Closing the Gap: Addressing the Vocabulary Needs of English-Language Learners in Bilingual and Mainstream Classrooms

Abstract

ABSTRACTS
Gaps in reading performance between Anglo and Latino children are associated with gaps in vocabulary knowledge. An intervention was designed to enhance fifth graders' academic vocabulary. The meanings of academically useful words were taught together with strategies for using information from context, from morphology, from knowledge about multiple meanings, and from cognates to infer word meaning. Among the principles underlying the intervention were that new words should be encountered in meaningful text, that native Spanish speakers should have access to the text's meaning through Spanish, that words should be encountered in varying contexts, and that word knowledge involves spelling, pronunciation, morphology, and syntax as well as depth of meaning. Fifth graders in the intervention group showed greater growth than the comparison group on knowledge of the words taught, on depth of vocabulary knowledge, on understanding multiple meanings, and on reading comprehension. The intervention effects were as large for the English‐language learners (ELLs) as for the English‐only speakers (EOs), though the ELLs scored lower on all pre‐ and posttest measures. The results show the feasibility of improving comprehension outcomes for students in mixed ELL‐EO classes, by teaching word analysis and vocabulary learning strategies.

Full text

Closing the Gap: Addressing the Vocabulary needs of English-Language Learners in Bilingual
and mainstream classrooms (Cerrando la brecha: Acerca de las nesecidades de vocabulario de
aprendices de inglés en aulas bilingües y comunes) (Schließder Lücke: Ansprechen des
Wortschatzbedarfs von Anfängern in der englischen Sprache in bi-lingualen und allgemeinen
Klassenzimmern) (溝の埋め立て : バイリンガル受び通常の教室における英語学習者の語葉の必要性に対する取
り組み) (Ré ...
Author(s): Maria S. Carlo, Diane August, Barry Mclaughlin, Catherine E. Snow, Cheryl
Dressler, David N. Lippman, Teresa J. Lively and Claire E. White
Source:
Reading Research Quarterly,
Vol. 39, No. 2 (Apr. - Jun., 2004), pp. 188-215
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the International Reading Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4151671 .
Accessed: 30/01/2015 13:45
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Wiley and International Reading Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Reading Research Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reading
Research
Quarterly
Vol.
39,
No.
2
April/May/June
2004
?
2004 International
Reading
Association
(pp. 188-215)
Closing
the
gap:
Addressing
the
vocabulary
needs
of
English-
language
learners
in
bilingual
and
mainstream
classrooms
MARIA
S. CARLO
University
of
Miami, Miami, Florida,
USA
DIANE
AUGUST
August
&
Associates,
Washington,
DC,
USA
BARRY
MOLAUGHLIN
University
of
California,
Santa
Cruz, California,
USA
CATHERINE
E.
SNOW
CHERYL DRESSLER
Harvard Graduate School of
Education,
Cambridge,
Massachusetts,
USA
DAVID
N.
LIPPMAN
TERESA
J.
LIVELY
University
of
California,
Santa
Cruz, California,
USA
CLAIRE
E.
WHITE
Harvard
Graduate School of
Education,
Cambridge,
Massachusetts,
USA
he
existence of a
large
and
persistent
gap
between the
reading
performance
of
Anglo
and Latino
children
on national assessments in the
United States
(Donahue,
Finnegan,
Lutkus, Allen,
&
Campbell,
2001)
represents
both an intellectual and a
practical
challenge.
Practically,
gaining
access to the information
taught
in
middle
and
secondary
content area
classes
requires
that all children exit the
elementary
188
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ABSTRACTS
oClosing
the
gap:
Addressing
the
vocabulary
needs
of
English-
language
learners
in
bilingual
and
mainstream
classrooms
GAPS
IN
reading
performance
between
Anglo
and Latino children are associated with
gaps
in
vocabulary
knowl-
edge.
An
intervention was
designed
to enhance fifth
graders'
academic
vocabulary.
The
meanings
of
academically
useful
words were
taught together
with
strategies
for
using
information from
context,
from
morphology,
from
knowledge
about
multiple
meanings,
and
from
cognates
to
infer
word
meaning. Among
the
principles
underlying
the intervention were that new
words should
be
encountered
in
meaningful
text,
that native
Spanish speakers
should
have access to the text's
meaning through Spanish,
that
words should
be
encountered
in
varying
contexts,
and that
word
knowledge
involves
spelling,
pronunciation,
morphology,
and
syntax
as well as
depth
of
meaning.
Fifth
graders
in the
intervention
group
showed
greater growth
than the
comparison group
on
knowledge
of the
words
taught,
on
depth
of
vocabulary
knowledge,
on
understanding multiple meanings,
and on
reading comprehension.
The
intervention
effects were as
large
for the
English-language
learners
(ELLs)
as for
the
English-only
speakers
(EOs),
though
the
ELLs
scored lower on all
pre-
and
posttest
measures.
The
results show the
feasibility
of
improv-
ing
comprehension
outcomes for students
in
mixed ELL-EO
classes,
by
teaching
word
analysis
and
vocabulary
learning strategies.
Ia brecha:
Acerca de las
necesidades de
vocabulario de
aprendices
de
ing9is
en aulas
bilingies
y
comunes
LAS
DIFERENCIAS
en el
desempefio
lector
entre
niiios
angloamericanos
y
latinos
se asocian a brechas en el
conocimiento del vocabulario. Se
diseii6
una
intervenci6n
para mejorar
el
vocabulario academico de
nifios
de
quin-
to
grado.
Se
ensefiaron
los
significados
de
palabras
academicamente
titiles,
junto
con
estrategias para
usar
informa-
ci6n
del
contexto,
de la
morfologia,
del conocimiento
de
significados muiltiples
y
de
palabras
emparentadas
para
in-
ferir los
significados.
Entre
los
principios
subyacentes
a la
intervenci6n
se
propuso que
las
palabras
nuevas debian
encontrarse
en
textos
significativos,
que
los
hablantes
nativos
de
espafiol
debian
tener
acceso al
significado
del
texto
a travis de su
lengua, que
las
palabras
debian
aparecer
en
contextos variados
y
que
el conocimiento de las
palabras
incluye
ortograffa,
pronunciaci6n,
morfologia
y
sintaxis,
asi como
significado
en
profundidad.
Los
ni-ios
de
quinto
grado
del
grupo
de
intervenci6n
mostraron un
mayor
crecimiento
que
el
grupo
de
comparaci6n
en: conocimiento de
las
palabras
ensefiadas,
profundidad
de conocimiento del
vocabulario,
comprensi6n
de
significados mdltiples
y
com-
prensi6n
lectora.
Los
efectos de
la
intervenci6n
fueron tan
grandes
para
los
aprendices
de
inglks
(ELL),
como
para
los
hablantes
nativos
de
inglks
(EO),
aunque
el
grupo
ELL
obtuvo
puntajes
inferiores
en todas las
medidas
pre
y
post
test. Los resultados
muestran
la
factibilidad
de
mejorar
la
comprensi6n
de estudiantes en aulas mixtas
ELL-EO,
mediante
la ensefianza
de andlisis de las
palabras
y
estrategias
de
aprendizaje
del
vocabulario.
SchlieBen der LOcke:
Ansprechen
des
Wortschatzbedarfs
von
Anftingern
in
der
englischen
Sprache
in
bi-lingualen
und
algemreinen
Klassenzinmmern
LOCKEN
BEI
der
Leseleistung
zwischen
Anglo-
und
Latino-Kindern werden
mit
Wissenlhicken
im
Wortschatz
as-
soziiert.
Ein
Einwirken wurde darauf
ausgerichtet,
den
so
geschulten
Wortschatz bei
Schiilern
der
fiinften
Klasse
zu verbessern. Die
Bedeutungen
von
theoretisch-akademisch
dienlichen
Wirtern
wurden zusammen mit
Strategien
tiber
die
Anwendung
von
Informationen
aus
dem
Textinhalt,
der
Morphologie,
dem
Wissen um die
vielfAltige
Sinndeutung,
und
den
Kognaten
zum
Ableiten
der
Wortbedeutung
unterricht.
Unter
den
der
Intervention
zu-
grundeliegenden Prinzipien
gait
es,
dagf
neue
W6rter
innerhalb eines
sinnverdeutlichenden
Textes
in
Angriff
genommen
werden
sollten,
so
da8f
die
als
Muttersprache
spanisch
Sprechenden Zugang
zu
Sinn
und
Bedeutung
des
Textes
in
spanisch
haben
sollten,
dag W6rter
in
variierenden Kontexten
angewandt
werden
sollten und
daf
die
Wortbeherrschung,
das
Buchstabieren,
die
Aussprache,
Morphologie
und
Syntax,
sowie die tieferen
Bedeutungen
mit
einbezogen
sind.
Fiinftkldssler
in der
Interventionensgruppe
zeigten
gr6iiere
Fortschritte als ihre
Vergleichsgruppe
in
Kenntnissen
der
unterrichteten
W6rter,
in
der
Griindlichkeit
ihrer
Vokabelbeherrschung,
beim
Erfassen von
Vieldeutigkeiten,
und ihrem
Leseverstindnis.
Die
Interventionsauswirkungen
waren ebenso
weitre-
ichend
bei
Anflingern
in der
englischen
Sprache
(ELL)
wie bei
originir-englischen
Muttersprachlern
(EO),
wobei
jedoch
die
ELL-Werte
bei allen Vor- und Nachtests
geringer
ausfielen. Die
Resultate
zeigten
deutlich
M6glichkeiten
im Verbessern der
Ergebnisse
fir
Schiiler
in
gemischten
ELL-EO-Klassen
auf,
sowie
beim
Unterrichten von
Wordanalyse
und
Vokabel-Lernstrategien.
189
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ABSTRACTS
mf'I)r)3
0)
milt
L
0
I
4
<15a
*J
9VOt
?
t,.L
t
tc
5r-
AZTJ
'
19
av
Itkl
w
1IPt
0U) 1
)
afblLTM
00);k-8
-tP?-,
r
L--:t)fco
UtMFiEr~4~~t
~
~T-~~:;~~it,
*03
M
t~
X,~
~~~~ i~~2~-rr~:~~is~
?3;~?r
7;ra>.~i:a~E:1~2iii~jf:
?~?f~if=.;l-t~i
t t
l~si~-
~
*
t
7,)t~~b
Reduire
I'6cart:
intervenir
sur
les
besoins en
vocabulaire
anglais
d'apprenants
de
classes
bilingues
et de classes
d'int
gration
LES
ICARTS
de
rdussite
en
lecture
entre
eleves
anglophones
et
hispanophones
vont de
pair
avec des
ecarts
dans
leur connaissance du vocabulaire. On a
planifie
une
intervention en vue
de
developper
le vocabulaire scolaire
d'dllves
de
cinquieme
ann&e.
On a
enseignd
le sens de
mots
utiles dans
le
cadre scolaire
en
meme
temps
que
des
strategies
pour
utiliser l'information
apportde
par
le
contexte,
la
morphologie,
la
pluralitd
des sens
et
l'origine
afin
d'infdrer
le sens des mots. Un des
principes
sous-tendant
l'intervention
etait
que
les mots nouveaux
devaient
etre
rencontrrs
dans
un
contexte
signifiant,
que
les enfants de
langue espagnole
devaient
avoir acces au sens du texte
en
passant par
l'espagnol,
et
que
la connaissance
d'un
mot
implique
l'orthographe,
la
prononciation,
la
mor-
phologie
et
la
syntaxe
tout
comme son sens
profond.
Les
eleves
de
cinquieme
ann
e
du
groupe
d'intervention
ont
rdalise
plus
de
progres
que
ceux du
groupe
temoin
en ce
qui
concerne
la
connaissance des
mots
enseignis,
la
con-
naissance
profonde
du
vocabulaire,
la
comprdhension
de
la
pluralite
des
sens
et la
comprehension
de
la
lecture.
Les
effets
de l'intervention ont
etd
aussi
importants pour
les 6leves
ayant
l'anglais
pour langue
2
que pour
ceux
dont
c'est
la
langue
maternelle,
bien
que
les
resultats
des
premiers
aient
etd
plus
faibles a* tous les
tests,
avant
et
apres
l'intervention.
Les
resultats
montrent
qu'il
est
possible
d'ameliorer
les
rdsultats
en lecture des
eleves
dans des clas-
ses mixtes
(anglais langue
maternelle
ou
langue
2),
en leur
enseignant
des
strategies
d'analyse
des
mots et
d'apprentissage
du
vocabulaire.
