A Comparison of Empirically Supported Versus Traditional Vocabulary

A Comparison of Empirically. Supported Versus Traditional Vocabulary Instruction in a Third Grade Classroom Deborah Doern Wichita State University College of Education Fall, 2008

Discussion to be Covered � Global State and Local Concerns � Focus Group � Literature Review � Methodology � Plan of study � Data Results � Student Work Examples � Conclusions � Questions

Global, State, and Local Concerns ØIn response to failing schools, ØState testing mandates the No Child Left Behind act was proficient learners created ØPray-Woodman's ØNCLB Improvement Plan (SIP) incites need for more School scientifically researched material implements strategies for ØCompetent teachers will improvement in three areas look for researched strategies in ØWhat order to refine teaching to improve vocabulary instruction ØAdequate within a classroom of third grade Yearly Progress (AYP)Stronger accountability for schools strategies would be useful students

Focus Group ØTwenty-five third grade students ØEleven boys and fourteen girls ØSuburban district ØRacial breakdown 88% White, 8% Black, and 4% Hispanic ØFour students attend Reading Lab ØOne student attends Math Lab ØOne student receiving home-bound instruction ØTwo students with identified learning disabilities

Literature Reviews � � � Many children with reading problems have limited or poor vocabularies Students with low vocabulary skills will continue to increase those low skills over time Study embraced training Teaching Assistance Gains were shown Ongoing remediation remained Duff et all, (2008) � � � Apthorp (2006) examined effectiveness of an intervention plan Control group and treatment group spotlighted Graphic organizers were used for writing Repeated exposure to vocabulary words Evidence supported efficacy of content rich vocabulary Apthorp (2006)

Literature Review � � � � Contextual learning/formative setting Year long study no control group Learning vocabulary using root words, suffixes, and prefixes Journaling and graphic organizers used Read rich literature material Results showed students’ word knowledge grew Below level pre-test students showed more gains than students who pre-tested above average Graves’ 2000, 2006 study (as cited in Baumann, Ware, & Edwards, 2007)

Literature Review “The Big Five” ØPhonemic Awareness ØPhonics ØFluency ØComprehension ØVocabulary National Reading Panel (NICHD, 2000)

Methodology ØPre-test students on a set of new vocabulary words ØStudents’ anthology books used as well as workbooks ØStudents choose correct vocabulary word in context ØUse the new vocabulary word by writing it in a sentence ØTeacher listens to students read for the week Ø While students are reading look for correct usage of vocabulary words in context ØPost-test students over the learned vocabulary words

Teacher’s Plan of Study ØPre and post test a set of ten vocabulary words ØStudents taught using regular procedure ØJournal entries taken with each lesson ØComparison of gain scores ØIn effort to improve instruction teach the researched strategies ØPre and post test set of ten vocabulary words ØComparison of gain scores ØInterview students, compare gains, take notes ØFisher & Frey (2008) study found that teachers must transfer responsibility for learning to our students gradually and offer support

Searching For Strategies ØStrategy activities chosen for new way to teach ØFlipbook definitions of vocabulary words along with illustrations ØComposing with words ØVocabulary Concentration Game ØSusan Jones. (1999). Vocabulary Activities. Teacher. Vision. com. http: //www. teachervision. fen. com/vocabulary/lesson-plan/43187. html ØResource Room http: //www. resourceroom. net/Comprehension/vocabactivities. asp

New Methods Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Pre-test students on new words Teach students using new researched strategies Play vocabulary concentration game Make a flip book of definitions along with illustrations Create a story using the new words Students illustrate their story Publish students’ writing in a class book Leave book out for all to read and share Post-test vocabulary words Explain results or comparison scores in Excel

Data Results Using New Approach 12 10 8 Vocabulary Pre-Test 6 Vocabulary Post-Test 4 2 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25

Vocabulary Gain Results Gain Score 4, 5 4 3, 5 3 2, 5 Gain Score 2 1, 5 1 0, 5 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25

References Armbruster, B. B. , Lehr, F. , & Osborn, J. (2003). Put reading first k-3 (2 nd ed. ). Retrieved October 24, 2008, from http: //www. nifl. gov/partnershipforreading/publications/PFRbooklet. pdf Apthorp, H. S. (2006, November/December). Effects of a supplemental vocabulary program in third-grade reading/language. The Journal of Educational Research, 100( 2), 67 -79. Curtis, M. , & Longo, A. (2001, November). Teaching vocabulary to adolescents to improve comprehension. Retrieved October 20, 2008, from http: //www. readingonline. org/articles/curtis/index. html Duff, F. J. , Fieldsend, E. , Bowyer-Crane, C. , Hulme, C. , Smith, G. , Gibbs, S. , et al. (2008). Reading with vocabulary intervention: Evaluation of an instruction for children with poor response to reading intervention. Journal of Research in Reading, 31 (3), 319 -336. Fisher, D. , & Frey, N. (2008, November). Releasing responsibility. Educational Leadership, 66 (3), pp. 32 -37. Jones, S. (1999). Multisensory vocabulary guidelines and activities. Retrieved November 24, 2008, from http: //www. resourceroom. net/Comprehension/vocabactivities. asp Kansas State Department of Education. (2007). KSDE report card 2006 -2007: Pray Woodman Elementary. Retrieved September 13, 2008, from http: //online. ksde. org/rcard/summary/D 02662043. pdf Nation, P. (2008). Teaching vocabulary. Asian EFL Journal Teaching Vocabulary Retrieved September 13, 2008, from www. asian-efljournal. com/set. _05_pn. pdf Ratcliffe, D. (2002). Qualitative research: Part four: Data collection. Retrieved November 5, 2008 from http: //qualitativeresearch. ratcliffs. net/4 htm Teacher. Vision. com. (2008). Vocabulary activities. Retrieved November 24, 2008, from http: //www. teachervision. fen. com/vocabulary/lesson-plan/43187. html Trochim, W. M. K. (2008). Qualitative approaches. Retreived November 5, 2008, from http: //www. socialresearchmethods. net/kb/qualapp. htm Unger, C. (2003). Why listen to students? Retrieved November 10, 2008, from http: //www. newhorizons. org/voices/unger/. htm Wikipedia. (2008). Maize, Kansas. Retrieved September 13, 2008, from http: //en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Maize, _Kansas

Composing With Words Authentic Hailed Outwit Sobbing Weakling Dumbstruck Strode Scurried Bellowed dwarfed By: April

Composing With Words Barren Crevasse Impassable Perilous Deserted Floe Grueling Terrain By: Jacob S.

Composing With Words By: Ellie and Karli

Composing With Words

Conclusions Ø Ø Ø Provide a variety of structured opportunities Use new words in authentic and engaging contexts Give students time to practice new words Give repeated practice and feedback Must allow student to see and use the words multiple times What to Do? Ø Ø Ø Ø Practice new words through reading Practice words through writing Practice speaking new words Teacher leads conversations with new vocabulary words Associate new words with pictures Play word games Use semantic maps and graphic organizers Activities to Own Words

Questions