BECOMING ACQUAINTED WITH THE FACES OF WORDS: FOSTERING VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT IN KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS THROUGH STORYBOOK READINGS Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this dissertation is my own or was done in collaboration with my advisory committee. This dissertation does not include proprietary or classified information. ________________________________________ Resia Thornton Brooks Certificate of Approval: ____________________________ ____________________________ Edna G. Brabham Bruce A. Murray, Chair Associate Professor Associate Professor Curriculum and Teaching Curriculum and Teaching ____________________________ ____________________________ Marie Kraska Joe F. Pittman Mildred Cheshire Fraley Interim Dean Distinguished Professor Graduate School Educational Foundations, Leadership and Technology BECOMING ACQUAINTED WITH THE FACES OF WORDS: FOSTERING VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT IN KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS THROUGH STORYBOOK READINGS Resia Thornton Brooks A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Auburn, Alabama December 15, 2006 BECOMING ACQUAINTED WITH THE FACES OF WORDS: FOSTERING VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT IN KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS THROUGH STORYBOOK READINGS Resia Thornton Brooks Permission is granted to Auburn University to make copies of this dissertation at its discretion, upon individuals or institutions and at their expense. The author reserves all publication rights. ____________________________ Signature of Author ____________________________ Date of Graduation iii VITA Resia Thornton Brooks, daughter of Napoleon Trawick and Barbara Thornton Johnson, was born on August 13, 1975 in Ozark, Alabama. She grew up in Mobile, Alabama and graduated from Samuel Silenus Murphy High School in 1993. Resia went on to receive her Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education with a middle school endorsement in language arts from the University of Montevallo in 1997. She began her teaching career at Calloway Smith Middle School in Mobile, Alabama. She later taught at Oak Mountain Elementary School in Birmingham, Alabama. She earned a Master of Education degree in Education Administration at the University of Montevallo in the summer of 2000. In the fall of 2002, she began doctoral studies in reading education at Auburn University. In 2005, she was named the principal of Valley Elementary School in Pelham, Alabama. She has been married to Lewis Brooks since September 20, 2003. They have two sons, Jordan and Justin. iv DISSERTATION ABSTRACT BECOMING ACQUAINTED WITH THE FACES OF WORDS: FOSTERING VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT IN KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS THROUGH STORYBOOK READINGS Resia Thornton Brooks Doctor of Philosophy, December 15, 2006 (M.S., University of Montevallo, 2000) (B.S., University of Montevallo, 1997) 93 Typed Pages Directed by Bruce A. Murray The purpose of the study was to examine the effect of storybook readings with explicit instruction of target words on the vocabulary acquisition of primary grade students. The secondary focus of the research sought to investigate vocabulary learning through storybook readings as it relates to students? entering vocabulary knowledge. The study involved 78 kindergarten students who were randomly assigned to one of three groups: Storybook reading with explicit instruction of target words, storybook reading without explicit instruction of target words, and a control group. The Peabody-Picture Vocabulary Test-III was used to assess receptive vocabulary knowledge. v Data analysis indicated that there was a statistical difference between students who received storybook readings with explicit instruction and students who were not exposed to storybook readings. A trend was noted between the explicit storybook group with explicit instruction, which had higher mean scores, and the storybook reading only group. However, statistically significant differences were not indicated. Students with higher initial vocabularies made greater vocabulary knowledge gains on the vocabulary posttest measure suggesting a ?rich-get richer effect? pertaining to vocabulary acquisition. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to extend my gratitude to those individuals who offered their support and assistance throughout this study. Sincere appreciation is extended to Dr. Bruce Murray, chairperson of my committee, for his eager assistance and constant support throughout my doctoral program and the research process. I am also extremely appreciative of the guidance and contributions provided by Dr. Edna Brabham, Dr. Marie Kraska and Dr. Judith Lechner. I thank the Shelby County Board of Education for allowing me to implement this research study. A special thanks is extended to the teachers at Valley Elementary School who gave of their time and talents throughout the research study: Lauren Batson, Luanne Henke, Monisha Seay, Sylvia Traynham, Marla Vaughn, Tara Baldwin, and Jan Renfro. Special expressions of gratitude are given to my mother, Barbara Johnson, and my stepfather, Peter Johnson, for their unwavering support in my life. Their hard work and sacrifices have served as the cornerstone for my accomplishments. For this, I am forever grateful. The sincerest of thanks goes to my husband, Lewis Brooks, whose immeasurable love, encouragement, and selfless acts guided me on this journey. I am deeply blessed to have him as my best friend. I thank Jordan and Justin for their hugs and kisses when I needed them the most. I extend heartfelt thanks to Sharon ?Mama Brooks? for her words of wisdom and countless Sunday dinners. For all that has been, thanks. For all that will be, yes. In memory of ?Na?. vii Style