Running head: MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
Efficacy of Multi-Strategic Vocabulary Instruction of Verbs
for English Language Learning
Pamela L. Rubel
Calistoga Joint Unified School District
Author Note
This paper was created as part of a Master’s of Education Research Project
1
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
2
Abstract
This paper describes one small sample analysis and comparison of methods for teaching
vocabulary to kindergarten English Language Learners (ELLs). The methods being compared
were traditional English Language Development curriculum primarily focused on nouns and a
curriculum enhancement set of strategies focused on verbs.
Students learning English often pass through a stage of acquisition known as “the silent
period”. Students observe and listen, but do not often participate verbally. After a time of full
immersion, students will begin to use verbal language to answer questions, express needs or
wishes and engage in peer conversations (Goldenberg, 2008). The teacher noted that although a
significant part of the year had passed, many ELL’s were not using their verbal skills to
participate in discussions or question and answer sessions. The teacher posed the question:
What would be the effect on participation rates of ELLs in read-aloud activities if the English
Language Development (ELD) vocabulary instruction focused on verbs and included a specific
set of strategies including videos, pictures, acting out, explicit instruction and technology? Three
research questions were addressed. First, is there a specific need for vocabulary instruction for
English Language Learners? Second, what kind of vocabulary instruction strategies for English
language acquisition improve use of English in academic settings? And third, what effect does
specific multi-strategic instruction in verbs have on participation in class discussions during and
after reading aloud. The data revealed no clear effect on participation, but did have a specific
effect on student knowledge of verbs and enthusiasm during subsequent verb vocabulary
activities as observed by the teacher during informal assessments following the study.
Keywords: English Language Learner, English Language Development,
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
3
Efficacy of Multi-Strategic Vocabulary Instruction of Verbs
for English Language Learning
Introduction
Background and Need
The topic for the research arose from a perceived need in one kindergarten classroom
comprised of 24 students, 11 boys, 13 girls, of whom 18 were designated English Language
Learners (ELLs) and 80% were designated socio-economic disadvantaged as measured by the
percent of free and reduced lunch participation. The teacher was interested in the variation of
participation in read-aloud activities between ELLs and English Only students (EOs). She had
anecdotally noted that many ELLs did not participate in verbal question and answer periods and
when they did, it seemed that they used simple verbs and a single tense, such as go for “He go to
see the cars”. Teachers use read-aloud discussions as a means to gauge student comprehension
of text, correct misconceptions, increase understanding and as an opportunity to model correct
grammar and vocabulary usage. When young children are first beginning to speak, they often
use two or three word phrases which the adult would repeat back to them correcting any
vocabulary, tense, or syntax errors. In the same manner, a teacher repeats verbal responses by
ELLs, but uses correct grammar as a model for the language learner. Read aloud comprehension
questions used by this teacher often required the students to describe what was happening in the
story and what might happen next.
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
4
Statement of the Problem
Little research is available addressing the issue of the particular vocabulary instruction
that is most valuable to students for full participation in classroom discussions, which are
conducted orally in kindergarten.
Students enter kindergarten with varying degrees of English proficiency. Approximately
80 percent of students at the target school are designated English Language Learner (ELL).
Students receive English Language Development (ELD) instruction using curriculum provided
by the District called Avenues. Avenues is divided into 10 themes, 8 of which are focused on
nouns. Only the final two themes focus on verbs. The technology included with this traditional
curriculum is a CD of songs and chants, one or two for each theme and manipulative cut out
pictures of objects for each theme. After analyzing the curriculum, the teacher questioned
whether ELLs were receiving enough vocabulary instruction with verbs to enable them to
participate more frequently in discussions of kindergarten text. With a heavy emphasis on nouns,
the traditional curriculum did not teach enough verbs, vocabulary necessary to answer
comprehension questions such as, “What happened first, next, last?” “What is the character
going to do?”, or “Why is he doing that?” These are key comprehension questions for
understanding text structure, making inferences and predictions.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study was to determine if vocabulary instruction of verbs using a set
of specific strategies would change the participation rate in read-aloud discussions for ELLs.
Participation in discussions allows the teacher to measure comprehension, correct
misconceptions and model correct grammar use. This study quantifies participation rates of
ELLs in discussions during and after read-aloud, both prior to and after application of the new
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
5
set of strategies. Additionally, the study attempts to discover if traditional ELD vocabulary
instruction were changed by applying a specific set of strategies focused on verbs, would there
be an effect on participation rates in read-aloud discussions for ELLs?
