Running head: EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

Effects of Intensive Vocabulary Instruction with At-risk Student Populations

Alexandrea Oliphant University of St. Thomas

Research Professor: Deborah Masterson Ed.D April 2013

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Table of Contents Abstract Chapter 1: Problem Statement and Background Information Description of Problem Current Study Hypothesis & Design Justification Self Reflection Chapter 2: Literature Review Causes of limited vocabulary comprehension within ELL at-risk populations Causes of limited vocabulary comprehension within low-SES at-risk populations Previous experimental techniques in vocabulary attainment Implications of vocabulary intervention in at-risk student populations Effective vocabulary intervention Literature Review Summary 4 5 5 6 6 6 7 10 11 12 14 17 20 21

Chapter 3: Method

23

Participants & Sampling Measures Design Procedures

23 23 24 25

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Data Analysis Plan Ethical Issues 26 27

Chapter 4: Data Analysis

26

Chapter 5: Results

32

Interpretation of Findings Strengths and Limitations Recommendations and Action Planning References

32 33 33 35

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

Abstract All students, despite differences in socio-economic status, ethnic or cultural backgrounds need effective vocabulary instruction. At-risk English language learners or students from low socioeconomic backgrounds have a higher incidence of insufficient vocabulary knowledge and comprehension. Previous literature suggests that the most successful way for teachers to assist students and their vocabulary development is to implement highly effective, repetitious and intensive intervention strategies (Jalongo & Sobolak, 2011). This study was conducted in a large, public urban middle school with at-risk students in the seventh grade located in Texas. In this study, intensive vocabulary comprehension strategies were used weekly in one pre-AP class consisting of at-risk seventh grade students in order to facilitate student vocabulary attainment, comprehension and retention. Another similar pre-AP class consisting of seventh grade at-risk students received the same vocabulary instruction but did not utilize intensive vocabulary strategies to facilitate vocabulary attainment, comprehension and retention. All other variables between classes remained the same. Class data from unit tests were compared and determined a significant change in test scores between the classes. The results supported the hypothesis of evidence-based vocabulary intervention techniques were effective strategies. Further research should encompass identifying individual evidence-based strategies that are effective tools for vocabulary comprehension.

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Chapter 1 Problem Statement and Background Information Description of Problem According to the Center for American progress, many at-risk students lack the necessary reading skills to read and comprehend text from their current grade level. Evidence has shown that at-risk students perform well below satisfactory range on standardized reading comprehension tests, as compared to their middle-income peers in both the fourth and eighth

grade, when standardized tests are utilized to assess reading comprehension. Researchers for The National Center for Education Statistics have identified and discussed that seventy percent of fourth and eighth grade students with limited English proficiency scored below basic when reading abilities were measured through standardized tests according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (White & Kim, 2009). Scammacca, Roberts, Vaughn, Edmonds, Wexler, Reutebuch, & Torgesen (2007) discussed six crucial elements of literacy that students must be able to do to attain proficient reading achievement during middle school. Students must be able to read text effortlessly. They must have a range of vocabulary and be able to understand the meaning of various vocabulary words. Students must actively use reading strategies in a variety of ways in order to develop vocabulary comprehension. Students must also have prior knowledge they can access to relate to the literary content. Students must elicit higher-level interpretation and thinking skills and be motivated to engage in active learning to understand text.

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Current Study

This study investigated the effectiveness of an intensive vocabulary intervention program for improving student outcomes on unit science exams. This experiment was conducted in a large, public urban middle school with at-risk students in the seventh grade located in Texas. Students who attended this school are either zoned to attend or were magnet students. The participants were 7th graders who were at-risk due to low socioeconomic status, having learning disabilities or limited English proficiency. The goal of this research was to assess whether or not intensive vocabulary methods had a positive effect on test scores. Hypothesis and Design A quantitative experimental design was used for this research study. The affect of the independent variable on dependent variables was observed and analyzed to determine significance. I hypothesized that an intensive vocabulary intervention program will positively affect the results for at-risk seventh graders on their unit science exams. I based my hypothesis on previous research conducted by Vaughn, et al, (2010) which specified vocabulary intervention components such as class discussion; graphic organizers, peer grouping and explicit vocabulary instruction were effective methods. These vocabulary intervention methods rendered positive student test performance when pretest and posttest data was analyzed and compared. Justification This study has personal, educational and social significance. It is important for educators to continue to develop their educational methods to improve overall student instruction and performance. If intensive vocabulary intervention had a positive impact on test scores, teachers may implement intensive vocabulary methods during classroom instruction. It is hoped that information from this study will assist teachers instruct students more effectively. New teachers

