LLED 360

Vo-ca-bu-la-ry. Students must continue reading at home as well as in school to improve their vocabulary. Vo-ca-bu-la-ry.

             The reading for this week called “A Focus on Vocabulary” by Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert was an interesting read and will be useful for me as an English Teacher Candidate.  This article was about vocabulary and its correlation with reading comprehension and student success.  Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert note in their article that words come in two forms: oral and print (Lehr, Osbroune & Heibert, p.1).  Oral vocabulary includes words that we “recognize and use in listening and speaking,” (Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert, p.1) while print vocabulary includes words “that we recognize and use in reading and writing” (Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert, p.1).  I found it particularly interesting to learn that word knowledge comes in two distinct forms: receptive and productive.  Receptive vocabulary includes “words that we recognize when we hear or see them” (Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert, p.1).  Productive vocabulary includes “words that we use when we speak or write” (Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert, p.1).  Although these concepts about vocabulary seem to be common knowledge for many of us, it is important to remember that many students may not be familiar with a wide range of vocabulary so it will be important to break these concepts into understandable ideas.  I also think that it’s a good idea to give students multi-modal ways to absorb language.  Perhaps the student will not understand the meaning of the word when it is discussed in class but will understand the word when you have the student write it in a sentence.  Furthermore, the student may not have understood the word when they read it in a book but understand the word when they see it used in the context of a movie.  I think it is really important to use a variety of teaching tools to help students develop a rich vocabulary.

This article also discussed that many words in a student’s vocabulary repertoire are learned through incidental learning.  Learning words takes place in every setting that a student is exposed to.  The more words that they see on a daily basis, the better chances that student has for success within the classroom.  Remembering the meaning of a word, however, is not as simple as picking up a dictionary and reading the definition.  During my time as a student, I have come to realize that it is easiest (for me!) to learn the meaning of a word when it is placed in a sentence.  It also helps to use the word in a sentence multiple times in order to assist in my own comprehension of the word.

As a teacher candidate, it will be difficult to use class time to explain every new word that a student encounters.  If I did that, I would probably have no time to teach my lesson!  Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert propose that teachers should look at the importance, usefulness and frequency of word use before teaching it to their students.  Words can be categorized into three tiers which help teachers gain an understanding of which words they should focus on teaching in the classroom.  Tier one consists of words such as clock or baby “whose meanings students are likely to know” (Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert, p.10).  The second tier consists of words such as fortunate or maintains which are words that are “likely to appear frequently in a wide variety of texts and in the written and oral language of mature language users” (Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert, p.10).  Finally, the third tier is made up of words such as pallet or retinue that “appear in text rarely” (Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert, p.10).  By splitting up vocabulary words into three tiers, it makes it easy for me as a teacher candidate to instruct students on tier two vocabulary words that recur frequently.  The students can then gain a strong grasp of these words that are used on a regular basis so that they will be prepared to effectively answer questions in class or during exams.  If the student has difficulty with tier one or tier three questions, they can either look the words up on their own time or come to me after or during class with additional questions.  Using this three tiered approach is effective because it will allow me to address the meaning of important vocabulary words while ensuring that slower or more advanced learners still feel comfortable asking me about the meaning of vocabulary words that are problematic for them.

This reading was very insightful in that it helped to break down the learning process that ELL go through to learn English.  The majority of us aren’t aware of exactly how complex learning any new language is.  It’s fascinating how many words students actually learn each week and throughout their lifetime.  The article stresses the importance of incidental learning.  A lot of this learning happens outside of the classroom so it is important that young children who are learning English receive the right kind of exposure to the language.  When I look back at how I learned English, it is exactly as how the article describes: through oral & print channels.  My parents were very keen on persevering our native tongue, but they were very helpful when I needed assistance with my English vocabulary.  I can attest to the incidental learning that happens in ELLs.  I spoke English a lot at home with my brother against my parent’s wishes and watched English television programs.  I also spent a lot of time listening to English radio stations and memorized the lyrics.  I may not have fully understood all the words I heard initially, but with repeated exposure, I was able to grasp the meaning behind those unfamiliar words.  In addition to this, I really loved to read.  I received a vocabulary book as my first English book from my parents.  The book had pictures and words.  The use of associating specific words and images really aided me in my learning of the language.  I began to frequent the library every week to borrow books for leisure reading, especially in the summer.  I also took the initiative to do my own “research” on certain topics of interest.  When I reached grade 5, my level of English was good enough to be considered “advanced”.  The article mentions the learning of root words and prefixes/suffixes.  My grade 7 teacher spent each week teaching us a root word and its uses.  To this day, I never forgot them and it has really benefited me in vocabulary comprehension.  Not to make this a life story, but I felt that my learning of the English language developed as a result of repeated exposure.  Without the continued repetition of words, I wouldn’t have grasped the language as easily as I did.  I remember watching Much Music when I was younger and I couldn’t make out any of the words.  I thought music in general was all gibberish.  It wasn’t until I got older and learned these songs that I could make sense of them.  In regards to the Tiered level of words, I agree that more focus should be paid to the Tier 2 words.  Far too often teachers want to impress their class by teaching them fancy, novel words that are rarely used.  Teaching Tier 2 words will enable the students to broaden their vocabulary and make the learning of Tier 3 words easier.

