A Review of The Current Research On Vocabulary Instruction
A Review of The Current Research On Vocabulary Instruction
A Review of The Current Research On Vocabulary Instruction
2010
A RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Contents
Introduction
Methodology
Database
Analysis
Results
Frequency of exposure to targeted vocabulary words
Explicit instruction of targeted vocabulary words
Questioning and language engagement
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
Conclusions
Appendix
Studies reviewed for this synthesis
9
11
References
17
Introduction
The National Reading Panel (NICHD, 2000) identified vocabulary as one of five major components of reading. Its
importance to overall school success and more specifically to reading comprehension is widely documented (Baker,
Simmons, & Kameenui, 1998; Anderson & Nagy, 1991). The National Reading Panel (NRP) stated that vocabulary
plays an important role both in learning to read and in comprehending text: readers cannot understand text
without knowing what most of the words mean. Teaching vocabulary will not guarantee success in reading, just
as learning to read words will not guarantee success in reading. However, lacking either adequate word
identification skills or adequate vocabulary will ensure failure (Biemiller, 2005).
Vocabulary is generically defined as the knowledge of words and word meanings. More specifically, we use
vocabulary to refer to the kind of words that students must know to read increasingly demanding text with
comprehension (Kamil & Hiebert, 2005). It is something that expands and deepens over time.
The NRPs synthesis of vocabulary research identified eight findings that provide a scientifically based
foundation for the design of rich, multifaceted vocabulary instruction. The findings are:
Provide direct instruction of vocabulary words for a specific text. Anderson and Nagy (1991)
pointed out there are precise words children may need to know in order to comprehend particular lessons
or subject matter.
Repetition and multiple exposures to vocabulary items are important. Stahl (2005) cautioned
against mere repetition or drill of the word, emphasizing that vocabulary instruction should provide students
with opportunities to encounter words repeatedly and in a variety of contexts.
Vocabulary words should be those that the learner will find useful in many contexts. Instruction
of high-frequency words known and used by mature language users can add productively to an individuals
language ability (Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2002). Research suggests that vocabulary learning follows a
developmental trajectory (Biemiller, 2001).
Vocabulary tasks should be restructured as necessary. Once students know what is expected of them
in a vocabulary task, they often learn rapidly (Kamil, 2004).
Vocabulary learning is effective when it entails active engagement that goes beyond
definitional knowledge. Stahl and Kapinus (2001) stated, When children know a word, they not only
know the words definition and its logical relationship with other words, they also know how the word
functions in different contexts.
Computer technology can be used effectively to help teach vocabulary. Encouragement exists but
relatively few specific instructional applications can be gleaned from the research (NICHD, 2000).
Vocabulary can be acquired through incidental learning. Reading volume is very important in terms
of long-term vocabulary development (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1998). In later work, Cunningham (2005)
further recommended structured read-alouds, discussion sessions and independent reading experiences at
school and home to encourage vocabulary growth in students.
Dependence on a single vocabulary instruction method will not result in optimal learning
(NICHD, 2000).
Stahl (2005) stated, Vocabulary knowledge is knowledge; the knowledge of a word not only implies a definition,
but also implies how that word fits into the world. Consequently, researchers and practitioners alike seek to
identify, clarify, and understand what it means for students to know what a word means. The sheer complexity
of vocabulary acquisition, as evidenced by reviewing critical components such as receptive vocabulary versus
productive vocabulary, oral vocabulary versus print vocabulary, and breadth of vocabulary versus depth of
vocabulary (Kamil & Hiebert, 2005) raise questions worthy of further research. Other factors such as variations in
students vocabulary size (Anderson & Freebody, 1981; Nagy, 2005), levels of word knowledge (Dale, 1965; Graves
& Watts-Taffe, 2002), as well as which words are taught (Beck et al., 2002; Biemiller, 2005) and how word
knowledge is measured (Biemiller, 2005) must all be considered in shaping our understanding of vocabulary
acquisition.
The studies examined in the NRP Report (NICHD, 2000) suggested that vocabulary instruction does lead to
gains in comprehension, but methods must be appropriate to the readers age and ability. The importance of
vocabulary to success in reading is well known, but there continues to be little research that conclusively identifies
the best methods or combinations of methods of vocabulary instruction.
This publication reviews the most recent research on vocabulary acquisition and instructional practices since
the release of the National Reading Panels report.