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

could use the findings of this study to support and improve teaching methods that utilized in their classrooms. Teachers may also use the results from this study to identify trends within at-risk student populations to incorporate effective vocabulary strategies into daily classroom activities. At-risk students may use the effective vocabulary strategies used in this study to achieve significant gains in their test scores. Socially, building student vocabulary could potentially improve their overall literacy. Self Reflection Teachers are encouraged by principals and instructional coordinators to utilize any instructional strategies to improve at-risk student test scores. There are many opportunities throughout the school year for teachers to attend workshops that focus on reading strategies that foster vocabulary comprehension. In my own classroom for the past three years, I have observed that students who have a strong reading ability and vocabulary comprehension skills preform better on standardized tests as compared to students who are struggling readers or have limited vocabulary comprehension. Those students who are unable to understand test questions due to their limited vocabulary comprehension usually do not make high test scores. Tests are latent with content specific and every day vocabulary words that are not comprehended by some students. If a student does not understand or know the meaning of vocabulary that is used to formulate test questions, it is not likely the student will be able to determine the correct answer to the test question. A student must understand what a question is asking in order to answer the question with the correct answer. Vocabulary comprehension is imperative for students to preform well during examination. I believe this problem exists in education because students are promoted to the next grade level without having their reading and vocabulary comprehension thoroughly assessed. From my classroom teaching experience, I have observed that struggling

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION readers are often ashamed of their reading ability, and many of these students are able to

successfully move from one grade to the other without the major deficiencies of their vocabulary comprehension being detected. Years of deficient vocabulary comprehension culminate with a number of students who are ill prepared to take rigorous tests due to their lack of understanding necessary vocabulary words. Currently, teachers are making valiant efforts to prepare students who struggle with vocabulary comprehension in a variety of ways. Teachers are teaching students test-taking strategies, which are largely based on selecting an answer through the process of elimination. Some teachers incorporate the use of word walls to foster vocabulary comprehension. Some teachers include vocabulary words into their unit curriculum; however a large number of students are only memorizing the meanings of vocabulary words temporarily to prepare for examination and only temporarily retain the meaning of the words. The Massachusetts Reading Association, MRA, (2011) explained that memorization does not assist students with comprehension or retention of vocabulary comprehension over time. However, students who regularly engaged in active learning activities that offered multiple opportunities to work with vocabulary and concepts enabled students to make imperative vocabulary connections between familiar and unfamiliar words. This type of vocabulary practice resulted in an increase of student vocabulary comprehension and retention rates. At my school, teachers are encouraged to make direct and incidental vocabulary learning opportunities fun through games and interactive activities. I want to find a vocabulary intervention technique that employs active learning to improve overall student reading comprehension and academic attainment. I believe that at-risk students need an abundant language environment at school, where a great deal amount of time each week is devoted to building vocabulary and comprehension. In my opinion, intensive vocabulary intervention can promote the language abilities that at-risk students require

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION to develop essential comprehension skills that will foster academic improvement and achievement.

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Chapter 2 Literature Review

10

There have been various assessment methods developed to identify students with reading difficulties and employ intervention strategies, however they has not been as much advancement in the area of remediating reading comprehension difficulties involving older students (Speece, Ritchey, Silverman, Schatschneider, Walker, & Andrusik, 2010). Though some students have struggled with reading since the beginning of their formal education, some students do not begin to have noticeable reading difficulty until they have reached the middle grade years. The ability to read and understand vocabulary is a necessary and imperative ability students must have in order to attain academic success. Academic success is largely measured through both formative and summative assessments in public schools. Student scores on summative assessments such as national and state standardized tests and district benchmarks are referenced to place students in academic courses, to predict their educational ability and overall intelligence. Students must be able to demonstrate their knowledge of a particular subject by attaining satisfactory scores on standardized testing. If a student is unable to make a satisfactory score on a standardized test, he will be subjected to a barrage of rigorous academic interventions that are focused primarily on test-taking strategies. However, if a student is unable to read and understand vocabulary, the possibility of attaining a satisfactory score on a standardized test is low. The following literature review will discuss possible causes of limited vocabulary comprehension in English language learner (ELL) at-risk populations and possible causes of limited vocabulary comprehension in low socioeconomic (low-SES) at-risk populations. This review will also explain different intervention techniques utilized to develop and improve student vocabulary attainment in the past. Lastly, implications of

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION intensive vocabulary intervention in at-risk student populations and effective vocabulary intervention will be discussed. Possible causes of limited vocabulary comprehension within ELL At-risk populations

11

English language learners (ELL) often have a lower level of English vocabulary knowledge and comprehension as compared to native English speaking students (Burgoyne, Kelly, Whiteley & Spooner, 2009). Many times ELL students enter kindergarten with rudimentary language skills and lack the abilities necessary to begin reading when paralleled to their English-only peers (White & Kim, 2009). This gap often continues to widen throughout their school years (White & Kim, 2009). Data from standardized tests given at different stages in education has indicated that native English speaking students displayed higher rates of educational mastery compared to ELL students during testing (Burgoyne, et al., 2009). This may be due to the fact that ELL students may only decode text phonetically but do not understand the meaning of the words that were previously read (Burgoyne, et al., 2009). Vocabulary comprehension is comprised of multiple components such as background knowledge, vocabulary knowledge, inference and integration skills which are imperative for ELL students to acquire vocabulary terms and meanings (Burgoyne, et al., 2009). An ELL students lack of ability to preform one of these comprehension components could interfere with their overall vocabulary attainment. In a study conducted by Burgoyne, et al. (2009) overall reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge of ELL students versus native English speaker students were examined. Ninety-two ELL students in the third grade participated in this study conducted at an English speaking school. Forty-six of the children were ELL students who spoke a variety of different languages other than English in the home and outside of school. At the beginning of the study, students took a standardized test called the NARA-R, which is the national standardized test the

