LexCH: a quick and reliable receptive vocabulary size test for Chinese Learners

Abstract

The measurement of vocabulary size is crucial in applied linguistics research. Although increasing attention has been given to the study of Chinese vocabulary assessment, few reliable and valid tools are available to evaluate Chinese learners’ receptive vocabulary size, particularly for teenagers and adults. We aim to fill this gap by developing LexCH, a quick, reliable and free receptive vocabulary size assessment tool that researchers and language teachers can readily adopt. In developing LexCH, we chose items covering a range of difficulty levels and with strong discriminative power as test items for the final version of LexCH based on item response theory. In total, 480 students from a junior high school and a high school in China participated in this study. Our initial validation results suggest that LexCH is a reliable and valid receptive vocabulary size test for L1 Chinese speakers; it also shows great potential for use among L2 Chinese learners. Implications for assessing receptive vocabulary size in Chinese learning are provided.

The development of a Chinese vocabulary proficiency test (CVPT) for learners of Chinese as a second/foreign language

“…In terms of external validity, we found non-significant gender effects for most items and evidence of criterion relevance shown by the strong relationships between the test scores and both HSK levels and cloze test scores. These results are consistent with existing Rasch-based vocabulary tests with selectedresponse formats (Beglar, 2010;Ha, 2021;Qi et al, 2022;Webb et al, 2017) and further confirm the feasibility of applying Rasch model in validating vocabulary tests (Aryadoust et al, 2021). However, it is important to note that some items might pose challenges to the validity of the CVPT and need further analysis.…”

“…Shen, 2009;Wang & Deng, 2020;J. Zhang, 2017) and one focusing on native Chinese speakers (Qi et al, 2022).…”

“…These tests differ in the purposes of vocabulary assessment. Shen (2009) and Qi et al (2022) aimed to estimate vocabulary size based on items selected from a vocabulary frequency list. In contrast, most tests aimed at CS/FL learners are vocabulary proficiency tests because they measure test-takers' performance at different levels of an L2 Chinese vocabulary syllabus.…”

“…In contrast, most tests aimed at CS/FL learners are vocabulary proficiency tests because they measure test-takers' performance at different levels of an L2 Chinese vocabulary syllabus. However, only two tests were validated using methods from Classical Test Theory (Wang & Deng, 2020) or Item Response Theory (Qi et al, 2022).…”

“…Different types of tests have been developed to assess vocabulary breadth for languages using sound-based writing systems such as English (Nation & Anthony, 2017), but relatively little attention has been paid to Chinese, which utilizes a morphosyllabic writing system (Qi et al, 2022). Previous studies on the acquisition of Chinese as a second/foreign language (CS/FL) have not used vocabulary breadth as a proficiency measure due to the dearth of validated Chinese vocabulary tests (H. Zhang, 2018).…”