Review of the Literature
There are abundant studies and analyses that regard vocabulary instruction as essential
for ELLs to achieve at a high level in school. According to Chung (2012) (citing August, Carlo,
Dressler, & Snow, 2005) there is a significant achievement gap between English Language
Learners (ELLs) and English Only students (EOs). Further, school achievement is tied
specifically to proficiency in English and vocabulary is the most crucial element in learning
English (Chung, 2012). The achievement gap, therefore, could be characterized as a vocabulary
gap.
Data for the ELL population as of 2007 also connects socioeconomic factors to school
performance.
Goldenberg (2008) (from Capps, Fix, Murray, Passel, and Herwantoro, 2005)
The majority of ELLs – 80% - are Spanish speakers and Spanish Speakers come
from lower economic and educational backgrounds than other immigrant groups.
“24% of immigrants from Mexico and Central America are below poverty level
and fewer than 40% have the equivalent of a high school diploma. Consequently,
most ELLs are at risk for poor school outcomes not only because of language, but
also because of socioeconomic factors.”
Wang (2009) asserts that meaning vocabulary is a critical aspect of school readiness and
that low socioeconomic status students (SES) often begin school with a significantly lower
vocabulary than high SES students.
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
6
Since approximately 80% of students at the target school were classified
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged (SED) as determined by the percent of free and reduced lunch
participation and approximately 80 per cent of the school population were English Language
Learners, it is reasonable to assert that students in the target school would be at risk for lagging
achievement connected to low vocabulary knowledge that would persist through the grades.
Even after achieving a level of bilingualism, ELLs would still perform lower than EOs in oral
language and continue to lag behind (Paez, 2007), pp.85-102.
Current successful strategies to teach vocabulary are discussed in general and specific
terms. Chung (2012) citing Graves (2007); Stahl & Nagy (2006) proposes that the most
comprehensive, and effective research-based vocabulary program would consist of : “4
important components including word learning strategies, word consciousness cultivation (and
the 2 most important to this study) rich language and word experiences and direct word teaching.
Chung (2012) explains that direct word teaching is best when taught in context as Carey (1978),
cited by Chung (2012), found that young children learn by associating new vocabulary to
meanings linked to concrete tasks. Chung states further that teacher read-alouds accompanied
with explanations and discussion of vocabulary…and teacher modeling of new and high level
vocabulary usage also enhances vocabulary growth (citing Blachowicz et al., 2006; Graves,
2007).
In an example of direct word teaching, Dockerell (2010) reported significant gains in
receptive as well as expressive language were recorded when vocabulary instruction focused on
specific structures for talking. The structures included play-acting targeted key vocabulary
items, discussions around pictures in books and describing pictures of common activities.
Several studies and meta-analyses looked at vocabulary instruction enhanced with
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
7
elements of media. ELLs experience large deficits of vocabulary, so “it is critical to develop
creative methods to expose ELLs to words in ways that develop and reinforce word meaning and
examples of methods that do this include the use of technology” (August et al., 2005). One
study used thematic videos that teachers showed and also highlighted important vocabulary
while it played. On post-tests of target words and general vocabulary knowledge taught through
read aloud texts, ELLs receiving multimedia-enhanced instruction gained significantly over
ELLs receiving non-multimedia-enhanced instruction (Silverman & Hines, 2009). In discussing
the results Silverman and Hines suggest that the addition of video and sound to the verbal
definitions and pictures in the read-aloud provided multiple access points to support vocabulary
development.
Moody (2010) notes that the use of high quality interactive e-storybooks may support
emergent literacy development through the use of scaffolding, thus supporting vocabulary
development, engagement, and comprehension of the story. Korat (2010) concluded that
children exhibited good progress in word meaning when exposed to an e-book that they read
independently only a few times.
Finally, in a meta-analysis of effective uses of technology such as video, audio and
multi-media in second language instruction, positive results were reported and “The application
of technologies can be effective in almost all areas of language education.” (Zhao, 2003)
The most successful vocabulary instruction included elements that blended direct
instruction, meaning through concrete tasks and the application of technology.
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
8
Research Methods
Project Introduction
The teacher used only her class for the study. The class was composed of 24 students, 11
boys and 13 girls. 18 students were designated ELLs and 6 students were designated EOs.
The teacher video recorded four read aloud sessions on three separate days. One session
was recorded prior to applying the new strategies, the other three were recorded while the new
instructional strategies were in place. Student participation was quantified by tallying the
number of times they sought participation and the number of times they actually participated.