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION UK utilizes to measure student reading comprehension, text reading accuracy and fluency. During the test, students read passages aloud and corrected errors. The students also answered open-ended questions that assessed literal understanding and correct story inferences. Students

12

were also tested on their comprehension of vocabulary when removed from text. After a student made a certain number of reading accuracy errors during the test, the test administration ended. Data from each student was collected and analyzed. The data from the NARA-R test indicated native English speakers made significantly higher scores on the reading accuracy, reading comprehension and vocabulary comprehension portions of the exam as compared to ELL students who took the same exam. This study demonstrated that ELL students have problems understanding written and spoken vocabulary as compared to their native English-speaking peers (Burgoyne, et al., 2009). The findings of this study also indicate that ELL students have an extreme difficulty understanding written and spoken English vocabulary. ELL student reading comprehension difficulties are not a result of poor decoding skills; however the lower levels of English vocabulary knowledge may place significant limitations on ELL student reading comprehension. Great emphasis on intensive vocabulary development is necessary in order for ELL learners to improve their vocabulary comprehension (Burgoyne, et al., 2009). Possible causes of limited vocabulary comprehension within low-SES At-risk populations A gap in academic achievement is evident across all socioeconomic groups, however the gap between low SES students and students who are from homes that are not considered low SES is the most apparent. Students who come from homes with little to no income may have more difficulty acquiring and developing their vocabulary compared to students from other socioeconomic groups (Thomas-Tate, Washington, & Edwards, 2004). A childs early

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION vocabulary development is influenced by general world knowledge and cultural experience. Often times, the number of vocabulary terms an at-risk student has been exposed during their lifetime can be significantly less than another student who is not considered at-risk (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). Children from diverse economic or cultural environments (ELL or low socioeconomic background students, low SES) often struggle in mainstream schools because their limited vocabulary background frequently lacks words that express understanding, life experience and behaviors (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). Evidence has shown the dialect of English some low

13

SES African American students are exposed to at home called African American English, (AAE) is connected the students literacy development and reading ability. Phonological differences in AAE and mainstream English (MAE), such as consonant and syllable deletion and substitution may explain displayed literacy achievement differences or gaps between at risk students and students who are not considered to be at-risk (Apel & Thomas-Tate, 2009). Low SES students limited life experience due to familial economics creates less opportunity for vocabulary growth (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). The differences in life experience that help to build a childs vocabulary are often reduced for low SES students and the early differences in vocabulary create a disadvantage gap for low SES children that becomes very difficult to close without intervention (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). Low SES students of diverse backgrounds may struggle with vocabulary comprehension because of the incongruent meanings of words between home and school. This difference in word meanings at home and at school may create a language conflict that can impede a low SES students literacy and comprehension achievement. The achievement gap between low SES students and other students may begin even before students attend school but the gap can be

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION observed through standardized test performance. Since standardized tests place a large importance on vocabulary comprehension, it is imperative that low SES students receive systemic vocabulary instruction to build vocabulary comprehension and decoding skills (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). Previous Experimental Techniques in Vocabulary Attainment There have been many studies conducted to determine techniques that are successful in assisting students attain vocabulary. This section of the literature review will discuss several vocabulary techniques in detail. In a 2006 Biemiller and Boote study, several vocabulary attainment strategies were tested using kindergarten, first and second grade students to observe

14

the effectiveness of a single particular vocabulary attainment method. The strategies consisted of the following: repeated reading of the same storybook with direct vocabulary instruction including word definition during the reading versus no direct vocabulary instruction during the reading. Another strategy tested was the number of times a storybook was read (two versus four times) to the students. Lastly, the use of pretests to assess student vocabulary comprehension before and after being read to or not pretesting students was examined. Vocabulary instruction was tested by reading a storybook to students with no vocabulary interruptions, which is normal in a regular classroom setting in this study (Biemiller and Boote, 2006). One tested group of students continued to receive vocabulary instruction, while the other group did not receive any direct vocabulary instruction. The group of students that received vocabulary instruction was initially provided with the explanation of one or two vocabulary meanings from the storybook that would be read to them. In subsequent readings of the same book, teachers provided direct instruction about different vocabulary words and meanings from the story. Four to six different words were explained and students were questioned about their

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

15

comprehension of the word meanings during each reading lesson. Results from posttests showed that students who received vocabulary instruction demonstrated a twenty-three percent increase of vocabulary word comprehension than the students who were not instructed (Biemiller and Boote, 2006).