I really liked how this article provided many examples of teaching strategies that can be used when learning new words. My own experience of learning vocabulary that I remember were either finding definitions for words that my teacher or myself had picked out from a novel we were studying. It was quite a challenge especially when faced with a word with multiple meanings and not knowing which one to choose. I would often just choose the first definition provided in the dictionary and write in the “correct” definition if my choice happened to be incorrect when the terms were reviewed the next morning in class. Lehr et al. mention that it is important for teachers to focus on “tier two” (11) vocabulary with multiple meanings rather than “tier three” (11) vocabulary that are very rarely used or “tier one” (11) vocabulary that are very common that most students will already be familiar with. Thinking back, I wish my teachers reviewed some of the other common uses of a word we were studying instead of only focusing on the particular definition they were looking for. Going over the relationship between context and how meanings of the word changes accordingly may have been helpful. While the dictionary is a helpful source when it comes to learning new words, other learning strategies should be used as well (Lehr et al.). I remember having to look up many words while learning English, but hardly understanding any of the words even after having written down definitions.

Another part of this article that I found to be really interesting was the discussion of how beneficial a teacher reading aloud can be for the development of students’ vocabularies (Lehr et al.). I wonder how this compares to silent reading when it comes to the development of vocabulary. I know I have found myself unknowingly skipping words that I did not know while reading silently and then being very surprised the next day when there was a pop quiz on definitions of words that were in the assigned chapter that I had skipped while reading. Would a student be more likely to notice a new word when listening to a story that was being read aloud word for word rather than silent reading where many words can be read at the same time? Another benefit of listening to a story being read aloud may also be learning how words are pronounced. Perhaps a student’s reading ability is important too when looking into how much a student will benefit from various types of reading. Lehr et al. reported that when students can read by themselves, the amount of time they spend reading will predict the number of words they know.

In “A Focus on Vocabulary,” Lehr, Osborn, and Hiebert examine the dangers of deficient vocabulary and the processes by which new vocabulary is acquired. They are limiting their discussion of vocabulary to more advanced words that learners may be exposed to at higher levels and not the fundamental vocabulary that is used in basic, day-to-day communication.

Some words may be understood enough to be received but not comfortable enough to be used. A given passage or statement may contain a word that is entirely new to us, but a general definition can often be inferred based on its context (A Focus on Vocabulary, p. 4). From there, our working definition or schema of these words is gradually expanded upon as we learn more about it through further exposure in different contexts. Eventually, we may be comfortable enough to begin experimenting with these words and may begin applying them in novel ways.

There is a great range of vocabulary knowledge across all grade levels. Throughout all assessed age groups, the range varies by a factor of ten within each peer group, respectively (A Focus on Vocabulary, p. 2). The current approach to these differences in the Canadian school system is streaming. However, it is known that learning opportunities become polarized over time; increased exposure leads to an improved vocabulary, where reduced expose leads to fewer opportunities for improvement. This calls the efficacy of streaming into question. Educators want to reduce, not simply accommodate, these differences in vocabulary.

Studies have shown that educators simply cannot explicitly teach all necessary vocabulary within schools (A Focus on Vocabulary, p. 3). Other opportunities to build schema beyond the walls of the classroom need to be identified and embraced. Lehr, Osborn, and Hiebert highlight an array of methods by which learners might expand their vocabulary (A Focus on Vocabulary, p. 4-18).

Multimedia is tremendously useful in engaging learners and building schema, but its temporal nature reduces the ability to individually adjust pace in order to process appropriately. Teachers, family, and peers may gradually increase daily opportunities for exposure to new vocabulary by introducing them in a comfortable context (A Focus on Vocabulary, p. 7), but this can be an incredibly slow-going process and opportunities may be few and far between.

