Adapting the Productive Vocabulary Test for Applied University Learners: A Pilot Validation Study

Authors

  • YAQIONG MENG

    Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
  • Supyan Hussin

    Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
  • Harwati Hashim

    Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i7.9729
Received: 27 April 2025 | Revised: 26 May 2025 | Accepted: 13 June 2025 | Published Online: 4 July 2025

Abstract

This study aims to adapt and validate Paul Nation’s Productive Vocabulary Knowledge Test (PVKT) to better suit low-proficiency learners in applied universities in China. While PVKT is a widely recognized and validated tool for assessing productive vocabulary knowledge across word frequency levels, its academic focus and cognitive demands pose challenges for learners with limited vocabulary knowledge. Guided by Kane’s (2013) Argument-Based Approach to validation and Bachman and Palmer’s (2022) Principles of Test Design, the adapted version retains PVKT’s three-tiered frequency structure (2000, 3000, and 5000 words) while incorporating simplified sentence structures and vocabulary drawn from applied university English textbooks. A pilot study involving 49 students was conducted to evaluate the adapted test's validity, reliability, and practicality. Data analyses included descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation analyses, Cronbach’s Alpha, and test-retest reliability. The findings reveal that the adapted PVKT demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.88) and moderate construct validity (r = 0.561), and demonstrates practical usability based on student and teacher feedback. This study provides a reliable and accessible diagnostic tool for productive vocabulary assessment in applied university settings and contributes to more targeted vocabulary instruction for low-proficiency learners. It holds promise for large-scale classroom-based assessment. Future research could further examine its predictive validity in learning outcomes.

Keywords:

Productive Vocabulary Knowledge; Vocabulary Assessment; Test Adaptation; Applied University English; Construct Validity; Low-Proficiency Learners

References

[1] Nation, I.S.P., 2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.

[2] Laufer, B., Nation, P., 1999. A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing. 16(1), 33–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229901600103

[3] Chen, S., Zhang, Y., Li, R., et al., 2023. A study on undergraduate English program modes in China. Education Sciences. 13(12), 1241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13121241

[4] Schmitt, N., Nation, P., Kremmel, B., 2020. Moving the field of vocabulary assessment forward: The need for more rigorous test development and validation. Language Teaching. 53(1), 109–120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000326

[5] Kane, M., 2013. The argument-based approach to validation. School Psychology Review. 42(4), 448–457. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2013.12087465

[6] Bachman, L., Palmer, A., 2022. Language Assessment in Practice: Developing Language Assessments and Justifying Their Use in the Real World, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK. pp. 1–456.

[7] Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., 2020. Vocabulary in Language Teaching, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 1–9.

[8] Viik, T., 2024. Philosophical Thinking and Language: A Phenomenological Approach [in Estonian]. Methis. 27(34), 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7592/methis.v27i34.24688

[9] Yavaş, O., Başal, A., 2024. Technology in English vocabulary instruction for K-12: A systematic literature review. The Literacy Trek. 10(2), 146–179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47216/literacytrek.1535630

[10] Barghamadi, M., Müller, A., Rogers, J., et al., 2024. Exploring the relationship between English proficiency and influential factors on productive knowledge of multi-word units to create effective learning materials. Language Teaching Research Quarterly. 45, 106–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.45.06

[11] Ünal, B., 2023. Glossing and incidental vocabulary learning in L2 reading: A cognitive load perspective. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. 61(2), 601–629. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2020-0164

[12] Fitzpatrick, T., Clenton, J., 2017. Making sense of learner performance on tests of productive vocabulary knowledge. TESOL Quarterly. 51(4), 844–867. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.356

[13] Karafkan, M.A., Ansarin, A.A., Hadidi, Y., et al., 2022. Depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge as predictors of narrative, descriptive and argumentative writing. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies. 9(2), 27–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2020.14268.1757

[14] Ghaedi, R., Shahrokhi, M., 2016. The impact of visualization and verbalization techniques on vocabulary learning of Iranian high school EFL learners: A gender perspective. Ampersand. 3, 32–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2016.03.001

[15] Nguyen, T.C.D., 2022. The impact of context on EFL learners' vocabulary retention. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching. 6(2), 23–60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejfl.v6i2.4295

[16] Webb, S., Webb, S.A. (eds.), 2020. The Routledge Handbook of Vocabulary Studies, 2nd ed. Routledge: London, UK.

[17] Hunt, A., Beglar, D., 2005. A framework for developing EFL reading vocabulary. Reading in a Foreign Language. 17(1), 23–59.

[18] Burt, K.G., Fuster, M., Folta, S., et al., 2025. The Dietetics Profession Privilege Scale: Development, Psychometric Testing, and Application Among a Diverse Cohort of Dietetics Professionals. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 125(3), 366–385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2024.09.005

[19] Beglar, D., 2010. A Rasch-based validation of the Vocabulary Size Test. Language Testing. 27(1), 101–118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209340194

[20] Creswell, J.W., 2015. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 5th ed. Pearson: Boston, United States. pp. 1–668.

[21] Dörnyei, Z., 2007. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1st ed. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK. pp. 1–336.

[22] Isaac, S., Michael, W.B., 1995. Handbook in Research and Evaluation: A Collection of Principles, Methods, and Strategies Useful in the Planning, Design, and Evaluation of Studies in Education and the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd ed. EdITS Publishers: San Diego, United States. pp. 1–262.

[23] Johanson, G.A., Brooks, G.P., 2010. Initial scale development: Sample size for pilot studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 70(3), 394–400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164409355692

[24] Lynn, M.R., 1986. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research. 35(6), 382–386. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017

[25] Yusoff, M.S.B., 2019. ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Education in Medicine Journal. 11(2), 49–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2019.11.2.6

[26] Masoumian, S., Zandifar, H., Fattah Damavandi, S., et al., 2025. Psychometric properties of the Persian version of the suicidal intrusions attributes scale (SINAS) in patients with suicidal attempt. BMC Psychology. 13(1), 259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02600-8

[27] Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H., 1994. Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill: New York, United States.

[28] Polit, D.F., Beck, C.T., 2006. The content validity index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health. 29(5), 489–497. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147

[29] Fulcher, G., 2024. Practical Language Testing, 2nd ed. Routledge: London, UK. pp. 1–364. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003373629

[30] Padilla-García, J.L., Benítez Baena, I., 2014. Validity evidence based on response processes. Psicothema. 26(1), 136–144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2013.259

[31] Álvarez, C.D.C., Rojas, J.M., Ballesteros, A.E.Z., et al., 2025. Simulation study on the power and sensitivity of sixteen normality tests under different non-normality scenarios. TecnoLógicas. 28(62), e3293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22430/22565337.3293

[32] DeVellis, R.F., Thorpe, C.T., 2021. Scale Development: Theory and Applications, 5th ed. SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, United States. pp. 1–300.

[33] Ezra, A.R., Maha, F., 2025. Intellectual Adjustment as Correlates of Academic Performance among Public Senior School Students in North Central Nigeria. Scholar Journal of Science and Education. 3(3), 210–215. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15046097

Downloads

How to Cite

MENG, Y., Hussin, S., & Hashim, H. (2025). Adapting the Productive Vocabulary Test for Applied University Learners: A Pilot Validation Study. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(7), 90–111. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i7.9729

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 7 (July 2025): In progress

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 YAQIONG MENG, Supyan Hussin, Harwati Hashim

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.