YCTpaHsReM
pa31n4tSm:
pacwmipeHme
CnOBsapHOFO
3anaca
npH
M3y4eH
HM
i
HiFlMCCKOFO ri3bl
Ka
MOHO-
14
6$mntHFHallbHblMM
yHaluAhMsici
Pa3AHIHlM
B
ypOBHe
pa3BIHTHl HaBbIKOB
wTeHHIH
MeCAAy
AeTbMH
aHTnAOCaKCOHCKOFO
1
AaTHHO-
aMepHKaIHCKOrO
ipOHCXOKHAeHHA
CBR3aHbI C
pa3AHqHl4MH
B IX
CAOBapHOM
3aIIace.
ABTOpbl
pa3pa6o0TaAH
MeTOA,
HpeAHa3Haie1HHbIH
AAA
yBeAHtMeHInl
aKaAeMHqeCKorTO
CAOBapHorO
3anraca
y
HriTHKAaCCHHKOB.
3HaqeHHR
niOAe3HbIX
AAA
yqe6bI
CAOB
HpenriAaBaAHCb
BMeCTC
Co
CTpaTerIMH,
HO3BOAABIIHM
H
HOHHTb
CAOBO
Ha
OCHOBe KOHTeKCTa,
Mop4COAorHxieCKOrO
cTpoeHHII,
3HaHH14I
pOACTBeHHeIX
CAOB
1H
ApyrHX
3HaieHHii
AaHHOIO
CAOBa.
piHuHinbI
r
nipeAAaraemoro
MeTOAa:
HOBble
CAOBa
npeAbqIBAnIrOTCA
He
no
oTAeAbHOCTH,
a
B
OCMbICAeHHOM
TeKCTe;
HCHRa-HOlR3b1HblHe
AeTH
IMetOT
AOCTryr
K
CMbICAy
TeKcTa qepe3
HCHraHCKHI
H3bIK;
CAOBa
ripeAsaramorca
B
pa3AHHliblX
KOHTeKCTaX;
3HiaHHe
CAOBa
BKAIOqaeT
B
ce6a
ero
HarIHCaHH4e,
ripoH3HOHIeHiHe,
Mop(coAoIOr
o
1
CiHTaKCHC,
a
TaoKme
AOCTaTOsHyio
rAy6HHy
ero
3HaqeHHiH.
Ho
cpaBHeHH4O
C
KOHTpOAbHOli
rpyrinoii II5THKAaCCHHKH
B
3KcnepMMeMHTaAbHOH4
rpynne
Ayite
yCBOHAH
nrperoOAaBaeMbIe
CAOBa,
poAeMOHCTpHpoBaAn
60AbLmHHi
CAOBapHbhIi
3arac,
Ayimlee
HOHHMaHHe
pa3AHMHbIX
3HaMHeHHIi
CAOB
H
HOHHMaHi4e
HpoirHTaHHorO.
Pe3yAbTaTmb
ipMeeHeHMiA
AaHHOTO
MeTOAa OKa3aAHCb
paBHo
BMCOKHMH
KaK
AAA
y
"alHXCA-AaTHHoaMepHKaHUeB
(ELL's),
TaK
iH
AAH
aHTAOrOBOpqIL1X
AeTei-
(EO's),
XOTA
Ha
ripe-TecTosBbIx
nocT-TeCTroBblX
HCrbrTaHHI
X
H rnepBbie
fiOKa3aAH
6oAee
HH3KHe
pe3yAbTaTbl.
Pe3yAbTaTbI
IIOKa3bIBaIOT
BO3MOHtHOCTb
HOBblIeHHIIH
ypOBH
nHOHMHMRHH
HrpouwrTaHHOro
B
CMCeaIHHbX
IKAaccax
(ELL-EO)
c
noMomoubo
MeToAa,
Hriapa3AeaHorO
Ha
paciulpeHHe
cAoBapA.
190
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Closing
the
gap
191
grades
with
good
reading comprehension
capacity.
Without
this
capacity,
access to
grade-appropriate
content
knowledge,
entry
into
challenging
courses
in
secondary
school,
success
on
the
tests
increasingly
being
required
for
promotion
and
graduation,
and
entry
into
tertiary
education
are
all
unlikely.
Thus,
closing
this
gap
has
high priority
if
U.S.
education
is
to fulfill
its
goal
of
reducing
inequities
in
access
to
economic
opportunities
that
are
contingent upon
successful
school
achievement.
Yet
as
recently
as
2000
Garcia
noted
that "few
researchers
have
devel-
oped
programs
to
improve
students'
second-language
reading
vocabulary"
(p.
826).
The
intellectual
challenge
posed
by
the
gap
in-
volves
isolating
its root
cause.
The
problem
is
one of
too
many
rather
than
too few
likely
explanations.
Considerable
previous
work
suggests
that one
major
determinant of
poor
reading
comprehension,
for
Latino
children
(Garcia,
1991;
Nagy,
1997;
Verhoeven,
1990)
and for
other
lagging
readers
(National
Institute
of
Child Health
and Human
Development,
2000),
is
low
vocabulary.
Lack of
knowledge
of
the
middle-
and lower
frequency
"aca-
demic"
words
encountered
in
middle and
secondary
school
texts
impedes
comprehension
of
those
texts,
which
in
turn
impedes
the
natural
process
of learn-
ing
new word
meanings
from
exposure
during
read-
ing
(Stanovich,
1986).
It is
widely
known
that
vocabulary
relates to
reading
comprehension
scores
(Freebody
&
Anderson,
1983),
and
the
presumption
is
that the
effect is
reciprocal-greater vocabulary
knowledge
makes
comprehension
easier,
while
wider
reading
generates
larger
vocabularies.
One
goal
of
the current
study
was to
test
whether
improvements
in
vocabulary
related to
improvements
in
reading
comprehension
for
English-language
learners
(ELLs).
Review
of
literature
on
vocabulary
instruction and
learning
Attempts
to
address the
practical
challenge
of
improving
reading comprehension
by
explicitly
teaching
vocabulary
have
met
with
mixed
success
(Stahl
&
Fairbanks,
1986),
in
part
because of
the
difficulty
of
generating
a
large
instructional
impact
on
vocabulary
knowledge.
Successful
vocabulary
cur-
ricula
increase
children's
word
knowledge
by
approx-
imately
300
words
a
year
(Stahl
&
Fairbanks).
While
such
gains
are not
unimportant,
they
are
hardly
suf-
ficient
to
close the
gap
between
the
vocabulary
skills
of lower
socioeconomic
status
(SES)
and
middle SES
children,
which
is
estimated
to be
as
high
as
6,000
words
at
school
entry
(Hart
&
Risley,
1995).
Addressing
the
vocabulary
deficits
of
second-
language
learners,
who
may
arrive
in U.S.
classrooms
in second or third
grade
with no
English
vocabulary
at
all,
is even more
challenging.
While such
children
may
appear
to
acquire
oral
English
vocabulary
quickly,
they
can remain
well behind children
who
have been
exposed
to oral
and literate
English
since
birth,
unless
provided
with
skills and
strategies
for
rapid
learning
of the
words
they
will encounter
in
their
reading-words
that
may
be used
rarely
in
spoken
language.
For avid
readers,
much
vocabulary
acquisition
occurs
incidentally
as a
result
of
encountering
unfa-
miliar words
while
reading
(Sternberg,
1987).
Nonetheless,
the
probability
of
acquiring
an
un-
known word
incidentally
through reading
is
only
about
15%
(Swanborn
&
de
Glopper,
1999),
which
means the word would need to be encountered
eight
times
to
be
learned
with
high
probability.
The
prob-
ability
of
learning
any
word
at a first encounter
is
lower
for
younger
readers,
for more
difficult
texts,
and
probably
for
students
who have
had no
training
in
deriving
meanings
for
unknown
words
(Fukkink
& de
Glopper,
1998;
Kuhn
&
Stahl,
1998).
Thus,
incidental
vocabulary
learning
is not
a
reliable
proce-
dure
for
promoting
vocabulary
growth.
Relying
on
incidental
vocabulary
learning
is
even more
problematic
for
ELLs
than for
their
English-only
(EO)
counterparts.
ELLs
are
less
able
to use context to
disambiguate
the
meaning
of
unfa-
miliar
words
because a
higher
proportion
of words
in
text is
likely
to
be unknown
to
them.
Furthermore,
because
they
lack full
command of the
English
grammar,
they
are less
able
to
exploit
linguistic
cues
to word
meaning
as an
EO
speaker
could
(Stoller
&
Grabe,
1995).
Reading
texts
in which more
than
2%
of the words are
unfamiliar
blocks
comprehension
and
novel
word
learning
(Carver,
1994).
As is
sug-
gested
in
many
of
the
chapters
in
Huckin,
Haynes,
and
Coady
(1995),
which
explore
the
relationship
between
reading
and
vocabulary
development
in
a
second
language,
vocabulary
instruction
for
ELLs
would
ideally
combine
direct
teaching
of
words
with
incidental
learning
fostered
by
multiple
opportuni-
ties to
encounter
novel
words
in
authentic and
moti-
vating
texts.
In
addition
to direct instruction and
incidental
learning,
evidence
suggests
the
desirability
of
en-
hancing
the
value
of
incidental
exposure
by
teaching
ELLs
strategies
for
inferring
the
meanings
of
newly
encountered,
unfamiliar
words.
Many
such
strategies
exist and
are
used with ease
by
high-level
readers.
They
include
using
contextual
cues,
morphological
information,
and
cognate knowledge,
as well as
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

192
Reading
Research
Quarterly
APRIL/MAY/JUNE
2004
39/2
using
aids such as dictionaries
and
glossaries
(Garcia
&
Nagy,
1993;
Jimenez,
Garcia,
&
Pearson,
1996;
Nagy,
Garcia,
Durgunoglu,
&
Hancin-Bhatt,
1993;
Nation,
2001).
Beck, McKeown,
and Omanson
(1987)
demonstrated
that it was
possible
to teach
EO
children the use of
strategies
for
inferring
word
meaning,
while at the same time
enriching
vocabu-
laries
with
direct
teaching. Nagy
et al. as
well as
Garcia
and
Nagy
have
presented
results
suggesting
the
efficacy
of
teaching
native
Spanish
speakers
ex-
plicitly
about the
value
of
cognates
and
of
morpho-
logical relationships
between
Spanish
and
English.
But
no
one
has,
to
our
knowledge,
previously
tested
the
impact
of an
English
vocabulary
enrichment
in-
tervention that combined
direct
word
instruction
with
instruction
in
word-learning
strategies
on the
word
knowledge
and
reading
comprehension
abili-
ties of
ELLs. That was our
major
goal
in
the
study
presented
here.
Theoretical
fiamework
for
designing
a
vocabulary
intervention
What
is
involved in
learning
words?
The
intervention we tested and the
measures
we
selected
to
assess its
impact
reflect our
model of
the
complexity
of
word
meaning.
"Knowing
a
word"
implies
knowing
many
things
about
the
word-its
literal
meaning;
its various
connotations;
the sorts of
syntactic
constructions into which it
enters;
the
mor-
phological options
it
offers;
and a rich
array
of
se-
mantic
associates,
including
synonyms, antonyms,
hypernyms,
hyponyms,
and words with
closely
relat-
ed
yet
contrasting meanings,
as well as
its
capacity
for
polysemy
(see
Bloom, 2002;
Nagy
&
Scott, 2000,
for
reviews).
Learning
a
word
requires
learning
(over
a se-
ries of
encounters)
these various
aspects
of its mean-
ing,
and
inferring
word
meaning
from
context can
also
require
being
alert to these various
aspects;
a first
encounter
with a
word
might,
for
example,
provide
information about
syntactic
word
class
and
some
very
general
specification
of
meaning
domain,
whereas
subsequent
encounters
will
expand
the
semantic
spec-
ification and
may
lead to
discovery
of
polysemous
possibilities.
Thus,
subsequent
encounters build
depth
of
word
knowledge,
which is as
important
in
using
words
as is
the more
commonly
assessed
breadth.
Second-language
speakers
have
been shown
to
be
lacking
depth
of
word
knowledge,
even for
frequently
occurring
words
(Verhallen
&
Schoonen,
1993).
