISH ABSTRACT iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES vi
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
Background and Motivation 1
Research Questions 4
Significance of the Study 5
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 7
Vocabulary Knowledge 7
Vocabulary Measurement 19
Measurement Theories 26
Vocabulary Tests 33
CHAPTER THREE METHOD 37
Test Construction 37
Participants and Test Administration 40
Scoring and Coding 41
Data Analysis 41
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS 43
Goodness of Fit Statistics 43
Test Information Function 44
Item Characteristics and Item Parameter Estimates 45
Interaction between Frequency Bands 52
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION 55
Test Quality 55
Item Parameters and Frequency Bands 58
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION 71
Summary of Major Findings 71
Implications 73
Limitations of the Study 75
Suggestions for Future Research 76
REFERENCES 77
APPENDIX A The CEEC Multiple Choice Vocabulary Test 88
APPENDIX B The Item Characteristic Curves for the 180 Test Items 96
APPENDIX C Item Parameter Estimates and Fit Statistics of the 180 Test Items 119

Aizawa, K. (2006). Rethinking frequency markers for English-Japanese dictionaries. In M. Murata, K. Minamide, Y. Tono and S. Ishikawa (eds) English lexicography in Japan (pp. 108-119). Tokyo: Taishukan-shoten.
Alderson, J. C., Clapham, C., &; Wall, D. (1995). Language test construction and evaluation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Anastasi, A., &; Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing. New York: Macmillan.
Anderson, R. C., &; Freebody, P. (1979). Vocabulary Knowledge (Technical Report No. 136). Urbana, IL: Center for the Study of Reading. (ERIC ED177480)
Anderson, R. C., &; Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. T. Guthrie (ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research Reviews (pp. 77-117). Newark. DE: International Reading Association.
Attali, Y., &; Bar‐Hillel, M. (2003). Guess where: The position of correct answers in multiple‐choice test items as a psychometric variable. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40(2), 109-128.
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F. (2004). Statistical analyses for language assessment: Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Bachman, L. F., &; Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Bauer, L., &; Nation, P. (1993). Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6(4), 253-279.
Baumann, J. F., Kame’enui, E. J., &; Ash, G. E. (2003). Research on vocabulary instruction: Voltaire redux. In Lapp, D. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (pp752-785). Hoboken, NJ : Taylor &; Francis.
Beglar, D. (2010). A Rasch-based validation of the Vocabulary Size Test. Language Testing, 27(1), 101-118.
Beglar, D., &; Hunt, A. (1999). Revising and validating the 2000 word level and university word level vocabulary tests. Language Testing, 16(2), 131-162.
Bernhardt, E. B., &; Kamil, M. L. (1995). Interpreting relationships between L1 and L2 reading: Consolidating the linguistic threshold and the linguistic interdependence hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 15-34.
Bertram, R., Baayen, R. H., &; Schreuder, R. (2000). Effects of family size for complex words. Journal of Memory and Language, 42(3), 390-405.
Blachowicz, C. L., &; Fisher, P. (2004). Vocabulary lessons. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 66-69.
Brown, J. D., &; Hudson, T. (2002). Criterion-referenced language testing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Carrell, P. L., &; Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 553-573.
Carver, R. P. (1994). Percentage of unknown vocabulary words in text as a function of the relative difficulty of the text: Implications for instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 26(4), 413-437.
Chen, L.-J. (2011). An application of Item Response Theory to Developing and Validating a Vocabulary Levels Test. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, R.O.C.
Christenfeld, N. (1995). Choices from identical options. Psychological Science, 6(1), 50-55.
Cizek, G. J. (1994). The effect of altering the position of options in a multiple-choice examination. Educational and psychological measurement, 54(1), 8-20.
Coady, J., &; Huckin, T. (1997). Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
College Entrance Examination Center. (2000). 大考中心高中英文參考詞彙表.
Retrieved from http://www.ceec.edu.tw/Research/paper_doc/ce37/ce37.htm
Corson, D. (1995). Using English words. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Cronbach, L. J. (1946). Response sets and test validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6(4), 475-494.
Cronbach, L. J. (1950). Further evidence on response sets and test design. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 10, 3-31.
Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. Educational Measurement, 2, 443-507.
Daller, H., Milton, J., &; Treffers-Daller, J. (2007). Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, A., Brown, A., Elder, C., Hill, K., Lumley, T., &; McNamara, T. (1999). Dictionary of language testing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Fagley, N. (1987). Positional response bias in multiple-choice tests of learning: Its relation to testwiseness and guessing strategy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 95.
Fan, M. (2000). How big is the gap and how to narrow it? An investigation into the active and passive vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners. RELC Journal, 31(2), 105-119.
Goulden, R., Nation, P., &; Read, J. (1990). How large can a receptive vocabulary be? Applied Linguistics, 11(4), 341-363.
Graves, M. F., &; Watts-Taffe, S. M. (2002). The place of word consciousness in a research-based vocabulary program. What research has to say about reading instruction, 3, 140-165.
Haladyna, T. M., &; Rodriguez, M. C. (2004). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. New York: Routledge.
Hambleton, R. K., &; Swaminathan, H. (1984). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., &; Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications.
Heaton, J. B. (1990). Classroom testing. New York: Longman.
Hilton, H. (2008). The link between vocabulary knowledge and spoken L2 fluency. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 153.
Hirsh, D., &; Nation, P. (1992). What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts for pleasure?. Reading in a Foreign Language, 8, 689-689.
Hsueh-Chao, M. H., &; Nation, P. (2000). Unknown Vocabulary Density and Reading Comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 13(1), 403-430.
Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B. (1982). Does the EFL reader need reading strategies more than language? Some experimental evidence. . Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, New York.
