Chapter 7

Vocabulary

Definition

Our vocabulary consists of the individual words we understand or know the meanings of. Our reading vocabulary consists of words that we understand as we read. It is possible to know the meaning of a word when we hear it spoken but still not be able to read it in print. This is common for beginning readers, whose oral vocabulary is often larger than their reading vocabulary. The depth of our knowledge for individual words can also vary. We may have a deep understanding of words that we use a lot, knowing all of the different definitions given for a word in a dictionary, for example. Or our knowledge may be shallow, as when we know only one of the several meanings for a word, or when we have heard a word only a few times but have never used it or checked on its definition (McKeown & Curtis, 1987).

The NRP identified five main methods for teaching vocabulary (NRP, 2000b, p. 4-3):

1. Explicit Instruction: Students are given definitions or other attributes of words to be learned.
2. Implicit Instruction: Students are exposed to words or given opportunities to do a great deal of reading.
3. Multimedia Methods: Vocabulary is taught by going beyond text to include other media such as graphic representations, hypertext, or American Sign Language that uses a haptic medium.
4. Capacity Methods: Practice is emphasized to increase capacity through making reading automatic.
5. Association Methods: Learners are encouraged to draw connections between what they do know and words they encounter that they do not know.

Rationale

Vocabulary is crucial for getting meaning from text. Without knowledge of the key vocabulary in a text, a reader may struggle to understand the writer's intended message.

Vocabulary occupies an important position in learning to read. As a learner begins to read, reading vocabulary encountered in texts is mapped onto the oral vocabulary the learner brings to the task. The reader learns to translate the (relatively) unfamiliar words in print into speech, with the expectation that the speech forms will be easier to comprehend. Benefits in understanding text by applying letter-sound correspondences to printed material come about only if the target word is in the learner's oral vocabulary. When the word is not in the learner's oral vocabulary, it will not be understood when it occurs in print. Vocabulary occupies an important middle ground in learning to read. Oral vocabulary is a key to learning to make the transition from oral to written forms. Reading vocabulary is crucial to the comprehension processes of a skilled reader (NRP, p. 4-3)

Assessment

Vocabulary knowledge can be assessed in many ways, each of which may influence an instructor's view of a student's vocabulary ability.

Vocabulary tests can be formal and standardized, such as the ABLE (Adult Basic Learning Examination, Karlsen & Gardner, 1986) or they can be less formal, as may be the case when teachers make up vocabulary tests for their classes. Tests can ask for different kinds of responses. Some ask the learner to respond with longer, oral answers (such as, Tell me what the word automobile means). Other, more common vocabulary tests are multiple-choice and may ask learners to read the questions and possible responses (NRP, 2000b, p. 4-14--4-15).

Asking students to read vocabulary test items may confound other aspects of reading, such as alphabetics and fluency, with vocabulary knowledge. If students cannot read or decode the words in a vocabulary test item, they may not be able to respond correctly even if they know the word when they hear it. Oral vocabulary tests may be more accurate measures of students' general knowledge of word meanings because they do not require decoding.

Whichever type of test is used,

...we can never know exactly how large a vocabulary an individual has. Instead, we often [use informal tests to] measure only specific vocabulary items that we want the individual to know, for example, in the context of a reading or a science lesson. Standardized tests attempt to deal with this by selecting words that differ widely in their familiarity. Persons who can correctly identify unfamiliar words are assumed to have larger vocabularies. The more unfamiliar [low frequency] words that can be identified, the larger the vocabulary. However, these are estimates, rather than precise measurements (NRP, p. 4-16).

Vocabulary Assessment: Principles and Trends

Question

Based upon assessment results, what are ABE learners' strengths and needs in vocabulary?

Although a few research studies describe adults' general level of vocabulary development, no studies were found related to the effects of language ability or learning disabilities on vocabulary knowledge.

Trend 7

ABE adult readers' vocabulary growth may be dependent upon reading ability. Although their life experience may give them an advantage on vocabulary knowledge at lower reading levels, this advantage may disappear at higher reading levels. (Greenberg, Ehri, & Perin, 1997)

Experimental results from a study that compared the vocabulary achievement of ABE adult readers to the vocabulary achievement of children matched for reading ability finds that adults' vocabulary knowledge is better than children's at reading GE 3 and 4, but not at reading GE 5. It should be noted that the measure of oral vocabulary knowledge used in this study (the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test) might not contain as much adult-oriented content as a test developed specifically for adults (such as the ABLE Reading Vocabulary test).

Vocabulary Instruction: Principles and Trends

Overall

Questions

Does participation in adult basic education increase ABE students' vocabulary achievement? Does vocabulary instruction lead to increases in reading achievement?

