General and Technical Vocabulary as Predictors of ESP Reading Performance among Engineering Students at ENSAM Meknes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54536/jir.v4i1.7464Keywords:
Commonality Analysis, Engineering Students, ESP, General Vocabulary Knowledge, Reading Comprehension, Technical Vocabulary, UVLT, Hierarchical RegressionAbstract
This study examined whether general vocabulary knowledge and engineering-related technical vocabulary knowledge predict ESP reading performance among third- and fourth-year engineering students at ENSAM Meknes. The study was designed for a pooled engineering sample drawn from three majors and relied on a standardized measure of general vocabulary knowledge together with two researcher-developed instruments: a shared engineering-related technical vocabulary test and a shared engineering-ESP reading test. The design was motivated by two strands of scholarship. First, research on L2 reading has repeatedly shown that vocabulary knowledge is strongly associated with reading comprehension and that lexical coverage in a text affects how successfully readers construct meaning. Second, work on specialized discourse has argued that technical vocabulary should be identified in relation to the discourse practices of a field rather than treated as undifferentiated general lexis. The study used a cross-sectional predictive correlational design. General vocabulary knowledge was measured through the Updated Vocabulary Levels Test (UVLT), while engineering-related technical vocabulary knowledge and ESP reading performance were assessed through a 30-item vocabulary test and an 18-item reading test aligned with a shared engineering-ESP context. Both lexical predictors significantly contributed to ESP reading performance, but engineering-related technical vocabulary emerged as the stronger predictor in both hierarchical regression orderings. A commonality analysis further suggested that a substantial portion of the explained variance was shared by the two lexical predictors, while technical vocabulary retained the larger unique contribution. The overall pattern supports a layered view of ESP reading in which broad lexical knowledge provides an important base, but specialized vocabulary adds substantial explanatory value in discipline-oriented reading tasks.
References
Azalmad, N.-E. (2023). Exploring the interplay of vocabulary size, depth, and reading performance among engineering students in an ESP context. American Journal of Education and Technology, 2(4), 17–23.
Chung, T. M., & Nation, I. S. P. (2003). Technical vocabulary in specialised texts. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(2), 103–116.
Chung, T. M., & Nation, I. S. P. (2004). Identifying technical vocabulary. System, 32(2), 251–263.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238.
Hu, M., & Nation, I. S. P. (2000). Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 13(1), 403–430.
Laufer, B., & Ravenhorst-Kalovski, G. C. (2010). Lexical threshold revisited: Lexical text coverage, learners’ vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 15–30.
Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59–82.
Nation, I. S. P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 9–13.
Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language Learning, 52(3), 513–536.
Ray-Mukherjee, J., Nimon, K., Mukherjee, S., Morris, D. W., Slotow, R., & Hamer, M. (2014). Using commonality analysis in multiple regressions: A tool to decompose regression effects in the face of multicollinearity. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 5(4), 320–328.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge University Press.
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.
Staehr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 139–152.
Ward, J. (2009). A basic engineering English word list for less proficient foundation engineering undergraduates. English for Specific Purposes, 28(3), 170–182.
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), 34–70.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Youssef Baaqili, Abdelkrim El Khatmi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