Sensitivity
on the
part
of learners to
issues
of
depth
(e.g.,
recognition
that
polysemy
exists)
may
ease
the
process
of
reading
comprehension.
How
can one
best
promote
word
learning?
We
present
here
findings
from the
implemen-
tation
of a
15-week
intervention
focused
on
teaching
useful
words
and
word-learning
strategies.
The de-
sign
of
the
intervention
was related
to
practices
shown
to be
effective
in
previous
work
(e.g.,
Beck
et
al.,
1987;
Blachowicz
&
Fisher,
1996;
Graves,
2000;
Huckin
et
al.,
1995;
Nagy,
1988;
Nation,
2001;
National
Institute
of Child
Health
and
Human
Development,
2000;
Stahl,
1986)
that
together
dic-
tated
our
answers to
key
questions
about
which
words
to
teach,
how often
to
present
them,
what
as-
pects
of word
knowledge
to focus
on,
and
what
in-
structional
activities
to use.
(a)
Which words?As recommended
by
Beck et
al.
(1987),
the
intervention
focused
on
general-purpose
academic
words
likely
to
be
encountered
across
a
variety
of content
areas,
rather than words
specific
to a
particular
subject
matter.
In
addition,
we
followed
Beck
et
al.'s
method
by choosing
words
of
middle-tier
frequency
that
had
depth potential
and
morphological
and
cognate
affordances.
(b)
How
to introduce
the words?
We chose
words from
texts
determined to
be
appropriate
for and
of interest
to
the
learners,
building
on the evidence
that
engaging
texts
promote reading
comprehension
(Guthrie
&
Wigfield,
2000)
and that
encountering
words
in
meaningful
con-
texts
promotes
memory
for
them
(Nation,
2001).
We
also
selected texts that
were available
in
Spanish
as
well as
English,
to facilitate
engagement
for
the ELLs
and
to
promote
their
comprehension
of
the context
in
which
the
words were
introduced
in
English.
(See
list of
words
and
activities
taught
in
Appendix
A and
B
and
a
sum-
mary
of
a
week's
worth
of
sample
lessons
in
Appendix
C.)
Additional
examples
are
presented
in
Lively, August,
Snow,
and
Carlo
(2003).
(c)
How
often?
Target
words should
be
encountered
several
times,
in
diverse
contexts,
and
with
varying
tasks
required
of learners
(Beck
et
al.,
1987).
By
designing
the inter-
vention around
texts
and
themes,
we created
a situation
in which
target
words
could
be
recycled
in later lessons
and would
appear
naturally
with
high
frequency
in
the
texts
being
read.
(d)
What
aspects
of
word
knowledge
to
focus
on?
Our
instruc-
tion focused on
depth
of
meaning,
polysemy,
morpho-
logical
structure,
and
cross-language
relationships,
as well
as
spelling
and
pronunciation,
of the
target
words.
The
instruction
was
designed
to
provide
children
with
general-purpose
strategies
for
acquiring
word
meaning
while
at
the same
time
teaching
specific
word
meanings.
Following
Graves
(2000)
and
others,
we chose
to
pro-
mote
strategic
knowledge
at
some
cost to the
time
avail-
able for
building
vocabulary
size,
because
previous
work
(e.g.,
Stahl
&
Fairbanks,
1986)
had shown
the
futility
of
trying
to teach
large
numbers
of words
directly.
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Closing
the
gap
193
(e)
What
instructional
techniques?
The
intervention
relied
on
explicit
instruction
in
using
context to
infer word
mean-
ing
(Graves,
2000;
Nation
2001),
in
depth
of word
mean-
ing,
in
the
possibility
of
polysemy,
in
performing
morphological
analysis,
in
glossary
use,
and
in
cognate
use.
(In
all
glossaries
we
included
the
Spanish
translation
for the
meaning
used in
the text as
well as the
English
de-
finition.
We also
alerted students to
the
presence
of
poly-
semous
words
by
including
all
definitions for
the word
and
highlighting
the
definition used in
the
text.)
Collaborative
work
in
groups
that
included
both EOs and
ELLs
provided
practice
in
English
for
ELLs
and
made
knowledge
about
cognates
available
to
EOs.
Students were
sensitized
to
the task of
vo-
cabulary
acquisition
using
techniques
like
Word
Wizard
(see
Beck,
McKeown,
&
Kucan, 2002,
for
description
of
Word
Wizard)
in
order
to
enhance
their
utilization of
opportunities
to
extend
word
knowledge
in
nonlesson
contexts. Teachers
were
pro-
vided with
information
about
the
principles
of
vo-
cabulary
acquisition
as
well as
specific
strategies
to
enhance their
use
of
effective
vocabulary
teaching
procedures
outside
the
vocabulary
lessons.
Method
Participants
The
participants
were
254
bilingual
and
monolingual
children
from nine
fifth-grade
class-
rooms
in
four schools
in
California,
Virginia,
and
Massachusetts. The
California site
included
two
schools
serving largely
working
class
Mexican
American
children,
either
in
bilingual
or
in
main-
stream
programs.
The
Massachusetts site
served
working
class,
mostly
Puerto Rican
and
Dominican
students,
again
in
either
bilingual
or
mainstream
classrooms,
within a
school where
many
of
the
teachers and
administrators were
bilinguals.
The
Virginia
site
was a
magnet,
English-medium
school
that served
mainly
working
class
Spanish
speakers
from
the
Caribbean
and from
Central
America,
to-
gether
with
native
speakers
of
many
other
languages
and
middle class
English-only speakers
attracted
by
its excellent
academic
programs.
While the
variations
across the
three sites created some
complexity
in im-
plementing
the intervention and in
interpreting
the
findings,
they
also
assure us that
any
intervention
ef-
fects found are
quite
robust.
One
hundred
forty-two
of
the student
partici-
pants
were
ELLs,
and 112
were
EOs. Ninety-four
of
the ELLs
and
75
of
EOs
were
in
the
intervention
condition.
The
remaining
students
(48
ELLs and
37
EOs)
were
in
comparison
classrooms.
Design
The
study employed
a
quasi-experimental
de-
sign
in which classrooms
at each site were
randomly
assigned
to the treatment
and
comparison
condi-
tions.
This
procedure
resulted
in
the
assignment
of
10 classes
to
the
treatment
(3
in
California,
4
in
Virginia,
and
3
in
Massachusetts)
while
6
classrooms
served
as
comparisons.
Students
in the
comparison
classrooms
did
not receive
special
instruction
other
than
that
normally
included
in
the school
curricu-
lum,
though
their
teachers
did
participate
as mem-
bers
of school teams
in
professional
development
activities focused
on
vocabulary
teaching
two
years
prior
to
the introduction
of the intervention.
Pilot
The intervention
activities
were
piloted
in the
same
three sites
the
year
before
the
intervention itself
was
implemented.
Over
200
Spanish-speaking
ELLs
and
EO students
participated
in
the
pilot along
with
12 teachers.
This
pilot
was
designed
to
enable us
to
refine
the
teaching
activities
and
the
student
assess-
ments.
On the basis
of
the
pilot
we
made
decisions
about
complexity, genre,
and
variety
of
texts to
use,
and
we
decided
that
teachers
implementing
the
in-
tervention would
benefit
from
ongoing
professional
development
focused
on the
intervention.
Testing procedure
Fifth-grade
students
in
the intervention
and
comparison
classrooms
were tested in the fall and
the
spring
of the academic
year
on
a
series
of tests de-
signed
to
reflect
the skills
the curriculum
taught
(forming
deeper
representations
of word
knowledge,
understanding
polysemy, morphological
analysis,
in-
ferring
word
meaning
from
context)
as
well as read-
ing
comprehension. Bilingual
graduate
research
assistants administered
all
tests
(see
the
Measures
sec-
tion).
Because
of various
scheduling
difficulties,
not
all students
took
all tests.
Intervention
procedure
The
intervention
consisted
of
15
weeks
of
in-
struction.
Ten to
12
target
words were
introduced
at
the
beginning
of each
week. Instruction
was deliv-
ered
for
30-45
minutes four
days
a week.
Every
fifth
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

194
Reading
Research
Quarterly
APRIL/MAY/JUNE
2004
39/2
week
was devoted
to
review of the
previous
four
weeks'
target
words.
The
intervention
was
organized
around the
topic
of
immigration;
the curriculum drew
readings
from
newspaper
articles, diaries,
firsthand documen-
tation
of the
immigrant
experience,
as
well
as histori-
cal and fictional
accounts,
building
each
week's
five-day sequence
of lessons around
a
single
text
unit. The lessons
included
some
homework
assign-
ments
and
a
weekly
review
test. The
Spanish
speakers
were
given
the text
(in
both written and
audiotaped
versions)
to
preview
in
Spanish,
on
Monday,
before its introduction
in
English
on
Tuesday.
On
Tuesday,
whole-group
lessons involved
presentation
of
the
English
text and
target
words,
followed
by
an
activity
that involved
identifying
tar-
get
words
in
the text whose
meanings
could be
in-
ferred
by
context.
Wednesday
lessons involved
work
in
heterogeneous
language groups
of
four to six
in
which the
children
completed
two
types
of cloze
tasks
with
the
target
words.
The
first
cloze
task
al-
ways
involved sentence contexts
that were consistent
with the
theme
of the
instructional
text. A second
cloze
activity
involved sentences
that
employed
the
target
words
in
contexts
that were
distant
in
theme
from the
instructional
text,
being
designed
to
help
students understand and
use
related
meanings
for
the
target
words,
and
in
the
process
develop
a
sense
that most words are
polysemous.
The
Thursday
les-
son
involved activities
of the
sort recommended
by
Beck et al.
(2002)
to
promote depth
of
word
knowl-
edge (e.g.,
word
association
tasks,
synonym/antonym
tasks,
semantic
feature
analysis).
Again
children
typi-
cally
completed
these activities
in
small
groups.
On
Fridays
the activities varied
in
focus,
as
can be seen
in
Appendix
B.
During
some
weeks,
Friday
activities
promoted
analysis
of
root
words
and derivational af-
fixes.
In
other weeks
Friday
activities
were
designed
to
promote
awareness
of
word
polysemy
and
cog-
nates. These activities
were
designed
to
promote
word
analysis
capacities
in
general,
not
specifically
to
reinforce
learning
of
the
target
words.
The curriculum materials
provided
to the
teachers included
detailed
lesson
plans
and
quasi-
scripted
lesson
guides,
as well as overhead
trans-
parencies,
worksheets,
homework
assignments,
and
all
necessary
reading
materials.
These materials and
the words
to
be
taught
were
previewed
in
biweekly
Teacher
Learning
Community
meetings
facilitated
by
a
researcher
at
each
site.
At
these
meetings,
prac-
tices that had worked
well in
previous
lessons
and
as-
pects
of the
curriculum
that had been
problematic
were
discussed. These
meetings
were meant
to
pro-
vide
support
to the teachers
throughout
the
imple-
mentation
of
the
curriculum
and
information
to
the
researchers
about
aspects
of the curriculum
that
were
working
well
or
not.
The curriculum
itself
was
not
modified
as a result
of the
meetings
with the
treat-
ment teachers.
Fidelity oftreatment
Three
lessons
(one
from
week
4,
one
from
week
9,
and one
from
week
13
of the curriculum
sequence)
were
filmed
in
each
intervention
classroom
to
obtain
data
on
the
fidelity
of
implementation
of
the
treat-
ment
at
each
site.
The
tapes
were
subsequently
coded
to
reflect
the
degree
to
which
the
teacher
correctly
implemented
the
key
elements
of the
lesson
plan;
for
each
key
element,
the
teacher
was
rated
as
having
omitted
it,
implemented
it
incompletely
or
incorrect-
ly,
implemented
it
fully,
or
enhanced
it
(White,
2000).
These
ratings
achieved
acceptable
levels
of
reli-
ability
(Kendall
coefficient
of concordance
=
.70).
They
were
summed
per
lesson
per
teacher
to
provide
a
single
score
indicating
fidelity
of
implementation.
Six
of
the
nine teachers
implemented
over
70%
of
key
lesson
elements
over
the three
weeklong
observa-
tions,
while
one achieved
only
35%
implementation
and the other
two
50-60%.
The three
teachers
with
the
highest
fidelity
enhanced
the
implementation
with additional
elements
that
were
consistent
with its
design,
and
none of
the
six
high
implementers
com-
mitted
any
errors of
implementation.