Laufer, B. (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t know, words you think you know, and words you can’t guess. In Coady, J., &; Huckin, T. (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp.20-34). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language: Same or different? Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 255-271.
Laufer, B. (2010). Lexical threshold revisited: Lexical text coverage, learners’ vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 15.
Laufer, B., Elder, C., Hill, K., &; Congdon, P. (2004). Size and strength: do we need both to measure vocabulary knowledge? Language Testing, 21(2), 202-226.
Laufer, B., &; Paribakht, T. S. (1998). The relationship between passive and active vocabularies: Effects of languagelearning context. Language Learning, 48(3), 365-391.
Lee, J. W., &; Schallert, D. L. (1997). The relative contribution of L2 language proficiency and L1 reading ability to L2 reading performance: A test of the threshold hypothesis in an EFL context. Tesol Quarterly, 31(4), 713-739.
Mackey, W. F. (1967). Language teaching analysis. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
McNamara, T. F., &; Candlin, C. N. (1996). Measuring second language performance. London, England: Longman.
McNamara, W. J., &; Weitzman, E. (1945). The effect of choice placement on the difficulty of multiple-choice questions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 36(2), 103.
Meara, P. M. (1992). EFL vocabulary tests: Swansea: Centre for Applied Language Studies, University of Wales.
Meara, P. M. (1996). The dimensions of lexical competence. In Brown, G., Malmkjaer, K., &; Williams, J. (Eds.), Performance and competence in second language acquisition (pp. 35-53). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Meara, P. M., &; Milton, J. L. (2003). X_Lex: The Swansea vocabulary levels test. Newbury, England: Express.
Melka, F. (1997). Receptive vs. productive aspects of vocabulary. In Schmitt, N., &; McCarthy, M. (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 84-102). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Melka Teichroew, F. J. (1982). Receptive versus productive vocabulary: a survey. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 6(2), 5-33.
Messick, S. (1980). Test validity and the ethics of assessment. American Psychologist, 35(11), 1012.
Messick, S. (1990). Validity of test interpretation and use. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. (ERIC ED 395031)
Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. Language Testing, 13(3), 241-256.
Milton, J. (2006). X-Lex: The Swansea vocabulary levels test. In Coombe, C., Davidson, P., &; Lloyd, D. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th and 8th Current Trends in English Language Testing (CTELT) Conference: Vol. 4. (pp. 29-39). UAE: TESOL Arabia.
Milton, J. (2009). Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters.
Milton, J., &; Daller, H. (2007). The interface between theory and learning in vocabulary acquisition. Paper presented at EUROSLA 2008, Newcastle, UK.
Morgan, B., &; Oberdeck, L. M. (1930). Active and passive vocabulary. Studies in Modern Language Teaching, 16, 213-221.
Morton, J. (1979). Word recognition. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Nagy, W., Anderson, R. C., Schommer, M., Scott, J. A., &; Stallman, A. C. (1989). Morphological families in the internal lexicon. Reading Research Quarterly, 262-282.
Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., &; Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 233-253.
Nagy, W. E., &; Scott, J. A. (1990). Word schemas: Expectations about the form and meaning of new words. Cognition and Instruction, 7(2), 105-127.
Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, P. (2006). How Large a Vocabulary is Needed For Reading and Listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59-82.
Nation, P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Heinle &; Heinle Boston.
Nation, P., &; Waring, R. (1997). Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. In Schmitt, N., &; McCarthy, M. (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 6-19). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Nevo, N. (1989). Test-taking strategies on a multiple-choice test of reading comprehension. Language Testing, 6(2), 199-215.
Palmer, H. E. (1968). The scientific study and teaching of languages. London: Oxford U.P..
Paribakht, T. S., &; Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In Coady, J., &; Huckin, T. (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174-200). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language Learning, 52(3), 513-536.
Read, J. (1988). Measuring the Vocabulary Knowledge of Second Langauge Learners. RELC Journal, 19(2), 12-25.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Riazi, A. M., &; Mosalanejad, N. (2010). Evaluation of Learning Objectives in Iranian High-School and Pre-University English Textbooks Using Bloom's Taxonomy. TESL-EJ, 13(4).
Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave Macmillan.
Schmitt, N., &; McCarthy, M. (1997). Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., &; Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55-88.
Scott, J. A., &; Nagy, W. E. (2009). Developing word consciousness. In Graves, M. F. (Eds.), Essential readings on vocabulary instruction (pp. 102-113). Newark, DE: International Reading Association
Slakter, M. J. (1968). The effect of guessing strategy on objective test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5(3), 217-222.
Stæhr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language learning journal, 36(2), 139-152.
Stæhr, L. S. (2009). Vocabulary knowledge and advanced listening comprehension in English as a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(04), 577.
Taylor, P. H. (1966). A study of the effects of instructions in a multiple‐choice mathematics test. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 36(1), 1-6.
Thorndike, R. L. (1949). Personnel selection; test and measurement techniques. Oxford, England: Wiley.
Ulijn, J. M., &; Strother, J. B. (1990). The effect of syntactic simplification on reading EST texts as L1 and L2. Journal of Research in Reading, 13(1), 38-54.
Waring, R. (1997). A comparison of the receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of some second language learners. Immaculata(1), 53-68.
Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 33-52.
Webb, S. (2007). The effects of repetition on vocabulary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 46-65.
Webb, S. (2008). Receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(1), 79.
Nagy, W.E., Herman, P.A. &; Anderson R.C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(2), 20.
Zareva, A., Schwanenflugel, P., &; Nikolova, Y. (2005). Relationship between lexical competence and language proficiency: Variable sensitivity. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(04), 567-595.