I believe that reading is the most sustainable and effective form of vocabulary study. There are many reasons for why this may be the case: materials that are readily available, less mentally taxing than active discourse, or how the flow of narrative engages learners. Additionally, with the advent of computer-based technologies, there have been a plethora of new opportunities to keep learners engaged with the material and continually developing new and existing schema (A Focus on Vocabulary, p. 16-17). Reading may be the dominant means of building schema, but it is clear that a synthesis of diverse means are required to equip learners with the necessary vocabulary they need to thrive.

There was a lot of emphasis in the article “A Focus on Vocabulary” on the importance of reading and being read to at an early age when learning a new language. This triggered reflections for me on the many ways my parents taught me language. From a young age mom wold take my sisters and I to the library on a weekly basis to take out as many and whatever books we wanted. My parents would then read to us every night before bed. I grew up with a love of reading and enthusiasm for learning. I am sure this can be largely attributed to these early routines in language learning. I feel very lucky that I had these positive experiences with language.

Lehrer et. al. mention a statistic based on socio economic status and language learning, “Hart and Risley (1995) found, for example, that 3year-olds in higher socioeconomic status (SES) families had vocabularies as much as five times larger than children in lower SES families” (p. 6). This statistic made me slightly uncomfortable in reading it. I think it is partly because I hope it does not perpetuate stereotypes of lower SES families as being illiterate or uneducated. Poverty should not always result in “word poverty”. I also think it made me reflect on the privileges I have had in my life. In regards to students who’s parents are ELLs as well, how can students improve their English outside of school without the aid of their parents or reinforcement of English at home? It is clear to me that it is not an easy task if the learner is older and does not have the advantage of rigorous language training and picture books that come with early childhood.

Through reading the article I was relieved to see a long list of concrete strategies that teachers can put into practice for their ELLs.
Some strategies that I see working for me include using synonyms, concept maps, dictionaries, word consciousness, and teaching about cognates. As a future art teacher I have never previously thought about making language learning an active focus in my classroom. Through these readings and class discussions I have realized how important it is. I also feel confident that I can work some of these strategies into my teaching without making too much of a sacrifice from other tasks. In the long run, I believe it will enrich classroom discussion and the life long success in learning for my students. I may even take them to the library…

The title of my post is a reference to the song in the television show Arthur. Here is the link to the song:
http://youtu.be/lg516PSgG5I

In the article A Focus on Vocabulary by Lehr, Osborn and Hiebert, I was particularly interested in the concept of “knowing” and acquiring “ownership” of words. I have found myself pondering my own vocabulary bank and how it came to be, as explained “[k]nowing a word by sight and sound and knowing its dictionary definition are not the same as knowing how to use the word correctly and understanding it when it is heard or seen in various contexts” (3). My own incidental word learning was brought to my attention recently in my volunteer classroom experience. While in the process of contributing to some class conversation on their discussion topic, the teacher interrupted me and asked if I could please explain what the word “rationalize” means to the class. I knew the purpose of this was to have the students understand this potentially new word in the context of my conversation. However, I was surprised at my awkward attempt to be able to define the word in a way that would make sense to the students! This was certainly a word that I understood and could use in a specific context, but I had a difficult time defining it in a simplistic way. In my first attempt, I had used a few synonyms to give meaning. While this method does work and is usually my go-to tool in my own learning, I quickly realized that I had just given them a bunch of other words that perhaps were just as new as “rationalize.” To my relief, the teacher stepped in to help with a couple examples of how a person might “rationalize something.” I will remember this method in my own teaching of new vocabulary. I think that teaching vocabulary by giving examples either through lessons, discussion and/or activities is a powerful way to develop understanding and accumulation of words.

Sara Martens

Lehr et al. raises a fascinating question in the article—how many words do students need to know to achieve comprehension? What constitutes an “extensive” vocabulary? To answer this question, we need to first put the word “vocabulary” in context. One could have extensive vocabulary in either academic (in specific disciplines) or non-academic context. Furthermore, it is important to consider the purpose behind having an extensive vocabulary. From a critical perspective, it seems that this “extensiveness” has implications for privileging certain groups of people while excluding others. In other words, a person who has an extensive vocabulary in a particular academic field is better able to maintain his/her status within that field (or within the class that esteems that field) than someone who does not. This is also the case for a person with extensive vocabulary in a non-academic field. In both cases, the purpose is to legitimize specialized knowledge through the possession and use of extensive vocabulary.

I am a bit disappointed by the fact that reviews of classroom intervention studies have suggested that no more than 8 to 10 words can be effectively taught each week. I have grown up learning the English language by memorizing a lot of vocabulary every week. Though there is no way of knowing how much vocabulary I have retained, I did arrive at the conclusion that knowing a word is more than spelling, defining and pronouncing it correctly. From a sociolinguistic perspective, the spelling, definition and pronunciation are in fact unstable elements of a word because they are socially constructed, have been shaped and changed over the course of the history. In short, in order to know a word, we must see it in different social and historical contexts. Hence, the student needs to be exposed to the word in a variety of contexts (that is, both inside and outside of the classroom) as much as possible to draw out the–perhaps inexhaustible–riches in the meaning of the word. I like this quote: “Knowing a word is a matter of degree rather than an all-or-nothing proposition. The degrees of knowing a word are reflected in the precision with which we use a word, how quickly we understand a word, and how well we understand and use words in different modes (receptive, productive) and for different purposes.”.

Finally, I like the strategy of Text Talk where the teacher draws from the student’s knowledge and experiences outside of the classroom and connect that to explaining the meaning of a word in the classroom. The concept of decontextualizing book language (the language that represents ideas and concepts) seems quite useful, as teachers are encouraged to go beyond having the students read aloud the text by engaging in meaningful, productive teacher-student talk that accompanies the reading to achieve a fuller comprehension.

According to Fang, the purpose of functional language analysis is to provide a metalanguage (“the language for talking about language”) to help students understand the choices that academic writers make as they write clauses, sentences and texts (p. 588). The metalanguage is especially important for ELLs in classes like science, history and mathematics where “technical and abstract vocabulary and sentences made up of embedded clauses that create a dense and compacted presentation of information” (p. 589). As a teacher candidate who has English as a Second Language as a teachable subject, I feel this article has several implications for my teaching. First, all teachers need to be conscious of the new language patterns in the disciplines with which the ELLs will be in contact. Fang says that the literacy development work cannot be the sole responsibility of the language arts teacher. Secondly, such a linguistic approach to academic text would enable the students to be critical of the text they are reading, as they gain a deeper understanding of how language is used to persuade the reader, legitimize scientific writing, and offer perspectives. On the one hand, I see how the ELLs could benefit from such linguistic analysis of academic writing. On the other, I am uncertain how such a seemingly detailed, sophisticated activity could be incorporated into a science or mathematics class without straying away from the main point of the lesson. While this approach can be useful, I am wondering how practical it is for the real world classroom.

I find the distinction between oral and visual vocabulary an interesting one, the loss of translation between seeing and hearing a word is a phenomenon that, I speculate, has happened to many of us.  For example I learned the word ethereal purely through text and for years pronounced it as “ur-e-thral” until a friend corrected me.

Since English is a language made of strange amalgamations of different conquering countries, developing from Latin roots, later being invaded and colonized by North Germanic and Norman French tribes, there are some grammatical nuances that make little sense to a newcomer to the language.  For example one might question why cow turns into beef, pig to pork, and chicken to…chicken?  I had a co-worker who was a non-native English speaker that once asked me why the plural of sheep wasn’t sheeps.  I still don’t think I am capable of answering that question.  Learning the rules of the language is especially complicated because of the many ‘exceptions to the rule’ that make up the language.

In my experience, the point the article makes about poorer readers falling farther behind and stronger readers excelling at a quicker rate rings true.  Learning new vocabulary is like equipping yourself with building blocks that grow and stack upon one another.  As the reading grow more and more complex, those who have the initial foundation can continue to construct and acquire new vocabulary.  However if these gaps are already present there is no platform to build upon, new vocabulary often slips and falls away, disregarded and ignored.  This can be an extremely exasperating process for the English language learner.  One of the standard expressions of this frustration I’ve heard are things like “why can’t you say it simpler?” and “what is the point of using big complicated words I can’t understand when you could use smaller ones?”

What are some of the tools we can use to effectively teach things like grammar and vocabulary besides demanding straight memorization of the rules and all the idiosyncrasies that accompany them?  It seems as if an effect way for students to make sense of such things as homophones (e.g. batter, rose) and homographs (e.g. desert) is to provide a lot of exposure of these words in their context.  Simply explaining why rose means a perennial flower as well as the past tense of rise would is a difficult task without seeing them properly situated in a sentence.

I remember doing assignments with an Oxford’s English dictionary by my side which was incredibly time consuming.  One of the great benefits of living in this software age is the convenience of the tools that come with it.  I was impressed by the article’s suggestion about putting hyperlinks into text.  I can’t think of a more convenient way to access new vocabulary while seeing it in use.  Perhaps utilizing new technologies such as these would be an effective way to engage students in new vocabularies.