manual or journal used: Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, fifth edition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2001. Computer software used: Microsoft Office Excel; Microsoft Word 2003; Statistical Package for Social Sciences 11.5 (SPSS 11.5). viii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................. xi I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1 Purpose of Study.....................................................................................................2 Significance of the Study........................................................................................3 Methodology...........................................................................................................5 Definition of Terms ................................................................................................6 Organization of Study.............................................................................................8 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE........................................................................9 Factors Related to Vocabulary Development ........................................................9 Gaps in Vocabulary Development.......................................................................15 Explicit Vocabulary Instruction...........................................................................17 Selecting Words to Teach ....................................................................................17 Using Storybooks to Promote Primary Vocabulary Development......................18 Summary..............................................................................................................27 III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES.......................................................................30 Overview of the Study .........................................................................................30 Setting and Participants .......................................................................................31 Data Collection Procedures .................................................................................31 Instruments...........................................................................................................36 Data Analysis Procedures ....................................................................................38 ix IV. DATA ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................39 Data Analysis and Results ..................................................................................39 V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................44 Restatement of the Purpose of the Study ............................................................44 Restatement of the Research Design and Methods.............................................45 Restatement of the Findings of the Study...........................................................46 Limitations ..........................................................................................................48 Implications.........................................................................................................51 Recommendations for Future Study ...................................................................52 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................54 APPENDIX A....................................................................................................................59 APPENDIX B ....................................................................................................................60 APPENDIX C ....................................................................................................................80 x LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Means and Standard Deviations of Vocabulary Knowledge Gains..................40 Table 2 Analysis of Variance of Instruction by Group..................................................41 Table 3 Means and Standard Deviations by Group and Level of PPVT .......................42 Table 4 Analysis of Variance of Instruction and Level of PPVT..................................43 xi I. INTRODUCTION The limits of my language are the limits of my mind. All I know is what I have words for. Ludwig Wittgenstein According to the 2000 report of the National Reading Panel (NRP) vocabulary is an important component in learning to read and in fostering literacy development. Vocabulary size in kindergarten is a predictor of reading comprehension in the middle grades (Scarborough, 1998). However, existing empirical studies focus on vocabulary instruction in the upper elementary grades with little emphasis on promoting vocabulary knowledge in the primary grades. More specifically, the NRP?s (2000) meta-analysis found only five studies involving kindergarten students. The recent No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 specifies attention to vocabulary in the primary grades using ?scientifically established? teaching methods. However, unlike work on decoding skills and spelling, there is no established method of teaching vocabulary in the primary grades (National Reading Panel, 2000). Children arrive in kindergarten with ?meaningful differences? in language achievement and these differences diverge greatly during the primary years (Hart & Risley, 1995). Consequently, negative Matthew effects (Stanovich, 1986) influence later reading competence. Stanovich introduced the organizing metaphor of "Matthew effects" taken from the "rich get richer and the poor get poorer" discussion in the Gospel 1 according to Matthew. Stanovich noted that small cognitive differences, particularly in phonological processing among young children, can lead to broad and significant differences in adult reading outcomes and verbal