Six studies were found that address the effects of instruction on vocabulary achievement (Byrne, Crowe, & Hale, 1996; Gold & Horn, 1982, and Gold & Johnson, 1982; Lazar, Bean, & Van Horn, 1998; McDonald, 1997; Nickse, 1988; Philliber, Spillman, & King, 1996; Venezky, Bristow, & Sabatini, 1994). Results from these studies were mixed, and so no trends or principles are drawn from the research. In the following discussion, only general descriptions of any procedures used are presented. More detailed descriptions are provided in the sections on specific subtopics.

Experimental results were mixed from one study of a specific approach to teaching reading that integrates listening, language, and basic reading skills instruction (reported in Gold & Horn, 1982, and Gold & Johnson, 1982). Learners demonstrated increased vocabulary knowledge on one measure (that used analogies) but not on another (knowledge of verbal opposites). Another experimental study found that participation in a family literacy program increased achievement on a combined measure of vocabulary and comprehension (Philliber, Spillman, & King, 1996). It should be noted that the design for this study included a post-hoc analysis with no control for initial group differences (and, possibly, the use of grade equivalent scores in the analysis).

Non-experimental results from the research were also mixed. Five non-experimental studies yielded nine results. One study used two measures of vocabulary knowledge (Lazar, Bean, & Van Horn, 1998), one used four (Byrne, Crowe, & Hale, 1996), and the remaining three used one measure each. Of the nine results, five were positive.

Participation in one ABE program using experienced teachers did not lead to increased vocabulary achievement (Venezky, Bristow, & Sabatini, 1994). In another program, literacy and workplace communication instruction did not lead to increased ability on three types of vocabulary tasks (defining words, understanding figurative language, and using words in multiple contexts), but did on another type (recognizing synonyms) (Byrne, Crowe, & Hale, 1996). The remaining programs all had pre-post data suggesting growth in vocabulary knowledge (Lazar, Bean, & Van Horn, 1998; McDonald, 1997; Nickse, 1988) with one showing growth on both general functional vocabulary (as measured by the TABE) as well as content-specific, workplace vocabulary (Lazar, Bean, & Van Horn, 1998).

Goals and Setting

Questions

Does participation in a program specifically aligned with one of the three major ABE goals or settings lead to a greater increase in reading vocabulary achievement than participation in another type of program? Does setting affect the degree to which vocabulary instruction increases achievement in other aspects of reading?

Trend 8

Teaching vocabulary within a family or workplace literacy program may lead to a greater increase in vocabulary achievement than instruction in other settings. (McDonald, 1997; Philliber, Spillman, & King, 1996)

Experimental results from one study of thirty-two family literacy programs in ten cities suggest that participation in a family literacy program leads to greater increases in "total reading" (vocabulary and comprehension scores on a standardized test combined) than non-family literacy programs (Philliber, Spillman, & King, 1996). It should be noted that the design for this study included a post-hoc analysis with no control for initial group differences and may have used grade equivalent scores as the unit of analysis. Descriptive results from one study of a classroom intervention suggest that integrating vocabulary instruction within a job-oriented setting will lead to greater increases in job-related vocabulary achievement than non-integrated approaches (McDonald, 1997).

Workplace Literacy

Question

Within a workplace literacy program, is it possible to increase vocabulary achievement?

No trends were found in the research related to vocabulary instruction in workplace literacy programs, which consisted of two non-experimental studies (Lazar, Bean, & Van Horn, 1998; McDonald, 1997). Results from the instructional interventions used in these two studies suggest that vocabulary knowledge may be increased in workplace settings. One literacy program located in a hospital setting (Lazar, Bean, & Van Horn, 1998) included classes consisting of: reading and discussion related to hospital tasks, demonstrations, simulations, small group work, practice in the use of work-related documents including charts and lists, and discussion related to job-based communication, problem-solving, and attitude. Vocabulary achievement increased on a general measure of vocabulary (the TABE Vocabulary subtest) as well as on a measure of specific job-related vocabulary knowledge.

The other study of an instructional intervention took place in a vocational class for ESL adults (McDonald, 1997). Results suggest that teaching ESL students in a vocational class using specific, job-oriented tasks and content increases general functional vocabulary, as measured by a standardized test of vocabulary (the ABLE).

Family Literacy

Question

Within a family literacy program, is it possible to increase vocabulary achievement?

No trends were found related to vocabulary instruction in family literacy programs either. In one study with non-experimental results, parent literacy training within a family literacy program led to increases in vocabulary of about 1 GE (on the vocabulary subtest of the TABE) after 40-50 hours of instruction (Nickse, 1988). Instruction was given one-on-one by highly trained tutors who received 112 total hours of training before and during the course of instruction. Instruction focused on decoding, vocabulary, reading/listening comprehension, study skills, and writing and modeling of learning activities to use with children. It was structured to include demonstration, guided and independent practice, and evaluation activities.