In
fact,
the
poorest
implementers
committed
errors
in
imple-
menting
only
4%
of
the
elements;
omission
of ele-
ments was
their
major failing.
Measures
The measures
used
in
the
study
are described
below.
Table
1
includes
sample
items
and relevant
psychometric
information
about
each
measure.
PPVT-R
Students
were tested
individually
on the
L
form
(pretest)
and
M
form
(posttest)
of the
Peabody
Picture
Vocabulary
Test
Revised
(PPVT-R).
Children
who had
been
tested
on
PPVT-R
in
the
spring
of
fourth
grade
were
not
retested
until
spring
of
fifth
grade.
Students
new to
the
study
were
tested
in
both
fall
and
spring.
Polysemy
production
The
students'
task
on the
polysemy
production
test
was
to
generate
as
many
sentences
as
possible
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Closing
the
gap
195
TABLE 1
PROPERTIES OF
FIFTH-GRADE ASSESSMENTS
Word
Mastery
Association
Polysemy
Cloze
Morphology
Total
items
36
20 6
18
27
Possible
range
0-36
0-54 0-54
0-18
0-135
Coefficient
alpha
.83
.94
.64
.73
.94
Sample
items
Rigid:
Policy:
Write a sentence for With time
things got
Election: How
many
(a)
soft and
smooth,
Uniform,
decisions,
each
meaning
you
better and
many
set-
people
did
they
(b)
approved
by
some-
plan,
action,
insurance,
know
for
pitch.
tiers
became
one
in
authority,
(c)
congress
(a)
anxious,
(b)
sick,
(c)
valuable,
(d)
stiff
and
open,
(d)
prosperous
difficult to bend
conveying
the
different
meanings
of the
polysemous
words. The words
in
the
fifth-grade
polysemy
task
were
ring, place,
settle,
pitch,
back,
and check. The
stu-
dents'
correct
responses
were awarded
points
on the
basis of the
frequency
of
the
response
in the
response
pool.
Common
responses
were
awarded
one
point
(e.g.,
"Don't
bug
me"
or "She left a
ring
in
the
tub").
Two
points
were
awarded
to
responses
in the
inter-
mediate
range
of
frequency
(e.g.,
"My
mom drives a
Volkswagen bug"
or "The
phone
has a
funny
ring").
Three
points
were
awarded
to the correct
but most
infrequent responses
in
the
pool
(e.g.,
"There was a
bug
in
the
program"
or "The boxer left
the
ring").
Reading
comprehension
Reading comprehension
was
assessed
with
multiple-choice
cloze
passages
with content words
deleted
at
random. Students read
three
stories with
six cloze items
per
story.
Ten of the
deleted words
were
taught
in the
intervention.
Word
mastery
The
mastery
test was
designed
to determine
if
the
vocabulary
words
directly
taught
were successful-
ly
learned.
It consisted of
36
target
word
multiple-
choice items. Each
target
word was followed
by
four
short definitions. Students
were
asked to select the
definition
that best
described
the
word.
WordAssociation task
This
task,
developed
originally
by
Schoonen and
Verhallen
(1998),
measured
depth
of
word
knowledge
by
tapping
into children's
knowledge
of
paradigmatic
and
syntagmatic
word relations.
The task
consisted of
20
target
words,
half of which were
included
in
the
curriculum.
Each of the
target
words
appeared
in
the
center of a
page,
with six
other words
printed
around
the
periphery.
Students were asked to draw lines from
the
target
word
to the three
peripheral
words
most
closely
connected to
it.
Specifically,
students were
asked to
pick
three of the words that
"always
go
with
the
word
in
the
middle."
For
example,
the word de-
bate
has immutable associations to the
words
riva4
discussion,
and
opinion
but
only
circumstantial
associa-
tions to the words
president,
television,
and
fight.
Morphology
Children's
knowledge
of
English
morphology
was assessed with
a
paper
and
pencil adaptation
of
Carlisle's
(1988)
Extract-the-Base task. Our task con-
sisted of
27
items
(fewer
than a third were interven-
tion
words)
that
required
that the
student
provide
the
base
form of a derived
word. Students
heard the
derived word
(e.g.,
discussion)
followed
by
a
lean
sen-
tence context
(e.g.,
What
did
he want to
?)
and were
asked
to
provide
the word that fit
in
the
sentence
(i.e.,
discuss).
The items varied
in
the trans-
parency
of
relationship
between the
derived
and base
forms.
Some items involved no
phonological
or or-
thographic change (e.g.,
remark-remarkable);
some
involved a
phonological change
but no
orthographic
change (e.g.,
nation-national);
some involved an or-
thographic change
but no
phonological change (e.g.,
furious-fury);
and some involved both
changes (e.g.,
migration-migrate).
The children's
spelling
of the base
words often did not conform
to
spelling
conventions
of
English.
The
following coding
scheme informed
by
Bear,
Invernizzi,
Templeton,
and
Johnston's
(1996)
spelling
rubrics
was used to score the stu-
dents'
responses.
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

196
Reading
Research
Quarterly
APRIL/MAY/JUNE
2004 39/2
5
points:
Correct
base,
correctly
spelled:
guide
4
points:
Correct
morpheme
boundaries and reasonable
spelling
with all
phonemes
represented:
assist,
emty,
cantinew
3
points:
Correct
morpheme
boundaries,
more deviant
spelling
with all
phonemes represented:
viori,
oqupie
2
points:
Derived
form,
but base word
preserved/visible
and more or less
correctly
spelled:
elected,
assisted
1
point:
Some of the
target
sounds
represented,
but
basi-
cally
the
wrong
word: sends
for
sense
0
points: Completely
incorrect.
This
category
includes re-
producing
the stimulus word
(discussion)
or
pro-
viding
words that are
morphologically
unrelated
to the
stimulus word
(hire
for
employ)
Results
Effect
of
the
intervention
A
multivariate
analysis
of variance
performed
on the
six
dependent
measures for which scores were
available
(Task:
Mastery,
Word
Association,
Polysemy,
Cloze,
Morphology)
in
both fall
and
spring
(Time),
and
incorporating
as
predictor
vari-
ables
site,
language
status,
and
condition,
revealed
overall
between-subjects
effects
attributable to
site
and to
language
status. Tests of
within-subjects
ef-
fects showed
significant gains
over
time,
and
a
signif-
icant interaction between
gain
over time
and
condition,
as well as a
three-way
interaction
between
gain
over
time, site,
and condition
(see
Table
2).
TABLE 2
RESULTS OF MANOVA ON FIFTH-GRADE
OUTCOMES
Effect
F
df
MSE
p
Time of
test
104.99
1,82
47.39
Time
X
condition
7.92
1,82
47.39
**
Time
X
condition
X
school
3.85
2,82
47.39
Task
434.53
1,82
351.15
***
Task
X
language
30.94
1,82
351.15
***
Task
X
school
4.03
3,82
351.15
*
Task
X
language
x
school
3.76
3,82
351.15
*
Time
X
task
44.55
1,82
37.35
*
School
4.65
3,82
727.07
**
Language
56.74
1,82
727.07
School
x
language
3.89
3,82
727.07
*
*p
<
.05;
**p
<
.01
; ***p
<
.001.
These results confirmed the
justifiability
of
pursuing
analysis
with each of the
outcome
variables
individually
(see
Table
3)
following
normal
practice
(Myers
&
Well,
1991).
While a conservative
approach
to the
follow-up
analyses
would
correct
for
Type
I
error
rate
per
family
of
contrast,
we chose to
report
uncorrected
effects
given
the
unavailability
of data about
vocabulary
in-
tervention effects
in
this
population.
The reader
should
note that
effects
for which the
probability
lev-
el is
larger
than .01 would not meet the more
strin-
gent
standard based on the Bonferroni
adjustment.
PPVT-R,
a
measure
designed
to reflect indi-
vidual differences but to be insensitive to
curricular
influences,
was
significantly higher
for
the
EO
stu-
dents and showed
significant gains
from fall to
spring.
It also
differed
significantly
across the three
sites,
with the
highest
scores
in
Virginia
and the
low-
est
in
Massachusetts.
It
did
not, however,
reveal
any
influence
of
treatment;
the
treatment
group
by
gains
interaction term was not
significant,
nor
were
any
other
interactions with
gains
detected.
We
analyzed
the
remaining
five
measures,
Mastery, Polysemy,
Word
Association, Cloze,
and
Morphology,
covarying
PPVT-R to
reduce
effects as-
sociated with differences
in
initial
English
proficiency
and
with site
differences
in
populations
being
served.
These
five
measures showed a
gradient
of effects.
Mastery,
Word
Association,
Polysemy,
and Cloze
all
showed
the
same
general
pattern
of results demon-
strating
impact
of
the intervention: The intervention
group
showed
greater gain
in
the course of the school
year
than
the
comparison
group.
Mastery,
Word
Association,
and
Polysemy
also
showed
an interaction
of
gain
over time with
site,
reflecting
either differen-
tial
effectiveness
of the
implementation
across
the
various sites or differential
susceptibility
to the
im-
pact
in
the
various
sites
(see
Figures
1
through
5).
Morphology
showed
only
marginally signifi-
cantly
differential
gains
as a function of condition or
site.
Morphology,
Mastery,
and Word Association
all
showed
a
three-way
interaction,
indicating larger
gains
for the
intervention than the
comparison
group
in
some sites
(see
Figures
4a and
4b).
These
interactions with site
could
reflect either
population
or
implementation
differences.
Main effects of
language group
were found for
Word Association and
Polysemy,
reflecting
the
gen-
erally
higher
performance
of native
English speakers.
Main effects for site were
found
for
Morphology,
Mastery,
and Word Association. The site differences
may
reflect
the distinctive
demographics
of the three
sites,
differing
recruitment
policies
for the
schools
involved,
or
quality
of
education delivered.
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Closing
the
gap
197
TABLE
3
RESULTS OF ANOVAS ON EACH OUTCOME MEASURE
ADMINISTERED
IN FIFTH
GRADE
Word
Mastery
Association
Polysemy
Cloze
Morphology
Time
of
test
F
**7.64
ns
ns ns
**11.46
df
(1,218)
(1,217)
MSE
9.09
94.83
.03
.05
Time
by
PPVT-R
F
ns *4.71
ns
*4.73
ns
df
(1,217) (1,213)
MSE 24.82
3.72
02
.02
.02
Time
X
condition
F
***113.28
**11.24
**11.23
***17.84
ns
df
(1,218)
(1,217)
(1,212) (1,213)
MSE
9.09
24.82
3.23
3.71
q2
.34
.05 .05
.08
Time
X
school
F
886.38 ***5.19
*3.80
ns
ns
df
(2,218)
(2,217)
(2,212)
MSE
9.09
24.82
3.23
1
.06
.05
.04
Time
X
condition
x
school
F
***11.46
*3.48
ns
ns
***9.37
df
(2,218) (2,217)
(2,217)
MSE
9.09
24.82 94.84
2
.10
.03
.08
Time
x
language
X
school
F
ns ns
ns ns *4.44
df
(2,217)
MSE
94.84
.04
PPVT-R
F
***198.49 ***78.62 ***49.42 ***137.12 ***119.37
df
(1,218) (1,217) (1,212)
(1,213) (1,217)
MSE
24.87
37.85
11.49
8.80
849.53
2'
.48
.27 .19 .39
.36
Condition
F
***52.22
ns
ns
*4.91
ns
df
(1,218) (1,213)
MSE
24.87
8.80
.19
.02
Language
F
ns
**10.24
***13.05
ns
ns
df
(1,217) (1,212)
MSE
37.85
11.49
q'-
.05
.06
School
F
***8.59
ns ns
***12.56
**7.01
df
(2,218)
(2,213) (2,217)
MSE
24.87
8.80
849.53
?
.07
.11 .06
Language
X
condition
F
ns
ns
**7.36
ns
ns
df
(1,212)
MSE
11.49
l
-.03
School
x
condition
F
**5.83 **5.05
ns ns
**4.90
df
(2,218)
(2,217)
(2,217)
MSE
24.87
37.85
849.53
r"q
.05
.04
.04
*p
<
.05;
**p
<
.01;
***p
<
.001.