See Table 1. The video was transcribed for each question and answer period with student
responses rated against the vocabulary and sentence fluency bands of a retelling rubric developed
by the Napa Valley Unified School District (See Apendix). See Table 2
The new set of strategies employed included the following:

verb rap video obtained from YouTube

Interactive e-books accessed on iPads

Pictures showing actions

Action Charades

Teacher identifying and highlighting verbs in all language experienced
during the day including read-aloud, conversations, recess and other
lessons. This strategy was used concurrently with all other strategies and
sometimes within the context of the other 4 strategies.
Responses were transcribed from the video and evaluated by the teacher. The quality of
the responses were divided into named levels Beginning, Early Intermediate, Intermediate and
Proficient. These headings resemble CELDT designations. Each heading has a description for
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
9
the quality of response in four separate bands: Retelling, Story Elements, Vocabulary, and
Sentence Fluency. Responses were only for Vocabulary and Sentence Fluency.
Methodology
The first strategy used was the verb rap video. Students were observed to be engaged and
responding by copying movements in the video. A second playing of the video during the same
session produced even more participation by students. Engagement was virtually 100% with all
students observed to be watching the video for the duration. At the end of the second playing,
one student was heard to call out “again”.
The second strategy used was pictures of playground activities which children described
by using a verb. Another set of pictures of objects were placed in an outdoor scene, but instead
of naming the objects, students used verbs in phrases or sentences to describe what they were
doing, e.g. mowing the grass, sleeping, eating watermelon. This strategy was used in the context
of read-alouds also where description of the pictures emphasized the use of verbs.
The next strategy used was the iPad e-book, Tortoise and Hare. Students were asked to
read (and re-read) the e-book with a partner and to make a written list of all the verbs they could
find. Some students confused adverbs like slowly, with verbs, so the teacher was able to correct
this misconception and re-direct the student to the action versus the descriptor of the action.
Students were highly engaged in the activity and submitted a written list of 5 to 10 verbs each.
The final activity was action charades. The teacher had prepared cards of simple action
pictures obtained from the language arts resource book. Students were selected randomly to be
the “actor” and were allowed to opt out if they chose. Although students were a little
embarrassed to show the actions, the audience was highly engaged and were eager to guess many
times before landing on the correct answer.
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
10
The teacher continued to highlight verbs in language used in the classroom including
read-aloud, conversations, and instructions. The class also participated in other movement
activities such as moving like an animal and a song called Sammy where a little boy uses many
ways of moving before completing a chore. The verb rap video was the only other strategy
repeated during the research period. Following one such playing of the video, students went
directly out to recess and many were calling out to the teacher to watch them show a verb, e.g.
“I’m swinging,” “Look I’m spinning,” “I can climb,” etc.
Following a period of approximately 3 weeks, the teacher again video recorded a readaloud session and repeated the data collection.
Data Analysis
Data analysis revealed that ELLs actually participated slightly more often than EOs
during read-aloud activities before the targeted vocabulary instruction. ELLs comprised 75
percent of the classroom population, but had a participation rate of 81 percent compared to the
EOs population which comprised 25 percent, but had a participation rate of only 19%. After
applying the new strategies, participation rates more closely reflected the demographic of the
classroom with ELLs participation at 74 percent and EOs participation at 26 percent. There was
no increase in ELLs participation rates during the study.
There was a noteworthy change in the quality of responses that were measured against
the retelling rubric developed by the Napa Valley Unified School District. In a comparison of the
first session to each of the subsequent read-aloud sessions ELLs responses changed in a dramatic
way. Students in the ELL group moved from 58 percent of their responses in the Beginning
category to only 19 percent of responses in that category. While the responses evaluated as
Beginning decreased, responses evaluated at the higher levels of Early Intermediate,
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
11
Intermediate and Proficient increased. The percent of responses in the Early Intermediate
category rose from 21 percent to 31 percent of total responses. In the Intermediate category
responses rose from 12.5 percent to 23 percent of total responses. In the Proficient category,
responses rose from 4 percent to 23 percent of total responses. The total responses in the
Beginning category dropped 39 percentage points while the other three categories all rose
indicating a significant improvement in the quality of responses.
Findings and Implications
The findings of this study were inconclusive on the question of the efficacy of this
specific multi-strategic vocabulary instruction on participation in read-aloud discussions by
ELLs. There was no apparent direct link to suggest the strategies impacted participation by
ELLs. The teacher did note that a student who rarely spoke above a whisper, almost never
participated in any discussions and appeared uncomfortable when asked to respond verbally to
any query, raised his hand twice to participate in the first read-aloud discussion following the
verb video lesson.
