Cover not available
Article published In:
ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 170:1 (2019) ► pp.53–78

The VocabLab tests

The development of an English and French vocabulary test

 | KU Leuven
 | KU Leuven
 | KU Leuven
This study describes the development of an English and French multiple choice vocabulary test – the VocabLab tests – that measure learners’ knowledge at four frequency levels up to the most frequent 5,000 words: the 2,000-level, 3,000-level, 4,000-level, and the 5,000-level. The two tests aimed to address some of the limitations of tests currently in use. First, they are sampled from recent frequency lists. Second, they are geared towards Dutch-speaking learners of English and French in Flanders. Third, they attempt to minimize guessing by including an “I don’t know”-option. The findings showed that the tests are internally consistent. Mean scores decreased when the words were less frequent, lending evidence to the tests’ construct validity. Additionally, the tests seem to be able to discriminate between different proficiency levels. As both tests were developed according to the same principles, they can be used to compare learners’ English and French vocabulary knowledge.
Keywords: vocabulary test, English, French, frequency, vocabulary knowledge, vocabulary levels
Article outline
  • Background
    • Frequency-based vocabulary tests
      • English tests
      • French tests
    • Criticism of these tests
      • Guessing and overestimation
      • Cognates
      • Sampling, sampling rate and test sections
  • Rationale and aim
  • Research questions
  • The study
    • Item selection
      • Recent lemma-based frequency lists
      • Sampling rate
      • Selection of items
    • Test format
    • The Pilot tests
    • The final English test
      • Participants
      • Results
    • I don’t know-option:
    • The final French test
      • Participants
      • Results
    • I don’t know-option:
  • Discussion
    • Do the English and French test have a scalable profile?
    • Do the English and French test discriminate between different proficiency levels?
    • Use of the VocabLab tests
    • Limitations and future research
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 5 April 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.17029.pet
References (59)
References
Aviad-Levitzky, T., Laufer, B. and Goldstein, Z. (in press). The New Computer Adaptive Test of Size and Strength (CATSS): Development and Validation. Language Assessment Quarterly.
Bardel, C., Gudmundson, A., & Lindqvist, C. (2012). Aspects of lexical sophistication in advanced learners’ oral production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(2), 269–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Batista, R., & Horst, M. (2016). A new receptive vocabulary size test for French. The Canadian Modern Language Review / La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 72(2), 211–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baudot, J. (1992). Les fréquences d’utilisation des mots en français écrit contemporain. Montréal: Presses de l’Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
Bauer, L., & Nation, P. (1993). Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6(4), 253–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beglar, D. (2010). A Rasch-based validation of the Vocabulary Size Test. 5(1), 101–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beglar, D., & Hunt, A. (1999). Revising and validating the 2000 word level and university word level Vocabulary Tests. Language Testing, 16(2), 131–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cobb, T. (2000). One size fits all? Francophone learners and English vocabulary tests. The Canadian Modern Language Review / La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 57(2), 295–324. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). FREQUENCY 2.0: Incorporating homoforms and multiword units in pedagogical frequency lists. Eurosla Monograph Series 2(2), 79–108Google Scholar
Coxhead, A. (1998). An academic word list (Occasional Publication No. 18), Wellington: LALS, Victoria University of Wellington, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
(2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, M. (2008). Corpus of Contemporary American English. Retrieved from <[URL]>
Elgort, I. (2012). Effects of L1 definitions and cognate status of test items on the Vocabulary Size Test. Language Testing, 30(2), 253–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eyckmans, J., Van de Velde, H., Van Hout, R., & Boers, F. (2007): Learners’ response behaviour in Yes/No Vocabulary Tests. In H. Daller, J. Milton, & J. Treffers-Daller (Eds.), Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge (pp. 59–76). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gyllstad, H., Vilkaite, L., & Schmitt, N. (2015). Assessing vocabulary size through multiple-choice formats: Issues with guessing and sampling rates. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21, 276–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karami, H. (2012). The development and validation of a bilingual version of the Vocabulary Size Test. RELC Journal, 43(1), 53–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kremmel, B. (2016). Word families and frequency bands in vocabulary tests: Challenging conventions. TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 976–987. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kremmel, B., & Schmitt, N. (2016). Interpreting vocabulary test scores: What do various item formats tell us about learners’ ability to employ words? Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(4), 377–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). A computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Laufer, B., & Aviad-Levitzky, T. (2017). What type of vocabulary knowledge predicts reading comprehension: Word meaning recall or word meaning recognition? Modern Language Journal, 101(4), 729–741. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Levitzky-Aviad, T. (2018). Loanword proportion in vocabulary size tests: Does it make a difference? ITL-International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 169(1), 95–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & McLean, S. (2016). Loanwords and vocabulary size test scores: A case of different estimates for different L1 learners. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(3), 202–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindqvist, C., Bardel, C., & Gudmundson, A. (2011). Lexical richness in the advanced learner’s oral production of French and Italian L2. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 49(3), 221–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindqvist, C., Gudmundson, A., & Bardel, C. (2012). A new approach to measuring lexical sophistication in L2 oral production. In Camilla Bardel, Christina Lindqvist & Bhatia Laufer (Eds.), L2 Vocabulary Acquisition, Knowledge and Use (Eurosla Monograph Series 2) (pp. 109–126). Paris: Eurosla.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, D., & Le Bras, Y. (2009). A frequency dictionary of French. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McLean, S. (2017). Evidence for the adoption of the flemma as an appropriate word counting unit. Applied Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meara, P., & Jones, G. (1990). Eurocentres Vocabulary Size Tests 10KA. Zurich: Eurocentres Learning Service.Google Scholar