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

198
Reading
Research
Quarterly
APRIL/MAY/JUNE 2004 39/2
FIGURE 1A
AVERAGE
ELL
FIFTH-GRADE
FALL
AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
MASTERY TASK
AS
A
FUNCTION OF
SITE
AND
CONDITION
30
25
S20
?1
- ~S-~~L~-- ---
-------L-
2'-Z
=----
-~
0
15Sie
1
retment
ELL
~-
-----Treamnt
LL
z
10
Fall
Spring
Time of test
*
Site
1
Treatment
ELL
Site
2
Treatment
ELL
.-
Site
3
Ireatmcnt LItI.
- -
--
- - -- -
Site
I
Comparison
ELL
- - - -
.
- - --
Site
2
Comparison E[.1-
- -
-
-
w
- -
- -
Site
3
Comparison IFI.L
FIGURE
1B
AVERAGE EO FIFTH-GRADE
FALL AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
MASTERY TASK
AS
A
FUNCTION OF SITE
AND
CONDITION
35
30
25
A
ir
8 20
-----------------------------------------
j
15
10
5
0
Fall
Spring
Time of
test
--
-
Site
1
Treatment
EO
A
Site
2
Treatment
EO
U
Site
3
Treatment
EO
- - -
-
-
- ----
Site
1 Comparison
EO
- -
-
- - -
-
-
Site
2
Comparison
EO
)
-
-
- - -
---
Site
3
Comparison
E-()
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Closing
the
gap
199
FIGURE
2A
AVERAGE
ELL
FIFTH-GRADE
FALL AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
CLOZE TASK
AS
A
FUNCTION OF SITE
AND
CONDITION
14
10
*--------------------------------------------
-o
6
z
4
2
0
Fall
Spring
Time of test
*
Site
1
Treatment
ELL
A
Site
2
Treatment
ELL
-
Site
3
Treatment
ELL
----
----
Site
1
Comparison
ELI.
----
-
- - -
-
Site
2
Comparison
ELL
---
---
--
Site
3
Comparison
ELL
FIGURE
2B
AVERAGE EO
FIFTH-GRADE
FALL AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
CLOZE TASK
AS
A
FUNCTION OF SITE
AND
CONDITION
18-
16
-
14
-
12
-
u+
-
............-
-
-
-
-
0
c
10-
-
o
E
8
z
6
4-
2-
0
Fall
Spring
Time of test
#
Site
I
Treatment
EO
A
Site 2
Treatment
EO
U
Site
3
Treatment
EO
-
- -
--
- - -
Site
1
Comparison
EO
- -
-
--
--
Site
2
Comparison
EO
- -
-
-
--
- - - -
Site
3
Comparison
EO
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

200
Reading
Research
Quarterly
APRIL/MAY/JUNE
2004
39/2
FIGURE
3A
AVERAGE
ELL
FIFTH-GRADE
FALL
AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
WORD
ASSOCIATION
TASK
AS
A
FUNCTION OF SITE
AND
CONDITION
45
40-
- - -
-
-
- -
~I?11-
-
-
-
- -
-
35
- - - - - - - - - - -- _-
-.---------,".•
'•
4
30
0
8 25
-o
E 20
z
15
10
-
5
0
Fall
Spring
Time
of test
*
Site
1
Treatment
ELL
A
Site
2
Treatment ELL
=
Site
3
Treatment
ELL
----
-----
Site
1
Comparison
ELI.
----A-----
Site
2
Comparison
ELI.
---------
Site
3
Comparison
ELI.
FIGURE
3B
AVERAGE EO FIFTH-GRADE
FALL AND
SPRING
PERFORMANCE ON
THE
WORD
ASSOCIATION TASK AS
A
FUNCTION OF SITE
AND
CONDITION
60
50
4
40
30
S30
20
Fall
Spring
Time
of
test
-
Site
1
Treatment
EO
A
Site
2 Treatment
EO
-
Site
3
Treatment
EO
----
- - - -
-
Site
1 Comparison
EO
Q
-
-
----
-
Site
2
Comparison
EO ---
-
----
Site
3
Comparison
EO
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Closing
the
gap
201
FIGURE
4A
AVERAGE
ELL
FIFTH-GRADE
FALL AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
MORPHOLOGY
TASK AS
A
FUNCTION OF SITE
AND
CONDITION
90
80
70
60
8
50
E
40
30
20
10
0
Fall
Spring
Time of test
0 Site
1
Treatment
EIL
-A
Site
2
Treatment
EIt
F11
Site
3
Treatment
LL.
-
-
- - - - - -
Site
1 Comparison
ELL.
---
- - - -
Site
2
Comparison
ELL
- - - - ----
Site
3
Comparison
E.LL
FIGURE
4B
AVERAGE EO FIFTH-GRADE
FALL
AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
MORPHOLOGY
TASK AS
A
FUNCTION OF SITE
AND
CONDITION
140
120
..
..-
100
8
80
S60
40
20
0
Fall
Spring
Time
of
test
-
Site 1
Ireatment
EO
A
Site 2
Treatment
EO
U
Site
3
Treatment
EO
- - - -
-
- - -
Site
1 Comparison E()
--
-
- - -
Site
2
Comparison
EO
- -
--
.-----
Site
3
Comparison
FO
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

202
Readinig
Research
Quarterly
APRIL/MAY/JUNE
2004
39/2
FIGURE 5A
AVERAGE
ELL
FIFTH-GRADE
FALL AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
POLYSEMY TASK
AS
A
FUNCTION
OF
SITE
AND
CONDITION
14
12
-o
10
Oj
8
,-----
E
6
Z
4
2
0
Fall
Spring
Time of test
*
Site
1
Treatment
ELL
Site
2
T"reatment
ELL
-
Site
3
Treatment
ELI.
----
-----
Site
1
Comparison
ELL
--
-+-
---
Site
2
Comparison
EL
---
-
- - - -
Site
3
Comparison
ELL.
FIGURE
5B
AVERAGE EO FIFTH-GRADE
FALL AND
SPRING PERFORMANCE ON
THE
POLYSEMY TASK
AS
A
FUNCTION OF SITE
AND
CONDITION
16
14
-
12------------------------------------------------------
12
0
S8
Z
6
4-
2-
0-
Fall
Spring
Time of test
-
Site
1
Treatment
EO
A
Site 2
Treatment
EO
-
Site
3
Treatment
EO
----
-----
Site
1
Comparison
EO
----
-
-
-
-Site
2
Comparison
EO
----
-
----
Site
3
Comparison
EO
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Closing
the
gap
203
The fact that
these
language group
and site dif-
ferences
emerged
despite
controls for
PPVT-R
sug-
gests
that differences
across the sites
in
level of
performance
and
in
impact
of the intervention
can
be
explained only
partly by
differences
in
demo-
graphic
characteristics
among
the
children
served.
The
striking
conclusion must be
that the effective-
ness of
the
vocabulary
instruction
was
quite
resistant
to
disruption
from
other influences.
Fidelity
of implementation
Why
were
there
persistent
differences
among
the sites in
so
many
outcomes? The three
sites
dif-
fered,
as
noted
above,
in
their
demographics,
in
the
organization
of
schooling
for
ELLs,
and
in
aspects
of
teacher
functioning.
Informal observations
suggested
differences
within
and across the schools
in
the
en-
thusiasm with which
the intervention was
embraced,
in the
reflectiveness
and
thoroughness
with which it
was
implemented,
as well as
in
the
quality
of
instruc-
tion
that was
occurring during
the rest of the
school
day.
To
see whether
fidelity
and
quality
of
imple-
mentation were
accounting
for site
differences,
fidelity
ratings
were introduced into
regression
analyses,
using
spring
scores on each of the
five
intervention-sensitive measures as
outcomes;
fall
score
on
the same
measure,
language group,
and
PPVT-R were
introduced
first
to
see
if
fidelity
rat-
ings
accounted
for
differences
in
spring
scores. For
none of
the
measures did
fidelity
significantly
in-
crease
the amount
of
variation
explained,
nor
were
differences
between
children
in
the classrooms of
high-
versus
low-fidelity implementers
significant.
Thus,
though
there was
considerable
variation
across
site
and across teacher
in
fidelity,
those differences do
not
help explain gains.
Discussion
The
major
goal
of this
study
was to
test the
im-
pact
of
an
English
vocabulary
enrichment
interven-
tion
that combined direct
word instruction with
instruction
in
word-learning strategies
on outcomes
for
ELLs.
In
addition,
we
wanted to
test
the
impact
of
that same curriculum
on
EOs
in the
same
class-
rooms. We found
that
a
challenging
curriculum that
focused on
teaching
academic
words,
awareness of
polysemy,
strategies
for
inferring
word
meaning
from
context,
and
tools
for
analyzing
morphological
and
cross-linguistic
aspects
of
word
meaning
did
improve
the
performance
of
both
ELL
and
EO
fifth
graders,
to
equal
degrees.
The children
in
the
intervention
classrooms
gained
knowledge
of the
words
that
were
explicitly
taught
as
well
as
knowledge
that
should
support
the
efficiency
of their
incidental
learning
of
novel
words
(i.e.,
vocabulary depth
as well
as
knowl-
edge
about
morphological
structure,
about
cognates,
and
about
polysemy).
Thus,
we confirmed
the effec-
tiveness
for ELLs
of
approaches
to
vocabulary
teach-
ing
such
as that
pioneered
by
Beck
et al.
(1987)
that
had
previously
been
shown effective
only
with
EOs;
we demonstrated
that
procedures
previously
shown
effective
only
with
ELLs,
such
as those
pioneered
by
Nagy
et al.
(1993),
could
be used
in
mixed-language
groups
in mainstream
classrooms;
and we
developed
a
single
curricular
approach
that
incorporated
many
specific
techniques
and
strategies,
such as
those
developed
by
Graves
(2000),
Nagy
(1988),
Stahl
(1986),
and
others,
previously
shown to
be
effective
in
supporting
vocabulary
learning.
A
second
goal
of
this
study
was to see
whether
improved
vocabulary
and word
analysis
skills
would
be
associated
with
improved
reading
comprehension
outcomes.
We
found
that,
for
both
ELLs
and
EOs,
the
intervention
was effective
in
improving
reading
comprehension
outcomes.
The effects
for
reading
comprehension
were
less
dramatic
than
for
word
knowledge,
as
shown
by
the effect
size of
.08
(eta
squared)
on the
reading
comprehension
measure
as
compared
with
.34
for
mastery
of
the words
taught.
Nonetheless,
it is
striking
that
any
improvement
in
reading
comprehension
was
measurable
after
a rela-
tively
brief curricular
intervention
that did
not focus
specifically
on
teaching
comprehension.
Thus,
we conclude
that
direct
vocabulary
in-
struction
is
effective,
with both
ELL and
EO
learn-
ers,
if it
incorporates
the various
principles
gleaned
from
previous
work
on
monolingual
English
speak-
ers
and
ELLs
(Beck
et
al.,
1987,
2002;
Graves, 2000;
Nagy,
1997;
National
Institute
of
Child
Health and
Human
Development,
2000;
Stahl
&
Fairbanks,
1986).
For
example,
teachers
should
introduce
novel
words
in the context
of
engaging
texts,
design
many
activities
such
as Charades
that
allow
learners
to ma-
nipulate
and
analyze
word
meaning,
heighten
atten-
tion
to words
in
general
with
techniques
like Word
Wizard,
ensure
that
learners
write
and
spell
the
tar-
get
words
several
times,
ensure
repeated
exposures
to
the
novel
words,
and
help
children
note
how
the
word
meaning
varies
as
a
function
of context.
We
also
conclude
that
teaching
children
strategies
for in-
ferring
the
meaning
of
unknown
words
is
effective,
with
both
ELL
and
EO learners,
if
it builds
on
well-
verified
procedures
(Garcia
&
Nagy,
1993;
Graves;
Jiminez
et
al.,
1996;
Nagy
et
al.,1993)
such
as
teach-
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

204
Reading
Research
Quarterly
APRIL/MAY/JUNE
2004 39/2
ing
explicitly
how
to
use
context
cues,
teaching
mor-
phological analysis,
and
teaching
about
cognates.
Challenges
to
curricular
change
Another
conclusion
to
be
drawn
from
this
work
is
the
complexity
of
implementing
a
challeng-
ing
curriculum in
urban
schools.
The
teachers in
our
study
were
volunteers,
and most
were
experienced
classroom
practitioners.
They
were,
however,
work-
ing
in
schools
that
were
adopting
a
variety
of
curric-
ular
initiatives,
which in
some
cases
diverted
time
and
attention
from
this
particular
intervention.