An unexpected finding of the study was in the quality of responses transcribed from the
read-aloud sessions which suggested a link in improvement with the set of strategies
implemented during the study. The teacher also reported a positive response to subsequent verb
exercises surmising that these attitudes were a result of the confidence students had in their own
knowledge of verbs. These findings suggests areas for further research.
Caution should be exercised in drawing broad conclusions from this paper as the student
sample was very small, there was no control group and the duration of the study was brief.
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
12
References
August, D. a. (2006). "Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the
National Literacy Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth".
August, D. M. (2005). "The Critical Role of Vocabulary Development for English Language
Learners.". Learing Disabilities Research & Practice 20, no. 1, pp. 50-57.
Chen, M. R. (2003). "Understanding Technology-enhanced Storybooks and Their Roles in
Teaching and Learning: An Investigation of Electronic Storybooks in Education.".
Journal of Literacy and Technology 3, no. 1, pp. 1-13.
Chung, S. F. (2012). "Research-Based Vocabulary Instruction for English Language Learners.".
Reading 12, no. 2.
Dockrell, J. E. (2010). "Supporting Early Oral Language Skills for English Language Learners in
Inner City Preschool Provision.". British Journal of Educational Psychology 80, no. 4,
pp. 497-515.
Ernst, G. (1994). "'Talking Circle': Conversation and Negotiation in the ESL classroom.". TESOL
Quarterly 28, no. 2, pp. 293-322.
Goldenberg, C. (2008). "Teaching English Language Learners.". American Educator.
Korat, O. (2010). "Reading Electronic Books as a Support for Vocabulary, Story Comprehension
and Word Reading in Kindergarten and First Grade.". Computers & Education 55, no. 1,
pp. 24-31.
Last Name, F. M. (Year). Article Title. Journal Title, Pages From - To.
Last Name, F. M. (Year). Book Title. City Name: Publisher Name.
Moody, A. K. (2010). "Using Electronic Books in the Classroom to Enhance Emergent Literacy
Skills in Young Children.". Journal of Literacy and Technology 11, no. 4, pp. 22-52.
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
13
Paez, M. M. (2007). "Dual Language and Literacy Development of Spanish-speaking Preschool
Children.". Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 28, no. 2, 85-102.
Shanahan, T. a. (2010). "The National Early Literacy Panel A Summary of the Process and
Report.". Educational Researcher 39, no. 4, pp. 279-285.
Silverman, R. a. (2009). "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, no. 2, p. 305.
Wang, X. C. (2009). Exploring a Model for Meaning Vocabulary Instruction in Early Childhood
Classrooms: A Formative Experiment.". Annual Meeting of the National Reading
Conference. Albuquerque.
Zhao, Y. (2003). "Recent Developments in Technology and Language Learning: A Literature
Review and Meta-analysis.". CALICO Journal 21, no. 1, pp. 7-27.
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
Tables
Table 1
Participation Data April to June 2013
Yellow highlight indicates data for ELLs
Blue highlight indicates data for EOs
14
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
Table 2
Quality of Responses
Yellow highlight indicates data for ELLs
Blue highlight indicates data for EOs
15
MULTI-STRATEGIC VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION
16
APPENDIX
Napa Valley Unified School District
RETELLING RUBRIC K-2
Draft
SENTENCE FLUENCY
VOCABULARY
STORY ELEMENTS
RETELLING
CELD
BEGINNING—1
EARLY
INTERMEDIATE—2
INTERMEDIATE—3
PROFICIENT—4
Tells a story with
isolated words or no
English words. May
use drawings, words
or phrases.
Tells a story with
incomplete
Sentences using
appropriate gestures,
expressions or
illustrative objects.
Tells a story using at
least 1 complete
sentence and
paraphrasing.
Tells a story using
fluent sentences &
details. Narrates
and paraphrases key
story elements.
Uses drawings,
words or phrases to
identify setting and
characters
Identifies orally the
setting and
characters using
simple sentences.
Identifies orally the
basic elements of
plot, characters and
setting.
Identifies and
describes in detail
the elements of
plot, characters and
setting.
Demonstrates
comprehension of
simple vocabulary
with an appropriate
action & uses simple
vocabulary.
May use limited
story related
vocabulary, but
misuse of words
makes
comprehension
difficult.
Uses more complex
vocabulary to
describe events with
general and specific
language.
Uses more complex
vocabulary to
describe events
smoothly and with
attention to sensory
details.
Communicates with
appropriate actions,
single words or
short phrases.
Communicates
using phrases and
short sentences.
Uses standard word
order, but may have
some inconsistent
grammatical forms.
(e.g., subject/verb
agreement)
Uses complete
sentences and
correct word order.