Another vocabulary technique that was examined was the effect of reading storybooks in repetition to students two or four times on vocabulary acquisition (Biemiller and Boote, 2006). During the first reading of the storybook, students were asked vocabulary comprehension questions at the end of the reading, as generally done in a normal classroom setting with few meanings explained prior to the reading. The same book was read to the students on several (two, three or four) other occasions and various vocabulary words and their meanings were highlighted and briefly explained by the teacher each time the book was read. There was no meaningful difference in vocabulary comprehension between students who were read the same story twice verses four times but there was a significant difference seen within students from different grade levels. Kindergarteners who listened to the storybook four times scored six percent higher on the vocabulary posttest when compared to kindergartners who only listened to the storybook twice. First graders who listened to the storybook four times scored seven percent higher on the vocabulary posttest when compared to first graders who only listened to the storybook twice (Biemiller and Boote, 2006). The use of pretests to assess student vocabulary comprehension before and after being read to or not pretesting students was examined by splitting a sample group of students into two groups. One group of the students was given direct vocabulary instruction with a set of twentyfour words and was pretested on the twenty-four words (Biemiller and Boote, 2006). The other

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION group of students were given direct vocabulary instruction and pretested with a different set of

16

twenty-four words. Following instruction, both groups were post tested on all forty-eight words, twenty-four of the forty-eight words being the words that the students were previously pretested over. The results of this test indicated the effect of pretesting student vocabulary attainment was insignificant in assisting students acquire vocabulary (Biemiller and Boote, 2006).

In a 2011 study conducted by Shook, Hazelkorn and Lozano, collaborative strategic reading technique (CSR) was implemented in a secondary classroom to evaluate if students would engage in active vocabulary building activities. The researchers in this study discussed how CSR vocabulary strategies assisted students, including students with learning disabilities with their comprehension of science vocabulary through text related learning, expository text comprehension strategies and opportunities to work with peers to facilitate learning. The CSR technique was utilized three times a week for thirty minutes each day and required students to be grouped and student roles were assigned to each group member. Student roles included: a leader who directed reading and asking teacher for assistance, a clunk expert who made sure all steps of CSR technique were followed when attempting to learn the meaning of a difficult word and an announcer who ensured every student in the group participated. Other student roles in the CSR technique comprised of an encourager who gave positive feedback to all group members, a reporter who reported vocabulary meanings the group struggled learning or did not understand and a timekeeper who ensured the group progressed through each part of the CSR technique. After roles were assigned, the group of students were given a vocabulary list to review and informed of a vocabulary test that would be given at the end of the week (Shook, et al., 2011).

Roles were rotated weekly and all students in the group served in each CSR role (Shook,

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION et al., 2011). Students utilized the CSR technique consisting of several simple steps when reviewing vocabulary words, definitions and concepts taught in class. First, the CSR technique

17

required the group to preview the topic to be reviewed to discuss what they knew about the topic and what they would learn during the lesson, then the group discussed what vocabulary and concepts they did and did not understand. Group members then summarized all reviewed vocabulary and concepts and articulated questions and answers about all reviewed vocabulary and concepts. At the end of each week students took vocabulary quizzes to help determine if the CSR technique assisted student acquisition and comprehension of the weeks vocabulary words (Shook, et al., 2011).

The results of this study concluded that prior to the implementation of the CSR technique the weekly class vocabulary quiz average was seventy five percent (Shook, et al., 2011). After five weeks of using the CSR technique, the vocabulary quiz average score for students without learning disabilities was a 94 and the vocabulary quiz average for students with learning disabilities was a 93.5. Both students with and without disabilities increased their vocabulary quiz scores between 13 points and 34 points signifying a positive correlation between the CSR technique and an improvement in vocabulary comprehension (Shook, et al., 2011).

Implications of intensive vocabulary intervention in at-risk student populations

In a study conducted by Beck and McKeown 98, low-SES kindergarten and first grade students were divided into experimental and control group to compare the effects of implementation of a vocabulary intervention strategy called Text Talk. Text Talk provided the experimental group of students the opportunity to develop vocabulary through rich discussion

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

18

about narratives that may be higher level that the students existing vocabulary. This intervention technique was utilized to force students to think about challenging vocabulary an actively participate in finding meanings to text through oral use of targeted vocabulary from the story. Teachers were trained to use the Text Talk strategy, and were given preselected books to instruct students over a ten-week period. Students were pretested of their knowledge of twenty-two targeted words. The text talk instruction was conducted before, during and after reading the story to build initial understanding, develop vocabulary comprehension and allow for other vocabulary activities to be used. Each week of the study, the researchers observed that teachers implemented the vocabulary strategy correctly and as instructed through training. The control group of students participated in reading narratives aloud but did not receive Text Talk instruction. At the end of Text Talk instruction the experimental and control group were post tested with the same tests that were administered before Text Talk instruction. The results showed that the kindergarten and first grade students who participated in Text Talk intervention instruction learned two to three more words than those students in the same grade level who did not participate in intervention instruction. The study concluded that intervention effectively assisted students to learn a significant and increased amount of vocabulary. This study also implied that younger students could learn and comprehend mature vocabulary when instructed and advanced comprehension may be elicited. Limitations to this study include the fact that younger students may not retain the mature vocabulary because their language knowledge base is not as expansive to support the words long term. This study also may not have been conducted long enough to imply true vocabulary gains. In a study conducted by Lovelace and Stewart, the effects of continual and intensive