Furthermore,
though
we
made
every
attempt
to
pro-
vide
curricular
materials
that
were
self-explanatory
and
easy
to
use,
those
materials
presupposed
knowl-
edge
about
vocabulary
and
about
lexical
analysis
that
the
teachers
in
some
cases
did
not
possess.
Despite
efforts to
design
the
curriculum
so
it
could be
used
with
little
additional
preparation
time from
the
teachers,
we
found
it
necessary
to
provide
consider-
able
professional
support,
and
even
so,
differences in
quality
of
implementation
were
measurable.
Additional
measures
ofsuccess
The
intervention
was,
overall,
successful
in
its
specific
aim
of
enhancing
reading
skills
and
word
knowledge.
It
was
successful
by
other
measures as
well.
The
teachers
reported
quite
a
high
level of
satis-
faction
with
the
materials,
and
the
students
enjoyed
the
lessons
and
displayed
heightened
sensitivity
to
word
meanings
and
increased
awareness of
Spanish-
English
relationships
(see Dressler,
2000).
It
is
disap-
pointing,
on
the
other
hand,
that
the
intervention
was
not
observed
to
change
classroom
practice
out-
side the
structured
lessons
and
has not
survived
as an
intact
instructional
program
in
any
of
the
classrooms
where
it
was
introduced,
though
some
teachers
report
continuing
to
use
some of
the
techniques
they
learned
during
the
intervention.
The
challenge
of
optimizing
learning
for
ELL
and
EO
children
simultaneously
The
intervention
assessed
here
incorporated
a
number
of
specific
instructional
components
(e.g.,
the
specific
texts
used,
the
small-group
activities,
the
crossword
puzzles
and
other
homework
assignments)
that
we
believe
contributed to its
success,
though
we
could
not
assess
their
independent
impact.
Some
of
these
components
were
designed
to
support
the
par-
ticipation
of
Spanish
speakers:
providing
the
key
texts
in
Spanish
so
they
could
be
previewed,
provid-
ing
translation
equivalents
of the
target
words
in
the
teaching
materials,
selection
of
immigration
as
the
organizing topic,
inclusion
among
the
texts
to
be
read
of
several
that
were
particularly
relevant
to
the
experiences
of
Mexican
and
Dominican
immigrant
families,
and
incorporating
instructional
activities
that relied
on
the
Spanish
speakers
as
resources
(e.g.,
in
identifying cognates).
Our
analyses
cannot
help
us
decide
whether
these
supports
for
Spanish
speakers'
participation
contributed
importantly
to the
effec-
tiveness
of
intervention
for
them,
or
indeed
whether
it
contributed
to
or
detracted
from
its
effectiveness
with
their
English-only
classmates.
Future
research
might
well
explore
the
impact
of these
various
com-
ponents
independently.
Limitations
This
study
was, of
course,
subject
to
many
limitations.
Several
of the
measures
we
used
were
experimenter
designed,
though
their
psychometric
properties
were
satisfactory.
We
did
not
employ
a
standardized
measure
of
reading
comprehension;
we
relied
on cloze
procedures
because
they
have
often
been
used
to
study
the
interaction
between
compre-
hension
and word
knowledge.
However,
concerns
have
been
raised in
the
research
literature
about
the
value
of
cloze
tests
as
measures
of
comprehension
(Shanahan,
Kamil,
&
Tobin,
1982).
Testing
the
ef-
fects
of
the
intervention
on
comprehension
perfor-
mance
using
a
wider
variety
of
reading
measures
would
be
valuable.
Because
we had
no
general
meas-
ure
of
English-language proficiency
for
the ELL
stu-
dents,
we
were unable
to test
the
interaction
between
English proficiency
and
intervention
effects.
Given
the
enormous
variability
in
English proficiency
among
ELLs,
it
would
be
important
to
determine
whether
the effects
of the
intervention
vary
as
a
function
of
English
proficiency.
In
addition, we were
unable
to test
long-term
effects
of
the
intervention,
either
on
students
or
on
teachers.
A
particular
issue
to think
about
in
evaluat-
ing
a
curriculum-based
intervention
like
this is
the
trade-off
between
the
value
of
a
predesigned
chunk
of curriculum
with
some
built-in
professional
devel-
opment
versus
a
more
significant
investment
in
pro-
fessional
development
itself.
Giving
teachers
more
access
to
information
about
and
practice
with
the
vocabulary
teaching
techniques
incorporated
into
the
intervention
might
have
enabled
them
to
use
those
techniques
more
broadly
across
a
variety
of
subject
areas,
possibly
with
greater
impact
than
the
45-minute
vocabulary-focused
lessons
we
designed.
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Closing
the
gap
205
Conclusion
The
key
distinction of the
vocabulary
training
offered
here
was that
teaching
new
words was
subor-
dinated
to the
goal
of
teaching
about
words-
various kinds
of
information about
words
that
could
help
children
figure
out
word
meanings
on their
own.
Thus,
the curriculum
introduced
only
12
to
14
new
words a
week,
sacrificing
the
opportunity
to
teach
an additional 10 to
15
words
in
order
to
focus
instruction on
strategies
for
narrowing
candidate
word
meanings
by
using
context,
noticing
words
in
new
contexts,
checking
the
likelihood
that the
word
has
a
Spanish
cognate,
and
analyzing
morphological
structure for
cues
to
meaning.
Such
strategies
could
have
ongoing
value
to
children
who
encounter
un-
known words in
semantically
rich
contexts,
who
un-
derstand
enough
of the context to
use contextual
information
in
analyzing
word
meaning,
and
who
remember to
use
them.
Their value at least
in
the
short run
was,
in
fact,
confirmed
by
our
finding
of a
significant impact
on
reading
comprehension.
MARIA
S. CARLO is an assistant
professor
in
the
Teaching
and
Learning Program
at
the School of
Education
of
the
University
of
Miami.
She is a
psychologist studying bilingualism
in
children
and
adults. Her research focuses on the
cognitive
processes
that
underlie
reading
in
a
second
language
and on
understanding
the
differences
in
the
reading
processes
of
bilinguals
and
monolinguals.
She has a
Ph.D.
in
psychology
from
the
University
of
Massachusetts
at Amherst.
She
can
be contacted at the
University
of
Miami,
PO
Box
248256,
Coral
Gables,
FL
33124-3310,
USA,
or
by
e-mail at
carlo@miami.edu.
DIANE
AUGUST
is
a senior
research scientist
at
the Center for
Applied
Linguistics. Currently
she is the
principal
investigator
of a
National
Institute
for
Child Health
and Human
Development
program
project
grant
focused on
the
development
of
literacy
in
English-
language
learners;
she
is also
staff director
for
a
Department
of
Education National
Literacy
Panel
on
Language
Minority
Children and
Youth.
Previously
she was
a
senior
program
officer
at the
National
Research Council and
study
director for the Committee on
Developing
a
Research
Agenda
on the
Education
of Limited
English
Proficient and
Bilingual
Students.
August
has
also worked
as
a
public
school teacher
and school administrator
in
California,
a
legislative
assistant
in
the
area of education for a
U.S.
Congressman
from
California,
a
grants
officer for the
Carnegie
Corporation
of New
York,
director of
education
for Children's
Defense
Fund,
and an
educational consultant
in
evaluation and
testing, program improvement,
and federal and state
education
policy.
She has
a Ph.D. in
education from
Stanford
University.
She can be contacted
by
e-mail
at
august@msn.com.
BARRY
MCLAUGHLIN
is
professor
emeritus
in the
Department
of
Psychology
at the
University
of
California,
Santa Cruz.
He was
formerly
director of the National Center for Research on Cultural
Diversity
and
Second
Language Learning.
His
research interests
are
in
the
areas
of
second-language acquisition
and
bilingual
development.
He
can be
contacted
at
Psychology
Department,
Program
in
Cognitive
Psychology,
University
of
California,
Santa
Cruz,
CA
95064,
USA,
or
by
e-mail at
mclaugh@cats.ucsc.edu.
CATHERINE
E.
SNOW
is
the
Henry
Lee
Shattuck
professor
at
the
Harvard
Graduate
School
of Education.
She chaired
the RAND
Reading
Study
Group
that
produced
the
report
Reading
for
Understanding
and
is
currently
involved
with
others
in
thinking
about
implications
of
research
on
reading
for
improvement
of teacher
education
and
professional
development.
She can
be contacted
at
Harvard Graduate
School
of
Education,
Larsen
313,
Cambridge,
MA
02138, USA,
or
by
e-mail at
snowcat@gse.harvard.edu.
CHERYL DRESSLER
is an assistant
professor
at the
Graduate
College
of
Education,
University
of
Massachusetts,
Boston.
She
teaches
courses
on
literacy
education
and
has a
particular
interest
in
the
literacy
development
of
English-language
learners. She
can be
contacted
by
e-mail
at
cheryl.dressler@umb.edu.
DAVID
N. LIPPMAN
has worked
in
education
and
psychology
research
since 1995.
He
is
currently working
for
Human
Development
and
attending
graduate
school
in
Oakland,
California,
USA.
He
may
be
contacted
at the
Institute
of Human
Development,
1211 Tolman
Hall,
University
of
California,
Berkeley,
CA
94720-1690,
USA,
or
by
e-mail
at
lippmyn@yahoo.com.
TERESA
J. LIVELY
enjoyed
a
14-year
career as
a
bilingual
teacher.
She
first
became aware
of
the
struggles
that
accompany
confrontation
with a
new
language
when
she
lived
in
Mexico for
two
years
as
a
child.
This childhood
experience,
in
combination
with
recognition
that
students'
academic
success is
greatly
influenced
by
their
ability
to
understand
and use
words,
prompted
her
to
emphasize
acquisition
of
vocabulary
in
her
classroom.
Lively
is
currently
completing
a
postdoctoral
internship
in
clinical
psychology.
She
may
be contacted
at
940
E.
Meadow
Drive,
Palo
Alto,
CA
94303, USA,
or
by
e-mail
at
tlively@pgsp.edu.
CLAIRE
E. WHITE is
a doctoral student
in
the
Language
and
Literacy
program
at
the
Harvard
Graduate
School
of Education.
She can
be
contacted
at Massachusetts
Department
of
Education,
350 Main
Street,
Malden,
MA
02148,
USA,
or
by
e-mail
at cwhite@doe.mass.edu.
REFERENCES
BEAR, R.,
INVERNIZZI,
M.,
TEMPLETON,
S.R.,
&
JOHNSTON,
F.
(1996).
Words their
way:
WordstudyJr phonics,
vocabulary, andspellingin-
struction.
Upper
Saddle
River,
NJ:
Prentice
Hall.
BECK,
I., MCKEOWN,
M.G.,
&
KUCAN,
L.
(2002).
Bringing
words
to
life:
Robust
vocabulary
instruction.
New York:
Guilford.
BECK, I.,
MCKEOWN, M.G.,
&
OMANSON, R.C.
(1987).
The
effects
and uses
of diverse
vocabulary
instructional
techniques.
In
M.G.
McKeown
&
M.E.
Curtis
(Eds.),
The
nature
of
vocabulary
acquisition
(pp.
147-163).
Hillsdale,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
BLACHOWICZ,
C.,
&
FISHER,
P.
(1996).
Teaching
vocabulary
in
all classrooms.
Columbus,
OH:
Prentice
Hall.
BLOOM,
P.
(2002).
How children
learn
the
meaning
of
words.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
CARLISLE,
J.F.
(1988).
Knowledge
of derivational
morphology
and
spelling
ability
in
fourth,
sixth and
eighth
graders. AppliedPsycholinguistics,
9,
247-266.
CARVER,
R.P.
(1994).
Percentage
of unknown
vocabulary
words
in
text
as a function
of the
relative
difficulty
of the
text:
Implications
for
in-
struction.
Journal
ofReading
Behavior,
26,
413-437.
DONAHUE,
P.L.,
FINNEGAN,
R.J.,
LUTKUS,
A.D.,
ALLEN,
N.L.,
&
CAMPBELL,
J.R.
(2001).
The
nation's
report
card:
Fourth-grade
reading2000.
Washington,
DC:
National
Center
for
Education
Statistics.
DRESSLER,
C.
(2000).
The
word-inferencingstrategies
ofbilingualand
monolingual fifth
graders:
A
case
study approach.
Unpublished
qualifying
paper,
Harvard Graduate
School of
Education,
Cambridge,
MA.
FREEBODY,
P.,
&
ANDERSON,
R.
