Are C-tests valid measures for L2 vocabulary research?
Are C-tests valid measures for L2 vocabulary research?
复制标题
C 测试对于 L2 词汇研究来说是有效的衡量标准吗？
DOI：
10.1177/026765839401000203
复制
发表时间：
1994
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
C. Chapelle
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Chapelle
二语研究者(Singleton and Little，1991)提出，C-Testing可用于二语词汇研究。C-Testing是一种常模参照测验，用于水平测试和位置测试。本文阐述了研究者如何通过权衡在二语研究中使用C测试方法进行词汇评估的有效性理由，从而将测量理论的精髓运用到二语研究中。效度是使用当前测量理论(Messick，1989)中的主要框架来定义的，并解释了它与二语研究的相关性。这一定义的基石是结构效度，这就要求对要测量的结构--中介语词汇(即词汇能力)--有一个定义。提出了词汇能力的理论定义，并用它来考虑是否有理由支持和反对将C测试成绩作为词汇能力的标志。基于关于结构效度和效用的证据以及解释的结果，C测试方法在二语词汇研究中的潜力和局限性被识别出来。
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.