Meara, P., & Milton, J. (2003). X_Lex, The Swansea Levels Test. Newbury: Express.Google Scholar
Milton, J. (2007). Lexical profiles, learning styles and the construct validity of lexical size tests. In H. Daller, J. Milton, & J. Treffers-Daller (Eds.), Modelling and Assessing Vocabulary Knowledge (pp. 47–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milton, J., & Vassiliu, P. (2000). Frequency and the lexis of low level EFL texts. In K. Nicolaidis, & M. Mattheoudakis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics (pp. 444–455). Thessaloniki, Greece: Aristotle University.Google Scholar
Mueller Gathercole, V. C., Mon Thomas, E., & Hughes, E. (2008). Designing a normed receptive vocabulary test for bilingual populations: A model from Welsh. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11(6), 678–720. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nation, P. (1983). Testing and teaching vocabulary. Guidelines, 51, 12–25. Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Heinle & Heinle Publishers.Google Scholar
(2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? The Canadian Modern Language Review / La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 63(1), 59–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). The BNC/COCA word family lists. Unpublished paper Available at: <[URL]>
Nation, I. S. P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 9–13.Google Scholar
Noreillie, A., Kestemont, B., Heylen, K., Desmet, P., & Peters, E. (2018). Vocabulary knowledge and listening comprehension at an intermediate level in English and French as foreign languages An approximate replication study of Stæhr (2009). ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 169(1), 212–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, L. T. C., & Nation, I. S. P. (2011). A bilingual vocabulary size test of English for Vietnamese learners. RELC Journal, 42(1), 86–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peters, E. (2018). The effect of out-of-class exposure to English language media on learners’ vocabulary knowledge. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 169(1), 142–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peters, E., Noreillie, A., Heylen, K., Bulté, B., & Desmet, P. (in press). The impact of instruction and out-of-school exposure to FL input on learners’ vocabulary knowledge in two languages. Language Learning.
Sasao, Y., & Webb, S. (2017). The word part levels test. Language Teaching Research, 21(2), 12–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N. (2008). Review article: Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 329–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N., Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2011). The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 26–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stæhr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 139–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). Vocabulary knowledge and advanced listening comprehension in English as a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(4), 577–607. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stewart, J. (2014). Do multiple-choice options inflate estimates of vocabulary size on the VST? Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(3), 271–282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stewart, J., & White, D. A. (2011). Estimating guessing effects on the Vocabulary Levels Test for differing degrees of word knowledge. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 370–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stoeckel, T., Bennett, P., & Mclean, S. (2016). Is “I Don’t Know “ a Viable Answer Choice on the Vocabulary Size Test? TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 965–975. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. & Lorge, I. (1944). The teacher’s word book of 30 000 words. Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
Van Garsse, P. (2015). Analyse van de woordenschat op het B1-niveau van Quartier Latin 4 (Unpublished MA thesis). University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Van Houtven, T., Peters, E., & Van den Branden, K. (2013). Analyzing student teachers’ academic literacy needs: A qualitative analysis of Flemish first-year teacher trainees’ needs. Language Learning in Higher Education, 2(2), 267–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. (2009a). Vocabulary demands of television programs. Language Learning, 59(2), 335–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. P. H. (2009b). The lexical coverage of movies. Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 407–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., & Sasao, Y. (2013). New directions in vocabulary testing. RELC Journal, 44(3), 263–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webb, S., Sasao, Y., & Ballance, O. (2017). The updated vocabulary levels test: Developing and validating two new forms of the VLT. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 168(2), 33–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T. S. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: Depth versus breadth. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(1), 13–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
West, M. (1953) A General Service List of English Words. London: Longman, Green & Co.Google Scholar
Zhang, X. (2013). The “I don’t Know” option in the Vocabulary Size Test. TESOL Quarterly, 47(4), 790–811. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (12)