(1983).
Effects
of
vocabulary
difficulty,
text
cohesion,
and schema
availability
on
reading
comprehen-
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

206
Reading
Research
Quarterly
APRIL/MAY/JUNE
2004 39/2
sion.
Reading
Research
Quarterly,
18,
277-294.
FUKKINK,
R.G.,
& DE
GLOPPER,
K.
(1998).
Effects
of
instruc-
tion
in
deriving
word
meaning
from
context: A
meta-analysis.
Review
of
Educational
Research,
68,
450-468.
GARCIA,
G.E.
(1991).
Factors
influencing
the
English
reading
test
performance
of
Spanish-speaking Hispanic
students.
Reading
Research
Quarterly,
26,
371-392.
GARCIA,
G.E.
(2000).
Bilingual
children's
reading.
In
M.L.
Kamil,
P.B.
Mosenthal,
P.D.
Pearson,
&
R. Barr
(Eds.),
Handbook
of
reading
re-
search
(Vol.
III,
pp.
813-834).
Mahwah,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
GARCIA,
G.E.,
&
NAGY,
W.E.
(1993).
Latino
students'
concept
of
cognates.
In
D.J.
Leu
&
C.K.
Kinzer
(Eds.),
Examining
central
issues
in
literacy
research,
theory,
and
practice.
Chicago:
National
Reading
Conference.
GRAVES,
M.F.
(2000).
A
vocabulary
program
to
complement
and
bolster
a middle
grade
comprehension
program.
In
B.M.
Taylor,
M.F.
Graves,
&
P. van
den
Broek
(Eds.),
Readingfor
meaning:
Fostering
com-
prehension
in
the
middle
grades (pp.
116-135).
New
York:
Teachers
College
Press.
GUTHRIE,
J.,
&
WIGFIELD,
A.
(2000).
Engagement
and
motiva-
tion in
reading.
In
M.L.
Kamil,
P.B.
Mosenthal,
P.D.
Pearson,
&
R. Barr
(Eds.),
Handbook
ofreading
research
(Volume
III,
pp.
403-422).
Mahwah,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
HART,
B.,
&
RISLEY,
T.R.
(1995).
Meaningful
differences
in
the
everyday experience
of
young
American
children.
Baltimore:
Paul H.
Brookes.
HUCKIN,
T.,
HAYNES,
M.,
&
COADY,
J.
(1995).
Second
language
reading
and
vocabulary
learning.
Norwood,
NJ:
Ablex.
JIMENEZ,
R.,
GARCfA,
G.E.,
&
PEARSON,
P.D.
(1996).
The
reading
strategies
of
bilingual
Latina/o
students who
are
successful
English
readers:
Opportunities
and
obstacles.
Reading
Research
Quarterly,
31,
90-112.
KUHN,
M.R.,
&
STAHL,
S.A.
(1998).
Teaching
children to
learn
word
meanings
from
context:
A
synthesis
and
some
questions.
Journal
of
Literacy
Research,
30(1),
19-38.
LIVELY,
T.,
AUGUST, D.,
SNOW,
C.E.,
&
CARLO,
M.S.
(2003).
Vocabulary
improvement
program for
English
language
learners
and their
classmates.
Baltimore:
Paul H.
Brookes.
MYERS,
J.,
&
WELL,
A.
(1991).
Research
design
and
statistical
analy-
sis. New
York:
HarperCollins.
NAGY,
W.E. (1988).
Teaching
vocabulary
to
improve
reading compre-
hension.
Newark,
DE:
International
Reading
Association.
NAGY,
W.E.
(1997).
On
the role
of
context in
first-
and
second-
language vocabulary
learning.
In
N.
Schmitt & M.
McCarthy
(Eds.),
Vocabulary:
Description,
acquisition
and
pedagogy
(pp.
64-83).
Cambridge,
UK:
Cambridge University
Press.
NAGY,
W.E.,
GARCIA,
G.E.,
DURGUNOGLU, A.,
&
HANCIN-
BHATT,
B.
(1993).
Spanish-English
bilingual
students' use
of
cognates
in
English
reading.
Journal
of
Reading
Behavior,
25,
241-259.
NAGY,
W.E.,
&
SCOTT,
J.A.
(2000).
Vocabulary
processes.
In
M.L.
Kamil,
P.B.
Mosenthal,
P.D.
Pearson,
&
R. Barr
(Eds.),
Handbook
of
reading
research
(Vol. III,
pp.
269-284).
Mahwah,
NJ:
Erlbaum.
NATION,
I.S.P.
(2001).
Learning
vocabulary
in
another
language.
Cambridge,
UK:
Cambridge
University
Press.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE
OF
CHILD
HEALTH
AND
HUMAN
DEVELOPMENT.
(2000).
The
report
of
the
National
Reading
Panel.
Teaching
children
to
read:
An
evidence-based
assessment
of
the
scientific
lit-
erature
on
reading
and
its
implications for reading
instruction.
Washington,
DC:
U.S.
Government
Printing
Office.
SCHOONEN,
R.,
& VERHALLEN,
M. (1998).
Kennis
van
woor-
den:
De
toetsing
van
diepe
woordkennis
(Knowledge
of
words:
Testing
deep
word
knowledge). Pedagogische
Studien,
75,
153-168.
SHANAHAN,
T., KAMIL,
M.L.,
&
TOBIN,
A.W.
(1982).
Cloze
as a
measure
of
intersentential
comprehension.
Reading
Research
Quarterly,
17,
229-255.
STAHL,
S.A.
(1986).
Three
principles
of
effective
vocabulary
in-
struction.
Journal
ofReading,
29,
662-668.
STAHL, S.A.,
& FAIRBANKS,
M.
(1986).
The effects
of
vocabu-
lary
instruction:
A
model-based
meta-analysis.
Review
ofEducational
Research, 56,
72-110.
STANOVICH,
K.E. (1986).
Matthew
effects
in
reading:
Some
con-
sequences
of individual
differences
in
the
acquisition
of
literacy.
Reading
Research
Quarterly,
21,
360-407.
STERNBERG,
R.
(1987).
Most
vocabulary
is learned
from
context.
In
M.G.
McKeown
&
M.E.
Curtis
(Eds.),
The nature
of vocabulary
ac-
quisition (pp.
89-105). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
STOLLER,
F.,
&
GRABE,
W.
(1995).
Implications
for L2
vocabu-
lary
acquisition
and
instruction
from
L1
vocabulary
research.
In
T.
Huckin,
M.
Haynes,
&
J.
Coady
(Eds.),
Second
language reading
and
vo-
cabulary
learning (pp.
24-45).
Norwood,
NJ:
Ablex.
SWANBORN,
M.S.L., & DE GLOPPER,
K.
(1999).
Incidental
word
learning
while
reading:
A
meta-analysis.
Review
of
Educational
Research,
69, 261-286.
VERHALLEN,
M.,
&
SCHOONEN,
R.
(1993).
Vocabulary
knowl-
edge
of
monolingual
and
bilingual
children.
Applied
Linguistics,
14,
344-363.
VERHOEVEN,
L.T.
(1990).
Acquisition
of
reading
in
a
second
lan-
guage. Reading
Research
Quarterly,
25,
90-114.
WHITE,
C.E.
(2000).
Implementation ofa
vocabulary
curriculum
de-
signed for
second-language-learners: Knowledge
bases and
strategies
used
by
monolingualand
bilingual
teachers.
Unpublished
qualifying
paper,
Harvard
Graduate
School
of
Education,
Cambridge,
MA.
Received
October
3,
2001
Final revision
received
September
5,
2003
Accepted
September
19,
2003
AUTHORS'
NOTE
Teresa
Lively,
Diane
August,
Maria
Carlo,
and Catherine
Snow
have
a
significant
financial
interest
in and affiliation
with
a
product
that
has
been
developed
and
published
as a result
of the research
described
in
this
article.
EDITORS'
NOTE
This
manuscript
was
accepted prior
to the
finalization
of the
RRQ
guidelines
pertaining
to conflict
of
interest
(see
Editorial
in
RRQ,
Vol.
39, Issue
1).
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX A
TARGET
WORDS
(NONCOGNATES
ARE IN
ITALICS)
TAUGHT
DURING INTERVENTION
BY WEEK
OF INSTRUCTION
Week Title of
reading
material
Source
of selection
Target
words
(1)
A
journey
to the new
world-Part
1
Lasky,
K.
(1996).
Dear
America:
A
journey
to
the new world. The
diary ofRemember
Patience
Whipple.
New
York: Scholastic.
Ambition,
catastrophe,
determination, dictator,
discriminate, diverse,
epidemic, famine,
flee,
immigrant,
motive,
optimism, prospect,
settle
(2)
A
journey
to the new
world-Part
2
Same as above
Authority,
condemn,
corrupt,
establish,
faction, native,
persecution,
pilgrim,
political, puritan,
reformer,
reign,
scorn,
worship
(3)
A
journey
to the new
world-Part
3
Same
as
above
Accumulate, charter,
coalition,
colony,
economy, essentially,
financial,
grueling,
idealist, indenture,
livelihood, merchant,
profit, sponsor
(4)
Immigrant
kids
Freedman,
R.
(1980).
Immigrant
kids. New
York:
Puffin.
Ally,
contact,
determine, document,
draft,
exert,
fledgling,
jurisdiction,
official,
ominous,
ravage,
surplus,
trade,
treaty
(5)
Review week
No new words
(6)
Immigrant
kids at
home-Part
1
Same as above
Absorb,
century,
congested,
custom,
dense, dialect,
district,
ethnic,
fervent,
impoverished,
occupy,
prosperous,
social,
tenement
(7)
Immigrant
kids at
home-Part
2
Same as above
Arouse, common,
congregate,
dank,
elevated,
humanity,
monotonous,
pitched
battle,
relief
rival,
stifling,
torment,
ultimatum,
unfamiliar
(continued)
207
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX A
TARGET WORDS
(NONCOGNATES
ARE
IN
ITALICS)
TAUGHT
DURING INTERVENTION
BY WEEK
OF
INSTRUCTION
(continued)
Week Title of
reading
material
Source
of selection
Target
words
(8)
Immigrant
kids
at
schoo
-Part
1
Same
as above
Allegiance,
facility,
humiliate, laborious,
meticulous, monitor,
nonexistent,
penetrating,
pledge,
promote, represent,
rigid, script,
strive
(9)
Immigrant
kids
at
school-Part
2
Same as above
Agency,
anxiety,
fundamental,
heritage,
obtain,
periodic,
reflect,
reject,
shame,
stenography,
tradition,
transform,
values,
vocational
(10)
Review
week
No new words
(11)
New kids
in
town
Bode,
J.
(1989).
New
kids in town: Oral
histories
of immigrant
teens. New York:
Scholastic.
Amend,
collective,
debate,
demographics,
extend,
impression,
inaccurate,
issue, midst,
opportunity,
resident,
shnf,
stem,
unprecedented
(12)
The
new
immigrant
tide:
A
shuttle between
worlds
The New York Times.
(1998,
July
19-21).