Question

General Functional Literacy

Within a functional literacy program, is it possible to increase reading comprehension?

Trend 9

Teaching vocabulary within a general functional literacy program may lead to increases in vocabulary knowledge. (Gold & Horn, 1982, and Gold & Johnson, 1982; Venezky, Bristow, & Sabatini, 1994)

In a study with experimental results (reported in Gold & Horn, 1982, and Gold & Johnson, 1982), use of a specific teaching strategy called the Directed Listening--Language Experience Approach by trained tutors in one-to-one tutoring sessions led to an increase in adults' reading vocabulary achievement (on the word comprehension subtest of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test). The program did not lead to an increase in oral vocabulary, or language ability (measured with the Detroit Test of Verbal Opposites). The Directed Listening approach was eclectic and included the discussion of topics of interest to adults, focusing on understanding; language experience; alphabetics; comprehension strategies; and a recreational reading program.

In another study, with non-experimental results, learners participating in a large ABE program for students at all levels of literacy ability did not show gains in reading vocabulary ability (as measured by the TABE), despite receiving instruction from experienced ABE teachers (Venezky, Bristow, & Sabatini, 1994).

Instructional methods and material

Teaching Strategies

Question

What specific teaching strategies or techniques for reading instruction can be used to increase reading vocabulary achievement?

Trend 10

Beginning readers' reading vocabulary may be increased using an approach that combines listening comprehension instruction in a content area, high-interest texts generated from listening comprehension exercises, and phonics and multi-sensory skills work using the same content-oriented texts. (Gold & Horn, 1982, and Gold & Johnson, 1982)

Experimental results from one study of a specific teaching strategy (reported in Gold and Horn, 1982, and Gold and Johnson, 1982) suggest that an approach that combines listening comprehension with the use of student-generated texts increases reading vocabulary, but not overall language ability (as measured by a test of oral vocabulary knowledge). This program focused on listening comprehension and used student-generated texts for word analysis and reading comprehension instruction. Improved decoding from the word analysis instruction might account for improved performance on the reading vocabulary measure if it enabled these beginning adult readers to read words that they previously understood but could not decode. One-to-one instruction by trained tutors might also have been a factor.

Instructional Material

Question

Does the use of specific instructional material lead to increased reading vocabulary achievement?

No trends related to the effects of instructional material were drawn from the research. A non-experimental result from one study suggests that including job-oriented content and tasks in a vocational class will increase job-related vocabulary knowledge (McDonald, 1997).

Intensity and Duration of Instruction

Question

Does more intense literacy instruction, or instruction that is of longer duration, increase reading vocabulary achievement?

Trend 11

Provided that participation in a program produces gains in vocabulary achievement, instruction that is longer in duration may lead to increases in reading vocabulary achievement. (Philliber, Spillman, & King, 1996; Nickse, 1988; Venezky, Bristow, & Sabatini, 1994)

The results were mixed from three studies in which the duration of instruction varied across groups. Experimental results from one study, in which one group of students received three times the amount of instruction as those in another group, suggest that reading vocabulary achievement does not increase as the total number of hours of instruction increases (Venezky, Bristow, & Sabatini, 1994). However, there were no gains overall in reading vocabulary, so differential gains based on hours of instructional time might not be expected.

Two results suggest that as adults stay longer in a program, their vocabulary achievement does increase. An analysis of 32 family literacy programs found gains in vocabulary achievement (on a combined vocabulary-comprehension measure) to be related to length of stay in the programs (Philliber, Spillman, & King, 1996). Those staying less than 50 hours gained very little, those staying 51-100 hours gained an average of 1.1 GE, and those staying more than 150 hours gained an average of 1.4 GE. A similar relationship between duration of instruction and gain in vocabulary achievement is seen in the results from the analysis of another family literacy program (Nickse, 1988). Average gains in vocabulary achievement increased from no gain for those receiving 25-30 hours of instruction to a gain of .8 GE for those attending for 41-50 hours. It should be noted that both of these studies used GE scores, which are not equal interval scores, as the unit of analysis.

None of these studies described specific approaches to vocabulary instruction. Vocabulary achievement was simply one measure used to evaluate overall program effects.

Teacher Preparation

Question

Does teacher preparation lead to increases in vocabulary achievement?

No trends related to teacher preparation were found. Although some studies describe extensive training methods for teachers and tutors (e.g., Nickse, 1988), none evaluates the effects of training on vocabulary achievement directly.

Learner Characteristics

No studies evaluating the effects of ABE students' reading or motivational levels on vocabulary learning were found.

ESOL

Question

Are certain forms of reading vocabulary instruction more effective for ABE students with different levels of language ability, particularly ABE students in ESOL classes?