Methodology
Database
In order to review the research since the NRPs review, we used procedures defined by Cooper (1994) to identify
the body of studies included in this synthesis. These procedures included searching subject indices and citations,
browsing, and footnote chasing (White, 1994). Computer searches of PsycINFO and ERIC databases from
20022009 were conducted to locate appropriate studies. Descriptors for the computer search included reading
and vocabulary, vocabulary development, or oral language development. The ERIC search yielded 342 results
and PsycINFO yielded 297 results. Removing duplicates between the two databases generated a total of 324
results. Studies were selected through a two-step process that began as a broad search to locate all potentially
relevant research articles and became more restrictive as selection criteria were applied.
Analysis
Because this review builds on the work of the NRP, we adopted its criteria for including studies:
1. The study must have been relevant to instruction of vocabulary and/or oral language development.
2. The study must have been published in a scientific journal.
3. The studys experimental design had to involve at least one treatment and an appropriate control group or
needed to have one or more quasi-experimental variables with variations that served as comparisons between
treatments (NRP, 2000).
Beyond the NRPs criteria, this review added:
4. The study must have been published between 2001 and 2009.
5. The study must have included student participants in preK, K, 1, 2, or 3, or any combination thereof.
Applying these criteria reduced the number of applicable studies to 14. Using a code sheet based on two published
syntheses (Klingner & Vaughn, 1999), extensive coding was conducted to organize pertinent information from each
study. The code sheet allowed reviewers to record information on the coder, participants (e.g., participants ages)
and their setting; the studys purpose, research design, and methodologies; and descriptions of the intervention, the
measure, observations, and findings. When a study presented multiple purposes, sets of participants, and results,
only those purposes, etc. that pertained to this synthesis were coded and analyzed.
Results
See the appendix for an overview of the research findings. Examination of the 14 studies included in this synthesis
indicates convergence on the following research themes: (a) frequency of exposure to targeted vocabulary
augments childrens understanding of word meanings and their use of targeted words, (b) explicit instruction
increases word learning, and (c) language engagement through dialogue and/or questioning strategies during a
read-aloud enhances word knowledge.
3
Silverman and Hines (2009) also focused on which instructional methods work best in building word
knowledge for pre-school to second-grade students. They investigated the use of multimedia to enhance readalouds and vocabulary instruction for English language learners (ELL) and English speaking students. This study had
two interventions: one with multimedia, the other without. In both conditions, the teachers used a scripted lesson
on habitats using both narrative and informational texts. The intervention took place over four three-week cycles,
one cycle for each habitat studied. Students were introduced to the books in the same order and eight words
per book were chosen as the target words. The multimedia condition included four videos, one for each habitat.
Students were shown video clips after reading to facilitate their review of all of the words taught. Findings
indicated that the use of multimedia provided no statistically significant difference for English speaking students.
The use of multimedia for English language learners, however, was significant. Data indicate that the gap between
English learning and English speaking students was narrowed not only for the targeted vocabulary words but for
general vocabulary knowledge as well.
experiences produced a statistically significant difference and, based on assessment data, children maintained word
knowledge for six to eight weeks after instruction.
Similar findings were reported by Leung (2008), who conducted a study of preschoolers knowledge of
scientific vocabulary. Results indicated the greatest gains in word knowledge were made when an interactive
approach was used. First, teachers engaged students in dialogue during an interactive read-aloud of informational
picture books. Vocabulary and concepts were reinforced through student retellings and a hands-on activity that
related to the targeted words and meanings.
Conclusions
Vocabulary instruction is a crucial component of reading instruction. The goal of vocabulary instruction is to help
students learn the meanings of many words so they can communicate effectively and achieve academically.
Effective vocabulary instruction requires educators to intentionally provide many rich, robust opportunities for
students to learn words, related concepts, and their meanings. Students need strong instructional opportunities to
build their personal warehouse of words, to develop deep levels of word knowledge, and acquire a toolbox of
strategies that aids their independent word acquisition.
This review of current vocabulary research confirms the benefits of explicit teaching over implicit teaching in
promoting vocabulary development. Results from this review suggest that effective and efficient research-based
methods are available when selecting a particular instructional approach. The findings also suggest several
instructional implications for promoting word knowledge:
Frequent exposure to targeted vocabulary words. Biemiller and Boote (2006) found that repeated
reading of a storybook resulted in greater average gains in word knowledge for young children.
