Effective Vocabulary Instruction

There are two very common practices in vocabulary instruction that are not effective because they fail to engage students in word learning. The first is the use of dictionaries.  Students are often assigned to write a definition and then use the word in a sentence; but dictionaries are notoriously inadequate for providing the sort of information that helps students grasp a word's meaning.  Dictionaries may provide information that students find less familiar than the word being looking up. They fail to show how the word should be used appropriately, and they often do not provide examples to cue students into the meaning.  Often, a dictionary definition is too narrow to explain a dense concept or make needed connections to known concepts (Nagy, 1888; Beck et al, 1985).

A second ineffective strategy is using context to find the meaning of a word.  Contexts can be misleading at worst or totally unsupportive, providing no direct links or cues (Beck & McKeown, 2002). For example, unless you know what In fact, only 20% of contexts provide direct information from which meaning may be inferred.  Students without inferential skills may never make those connections even with an obviously stated definition. Texts also don’t have those external cues that we use to get meaning from oral language.   Context clues, like compare or contrast terms, may lead to multiple possibilities of meaning.  Often the word is learned only to provide a vague meaning in that context without any further use in other contexts (Nagy, 1988).

Here is what the National Reading Panel reported as conditions of effective vocabulary instruction.

1.  Vocabulary should be taught both directly and indirectly (Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986; Nagy & Herman, 1984).

2.  Repetition and multiple exposures to vocabulary items have a significant effect on vocabulary learning. 10-12 exposures in multiple contexts (Beck, 1982)

3.   Should be learned in rich contexts, i.e., extends beyond single class periods to authentic contexts (home, community); provides redundant and alternative information;  engages students in meaningful discussion (McKeown, Beck, Omanson, & Pople, 1985; Kameenui, Carnine & Freschi, 1982; Dole, Sloan, and Trathen, 1995)

4.  Vocabulary tasks should be restructured when necessary.  Alter passages; model use of context, writing good definitions; use reciprocal pair tutoring and small groups; match texts with abilities; provide sample sentences. (Gordon et al, 1992; Schwartz & Raphael, 1985; Scott & Nagy, 1997; Eldredge, 1990; Malone & McLaughlin, 1997)

5.  Vocabulary learning occurs more effectively when students are actively engaged in content area learning tasks. (Guthrie & Cox, 1998; Cunningham & Stanovich, 1997; Baker, Dreher, & Guthrie, 2000; Guthrie, Schafer, Von Secker, & Alban, 2000; Williams & Baumann, 2008).

6.  Computer technology provides opportunities for students to learn and practice new vocabulary (Reinking & Rickman, 1990; Heise et al.,1991; Davidson, Elcock, & Noyes, 1996; Heller, Sturner, Funk & Feezor, 1993).

7.  Vocabulary can be acquired through incidental learning.  Sources of spontaneous, natural word learning:  Story reading, word play, puns, rhymes, word puzzles, conversation with friends and family, TV, videos, and wide reading. (Robbins & Ehri, 1994; Leung, 1992;Senechal & Cornell, 1993; Nicholson & Whyte, 1992; Stahl, Richek, & Vandevier, 1991; Dickinson & Smith, 1994) 

8.  An eclectic approach, multiple methods, allows greater opportunity for deeper processing.

“The Panel is reluctant to suggest a single method of learning vocabulary because there were rarely more than a few studies on each individual method (NRP, 2000, p. 4-27).”

NRP. (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. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development