intelligence. Students who do not experience initial progress in learning to read find it increasingly difficult to master the process. Falling behind at the outset of schooling could limit the child's exposure to print, making it even more difficult to acquire new vocabulary and information from written materials. The interest in this study developed from the paucity of data on vocabulary implementation in the primary grades. The intent of this study was to further the investigation of vocabulary instruction with kindergarten students. Specifically, I wished to examine the effect of storybook readings with and without explicit instruction of target words on the vocabulary acquisition of kindergarten students with different levels of entering vocabulary knowledge. Purpose of Study This study seeks to determine the effect of reading storybooks with and without explicit instruction of target words on vocabulary growth. More specifically, it seeks to determine if reading storybooks with direct explanations of target vocabulary words fosters vocabulary knowledge in kindergarten students. In addition, the study examines whether vocabulary size influences how easily children learn the meanings of new words from storybook readings. The following research questions guide the study. 2 1. To what extent does a storybook read-aloud method with explicit instruction improve children's semantic knowledge of words used in the storybook? 2. To what extent is there a difference in children's knowledge of new vocabulary words when children are grouped by vocabulary ability? The following null hypotheses will be tested at the alpha=.05 level. 1. Data will reveal that a storybook read-aloud method with explicit instruction will not improve children's semantic knowledge of word meanings used in the storybook. 2. Data will reveal that children with higher initial vocabularies will not make greater gains in vocabulary by listening to storybooks with explicit vocabulary instruction than children with smaller initial vocabularies. Significance of Study There are significant differences in language development among children at the beginning of kindergarten (Biemiller & Menyuk, 1999). Children who begin school with vocabulary deficits are often predisposed to later reading challenges that are difficult to rectify (Hart & Risley, 1995). The best opportunity to address these differences is in the early primary years. Therefore, it is critical for students to receive purposeful vocabulary instruction as early as possible. Conversely, vocabulary instruction in kindergarten and the primary grades is limited and in many cases, does not exist. Often, phonics instruction and phonemic awareness activities take precedence in early reading instruction with vocabulary instruction receiving limited emphasis. Becker (1977) noted that school emphasis on word identification skills in the early grades without emphasis on challenging vocabulary results in comprehension problems in the later years. However, few studies have explored vocabulary instruction in the primary grades where developing 3 vocabulary acquisition is fundamental. Of the studies that examine vocabulary instruction in the early grades, many examine the use of storybooks to introduce new vocabulary words. Storybook readings are a common emergent literacy practice that provides rich language interactions and opportunities for using decontextualized language. Yet, research suggests that elementary teachers often do not use storybook reading optimally and fail to involve children in discussing major story elements (Beck & McKeown, 2001). Many teachers fail to capitalize on read-aloud opportunities to explore written language in meaningful and engaging ways. Beck and McKeown observed that the most frequent pattern involved teachers reading the story from beginning to end without any input from the students. When discussion did occur, it was directed toward simple questions and clarifications of unfamiliar vocabulary and story content. Questions were phrased in a manner that produced brief, simple answers. For example, ?Harry likes taking everything except a what?? or ?Who can tell me what a morsel is?? Often teachers provide students with one encounter of a word as it is presented within the storybook context without discussing connections to how the word could be applied to other contexts. Biemiller and Menyuk (1999) noted that books are rarely reread and used in conjunction with comprehension or word explanations. As such, students do not receive opportunities to interact with decontextualized language and do not fully benefit from the storybook reading experience. The insights presented in this research will assist teachers in designing activities to promote vocabulary growth through rich interactions and discussions about words and their relationships. This study highlights an approach in which teachers can provide opportunities for children to learn new words presented in storybooks through rich 4 conversations about language. It is hoped that the methods outlined in this study will prove beneficial in narrowing the vocabulary gaps among kindergarten students. In addition, the manner in which this study highlights effective instructional methods will assist teachers in incorporating best practices related to vocabulary instruction. Methodology The study involved 78 kindergarten students in a suburban school in north central Alabama. The students were randomly assigned to three groups within one of five classroom settings: storybook reading with explicit instruction of target words, storybook reading without explicit instruction of target words, and a control group that participated in phonics games. I created two sets of teaching scripts for the storybook lessons: Explicit and nonexplicit. The explicit lesson scripts included the reading of each storybook with discussion of the target vocabulary words. The nonexplicit lesson scripts included the reading of each storybook without discussion of the target vocabulary words. The lesson scripts were used for both treatment groups. The treatments were administered in five-day cycles for four weeks. The subjects who received storybook readings with vocabulary instruction were taught six words per week (24 words total). The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III was administered to assess receptive vocabulary abilities. At the conclusion of the four-week treatment, a researcher-created posttest was administered to assess vocabulary gains for the target words presented in the storybook readings. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to analyze the data. 5 Definition of Terms To provide clarity, significant terms used in this dissertation are as follows: 1. Vocabulary: The store of known words and their meanings. The National Reading Panel (2000) defines essential vocabulary as the words we must know to communicate effectively. 2. Reading comprehension: The NRP (2000) describes comprehension as an active process that requires an intentional and thoughtful interaction between the reader and the text. 3. Explicit vocabulary instruction: An instructional approach that actively involves students in word learning. Both definitional and contextual information are presented. The meanings of new words are taught through discussions and meaningful information about the words is provided. 4. Rich vocabulary instruction: According to Beck, McKeown, and Kucan (2002), rich instruction goes beyond definitional information to get students actively involved in learning new words. 5. Context clues: Context clues are the hints provided in text, which lead the reader to the meanings of words. 6. Established words: General, high frequency sight words such as baby, bottle, and watch. 7. Versatile words: Rich words that appear frequently across a variety of domains. They provide opportunities for students to build connections to other words and concepts. Examples may include: disposition, impulse, and optimist. 6 8. Specialized Words: Low frequency words that are often important for understanding specific text, but are not usually found in general texts. Examples may include: cornea, helium, and isotope. 9. Student-friendly definition: A student-friendly definition pinpoints a word?s meaning by explaining its typical use. It provides a meaning of a word in clear, everyday language. Beck et.al (2002) note, ?Student friendly definitions provide an explanation of the concept in language that is readily accessible so students can understand the concept with ease? (pg. 36). 10. Decontextualized language: Decontextualized language is not tied to the immediate context, and meaning is primarily conveyed through explicit vocabulary instruction. It requires children to use their developing mental abilities to represent ideas, a process that is important to the development of reading comprehension. 11. Schema: Schema refers to organized prior knowledge gained through previous experiences. Schema theory contends that children develop separate schemata for experiences and apply these schemata to understand situations that may occur later. Children will also apply schema to things they read and write about to develop relationships. 12. Word consciousness: A disposition toward words that is both cognitive and affective. The student who is word conscious is interested in words and gains enjoyment and satisfaction from using them well and from seeing or hearing them used well by others. 13. Picture walk: An activity in which the teacher shows students pictures from a storybook to build their interest in the story and to set up positive expectations about 7 what is to come. This approach allows students to activate prior knowledge about the content, to become familiar with the story, and to examine new vocabulary words. 14. Semantic(s): Semantics is the study of meaning in language, as the analysis of the meaning of words, phrases, sentences, discourse, and whole text; it also refers to the ways that language conveys meaning. Organization of the Study The study is presented in five chapters. Chapter I includes an introduction, the purpose of the study, research hypothesis, significance of the study, methodology, definition of terms, and organization of the study. Chapter II contains a review of the literature, which provides a historical perspective and context for the present study. It addresses factors in vocabulary acquisition, vocabulary assessments, vocabulary knowledge gaps, the elements of explicit instruction, and empirical support for using storybooks to aide in vocabulary development. Chapter III describes the methodology used to collect the data for the study. Chapter IV presents the analysis of the data and the research findings. Chapter V provides a summary of the research, suggests implications for instruction, limitations and recommendations for further research. 8 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE This chapter focuses on a synthesis of the current research on vocabulary instruction. It highlights factors related to vocabulary development, gaps in vocabulary knowledge, the assessment and evaluation of vocabulary, selecting words to teach, and explicit vocabulary instruction. Specific to the design of the present study, it concludes with a synthesis of the research on the use of storybooks in promoting vocabulary development in young children. Factors Related to Vocabulary Development Much of the research in the past two decades has focused on four factors related to vocabulary development. They include: a) vocabulary as it relates to comprehension, b) vocabulary size and growth, c) depth of word knowledge, and d) the role of context in learning new words. These elements serve as a foundation for understanding the complexities of vocabulary