A literature review central to the constructs of vocabulary assessment tasks entail that any task one applies for measuring the depth of receptive or produc- tive vocabulary, be able to reflect on developmental patterns (Waring, 1999). The terms receptive and productive vocabulary is used extensively in language studies and Psychology. One of the early vocabulary researchers, Myers (1914 as cited in Waring, 1999) tested recognition and recall memories for words in the form of simple tests. The procedure Myers followed was to initially give respondents a list of 20 words as a spelling test and after half an hour the respondents received a surprise recall test, fol- lowed by a recognition test of the 20 words mixed in with distorter words. Myers (1914, as cited in Waring, 1999) found that there was a disproportion between the recognition and recall memories for words, in that the respondents were able to rec- ognise words better than recall them.
The present study investigates the processes involved and the range of inferencing strategies employed in L2 learners to proceed from a pre-receptive to pro- ductive stage of vocabulary development. Smith and Prescott (1942) specified that receptive language skills of listening and reading were passive skills because the learner was not doing much in terms of comprehension of language. This belief was commonly held then. The skills of speaking and writing were thought to involve ac- tive creation of language and were classified under active skills. Lado’s (1961) pio- neering book, Language Testing, suggested that the learner is engaged in comprehen- sion regardless of the different skills involved. Researchers came to accept that recog- nition tested receptive knowledge while recall tested productive knowledge. However,
huge variations exist currently among researchers on definitions regarding receptive and productive vocabulary and how they must be tested.
Recognition and recall vocabularies are generally referred to as the prod- uct of the mental operations involved in the completion of a task (Waring, 1999). In the study conducted by Myers (1914 as cited in Waring, 1999), a test of recognition of vocabulary is one that has been structured with the view to present the learner with a set of choices from which she is to select the suitable option. Cronbach, 1942; Nation, 1990; Laufer & Nation, 1995; Bachman and Palmer 1996; Waring, 1999, and Wag- ner, Muse and Tannenbaum, 2006, among others have recognised the importance of assessing vocabulary on a multi-dimensional scale.
The present study emphasises the importance of testing L2 vocabulary proficiency in context and has attempted to develop CRT- diagnostic/ achievements tests to measure a range of lexical knowledge. Cronbach (1942) distinguishes five as- pects of lexical knowledge: generalisation (knowing the definition), application (knowledge about use), breadth of meaning (knowing different senses of a word), pre- cision of meaning (knowing how to use the word in different situations) and availabil- ity (knowing how to use the word productively).
Nation (1990) puts forward four scales of lexical knowledge: form (oral or written), position (grammar and collocations), function (frequency and appropri- ateness) and meaning (conceptual and associative). All these forms of knowledge can be receptive or productive. Bachman and Palmer (1996) propose that the general con- struct underpinning language testing involve testing multiple areas of knowledge and competence. The present study develops a vocabulary proficiency instrument in con- text that measures breadth of meaning (knowing different senses of a word), depth of meaning and precision of meaning (knowing how to use the word in different situa- tions) and vocabulary production. The study believes that the development of vocabu- lary is inherently complex in nature and can be assumed to be incremental where
learners require mastery of strategies to deal with comprehension prior to vocabulary knowledge becoming productive.
Waring (1999) postulates that multiple-choice tests and matching tests are standard ways of carrying out measurement of vocabulary. Vocabulary assessment in the history of the twentieth century is associated with the development of objective testing (Read, 2000). There appears to be a high correlation between tests of vocabu- lary and reading comprehension in both first language assessment studies (Anderson & Freebody , 1981) and second language assessments studies( Pike, 1979). Waring (1999) defines the Receptive- Productive vocabulary product as:
“ [I]t is likely that there is an underlying knowledge of words which is medi- ated by the mental processes of receiving and producing language. The Recep- tive and Productive vocabulary product (the test score) is probably the result of the interaction between the mental processes of reception and production and the underlying word knowledge. The degree of control one has over the interaction between the processes and the underlying word knowledge may also reflect the surface Receptive and Productive vocabulary product….Thus, performance on a test is a function of one’s underlying knowledge and one’s ability to control what happens in the Receptive and Production mental proc- esses” (Waring, 1999, p.15).
Wide ranges of test items and methods have been used for measuring vo- cabulary proficiency. According to Read (2000) discrete vocabulary tests that are se- lective and context independent may be deemed sufficient measures of vocabulary knowledge, but at the same time the author (Read, 2000) stated that it is difficult to establish if they are not much different from tests of grammar. The present study has designed criterion referenced tests CRT-diagnostic/achievement tests which assess L2 vocabulary in context through appropriate reading texts. Assessing vocabulary knowl- edge is manifold and one needs to select plausible materials and adequate procedures to gain valid and reliable results. A variety of tests are required to address diverse as-
pects of the lexicon (Bogaards, 2000). The creation of suitable vocabulary assessment tests has been made complex due to the lack of clear definition of what constitutes a ‘word’. Brown and Miller (1992) state that if we accept the sentence as an abstract unit set up by linguists that we can assume that words are patterns formed within sen- tences that are dependent upon each other. The term ‘word’ has not been an easy con- cept to define, both for theoretical and for applied purposes (Read, 2000). This belief is reiterated by researchers such as Bogaards (2000) who states that the term ‘word’ has never been clarified in linguistic theory though, many definitions have been pro- vided for the various aspects of lexical units.