Explicit instruction of targeted vocabulary words. Biemiller and Boote (2006) also found that word
explanations taught directly during the reading of a storybook enhanced childrens understanding of word
meanings. Nash and Snowling (2006) found that using a contextual approach to instruction produced greater
vocabulary gains than lessons that emphasized learning word definitions.
Questioning and language engagement. Scaffolding questions, that is, moving from low-demand
questions to high-demand questions, promotes greater gains in word learning (Blewitt, Rump, Shealy, & Cook,
2009). Vocabulary instruction should include teacher-student activities and interactive activities that target new
words (Coyne, McCoach & Kapp, 2007).
In summary, active vocabulary instruction should permeate a classroom and contain rich and interesting
information. Vocabulary instruction should cover many words that have been skillfully and carefully chosen to
reduce vocabulary gaps and improve students abilities to apply word knowledge to the task of comprehension.
Appendix
Vocabulary dimension
Vocabulary dimension
Participants
Participants
Two studies:
In Study 1, K2 students were read two
books twice in one week; a third book was
read four times. Students were pre- and
post-tested on 24 word meanings with
12 word meanings instructed and 12 word
meanings not instructed.
Study 2 was conducted in the same school
as Study 1, but during the next school year.
A five-day instructional sequence was
developed for each story and word
meanings taught were increased from 4 to
6 to 7 to 9. Each story was read four times,
with a review each day. On Day 5, context
sentences were added.
Outcome measure
Two studies:
In Study 1, an average gain of 12% on
word meanings was obtained using
repeated readings. Adding word explanation
added a 10% gain for a total gain of 22%.
Kindergarten students made the
greatest gain.
In Study 2, a gain of 41% in word meaning
was found. In this study a substantial
number of word meanings were taught
using repeated oral reading of stories
combined with explanations of words. The
researchers suggest that teaching 400 word
meanings per year is a reasonable goal.
11
Coyne, McCoach
& Kapp (2007)
Vocabulary dimension
Vocabulary dimension
Participants
Description of intervention
Description of intervention
12
Participants
Two studies:
Study 1: Children were directly taught the
meanings of three target vocabulary words
in the context of story reading. Childrens
understanding of the target words was
extended through interactive opportunities
as well as increased exposure to the
targeted words in various contexts beyond
the story reading. The incidental exposure
consisted of hearing the three targeted
words three times during the story reading.
Study 2: The same procedure was followed
for extended instruction as in Study 1;
however, rather than incidental exposure,
children received embedded instruction:
they not only heard the targeted words
during story reading, but were provided
with simple definitions of the words.
Outcome measures
Justice, Meier,
& Walpole (2005)
A second analysis found that students
with lower receptive vocabulary skills, as
measured by the PPVT, benefited more
(learned more vocabulary word meanings)
from the storybook intervention compared
with students who did not receive the
storybook intervention. Teaching word
meanings explicitly in the context of
storybook reading resulted in the same level
of vocabulary growth for students with
smaller initial vocabularies as it did for
students with larger vocabularies.
Vocabulary dimension
13
14
McGregor, Sheng,
& Ball (2007)
Vocabulary dimension
Vocabulary dimension
Participants
Findings
Findings
Outcome measures
Vocabulary dimension
Vocabulary dimension
Vocabulary dimension
NARA-II; Graded
Non-word Reading Test
Findings
Participants
Participants
15
References
Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching:
Research reviews (pp. 77117). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Anderson, R., and W. Nagy. 1991. Word meanings. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P.D. Pearson, (Eds.),
Handbook of Reading Research, Vol. 2, pp. 690724. New York: Longman.
Ard, L., & Beverly, B. (2004, September 1). Preschool word learning during joint book reading: Effect of adult
questions and comments. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 26(1), 1728. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. EJ722299). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Baker, S., Simmons, D., & Kameenui, E. (1998). Vocabulary acquisition: Synthesis of the research. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources
Information Center.
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life. New York: Guilford.
Biemiller, A. (2001). Teaching vocabulary: Early, direct, and sequential. The American Educator, 25(1), 2428.
Biemiller, A. (2005). Size and sequence in vocabulary development: Implications for choosing words for primary
grade vocabulary instruction. In E. H. Hiebert and M. L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing
research to practice (pp. 223242). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved August 18, 2009, from
PsycINFO database.