Cited by 12 other publications

Dudley, Amber, Emma Marsden & Giulia Bovolenta
2024. A Context-Aligned Two Thousand Test: Toward estimating high-frequency French vocabulary knowledge for beginner-to-low intermediate proficiency adolescent learners in England. Language Testing 41:4 ► pp. 759 ff. DOI logo
Laufer, Batia
2024. Understanding L2-derived words in context: Is complete receptive morphological knowledge necessary?. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 46:1 ► pp. 200 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Haiwei, Peng Sun, Yaowaluk Bianglae & Winda Widiawati
2024. The development of a Chinese vocabulary proficiency test (CVPT) for learners of Chinese as a second/foreign language . Language Testing 41:2 ► pp. 412 ff. DOI logo
Cromheecke, Oona & Marc Brysbaert
2022. A French C-test for language assessment. L’Année psychologique Vol. 122:1 ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Snoder, Per & Batia Laufer
2022. EFL Learners' Receptive Knowledge of Derived Words: The Case of Swedish Adolescents. TESOL Quarterly 56:4 ► pp. 1242 ff. DOI logo
Ha, Hung Tan
2021. Exploring the relationships between various dimensions of receptive vocabulary knowledge and L2 listening and reading comprehension. Language Testing in Asia 11:1 DOI logo
Laufer, Batia, Stuart Webb, Su Kyung Kim & Beverley Yohanan
2021. How well do learners know derived words in a second language?. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 172:2 ► pp. 229 ff. DOI logo
Vandenberghe, Bert, Maribel Montero Perez, Bert Reynvoet & Piet Desmet
2021. COMBINING EXPLICIT AND SENSITIVE INDICES FOR MEASURING L2 VOCABULARY LEARNING THROUGH CONTEXTUALIZED INPUT AND WORD-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 43:5 ► pp. 1009 ff. DOI logo
Vandeweerd, Nathan, Alex Housen & Magali Paquot
2021. Applying phraseological complexity measures to L2 French. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 7:2 ► pp. 197 ff. DOI logo
Webb, Stuart
2021. WORD FAMILIES AND LEMMAS, NOT A REAL DILEMMA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 43:5 ► pp. 973 ff. DOI logo
Noreillie, Ann-Sophie, Piet Desmet & Elke Peters
2020. Factors Predicting Low-Intermediate French Learners’ Vocabulary Use in Speaking Tasks. The Canadian Modern Language Review 76:3 ► pp. 194 ff. DOI logo
Peters, Elke, Ann‐Sophie Noreillie, Kris Heylen, Bram Bulté & Piet Desmet
2019. The Impact of Instruction and Out‐of‐School Exposure to Foreign Language Input on Learners’ Vocabulary Knowledge in Two Languages. Language Learning 69:3 ► pp. 747 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.