| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立雲林科技大學 === 應用外語系碩士班 === 94 === The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between
vocabulary skills and vocabulary test. The participants were 373 college
freshmen chosen from colleges in northern, central, and southern Taiwan. In
the present study, the procedures of data collection were divided into four phases.
First, the Vocabulary Skill Test was constructed based on the dual route model
(Jackson & Coltheart, 2001). The vocabulary skills include phonological awareness
skill, lexical skill, and morphological awareness skill. Secondly, 176
more-proficient readers and 197 less-proficient readers were selected based on the results of the GEPT reading test for intermediate level readers. Thirdly, the Vocabulary Skill Test, and the Vocabulary Test were administered to the participants respectively. Fourthly, in order to explore the differences of vocabulary learning among readers with different reading proficiency, 10 more-proficient readers and 10 less-proficient readers were randomly selected for interviewing. Pearson Product-Moment Correlation, simple regression analysis, multiple regression analysis, and t-test were applied in data analysis.
There are four major findings in this study. Firstly, the significant differences of the performances in the Vocabulary Test were found among TVES college students with different reading proficiency. The more-proficient readers obtained about 4100-4800 words, suggesting their vocabulary knowledge reached the expected level. In terms of the less-proficient readers’ performances in the Vocabulary Test, their vocabulary knowledge was about 2000-2700 words and their vocabulary level was at the 10th grade in the vocational high school. Secondly, it was found that the more-proficient readers’ and the less-proficient readers’ performances in the Vocabulary Skill Test was significantly different. The more-proficient readers outperformed the less-proficient readers in each subtest. Thirdly, the correlation coefficient between TVES college students’ performances in the Vocabulary Skill Test and the Vocabulary Test was .98, indicating the relationship between the two tests was significant. Fourthly, based on the interview data, the more-proficient readers’ vocabulary learning strengths can be revealed. The more-proficient readers obtained the vocabulary skills and they applied these skills to learn new words. On the other hand, the less-proficient readers did not acquire sufficient vocabulary skills and they seldom adopted these skills to learn new words. The results of the present study suggest that instruction on improving learners’ vocabulary skills is useful for vocabulary learning. For instance, enhancing learners’ phonological awareness, lexical ability, and morphological awareness becomes a necessity.
|
|---|