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION vocabulary intervention techniques were utilized to instruct five at-risk, African American

19

second grade students with below average vocabulary knowledge. (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). at-risk was defined by the student being eligible for the free or reduced lunch program. First, two story books with similar lexical density and informative ideas were chosen for student use throughout the study. Students were given a pretest examination with vocabulary from both book selections that assessed their initial knowledge of specific vocabulary. Students were scored on the pre-test based a scale of one to five, one was student had never heard the vocabulary word before and five being the student had full knowledge of the word meaning (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). After prior vocabulary knowledge was assessed, both books were presented to the students on a weekly basis for one month (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). Each day subsequently following book reading, game like intervention techniques designed to facilitate student comprehension of vocabulary were utilized to instruct students. Intervention techniques such as word association, sentence completion, and word networking were chosen to stress word relationships between previously acquired vocabulary and new target vocabulary that the students were expected to learn. Accompanying each book reading activity, interventions targeting three vocabulary words per lesson were implemented. Students were formatively assessed through probes each week. At the end of the study, students were assessed for vocabulary acquisition and retention (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009). The findings demonstrated the at-risk students did acquire new vocabulary and that the correct vocabulary meaning had been retained. The study concluded that there is a significant potential for vocabulary growth in at-risk student populations with the use of vocabulary intervention techniques (Lovelace and Stewart, 2009).

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Effective Vocabulary Intervention Research has been conducted to determine how the most effective and beneficial

20

vocabulary interventions should be used when building at-risk student vocabulary. Experimental testing has shown that interactive, repetitive and intensive active learning strategies such as in depth questioning, explanation and clarification assist at-risk students develop vocabulary acquisition and comprehension. In a 2011 Sobolak study, the amount of intensive vocabulary instruction needed to improve the vocabulary comprehension of at-risk, low SES students was examined. Twenty-one students in the first grad who were considered at-risk based on their eligibility for free or reduced lunch were the subjects of this study. Students completed a pretest examination to assess prior knowledge of pre-selected vocabulary. Students then received intense vocabulary instruction, learning six words at a time, for a minimum of four weeks and a maximum of twelve weeks depending on their needs. During the first week of instruction, the story was read aloud to all students, pictures, examples, student friendly definitions and introductions to targeted vocabulary words were conducted. Students were tested for vocabulary comprehension after each week of intensive instruction. Those students who exhibited mastery of the six target words no longer would be included in instruction. Those students who did not exhibit mastery received additional intervention studying the same target words for the next two weeks and were tested. If students did not demonstrate vocabulary mastery after three weeks of intervention, intervention proceeded with the next set of target words. Results from this study identified increased vocabulary acquisition and comprehension every week additional vocabulary intervention was received. As the study progressed, more students mastered each set of different target words without needing extra intervention time. This study concludes that intensive intervention techniques

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION allow more time and opportunity for all students to master target vocabulary and intervention time is crucial to vocabulary comprehension for all students and especially at-risk student

21

populations. The strength of this study is the importance placed on the amount of time that must be allotted for intervention strategies to work. All students can benefit from vocabulary intervention, and the study implies that teachers must not worry about the amount of time spent on vocabulary intervention because intervention time is beneficial. A limitation to this study is the possibility that the additional intervention time may have allowed for students to effectively memorize the meanings of the targeted vocabulary without comprehension. Literature Review Summary Much of the literature reviewed in this chapter discussed vocabulary intervention strategies for students who were in primary grades due to the fact that much of the instructional time in primary grades is focused on learning and comprehending the meanings of different words. In secondary grades, such as the seventh grade, most of the instructional time is spent focusing on subject area content. There is not much time during secondary grades to focus solely on vocabulary comprehension. For this reason, there were not many evidence based vocabulary studies involving secondary students available for review. One limitation to the researchers study is the fact that there is not much time to focus on vocabulary comprehension so the ability to effect significant change using evidence based vocabulary strategies will be challenging. It is the hope of the researcher that this study will provide strategies for teachers that will help to facilitate vocabulary comprehension in at-risk student populations. Every student, despite differences in socio-economic status, ethnic or cultural backgrounds need effective vocabulary instruction (Jalongo & Sobolak, 2011). At-risk students whether English language learners or students from low socioeconomic backgrounds have a higher

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION incidence of insufficient vocabulary knowledge and comprehension. The most successful way

22

for teachers to assist students and their vocabulary development is to implement highly effective, repetitious and intensive intervention strategies (Jalongo & Sobolak, 2011).