Biemiller, A., & Boote, C. (2006, February 1). An effective method for building meaning vocabulary in primary
grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 4462. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ734337).
Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Blewitt, P., Rump, K., Shealy, S., & Cook, S. (2009, May 1). Shared book reading: When and how questions affect
young children's word learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(2), 294304. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. EJ835037). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Cain, K. (2007, November 1). Deriving word meanings from context: Does explanation facilitate contextual
analysis? Journal of Research in Reading, 30(4), 347359. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
EJ778837). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Connor, C., Morrison, F., & Slominski, L. (2006, November 1). Preschool instruction and children's emergent literacy
growth. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 665689. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
EJ746473). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Cooper, H. The Handbook of Research Synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Publications, 1994.
Coyne, M., McCoach, D., & Kapp, S. (2007, March 1). Vocabulary intervention for kindergarten students: Comparing
extended instruction to embedded instruction and incidental exposure. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(2),
7488. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ786232). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Coyne, M., Simmons, D., Kame'enui, E., & Stoolmiller, M. (2004, September 1). Teaching vocabulary during shared
storybook readings: An examination of differential effects. Exceptionality, 12(3), 145162. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. EJ682910). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
17
Cunningham, A. E. (2005). Vocabulary growth through independent reading and reading aloud to children.
In E. H. Hiebert and M. L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cunningham, A.E., & Stanovich, K.E. (1998). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and
ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33, 934945.
Dale, E. (1965). Vocabulary measurement: Techniques and major findings. Elementary English, 42, 895901.
Graves, M. F., & Watts-Taffe, S. M. (2002). The place of word consciousness in a research-based vocabulary
program. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed.,
pp. 140165). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Justice, L., Meier, J., & Walpole, S. (2005, January 1). Learning new words from storybooks: An efficacy study with
at-risk kindergartners. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(1), 1732. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. EJ741266). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Kamil, M. L. (2004). Vocabulary and comprehension instruction: Summary and implications of the National Reading
Panel findings. In P. McCardle and V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore, MD:
Paul H. Brookes.
Kamil, M., & Hiebert, E. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary: Perspectives and persistent issues. In E. H.
Hiebert and M. L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 123).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved August 18, 2009, from PsycINFO database.
Klingner, J., & Vaughn, S. (1999). Students' perceptions of instruction in inclusion classrooms: Implications for
students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, Vol. 66.
Leung, C. (2008, March 1). Preschoolers' acquisition of scientific vocabulary through repeated read-aloud events,
retellings, and hands-on science activities. Reading Psychology, 29(2), 165193. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. EJ790593). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
McGregor, K., Sheng, L., & Ball, T. (2007, October 1). Complexities of expressive word learning over time. Language,
Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38(4), 353364. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
EJ776268). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Nagy, W. (2005). Why vocabulary instruction needs to be long-term and comprehensive. In E. H. Hiebert and M. L.
Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 2744). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved August 18, 2009, from PsycINFO database.
Nash, H., & Snowling, M. (2006, May 1). Teaching new words to children with poor existing vocabulary knowledge:
A controlled evaluation of the definition and context methods. International Journal of Language and
Communication Disorders, 41(3), 335354. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ747456). Retrieved
August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Nation, K., Snowling, M., & Clarke, P. (2007, June). Dissecting the relationship between language skills and learning
to read: Semantic and phonological contributions to new vocabulary learning in children with poor reading
comprehension. Advances in Speech Language Pathology, 9(2), 131139.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching
children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and
its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
Rosenthal, J., & Ehri, L. (2008, February 1). The mnemonic value of orthography for vocabulary learning. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 100(1), 175191. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ787151). Retrieved
August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
18
Silverman, R., & Hines, S. (2009, May 1). The effects of multimedia-enhanced instruction on the vocabulary of
English-language learners and non-English-language learners in pre-kindergarten through second grade.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(2), 305314. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ835042)
Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.
Stahl, S. (2005). Four problems with teaching word meanings (and what to do to make vocabulary an integral
part of instruction). In E. H. Hiebert and M. L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing
research to practice (pp. 95114). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved August 18, 2009, from
PsycINFO database.
Stahl, S. A., & Kapinus, B. (2001). Word power: What every educator needs to know about teaching vocabulary.
Washington, D.C.: National Education Association.
White, H. (1994). Scientific communication and literature retrieval. The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 4155).
New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Retrieved May 20, 2009, from PsycINFO database.
19