學術詞彙是學生在學術場域用以理解、思辯，以及與他人交流的重要工具。本研究透過文獻回顧指出學術詞彙的意義、特性，與評量方法，進一步探討我國國中教科書出現了哪些學術詞彙，以及國中學生相較於專家對學術詞彙的掌握程度。
本研究採用現行國中各版本之教科書作為語料來源，其中包含數學、理化、生物、地科、歷史、地理、公民等七科，合計54本課本，共597個單元。運用「庫博中文語料庫分析工具」將語料進行斷詞處理與產生詞頻表，再經由出現的單元數（詞頻）、領域廣度、均勻度等指標進行篩選，產生了762個詞彙的「國中學術詞彙表」，其中與英文學術詞彙有諸多雷同。然而，刪詞的過程發現，中文詞彙的詞性無法藉由形構上的變化表現出來，也因斷詞緣故，有虛詞附著在實詞上的現象。
接著，本研究選擇國中課本語料中含有國中學術詞彙之適當段落作為題幹，並將該學術詞彙挖空，編製成四選一選擇題式克漏詞測驗，共108題。透過中學教師或擁有碩博士學歷的37名專家進行預試後，篩選出60題作為正式施測之「國中學術詞彙能力測驗」。正式施測對象為臺灣五個縣市的五所國中共255位九年級學生，其中男生122名，女生133名，將施測結果與專家做對照，並進行試題分析後，有以下的研究發現：一、國中學術詞彙能力測驗具有良好的信效度；二、專家的學術詞彙能力顯著高於學生；三、國中女生的學術詞彙能力顯著高於男生；四、學術詞彙在不同的學科中具同質性，且難度相同；五、脈絡層次的掌握程度為造成專家與學生表現落差大的關鍵；六、學術辭彙之詞義在不同的學習階段可能產生轉化。最後，以上研究結果可提供教學現場之教師在一般教學、補救教學、教材或試題編製上作為參考。

Academic vocabulary is an important tool used by students for comprehension, critical thinking, and communication in the academic field. The research reveals the purpose, characteristics, and evaluation method of academic vocabulary, further probes into the academic vocabulary used in Taiwan’s junior high textbooks, and assesses the degree of students’ mastery of academic vocabulary in comparison with that of the professionals.
The research adopted various editions of textbooks currently used in junior high schools as the source of corpus, among which included the seven subjects of math, physics and chemistry, biology, earth science, history, geography, and civics, amounting to 54 books and 597 chapters. The corpus was tokenized through CORPRO to produce a word frequency list, then words in the list were filtered through criteria such as chapter count (frequency), range, dispersion, etc., producing a list of 762 Chinese words designated as “The Junior High School Academic Vocabulary List.” There is a high level of similarity between the resulting list and equivalent English academic vocabulary lists. However, in the course of developing the list, it was found that unlike the English language, the part of speech of each Chinese word cannot be identified through word arrangement and spacing , and thus the tokenization process often produced results where a content word followed by a function word was identified as one vocabulary word.
Next, a cloze test of 108 multiple-choice questions was developed by selecting sections of text containing academic vocabulary from the corpus. The academic vocabulary was removed from the text to form the test questions and the academic vocabulary was provided as one of the four options in a multiple-choice question. The test was then administered to 37 professionals as a pretest. A professional in this research was defined as someone who is a school teacher or someone holding a master’s or doctoral degree. Based on the pretest results, 60 questions were selected and compiled as a formal test designated as “The Junior High School Academic Vocabulary Test.” Said test was then administered to 255 ninth graders, 122 male and 133 female, from five junior high schools located in five different cities in Taiwan. The test results were compared with those of the professionals. The analysis revealed the following: 1. The Junior High School Academic Vocabulary Test has a good level of reliability and validity; 2. the professionals display higher levels of mastery of academic vocabulary compared to the students; 3. among the junior high school students, females displayed higher levels of mastery of academic vocabulary compared to males; 4. academic vocabulary is homogeneous across subjects and shows an equivalent level of complexity; 5. the key cause of the gap in mastery of academic vocabulary between the experts and the students lies in how well one deals with the different levels of context within a body of text; and 6. the meaning of academic vocabulary may evolve at different stages of learning. The research results can serve as a reference for teachers in regular teaching, remedial teaching, and material or test development.

形式（2021）：載於教育部重編國語辭典修訂本。取自http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cbdic/gsweb.cgi?o=dcbdic&searchid=
Z00000110674
南一（主編）（2017）：國民中學自然與生活科技2上。南一。
南一（主編）（2017）：國民中學社會3上。南一。
南一（主編）（2017）：國民中學自然與生活科技3下。南一。
洪小雯（2009）：「對外漢語測驗克漏字（完形測驗）文本分析初探」（口頭發表論文）。2009 年全美中文教師學會年會（ACTFL），美國聖地牙哥。https://www.sc-top.org.tw/download/research/Hsiao_Wen_Hong_01.pdf
郭生玉（2004）：教育測驗與評量。精華書局。
陳柏熹、葉泰廷、黃馨瑩、陳郁欣、蘇少祖（2015）：大學生基本素養測驗的發展及信度效度分析。教育科學研究期刊，60（3），95126。
https://doi.org/ 10.6209/JORIES.2015.60(3).04
康軒（主編）（2017）：國民中學自然與生活科技1下。康軒。
康軒（主編）（2017）：國民中學社會2上。康軒。
康軒（主編）（2017）：國民中學自然與生活科技3上。康軒。
黃居仁（2005）：漢字知識表達的幾個層面: 字，詞，與詞義關係概論。漢字與全球化國際學術研討會，台北市。
結構（2021）：載於教育部重編國語辭典修訂本。取自http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cbdic/gsweb.cgi?o=dcbdic&searchid=
Z00000090216
演化（2021）：載於教育部重編國語辭典修訂本。取自http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cbdic/gsweb.cgi?o=dcbdic&searchid=
Z00000155795
認同（2021）：載於教育部重編國語辭典修訂本。取自http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cbdic/gsweb.cgi?o=dcbdic&searchid=
Z00000136150
劉貞妤、陳浩然、楊惠媚（2016）：藉學術語料庫提出中文學術常用詞表：以人文社會科學為例。華語文教學研究， 13（2），4387。
https://doi.org/10.6393/JCLT
闕河嘉、陳光華（2016）：庫博中文獨立語料庫分析工具之開發與應用。載於在項潔（主編），數位人文研究與技藝第六輯（285313）。國立臺灣大學出版中心。 https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36253.97768
闕河嘉（2018）：庫博中文語料庫分析工具的數位人文價值。人文與社會科學簡訊，19（2），118123。
Bachman, L. F. (1985). Performance on cloze tests with fixed‐ratio and rational deletions. Tesol Quarterly, 19(3), 535556. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586277
Bailey, A. L., & Heritage, M. (Eds.). (2008). Formative assessment for literacy, grades K-6: Building reading and academic language skills across the curriculum. Corwin Press.
Baumann, J. F., & Graves, M. F. (2010). What is academic vocabulary? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(1), 412.
https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.54.1.1
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. Guilford Press.
Bensoussan, M., & Ramraz, R. (1984). Testing EFL reading comprehension using a multiple-choice rational cloze. The Modern Language Journal, 68(3), 230239.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1984.tb01569.x
Bolger, D. J., Balass, M., Landen, E., & Perfetti, C. A. (2008). Context variation and definitions in learning the meanings of words: An instance-based learning approach. Discourse Processes, 45(2), 122159.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530701792826
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Burgess, C., & Lund, K. (1997). Modelling parsing constraints with high-dimensional context space. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 177–210.
https://doi.org/10.1080/016909697386844
Campion, M. E., & Elley, W. B. (1971). An academic vocabulary list. New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Carroll, J. B. (1970). An alternative to Juilland’s usage coefficient for lexical frequencies 1. ETS Research Bulletin Series, 1970(2), i–15.
Collocation. (2021). In Oxford Online Dictionary. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/collocation
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213238.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3587951
Crossley, S., Salsbury, T., & McNamara, D. (2010). The development of polysemy and frequency use in English second language speakers. Language Learning, 60(3), 573605. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00568.x
Crosson, A. C., McKeown, M. G., & Ward Jr, A. K. (2019). An innovative approach to assessing depth of knowledge of academic words. Language Assessment Quarterly, 16(2), 196216. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1612899
Deane, P., Lawless, R. R., Li, C., Sabatini, J., Bejar, I. I., & O'Reilly, T. (2014). Creating vocabulary item types that measure students' depth of semantic knowledge. ETS Research Report Series, 1, 119.
Drum, P. A., & Konopak, B. C. (1987). Learning word meanings from written context. The Nature of Vocabulary Acquisition, 9, 7387.
Eddington, C. M., & Tokowicz, N. (2015). How meaning similarity influences ambiguous word processing: The current state of the literature. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(1), 1337. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0665-7
Farrell, P. (1990). Vocabulary in ESP: A Lexical Analysis of the English of Electronics and a Study of Semi-technical Vocabulary (Vol. CLCS Occasional Paper No. 25). Trinity College.
Gardner, D., & Davies, M. (2014). A new academic vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 305327. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt015
Ghadessy, P. (1979). Frequency counts, word lists, and materials preparation: A new approach. English Teaching Forum, 17(1), 2427.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316155752.006
Greene, J. W., & Coxhead, A. (2015). Academic vocabulary for middle school students. Paul H. Brookes.
Gustafsson, M. (2020). Wittgenstein on using language and playing chess: the breakdown of an analogy and its consequences. In The Logical Alien (pp. 202-221). Harvard University Press.
Harmon, J., & Wood, K. (2018). The vocabulary-comprehension relationship across the disciplines: Implications for instruction. Education Sciences, 8(3), 101109.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8030101
Hiebert, E. H., & Lubliner, S. (2008). The nature, learning, and instruction of general academic vocabulary. In A.E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about vocabulary instruction (pp. 106–129). International Reading Association.
Hopkins, K. D. (1998). Educational and psychological measurement and evaluation. Allyn & Bacon.
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2007). Is there an “academic vocabulary”?. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 235253.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00058.x
Jonz, J. (1976). Improving on the basic egg: The M‐C Cloze. Language Learning, 26(2), 255265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1976.tb00276.x
Keshavarz, M. H. & Salimi, H. (2007). Collocational competence and cloze test performance: A study of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics,17(1), 8192. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2007.00134.x
Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25(2-3), 259284.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539809545028
Lawrence, J. F., Hagen, A. M., Hwang, J. K., Lin, G., & Lervåg, A. (2019). Academic vocabulary and reading comprehension: Exploring the relationships across measures of vocabulary knowledge. Reading and Writing, 32(2), 285306.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9865-2
Lesaux, N. K., Kieffer, M. J., Faller, S. E., & Kelley, J. G. (2010). The effectiveness and ease of implementation of an academic vocabulary intervention for linguistically diverse students in urban middle schools. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 196228. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.45.2.3
Lynn, R. W. (1973). Preparing word-lists: a suggested method. RELC Journal, 4(1), 2528. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368827300400103
Lynn, R., & Mikk, J. (2009). Sex differences in reading achievement. TRAMES: A Journal of the Humanities & Social Sciences, 13(1), 112.
https://doi.org/10.3176/tr.2009.1.01
Masrai, A., & Milton, J. (2018). Measuring the contribution of academic and general vocabulary knowledge to learners' academic achievement. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 31, 4457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.12.006
McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Omanson, R. C., & Perfetti, C. A. (1983). The effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on reading comprehension: A replication. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(1), 318.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968309547474
McKeown, M. G., Crosson, A. C., Moore, D. W., & Beck, I. L. (2018). Word knowledge and comprehension effects of an academic vocabulary intervention for middle school students. American Educational Research Journal, 55(3), 572616.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217744181
Milton, J., & Fitzpatrick, T. (Eds.). (2013). Dimensions of vocabulary knowledge. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Mokhtari, K., & Velten, J. (2015). Strengthening academic vocabulary with word generation helps sixth-grade students improve reading comprehension. Middle Grades Research Journal, 10(3), 2342.
Nagy, W. (1997). On the role of context in first-and second-language vocabulary learning. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 64–83). Cambridge University Press.
Nagy, W. E. & Scott J. A. (2000). Vocabulary Processes. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr, (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research, Volume III.(pp. 269-284). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Reprint version.
Nagy, W., & Townsend, D. (2012). Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 91108.
https://doi.org/10.1002/RRQ.011
Nation, I. S. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language Google eBook. Cambridge University Press.
Ogle, D., Blachowicz, C., Fisher, P., & Lang, L. (2015). Academic vocabulary in middle and high school: Effective practices across the disciplines. Guilford Publications.
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191225). Routledge.
Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357383.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430701530730
Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 2237.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.827687
Praninskas, J. (1972). American university word list. Longman.
Pustejovski, J. (1995). The generative lexicon. MIT Press
Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language Learning, 52(3), 513536. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00193
Rajchert, J. M., Żułtak, T., & Smulczyk, M. (2014). Predicting reading literacy and its improvement in the Polish national extension of the PISA study: The role of intelligence, trait-and state-anxiety, socio-economic status and school-type. Learning and Individual Differences, 33, 111.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.04.003
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge university press.
Read, J. (2007). Second language vocabulary assessment: Current practices and new directions. International Journal of English Studies, 7(2), 105126. https://doi.org/10.6018/IJES.7.2.49021
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004b). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Routledge.
Schmitt, N. (2014). Size and depth of vocabulary knowledge: What the research shows. Language Learning, 64(4), 913951.
https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12077
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553220101800103
Schuth, E., Köhne, J., & Weinert, S. (2017). The influence of academic vocabulary knowledge on school performance. Learning and Instruction, 49, 157165.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.01.005
Schwanenflugel, P. J., Harnishfeger, K. K., & Stowe, R. W. (1988). Context availability and lexical decisions for abstract and concrete words. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(5), 499520. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90022-8
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 4059.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.78.1.v62444321p602101
Snow, C. E., & Uccelli, P. (2009). The challenge of academic language. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of literacy (pp. 112–133). Cambridge University Press.
Snow, C.E. (2010). Academic language and the challenge of reading for learning about science. Science, 328(5977), 450452. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182597
Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2013). Sex differences in mathematics and reading achievement are inversely related: Within-and across-nation assessment of 10 years of PISA data. PloS One, 8(3), e57988.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057988
Stubbs, M. (1993). British traditions in text analysis. M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair, 1-33. John Benjamins Publishing.
Townsend, D., Filippini, A., Collins, P., & Biancarosa, G. (2012). Evidence for the importance of academic word knowledge for the academic achievement of diverse middle school students. The Elementary School Journal, 112(3), 497518. https://doi.org/10.1086/663301
Voyer, D., & Voyer, S. D. (2014). Gender differences in scholastic achievement: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 11741204.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036620
Webb, S. (2012). Depth of vocabulary knowledge. In Chappelle, C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1656–1663). Wiley-Blackwell.
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(1), 3369.
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.168.1.02web
West, M. (1953). A General Service List of English Words. Longman, Green and Co.”.
Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., & Wilson, M. R. (1998). Acer ConQuest. ACER Press.
Yanagisawa, A., & Webb, S. (2020). Measuring depth of vocabulary knowledge. In S. Webb (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies (pp. 371- 386). Routledge.