It was not possible to draw trends from the one study having to do with language (McDonald, 1997). Non-experimental results from this study suggest that the use of job-oriented tasks and content with ESL students in a vocational class is effective in increasing their general functional reading ability (measured with the ABLE). It is not clear how students in the groups compared were different in language ability.

Ideas for Vocabulary Instruction from K-12 Research

The NRP review of vocabulary instruction research did not produce findings that were as strong as those related to alphabetics and fluency. The vocabulary research reviewed did not have the same breadth; the number of studies reviewed was smaller and studies of older students with reading disabilities and ESL students were not reviewed (NRP, p. 4-11). In addition, because not much research that met the NRP's criteria for inclusion was found, a less rigorous and more qualitative summary of the research was undertaken. For this reason, the suggestions listed below are labeled comments to distinguish them from the ideas derived from the stronger alphabetics and fluency research.

Nevertheless, the number of vocabulary studies meeting the NRP's criteria, though "small" relative to other areas studied by the NRP, was much larger than the number of ABE vocabulary research studies found. The NRP was able to identify many trends that may be useful for adult educators who teach reading vocabulary.

How are the results from the NRP review of K-12 vocabulary research related to vocabulary instruction for adults? The K-12 research does not address several of the topics important to adult basic education although it does address one topic not covered in other sections of the NRP review: assessment. Trends from the K-12 research also touch on the following ABE topics: goals and setting, teaching strategies, instructional materials, and functional reading level.

Trends from the NRP report that may be of particular interest or use to adult educators include those having to do with the importance of repetition and the use of multiple contexts in vocabulary instruction, the importance of active engagement, and the suggestion that restructuring tasks may be especially useful for at-risk learners.

Assessment

Although the research reviewed by the NRP did not directly address issues related to vocabulary assessment, the NRP completed a qualitative analysis of the ways in which researchers measure vocabulary and presented some tentative conclusions: (a) many measures of vocabulary are used and there is no one standard, so relying on only one measure may not provide sound results; (b) standardized tests may not be sensitive enough to measure the effects of some forms of instruction, so informal tests that more closely match instruction may be needed (p. 4-26).

Goals and Setting

The NRP review indirectly supports trends in the ABE research literature suggesting that vocabulary instruction in workplace and family literacy settings is effective.

Comment 1

To help provide repeated exposure to new vocabulary, teach ABE learners new words that will be useful to them in workplace or family settings.

K-12 Research. Some of the K-12 research on vocabulary instruction with children might explain why vocabulary instruction in workplace and family literacy settings with adults seems promising. A trend in vocabulary instruction research with children suggests that repeated exposure to new vocabulary in rich contexts is important for learning.

Repeated exposure to vocabulary items is important for learning gains. The best gains were made in instruction that extended beyond single class periods and involved multiple exposures in authentic contexts beyond the classroom... [Therefore] vocabulary words should be those that the learner will find useful in many contexts. (NRP, 2000b, p. 4-4)

Instructional Methods and Material

Teaching Strategies

Comment 2

Encourage activities, such as wide reading, that will expose ABE learners to new vocabulary. Encouraging independent reading, however, assumes that what is read is read fluently (i.e., is at an appropriate reading level).

K-12 Research. Vocabulary can be learned incidentally:

Because of the rapid rate at which vocabulary is acquired, it has always been assumed that much vocabulary was learned incidentally. One instantiation of this method is found in vocabulary learning in the context of storybook reading. Recent research studies in the area suggest that indirect learning can definitely occur, and that vocabulary can be acquired through incidental exposure (p. 4-21).

Comment 3

Pre-teach vocabulary words that ABE learners will encounter in texts being used for instruction.

K-12 Research. Pre-teaching vocabulary words that occur in a text, before students begin reading, improves vocabulary acquisition (p. 4-4).

Comment 4

Restructure the texts and procedures used for vocabulary instruction when necessary so that students understand what they need to do when reading and learning new words. Examples of restructuring include substituting easy words for hard ones, explaining what a good definition consists of, working in pairs, and selecting especially relevant words. Restructuring may be most effective with low-achieving students.

K-12 Research. Trends from the NRP review suggest that restructuring vocabulary tasks when needed can improve vocabulary acquisition (pp. 4-4, 4-22).

Instructional Materials

Comment 5

Computer programs may be useful in teaching vocabulary to adults.

K-12 Research. The NRP review did not evaluate specific instructional materials, but identified four studies that suggest that computers may be effective either as supplements to regular instruction or to provide multi-media vocabulary instruction.

Learner Characteristics

Functional Reading Level

Comment 6

ABE vocabulary instruction should be appropriate for older students and tailored to their ability level.

K-12 Research. The NRP review found that the effects from various methods of vocabulary instruction are affected by student age and ability level (p. 4-18).