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Chapter 3 Methods Participants and Sampling This experiment was conducted in a large, public urban middle school with at-risk students in the seventh grade located in Texas. Students who attended this school are either zoned to attend or were magnet students. The sample for this study was randomly assigned to

23

one of the two classes prior to the start of the school year using a computer software program. To ensure that the groups were equivalent, a pretest was administered. The mean score for group A was 70% and the mean score for Group B was 71.2%. At least 80% of students from both classes were considered to be at-risk students. The sample size consisted of sixty students, divided into two class periods, named class A and class B for this study. Class A consisted of thirty students. Twenty of the thirty students in class A were considered to be economically disadvantaged and five of the thirty students were limited English proficient. Class B consisted of thirty students, and twenty of the thirty students in class B were considered to be economically disadvantaged, and four of the thirty students were limited English proficient. Both classes were pretested before any intervention strategies began to ensure that classes were appropriately matched for comparison. The mean score at the beginning of the study for group A was 70% and the mean score for Group B was 71.2%. Prior to beginning this study, a human consent form, allowing student participation in this study was sent home with all students from both classes, signed by the students parent and every students consent from was returned to the researcher. Measures The measures utilized in this study were the unit tests designed by the seventh grade science department staff. One unit test was given each six weeks throughout the duration of the

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION study. Each unit test consisted of content area vocabulary and concepts learned during the six

24

weeks. The unit tests were used as the measure for this study, because specific testing vocabulary was consistently utilized on each unit test. A team of experienced science teachers developed the unit tests. The researcher was not a member of this team. The team members were unaware of the study at the time the tests were developed. The team used a backwards design when developing the tests, by identifying what the expected outcomes for both content and vocabulary were for each unit. Starting with the end in mind, the team of experienced teachers created units to specifically match the expected outcomes. This approach helps to ensure that the tests were a valid measure of what was taught and enhanced the validity and reliability of this study. The same tests were administered to both class A and class B. Design Since the students were randomly assigned to the two classes and pretest data provided more evidence that the two groups were equivalent, a pretest-posttest control group design was used for this study. The independent variables involved using two different approaches to vocabulary instruction. Group A, the experimental group received evidence-based vocabulary instruction (Treatment A). The control group, Group B received the traditional approach to vocabulary instruction. The dependent variable of this experiment was Class A and Class B student scores. One threat to this study was the possibility that the teacher/researcher did not understand well enough how to implement the evidence-based approach to vocabulary instruction. To overcome this threat, the teacher/researcher consulted instructional experts for additional training on the strategies to be used.

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Procedures Two similar Pre-AP classes (Class A and Class B) were identified. Similarities were based on the number of students in each class, the number of at-risk students in each class and ability level. For the initial data collection, Students from both classes were instructed without the use of evidence based vocabulary instructional strategies and subsequently given the same test in order to collect initial data. Based on initial unit test data, Class A received evidencebased vocabulary instruction. The evidence-based instruction (treatment A) included a specific multi-step procedure, which was repeated each time the class met based on the block schedule. First the teacher-researcher scanned the text for vocabulary that may have been considered challenging or unfamiliar to the students. Students were then asked to scan text for words that were challenging or unfamiliar vocabulary. Students were given the definitions of vocabulary words and instructed to create vocabulary booklets with the definition of the word, and illustration of the word and a sentence with the vocabulary used in the context of a sentence. Then students created a word wall to foster exposure, definition clarification and vocabulary application. Each class meeting also concluded with a brief oral review of the vocabulary. This model was based on evidence-based methods identified from a review of current professional journals. This evidence based instructional strategy was utilized throughout the duration of the

25

study with Class A. Test data from Class A was collected each six weeks following unit tests to collect follow-up data. Class B received traditional vocabulary instruction (treatment B), which included a single procedure, which was repeated each time the class met based on the block schedule. First the teacher-researcher reviewed the vocabulary and the definitions with the students. Students were given the definitions of vocabulary words and instructed to create vocabulary booklets with

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

26

the definition of the word, and illustration of the word and a sentence with the vocabulary used in the context of a sentence. This model was based on traditional methods identified from a review of past professional journals. This traditional instructional strategy was utilized throughout the duration of the study with Class B. Test data from Class B was collected each six weeks following unit tests to collect follow-up data. Data from Class A and Class B was analyzed to determine if there were resulting significant differences in test scores. It must be noted that the only manipulated variable between Class A and Class B was the implementation of evidence based vocabulary instruction versus traditional vocabulary instruction; all other educational techniques remained the same between both classes. Eighteen weeks were needed in order to employ methods, run trials and collect an adequate amount of data for this study to determine if evidence based vocabulary methods effectively facilitated vocabulary attainment, comprehension and retention. The researcher received permission to conduct the study from the schools principal in October 2012. The researcher distributed and collected signed human consent forms from all student study participants in October 2012. The researcher received formal permission to conduct the study by the school district in November 2012. An initial pretest was given to all study participants and Class A began to receive intensive vocabulary intervention techniques in December 2012. Data collection began in December 2012 and was collected on all study participants until April 2013. Data Analysis Plan The data analysis for this experimental research follows a pre-test post-test control group design. The experimental design required Class A and Class B to be assessed using the same initial unit test before any instructional treatments were utilized. This was done in order to have

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION data to compare after both types of instructional strategies (treatment A and treatment B) had been used to instruct class A and class B. Independent samples t-tests were done both pre-test and post- test on the experimental and control classes. In order to collect meaningful data from this study, individual student data from both class A and class B were analyzed to determine how many economically disadvantaged and limited English proficient students would participate in the study, since these students were the