Campaign,
civic,
concentration,
contemplate,
degree,
dual, ebullient,
forsaken,
fracture,
in
utero, renown, shuttle,
straddle,
transnational
(13)
A Mexican
town that
transcends
all
borders
Same
as
above
Assimilate,
bestride,
communal,
flourish,
hybrid, identity,
juncture,
novel,
psyche,
redefine,
saga,
span,
transcontinental,
transcend
(14)
The
new
immigrant
tide-Part
II
Same as above
Balk, conscious,
hyperdeveloped,
immediate, inevitable,
maintain,
overwhelming,
profound,
revolutionize,
status,
technology,
tentative,
underdss,
vital
(15)
Review
week No
new
words
208
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF
VOCABULARY
INSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
BY DAY
AND WEEK
OF INTERVENTION
Week
Day
1
Day
2
Day
3
Day
4
Day
5
(1)
Preview for
ELLs;
students
listen to
Spanish
summary
of
reading
passage
and
preview
list
of
target
words
Introduction;
predict
story
line;
read
passage;
circle
vocabulary;
extract
definitions;
assign
homework
Using
words
in
context;
complete
cloze
sentences
working
in
groups
Expanding
meaning:
Word
roots
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Cognates
(2)
Same as
above
Same as
above
Same as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Deep
processing
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Affixes
(3)
Same as
above
Same as
above
Same as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Deep
processing
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Idioms
(4)
Same
as
above
Same as
above
Same
as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Multiple
meanings
Tools
to
develop
vocabulary:
Root words
(5)
Word bee
Word
meaning
analysis
Charades Word
guess
Posttest
(6)
Preview for
ELLs
Introduction
Using
words
in
context
Expanding
meaning:
Antonyms/
synonyms
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Inferencing
(7)
Same
as
above
Same as
above
Same as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Deep
processing
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Cognates
(8)
Same as
above
Same as
above
Same
as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Word
substitution
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Affixes
(continued)
209
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX B
SUMMARY
OF VOCABULARY
INSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
BY
DAY
AND WEEK OF INTERVENTION
(continued)
Week
Day
1
Day
2
Day
3
Day
4
Day
5
(9)
Same
as
above
Same as
above
Same as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Related
words
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Root
words
(10)
Homework
Polysemy
Charades
Word
sort Posttest
(11)
Preview for
ELLs
Introduction
Using
words
in
context
Expanding
meaning:
Synonyms/
antonyms
Tools
to
develop
vocabulary:
Dictionaries
(12)
Same as
above
Same as
above
Same as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Synonyms/
antonyms
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Root
words
(13)
Same as
above
Same as
above
Same
as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Word
substitution
Tools to
develop
vocabulary:
Cognates
(14)
Same as
above
Same as
above
Same
as
above
Expanding
meaning:
Deep
processing
Tools
to
develop
vocabulary:
Multiple
meanings
(15)
Homework
Word
guess
Charades Word bee Posttest
210
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX C
OVERVIEW OF
WEEK 7
ACTIVITIES: IMMIGRANT KIDS
AT
HOME
Lesson Instructions to teacher
in
teacher
handbook
Instructions
to student
in
student
workbook
Day
1:
Preview for
ELLs
J
Instruct
ELL
students
to
go
to
stations where
they
will listen to
audiotaped
recordings
of
the
Spanish
version of the
English
text to be
read
the
next
day.
O
Students
will also be
given
brief
definitions for
Spanish
translations of
the
English target
words.
J
Listen to
audiotape.
Day
2:
Introduction
of text and
vocabulary
inferring
strategies
LI
Engage
students
in
a brief
story
prediction activity
using
illustrations
and review of
prior
week's
story.
LO
Read
the
passage
aloud
to the
students.
LI
Read
posted
target
words.
LC
Reread
the
passage
aloud to
the
students.
"
Call
on
students
who
appear
to know
the
meaning
of the
target
word.
"
Guide students
in
discussion of those
words whose
meaning
can be
inferred
from the
context.
0
Guide students
in
discussion
of
meaning
of
compound
words
in
the
passage
and add
to the
compound
word wall.
L
Assign
homework:
definitions.
Ji
Three- to five-minute
student
discussion of
predictions
O
Listen to
passage
and
follow
along
in
your
workbook.
O
Read
posted
target
words.
F
As teacher rereads
the
passage
circle each of the
target
words
as
they
come
up
in the text. Raise
your
hand
if
you
know the
meaning
of
the
target
word without
having
to
look
it
up
in
your
glossary
for this week.
i
For
homework
write
the
correct
target
vocabulary
word next
to the
definition
provided.
(continued)
211
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX C
OVERVIEW OF
WEEK 7 ACTIVITIES: IMMIGRANT KIDS
AT
HOME
(continued)
Lesson
Instructions
to teacher
in teacher
handbook
Instructions
to student
in
student
workbook
Day
3:
Using
words
in context
C
Review homework
using
the
homework
transparency
that
is
provided.
Write the correct
responses
on
the
transparency.
L
Group
students
in
heterogeneous
language groups
of
four
or five
students.
O
Show students
the
transparency
for
the
Contexting
activity
(see
example
below).
Have
students discuss
the
answers and raise their hands when
every
member
of
the
group
knows the
answer
and
agrees
with the
group's
answer.
Assign points
to
groups
for
correct answers.
O
Ask one member of the
group
to
provide
the answer and to
explain
why
it is the correct one.
cO
Read aloud
three or four sentences
from
previous
week's
Word
Wizard
activity.
Send
the sentences to the
project
webmaster so
that
they may
be
posted
on the
project
website.
O
Assign
homework: crossword
puzzle,
Word
Wizard
List for
posting
at home.
LO
Correct
your
homework
responses
if
necessary.
CI
As a
group
discuss each of
the
items
in
the
Contexting
activity
in
your
workbook.
Write
the answer in
your
workbook.
CI
Complete
the crossword
puzzle
on
your
own.
Day
4:
Expanding
meaning
C
Review crossword
puzzle
homework
using
the homework
transparency
that is
provided.
Write the correct
responses
on the
transparency.
CI
Group
students
in
heterogeneous
language groups
of
four
or five
students.
O
Guide students
through
Deep
Processing
activity
using
the
transparency
that
is
provided
(see
example
below).
Ll
Correct
your
homework
responses
if
necessary.
L
As a
group
discuss
each of
the items
in
the
Deep
Processing
activity
in
your
workbook. Write the
answer
in
your
workbook.
(continued)
212
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX C
OVERVIEW OF
WEEK 7
ACTIVITIES: IMMIGRANT
KIDS
AT
HOME
(continued)
Day
5:
Tools to
develop
vocabulary
and
vocabulary
review
J
Group
students
in
heterogeneous
language groups
of four
or five
students
for the
Cognates
activity.
Be aware that
ELL
students will be
the
experts
in
this
task. Instruct them to
help
English-
speaking group
members
complete
the
activity.
0I
Guide students
through Cognates
activity
using
the
transparency
that is
provided
(see
example
below).
O
Instruct students to
complete
the
Vocabulary
Review
activity individually.
J
As a
group
discuss
each
of the items
in
the
Cognates
activity
in
your
workbook. Write the
answer
in
your
workbook.
LO
Complete
the
Vocabulary
Review
by
writing
the
correct
target
vocabulary
word
next to the
definition
provided.
Vocabulary
inferring strategies
(example
of directions to
teacher)
OJ
Before
you
reread
the
passage
from the
transparency, say,
Follow
along
in
your
Student
Word Book as
I
read the
passage again.
Give me
a
"thumbs up"
when
I
read a
target
word
and then circle the word.
Ifyou
think
you
know what the word
means,
without
reading
the
definition,
raise
your
hand and
I
will call
on
you.
O
After students
have
suggested meanings,
say,
Let's check the
definition
to see how close
you
were.
O
Meaning
can be
inferred
for
humanity.
When
you
reach
humanity,
say,
Remember
that sometimes
you
can
figure
out what
a
word means
by
skipping
over it
andfinishing
the sentence.
Or
you
can reread the sentence while
thinking
about what
the
word
might
mean. Let me remind
you
how this works
by reading
the sentence
with
humanity
in it.
"The
sunlight
and
fresh
air
of
our mountain
home...were
replaced by four
walls and
people
over and
under and on all sides
of
us until it seemed that
humanity
from
all
corners
of
the world had
congregated
in this corner
ofNew
York
City.
"
Let's
see,
earlier in
the sentence
it talks
aboutpeople
on all sides
ofthem.
Do
you
think
humanity
has
something
to do with
groups ofpeople?
Let's
look
up
the
definition
to
see
ifwe're
close.
Word
Wizard
activity
(example
of
directions
to
teacher)
O
Encourage
each
group
of students to read
3-4
sentences from
the
previous
week.
Choose one from each
group
to be
posted
on the
Web.
O
Motivate students
to find sentences with this
week's
vocabulary. Say,
Each
timeyou
hear or read one
of
this weeks words used
in a
sentence
at
home,
school,
or even on
TV,
I
want
you
to write the sentence on a sentence
strip.
Please write down where
you
heard or
read it.
(continued)
213
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX
C
OVERVIEW
OF
WEEK 7
ACTIVITIES: IMMIGRANT KIDS AT
HOME
(continued)
Contexting
activity
(example
of directions to
teacher)
[L
Using
the
transparency
(in
Teacher's
Materials),
read the first
doze
sentence
aloud
to
the
class.
LO
Say,
Your
job
is to
figure
out which word
fits
in the
blank
using
the clues that are in the
sentence. When
everyone
in the
group
knows the correct word and
why
it
fits,
raise
your
hands. I'll call
on one
of
the
first groups ready.
You will
get
a
point ifyou get
the
correct
answer.
Remember,
everyone
in
your group
must know the answer and
why
it is correct.
"
Ask one child at a table for the correct answer
and
to
explain
why
it
is correct.
"
Find
ways
to
encourage English-language
learners to
participate.
O
Continue until the lesson is
completed,
giving
each
group
1
point
for each
correct
answer.
"
Note that first set of
14
doze
sentences consists of"near contexts." These are
sentence contexts that are similar
in
topic
to the
target
passage (e.g.,
Many
immigrants
from the same
country
gather together
for
religious
holidays. They
often
congregate
at the local
church.)
The
second
set of 14 doze
sentences are "far
contexts"
indicating
the
use of
the
word
in
a different thematic context
(e.g.,
At
some
parties,
the
guests
like to
congregate
in
a
person's
kitchen).
Deep
processing
activity
(example
of
directions to
teacher)
LO
Say,
You have
already
learned
many
of
the
definitions
for
this
week's
vocabulary
words.
Remember
that
definitions
alone don't teach
you everything you
need
to
know
to
really
understand what a word means. In
today's
activity you
will be
asked to think about how
one word's
meaning
relates to another word's
meaning.
Does
anyone
remember what
this
is called? That's
right,
it is
deep processing.
OC
Say,
For
example,
remember when
I
asked
you
to think about a
reformer.
Which
of
these
things
would a
reformer
be
likely
to
do?
(a)
Go to
the
park
for
a
picnic;
(b)
work to
change
rules that are
not
fair
to a
group
ofpeople;
(c)
notice that
something
isn't
fair
and
say,
"Oh
well,
I
can't do
anything."
J
Say,
When
you
think about
each
of
these
possibilities,
ask
yourself
whether a
reformer
would or would not be
likely
to do each
thing.
This makes
you
think more about
reformers
and
gives you
a richer and
deeper picture of
what
reformer
means.
LO
Say,
Now
you
will work in
your
groups
with
questions
similar to the
one
we
just
talked
about. Your
job
is to read
each
question
and talk with
your
group
to decide which
answer
is correct and
why.
Remember,
you
must be able to
explain why you
chose
your
answer.
LI
Examples
of items:
Would
you
rather
congregate
with
your
friends
in
a
dank
place
or a
stifling
place?
Explain
why.
What has
caused the most torment
in
your
life?
What
gave
you
relief from the torment? Name
3
things
that
commonly
arouse a
teacher's
anger.
(continued)
214
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX
C
OVERVIEW OF
WEEK 7
ACTIVITIES: IMMIGRANT KIDS
AT
HOME
(continued)
Cognate
activity
(example
of directions to
teacher)
I
Say,
Remember that
when
you
are
learning
another
language,
it sometimes
helps
to look
for
similarities in how words sound or are
spelled.
Ifyou
were in a
country
or
neighborhood
where
all the
signs
were in
Spanish,
which
word would
you
look
for ifyou
wanted
tofind
a
police
station?
Telkfono,
policia,
or
parque?
Who remembers what
words are called that have similar
spellings
in
English
and
Spanish
and are related in
meaning?
Remember,
there are also
false cognates.
False
cognates
are words that have
similar
spellings
in
English
and
Spanish,
but are NOT related in
meaning.
Does
anyone
remember a
false cognate?
What does the
Spanish
word
red mean? Red means net in
Spanish!
O
If this
appears
to
be
too
difficult
for
your
students,
you may
need to work as a whole
group
and look for the
cognates
on the text
transparency.
You
might
emphasize
the
cognates
as
you
read.
I
Say,
For this
activity
I
willgive
each team a
passage
to read. Your
job
is to look
for
the
words that have
Spanish cognates.
When
you find
a word
that
you
think
is a
cognate,
write the word and the
Spanish
cognate
on the
worksheet.
Discuss the
meanings of
the
Spanish cognates you
find
to make sure that
they
do have the same
meaning
as the
English
word in the
fable.
O1
When all teams have
completed
their
worksheets,
collect the
worksheets and write
the words and their
cognates
on the
board.
O
Ask
students
for
meaning
of both words to
decide
if
they
are
true or false
cognates.
OI
Prompt
for additional clues
if
students have not found them all.
215
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:45:11 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions