Note: The theoretical instructional components that drove the study were the research questions, formal, and informal assessments. Theoretical Framework.

A Visual Approach to Improving the Vocabulary of ELL Students 

Mary W. Strong, Ed.DWidener University

 Dorothy H. Idris, Ed.D

Widener University 

47TH ANNUAL KEYSTONE STATE READING ASSOCIATION CONFERENCESTATE COLLEGE, PA

OCTOBER 26-29, 2014

PRESENTATION: OCTOBER 27, 2014

Note: The theoretical instructional components that drove the study were the research questions, formal, and informal assessments.

Theoretical Framework and Research Question Based Instructional Components

Crucial Features to Attain Academic Language, Enhance Student Learning, and Support Students to Understand Grammar and Vocabulary:

• Accurate and precise use of grammar and vocabulary

•Proactive attention to vocabulary teaching engaging a plethora of instruction strategies (Bryant, et al., 2003)

• Visual aids to link each definition of every key word (Moore, 2010)

ASSESSMENT• PPVT™-4 A• Anecdotal Notes• Students' Work Samples• Observations• Unit Quizzes• PPVT™-4 B

Dougherty-Stahl & Bravo, 2010; Barone & Xu, 2008;

National Reading Panel, 2000

TIME AND REPETITIONStudents experience intense and consistent vocabulary instruction for 90 minutes a week for 10 weeks.

Beck & McKeown, 2007;Gersten, et al., 2007;

Kamil & Hiebert, 2005; Echevarria, Short, &Vogt, 2004

ROBUST VOCABULARYREADING ABILITY

TEST ACHIEVEMENT

INTERVENTION STRATEGIESAND

INSTRUCTION OPTIONSINCLUDING TECHNOLOGY

Common Core StandardsExplicit Lesson Plans

Differentiated InstructionGregory & Kuzmich, 2010; Kryza, Duncan, & Stephens, 2010; Beck, McKeown & Kucan, 2008, 2002;

Barone & Xu, 2008; Biemiller, 2006, 2003; Stahl, 1999

ADJECTIVESAND VISUAL AIDS

New words introduced simultaneously with visual aids,

manipulatives, and hands on objects.

Manoli & Papadopoulou; 2012; Baron, 2009; Gehrke & McNally, 2009; Colorado, 2007; Biemiller,

2003; Nagy & Scott, 2000

Evolved Theoretical Framework: Case Studies: Vocabulary Development of ELL Elementary Students Using Intensive Strategy Instruction and Visual AidsNote: Vocabulary attainment, reading comprehension, and test achievement have an interdependent relationship necessary for the delivery of effective instruction to at risk ELL students.

EvolvedTheoreticalFramework

Category

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Totals

Grade K 1 – 2 4 5 – 8

Boys 1 2 4 7Girls 1 2 2 4 9Total 2 4 6 4 16

Bengali 1 3 4

Hispanic 2 2 3 4 11

Brazilian 1 1

Total 2 4 6 4 16

Profiles of Case and Group Configuration

•16 participants represented 8.9% of total student body

•5 case studies provide practical examples of the educational and social conditions impacting students

•English was not spoken at home

•Possessed minor to severe learning and physical disabilities

Case and Grouping Configuration

•Low socioeconomic status

•Various ethnicities, ages, and genders

•Failed to achieve acceptable scores on statewide literacy assessments

•Various levels of English language abilities ranging from 0 - 2

Study Participants

Bangladesh

Puerto Rico

El Salvador

Honduras

Mexico

Brazil

RESEARCH PLAN OF ACTION

Plan• Cultivate student achievement goals• Create standards based unit plans and assessments• Generate objective driven lesson plans

Implement Intervention• Oversee structured, objective driven lesson plan• Explain content clearly• Provide students with various ways that include visual aids to move toward

proficiency• Constantly check for student understanding• Maximize instructional time

Increase Effectiveness• Assess student progress• Track and analyze student progress data• Seek and implement ways to improve practice and re-teach in

response to data

Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT-™4)

Pre Post Test Assessment

PPVT-™4 Scoring Form

Strategies ActivityOral Language Development

Employing explicit teacher talk. Thinking aloud during instructional activities. Modeling; make use of student modelsRetelling and using as many adjectives as possible in the description of words. Dramatizing, pantomiming, and illustrating concepts with visual aids. Sharing poetry, singing, games, and field trip to theater.Encouraging class discussions, such as sharing stories and experiences.

Read-Alouds Thoughtfully selecting quality books in a variety of genres.Encouraging students to interact and respond to texts.Modeling phrasing.Modeling that reading is fun.Modeling pronunciation of difficult words/sounds.

Shared Reading Judiciously selecting and preparing enlarged texts.Demonstrating key concepts.Following up with books made by students.

Small-Group Reading Instruction

Carefully selecting texts to target students’ vocabulary development.Assessing authentically and frequently.

Independent Reading Allowing student to explore and self-select books at her independent reading levels.Helping student understand what makes a book “easy” or “hard.”

Think-Alouds Carefully planning and pacing lessons by earmarking places during the lessons where think-alouds will be constructive. Modeling reading and writing strategies. Modeling problem-solving strategies with new vocabulary. Routinely demonstrate how adjectives clarify and embellish sentences allowing for clearer communication.

Shared Writing Teaching explicit writing strategies.Demonstrating revision, editing, elaboration, and conventions.Creating text for students to read independently.

Process Writing Conferencing with students individually.Allowing writers to self-select topics.Collecting individual assessment information in portfolios.

Independent Writing Providing time for practice, response, and reflection.Phonemic Awareness/Phonics

Providing instructional opportunities throughout all literacy practices.Introducing spelling patterns.Studying high-frequency words in context.

Note: The table classifies the lesson strategies that profiled the study’s primary interventions.

Vocabulary and Literary

Strategies Guiding

Instruction

•Classify lesson strategies

•Determine activities to be

taught

Intervention Routine1.Pre-class differentiated practice exercises and

activities2.Goal statement detailing focus of the lesson3.Direct instruction to introduce the focus learning

point of the target vocabulary and concepts 4.Student practice via oral, written, or listening activity5.Student practice via computer applications and/or

whole or small group activity: songs, games, or special practical application or skill supporting vocabulary enhancement (e.g., cooking, role playing, art project, etc.)

6.Exit questions (KWL model, Ogle, 1986)

Note:7.At the conclusion of each unit of learning, an

assessment was administered to students for the purpose of monitoring progress and to determine to what extent they were able to internalize the new vocabulary presented in each unit.

8.Outcome: Researcher could modify instruction as the assessment might inform.

INTERVENTION ROUTINES

Intervention Components

•Thematic lessons

•Visual aids to support thematic lessons

•Differentiated learning strategies

•Modifications as needed based on observations

Unit Topic Unit Topic

1. Self-IntroductionIntroduction of Family and Friends RelationshipIntroduction of OthersAdjectives to Describe Peopleand Physical Appearance

6. Writing ProjectAsking QuestionsInterviewing TechniquesPublishing Newsletter

2. Nouns verses AdjectivesColorsShapesSizes

7. The Human BodyEmotions and FeelingsHealthMedical TermsAdjectives of Feelings and Emotions

3. TimeDays Weeks MonthsSeasons and AdjectivesHolidays Haiku Poetry

8. Transportation and TravelThe CityReading MapsPicture This: Describing Vehicles and Machinery

4. Foods MeasurementInstruction and DirectionsCooking TermsAdjectives to Describe Foods and Materials

9. Counting MoneyBanking and CheckingAdjectives as Counters

5. AnimalsDiamante PoetryOnomatopoeiaAdjectives that Describe Animal Characteristic and Physical Appearance

10. PrepositionsLocationsPlacesHouse and FurnitureAdjectives Related to Interior and Exterior Objects

Lesson TopicsNote: Overview of the 10 units provided the lessons topics that focused on practical social language and academic usage. The goal was to help students survive speaking English in school in in their community.

ALWAYS ABOUT ADJECTIVESALWAYS ABOUT

ADJECTIVESALWAYS ABOUT ADJECTIVES

PROCEDURES

Teaching Adjectives to Support Vocabulary Instruction

Order of Adjectives. The table with samples is based on the model presented on the website, MyEnglishTeacher.net (2001). Lesson topic: Using adjectives and the order of adjectives. Advanced

Learning Center. Retrieved from http://www.myenglishteacher.net/adjectivesorder.html ORDER OF ADJECTIVES

Physical DescriptionDetermin

erObservati

onSize Shape Age Color Origin Materia

lQualifie

rNoun

a lovely square old blue Mexican Woven scarf

an huge antique Italian crystal glass

three ugly little square brown wooden boxes

my old Canadian

copper penny

their expensive round black Japanese genuine pearls

those decaying red Gala apples

that bulky archaic canvas painting

many fluffy large white cotton Beach towels

A few beautiful big oval French feathered

fans

VISUAL IMAGES AND THINGS MADE WITH THE HANDS SPEAK VOLUMES

•Test forms mimicked standardized tests

Constructive responsesTrue false statements / Identification

Open ended essayCloze statementsMultiple choice

(Dougherty-Stahl & Bravo, 2010)

• Self evaluationStudents learn the makeup of good

work, and how to compare their work to assess their own efforts and

feelings of accomplishment, and how to set personal learning goals

(Wise, et al., 2007)

ASSESSMENTUnit Quizzes

from simple and basic….

ASSESSMENTUnit Quizzes

To more complex….

…..eventually involving reading, writing, listening, visual explanation, and grammar

Case #° RS SS CI % NCE S

Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post                         

1 71 81 47 54 41-56 48-63 <0.1 0.1 1 1

2 155 168 104 111 96-111 103-118 61 77 56 65 6 6

3 89 95 81 81 74-89 74-89 10 10 23 23 2 2

4 130 162 83 101 76-91 94-108 13 53 26 51 3 5

5 67 78 60 56 54-68 50-65 0.4 0.2 1 1

6 52 88 26 47 20-36 41-55 <0.1 <0.1 1 1

7 85 39 34-47 <0.1 1

8 97 118 64 72 58-73 65-80 1 3 <1 11 1 1

9 88 117 86 101 79-93 94-108 18 53 30 51 3 5

10 143 153 90 97 83-98 90-104 25 42 36 46 4 5

11 86 100 61 66 55-70 60-75 0.5 1 2 1 1

12 140 146 89 89 82-97 82-97 23 23 35 35 4 4

13 57 81 73 79 67-80 72-87 4 8 12 21 1 2

14 26 45 57 71 51-65 65-79 0.2 3 9 1 1

15 98 121 93 105 87-99 98-112 32 63 40 57 4 6

16 78 114 51 70 45-60 63-78 <.1 2 8 1 1

*Score Summary Key: RS = Raw Score; SS = Standard Score; CI = Confidence Interval; % = Percentile; NCE = Normal Curve Equivalent; S = Stanine; GSV = Growth Scale Value; AE = Age Equivalent; GE = Grade Equivalent

°The focus cases of the study are reported in bold blue type

Students’ PPVT-™4 Raw Enumerated Pre and Post Test Scores*

Case #° GSV AE GEPre Post Pre Post Pre Post

             1 121 128 4.5 5    2 180 188 10.5 11.11 4.7 63 133 137 5.6 5.9 K-14 162 183 8.1 11.1 2.6 5.35 113 126 3.1 4.16 107 133 3.7 5.57 131 5.38 139 152 5.11 6.11 K-3 1.49 133 151 5.5 6.1 1.4

10 172 176 9.2 9.1 3.6 4.311 132 140 5.4 6 K-312 169 171 8.1 9.1 3.4 3.513 111 128 3.9 514 82 102 2.4 3.415 139 156 5.11 7.5 K-2 1.916 126 149 4.1 6.8 1.2

*Score Summary Key: RS = Raw Score; SS = Standard Score; CI = Confidence Interval; % = Percentile; NCE = Normal Curve Equivalent; S = Stanine; GSV = Growth Scale Value; AE = Age Equivalent; GE = Grade Equivalent°The focus cases of the study are reported in bold blue type

Students’ PPVT-™4 Raw Enumerated Pre and Post Test Scores Continued*

Students’ PPVT-™4 Pre and Posttest Normal Curve Equivalent Scores (NCE)

Research Questions AnsweredSlide 2

•Visuals assisted students in their comprehension of English•Focusing on adjectives helped students to expand their written and oral communications •Intensive strategies with a “no nonsense approach” is effective •Beneficial to all ages•Beneficial to all learning levels•Helped students to understand the contexts and content of self, immediate environment, and general interests that are school and community related (Gersten, et al., 2007)

ASSESSMENT: PPVT -™4

Case Growth Percentage

1 5.782 4.443 3.004 12.965 11.506 24.297 **∞ 131 Posttest RS8 9.359 13.5310 2.3211 6.0612 1.1813 15.3114 24.3915 12.2316 18.25

GSV Individual Growth Percentages

• Pre-posttest administration

• Measures receptive vocabulary

• Appropriate for all levels

As a result of the intervention, the most noticeable advances in English that students demonstrated by the end of the study were:

• Students learned the purposes of English

• Engaging in asking questions

• Initiating conversation

• Continuing and concluding a conversation

• Recounting and describing

• Making inferences

ReferencesAdvanced Learning Center (2001). Lesson topic: Using adjectives and the order of adjectives. Retrieved from

http://www.myenglishteacher.net/adjectivesorder.html Baron, D. (2009). Comprehension in the primary grades. Ganske, K & Fisher, D. (Editors), 2010. Comprehension Across the Curriculum:

Perspectives and Practices, K-12. New York: New York, The Guilford Press.Barone, M. D., & Xu, S. H. (2008). Literacy instruction for English Language Learners, PreK-6. New York: Guilford.Beck I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2008). Creating robust vocabulary: Frequently asked questions and extended examples. NY: Guilford

Publications, Inc.Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford.Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2007). Increasing Young Low-Income Children's Oral Vocabulary Repertoires Through Rich and Focused Instruction.

The Elementary School Journal, 107 (3), 251-271.Biemiller, A. (2006). Vocabulary development and instruction: A prerequisite for school learning. In D. Dickinson & S. B. Neuman (Eds.),

Handbook of Early Literacy Research (Vol. 2, pp. 41-51. New York: Guilford.Biemiller, A. (2003). Vocabulary: needed if more children are to read well. Reading Psychology Volume 24, Issue 3-4, pages 323-335

2003DOI:10.1080/02702710390227297 Published online: 19 Jan 2011Biemiller, A. (2000). Teaching vocabulary: Early, direct, and sequential. The International Dyslexia Association quarterly newsletter,

Perspectives , Fall 2000, Vol. 26, No. 4. Retrieved from http://www.wordsmartedu.com/Biemiller_Teaching_Vocab.pdfBryant, D.P., Goodwin, M., Bryant, B.R., & Higgins, K. (2003). Vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities: A review of the

research. Learning Disabilities Quarterly 26, (2), 117-128.Colorado, C. (2007). What is the difference between social and academic English? Retrieved

http://www.colorincolorado.org/educators/background/academic/Doughtery-Stahl, K. A., & Bravo, M. (2010). Contemporary classroom vocabulary assessment for content areas. Reading Teacher, 63, 566-578.

Retrieved from http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/uploads/006/716/Stahl%20Voc%20Assess%20RT.pdfEchevarria, J., Short, D., Vogt, M. E. (2004). Making content comprehensible: The SIOP model. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Education, Inc.Gehrke, B. & McNally, L. (2009).Frequency adjectives and assertions about event types. Retrieved from

elanguage.net/journals/salt/article/download/19.11/1870Gersten, R., Baker, S.K., Shanahan, T., Linan-Thompson, S., Collins, P., & Scarcella, R. (2007). Effective literacy and English language instruction

for English learners in the elementary grades: A practice guide (NCEE 2007-4011). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practiceguides/20074011.pdf.

Gregory & Kuzmich, (2010). Student teams that get results: Teaching tools for the differentiated classroom. Corwin: A SAGE Company, Thousand Oaks: CA

Kamil, M.L., & Hiebert, E.H. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary: Perspectives and persistent issues. In E.H. Hiebert & M.L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 1–23). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kryza, K. Duncan, A. & Stephens, J. (Editors). (2010). Differentiation for real classrooms: Making It simple, Making it work. Corwin: A SAGE Company, Thousand

Oaks: CAManoli, P., & Papadopoulou, M. (2012). Graphic organizers as a reading strategy: Research findings and issues. Creative Education, 3(3), 348-356. Retrievedfrom http://search.proquest.com/docview/1022986447?accountid=44936. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.33055Moore, D. (2010). Robust vocabulary instruction. Retrieved from http://www.ngsp.net/Portals/0/Downloads/HBNETDownloads/SEB21_0410A.pdfNagy, 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. 3, pp. 269–284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its

implications for reading instruction. Washington: DC, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.Ogle, D.M. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564-570Stahl, S.A. (1999). Vocabulary development. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.Wise, J. C., Sevcik, R.A., Morris, R.D., Lovett, M.W., & Wolf, M. (2007). The relationship among receptive and expressive vocabulary, listening

comprehension, pre-reading skills, word identification skills, and reading comprehension by children with reading disabilities. In Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol.50 1093-1109 August 2007. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2007/076) © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

Contact Information

Mary W. Strong, Ed.D1730 Magnolia DriveGreenwood, IN 46143

[email protected](484) 354-2066

 Dorothy H. Idris, Ed.D410 Walnut AvenueYeadon, PA 19050

[email protected](484) 744-2129