27

targeted group of the study. This data were also analyzed to determine if both class groups were proportional and appropriate for comparison. After initial pretest test data were collected for both classes, test data were collected from both classes over the three-month time period. Data were collected and maintained using the district approved grading software and all tests were stored in a secured and locked file cabinet at all times. At the end of the data collection period, statistical analysis was used to interpret the data Ethical Issues This study required approval by several entities. First, the researcher requested and received approval from the principal of the school where the study was conducted. The researcher completed a human subjects consent form to preform this type of graduate study from the university. This consent form was required and subsequently approved by the university. Then the researcher requested and received study approval. The researcher sent home a human consent form with the students that requested student participation in this study from the parent. After all approval and participant consent forms were received, the study proceeded. The intervention vocabulary technique that was used in this study and the research that was conducted involved regular instructional practice conducted in a commonly accepted educational setting. Classroom teachers have regularly embedded intervention techniques

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

28

throughout curriculum instruction to build vocabulary comprehension and acquisition. There was no harm to any student during this study and students could not be identified directly or through identifiers linked to participants. One possible ethical issue with this study is that only one class received the evidence based vocabulary instruction. However, the study was justified because it was not clear if evidence-based instruction would result in a meaningful improvement in student learning.

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

29

Chapter 4 Results The sample consisted of 60 seventh grade students with 30 in each class. The class averages for both pre-test and post-test conditions can be seen in Table 1. A t-test of independent samples was done for treatment and control classes prior to intervention (pretest) and after intervention was implemented (posttest). A t-test was chosen to analyze the data from this research to determine if resulting differences between the control and treatment groups was significant. According to the data, both classes were not significantly different from each other at the pretest, prior to intervention (t = -.335, df =58, p =.739). This data indicated the two groups were accurately matched for comparison. After the intervention was completed, the data from both classes were analyzed and the data analysis concluded that the classes were significantly different from each other at posttest test (t = -2.567, df = 58, p = .013). The treatment class had a mean of 80.60 (SD = 13.21) and the control class had a mean of 72.06 (SD =12.52). Please see figure 2.1. The posttest mean score of Class A (treatment group) showed significant improvement when compared to Class B (control group). The results support the hypothesis that an intensive vocabulary intervention program will positively affect the results for at-risk seventh graders on their unit science exams.

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

30

Table 1 Pre-Test and Post-Test Intervention and Control Class Grade Averages

Pre-Test for Treatment and Control Treatment Class Pre-Test Control Class Pre-Test Posttest for Treatment and Control Treatment Class Post-Test Control Class Post-Test

N 30 30

Mean 70.0000 71.2333

Std. Deviation 13.24569 15.20364

Std. Error Mean 2.41832 2.77579

30 30

80.6000 72.0667

13.21598 12.52290

2.41290 2.28636

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

31

Figure 2.1 Post-Test Class Mean grade comparisons

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

32

Chapter 5 Interpretation and Recommendations

Interpretation of Findings The statistical findings of the study supported the hypothesis that an evidence-based vocabulary intervention program would positively affect test results for at-risk seventh graders. I based my hypothesis on previous research conducted by Vaughn, et al, (2010) which specified evidence-based vocabulary intervention methods such as class discussion; graphic organizers, peer grouping and explicit vocabulary instruction were effective methods. Throughout this study, recommended evidence-based vocabulary interventions such as word walls, visual imagery and repetitious oral vocabulary practice were utilized with the treatment group on a daily basis (Sweeny and Mason, 2011). These vocabulary intervention methods rendered positive student test performance when pretest and posttest data was analyzed and compared. The results from this study were similar to an earlier study that identified students who received evidence-based vocabulary treatment, test scores improved more from pre-test to post test in comparison to students in the control group (Vaughn et al., 2010). A 2007 study by Scammacca, Roberts, Vaughn, Edmonds, Wexler, Reutebuch, & Torgesen determined that vocabulary interventions by teachers and researchers were linked with positive test outcomes for the students and that students benefitted from enhanced knowledge of word meanings and concepts. In a study by Sweeny and Mason (2011) vocabulary experts applied evidence-based vocabulary instructional methods with different groups of students, from multiple grade levels and content areas. The study concluded that specific and intentional vocabulary instruction helped to improve student

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION vocabulary comprehension. Strengths and Limitations

33

A strength of this study was the fact that the study conducted could be easily replicated. All classroom teachers could replicate the evidence-based strategies in their classroom because extensive training was not required for implementation. School-wide implementation of evidence-based vocabulary strategies could be both efficient and cost effective because few teachers would need to receive formal training and those teachers could train other faculty members to implement evidence based vocabulary strategies effectively. Another strength of this study was that the students were unaware that a study was being conducted therefore all students conducted themselves as usual. One limitation to this study was the data collection time period was only four months long. Since the duration of the study was limited, the results may not represent the long-term effect of evidence-based vocabulary strategies. Another limitation to this study is novelty effect of the evidence based vocabulary strategies. Students may have been more engaged during vocabulary instruction because the evidence-based strategies were new and unfamiliar. Students may or may have not maintained the same level of interest using the evidence-based vocabulary strategies over time. Recommendations and Action Planning Based on the results of this study, educators should explore the inclusion of evidence based vocabulary strategies to improve at-risk student vocabulary understanding and comprehension. Secondary students with reading difficulties benefit from intensive vocabulary interventions (Scammacca et. al, 2007). Another recommendation was that educators should explore methods of how to effectively implement evidence-based vocabulary strategies on a consistent basis in their classrooms (White & Kim, 2009). For example, a specific evidence-based vocabulary

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION

34

strategy, such as daily use of an interactive word wall with students has the potential to promote greater understanding of the content and should be incorporated into teacher planning considerations (Yates et. al, 2011). Evidence-based vocabulary strategies cannot work, if teachers and students do not utilize these methods. Educators are posed with the difficult task of improving the test scores of all students, no matter where the students achievement level begins. According to the findings of this study, evidence-based strategies are successful with most students and aid in the improvement of student test scores. Evidence-based vocabulary strategies may help educators have more success with helping students to reach academic goals. Additional research related to this study should include identification of which evidence-based strategies are the most effective with at-risk students. Further research should also include the amount of time evidence-based vocabulary should be implemented for student improvement to occur. As a classroom teacher, I will use evidence-based vocabulary strategies on a consistent basis with to assist my students with vocabulary comprehension and acquisition. My school campus could implement the use of evidence-based vocabulary strategies for all academic courses to help build vocabulary comprehension across all content areas. In turn, the campus may reap the benefits of evidencebased vocabulary strategies such as higher student achievement and improved student performance on district, state and national standardized tests.

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION References Apel, K., & Thomas-Tate, S. (2009). Morphological Awareness Skills of Fourth-Grade African American Students. Language, Speech & Hearing Services In Schools, 40(3), 312-324. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2009/08-0015) Beck, I., & McKeown, M. (2007). Increasing Young Low-Income Children's Oral Vocabulary Repertoires through Rich and Focused Instruction. Elementary School Journal, 107(3), 251-271. Biemiller, A., & Boote, C. (2006). An effective method for building vocabulary in primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 44-62. Burgoyne, K., Kelly, J., Whiteley, H., & Spooner, A. (2009). The comprehension skills of children learning english as an additional language. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 735-747. Retrieved from www.bpsiournals.co.uk

35

Gay, L. R., Mills, G., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research. (9th ed., p. 11). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Jalongo, M., & Sobolak, M. (2011). Supporting Young Children's Vocabulary Growth: The Challenges, the Benefits, and Evidence-Based Strategies. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38(6), 421-429. doi:10.1007/s10643-010-0433-x Lovelace, S., & Stewart, S. R. (2009). Effects of Robust Vocabulary Instruction and Multicultural Text on the Development of Word Knowledge Among African American Children. American Journal Of Speech-Language Pathology, 18(2), 168-179.

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION Scammacca, N., Roberts, G., Vaughn. S., Edmonds, M., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C. K., &

36

Torgesen, J. K. (2007), Interventions for adolescent struggling readers: A meta-analysis with implications for practice. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. Shook, A., Hazelkorn, M., & Lozano, E. (2011). Science vocabulary for all: Strategies to improve vocabulary in an inclusive biology class. The Science Teacher, 78(3), 5. Retrieved from http://www.questia.com/read/1G1-252634425/sciencevocabulary-for-all-strategies-to-improve Sobolak, M. J. (2011). Modifying robust vocabulary instruction for the benefit of lowsocioeconomic students. Reading Improvement, 48(1), 14-23. Speece, D. L., Ritchey, K. D., Silverman, R., Schatschneider, C., Walker, C. Y., & Andrusik, K. N. (2010). Identifying Children in Middle Childhood Who Are at Risk for Reading Problems. School Psychology Review, 39(2), 258-276. Sweeny, S., & Mason, P. (2011, August). Research-based practices in vocabulary instruction: An analysis of what works in grades prek-12. Retrieved from http://massreading.org/resources/vocpaper.pdf Thomas-Tate, S., Washington, J., & Edwards, J. (2004). Standardized Assessment of Phonological Awareness Skills in Low-Income African American First Graders. American Journal Of Speech-Language Pathology, 13(2), 182-190. Vaughn, S., Martinez L., Reutebuch C., Linan-Thompson S., Carlson C. & Francis, D. (2010, March). Enhancing social studies vocabulary and comprehension for 7th grade ELLS: Findings from two experimental studies. Retrieved from http://www.meadowscenter.org/files/SREE-Vaughn-March10.pdf

EFFECTS OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION White, C., & Kim, J. (2009, May). Putting the pieces of the puzzle together: How systemic vocabulary instruction and expanded learning time can address the literacy gap. Retrieved from Americanprogress.org

37

Yates, P. H., Cuthrell, K., & Rose, M. (2011). Out of the room and into the hall: Making content word walls work. Clearing House, 84(1), 31-36. doi:10.1080/00098655.2010.496810