This paper discusses the role of vocabulary knowledge on the writing performance of the Arabic language which known as a foreign language in the Malaysian education system. It also discussed the role of each part of vocabulary knowledge which namely receptive vocabulary knowledge and productive vocabulary knowledge. This paper reviews scholars' views regarding the relationship of both receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge in producing written text. It also highlights the comparison between Arabic vocabulary knowledge and English due to enhance learners' writing skill. Conclusion and recommendations such as integrating receptive and productive instructional styles were made in order to increase learners' interest towards writing in Arabic.

Vocabulary acquisition is a benchmark for language proficiency, which involves writing, reading, listening and speaking skills. A good command of language relies on the individual's vocabulary size and the level of understanding of a word. In fact, in order to use a language lucidly and effectively, a speaker or writer must choose the most precise words. Thus, vocabulary is a set of words known and used within a language to construct meaning in written texts and communication at large. In learning Arabic language, vocabulary acquisition becomes the main hindrance to the success of the whole language learning. Many students find it difficult to speak and write skillfully in Arabic because of a limited vocabulary. Arabic vocabulary lessons are implicitly applied in the teaching and learning process in classroom, thereby cause difficulties for students to master the language. Therefore, this paper discusses the experiences of Arabic vocabulary learning among the non-native speakers of Arabic from an Arabic teacher's perspectives. The discussion is also focused on the literature review related to vocabulary in Arabic language learning. Other than that, several recommendations are drawn to help improve the teaching and learning of Arabic vocabulary acquisition in Malaysia.

No abstract

Writing assessment relies closely on scoring the excellence of a subject’s thoughts. This creates a faceted measurement structure regarding rubrics, tasks, and raters. Nevertheless, most studies did not consider the differences among raters systematically. This study examines the raters’ differences in association with the reliability and validity of writing rubrics using the Many-Facet Rasch measurement model (MFRM) to model these differences. A set of standards for evaluating the quality of rating based on writing assessment was examined. Rating quality was tested within four writing domains from an analytic rubric using a scale of one to three. The writing domains explored were vocabulary, grammar, language, use, and organization; whereas the data were obtained from 15 Arabic essays gathered from religious secondary school students under the supervision of the Malaysia Ministry of Education. Five raters in the field of practice were selected to evaluate all the essays. As a result, (a) raters range considerably on the lenient-severity dimension, so rater variations ought to be modeled; (b) the combination of findings between raters avoids the doubt of scores, thereby reducing the measurement error which could lower the criterion validity with the external variable; and (c) MFRM adjustments effectively increased the correlations of the scores obtained from partial and full data. Predominant findings revealed that rating quality varies across analytic rubric domains. This also depicts that MFRM is an effective way to model rater differences and evaluate the validity and reliability of writing rubrics.