learning. Vocabulary as it Relates to Comprehension To acquire meaning from text, students need many words in their vocabularies and the ability to use strategies to assist in learning new words. If a student cannot understand the words in a text then the text will be difficult to comprehend. The National Reading Panel (2000) concluded that comprehension development could not be understood without a critical examination of the role played by vocabulary knowledge. In a meta- 9 analysis designed to examine the effects of vocabulary instruction on the learning of word meanings and comprehension, Stahl and Fairbanks (1986) concluded that overall vocabulary instruction does improve comprehension. An effect size of .97 could be attributed to vocabulary instruction for comprehension of passages containing taught words. Vocabulary instruction has typically involved students memorizing definitions and creating sentences based on the word?s meaning. However, this has proven to be an ineffective approach to teaching and learning new words. Stahl and Fairbanks (1986) found that just teaching definitions did not significantly affect comprehension. Teaching methods that included both definitional and contextual information and involved students in deeper processing proved promising in facilitating comprehension. Vocabulary Size and Growth Vocabulary size and development have played a key role in the research on vocabulary instruction. Many studies have attempted to identify the size and range of vocabulary knowledge, but vary in the sizes of vocabulary reported. Differences among these findings are due to what investigators treat as a ?word.? Estimates have varied, but have become more consistent in the last decade. Nagy and Anderson (1984) examined the number of distinct words in printed school English. Drawing on a database of five million words in grades 3 through 9 school texts, Nagy and Anderson grouped words into word families. To be included in a word family, the meaning of the related word could be determined by using knowledge of its root word and the context of the text. Based on this definition, Nagy and Anderson estimated that 88,533 distinct word families could be found in school texts. This estimate is now widely used as the domain of words that students in grades 3 through 9 can be 10 expected to know. For every word a child learns, it is estimated that there are an average of one to three additional related words that should also be understandable. Vocabulary size is related to vocabulary growth, the number of new words students learn each year. Research has indicated that most children are capable of learning large numbers of new words each year. An average student in grades 3 through 12 is likely to learn approximately 3,000 new vocabulary words each year, assuming he or she reads between 500,000 and a million running words of text a school year (Nagy & Anderson, 1984). Students who learn 3,000 word meanings each year learn approximately 8 words per day (Baker, Simmons, & Kameenui, 1995). Students have a core reading vocabulary of approximately 25,000 words by the end of elementary school (Nagy & Herman, 1987). Depth of Word Knowledge Vocabulary research (e.g., Baumann & Kameenui, 1991; Beck & McKeown, 1991) has also examined the importance of considering levels of word knowledge in vocabulary development. This research has examined what it means to ?know? a word. However, depth of word knowledge and what it means to know a word are complex and multifaceted processes. Stahl (1986) proposed three levels of word knowledge: association, comprehension, and generation. 1. Association: Word knowledge at the association level means that when presented with a new word, students can formulate associations, although they may be unable to understand the meaning of the word. 2. Comprehension: Knowledge of a word at the comprehension level signifies the student?s ability to understand the commonly accepted meaning of the word. 11 3. Generation: Word knowledge at the generation level indicates that students can provide the target word in a novel context, compare the definition to personal experience, and formulate a new sentence that clearly demonstrates the word?s meaning. Beck and McKeown (1991) stated, "Knowing a word is not an all-or-nothing proposition; it is not the case that one either knows or does not know a word. Rather, knowledge of a word should be viewed in terms of the extent or degree of knowledge that people can possess" (p. 791). Beck, McKeown, Omanson, & Pople (1987) described four levels of vocabulary knowledge on a continuum: 1. No knowledge. A reader might meet the word acquiesce in a text and have no knowledge of its meaning. 2. General sense. A reader might have some general information about a word, such as understanding that jovial has a positive connotation. 3. Narrow, context-bound knowledge. A reader might know that a benevolent dictator is a ruler who does not mistreat people, but is unable to understand how benevolent applies to other situations and types of behavior. 4. Rich, decontextualized knowledge of a word?s meaning. A reader might know that not only is a miser someone who saves money and lives as if poor, but can give examples of miserly behavior such as a pastor who has miserly behaviors (p. 148). Carey (1978) proposed a distinction between fast mapping and extended mapping to describe how young children can quickly learn the meanings of new words. She asserted that the process of acquisition could be separated into two phases, distinguished 12 from each other in terms of their time course. The first, noted as fast mapping, occurs upon the first encounter with the new word, or upon only a few encounters. Fast mapping yields only a small fraction of the total information that will constitute the full learning of the word. In fast mapping, an individual is able to learn a very superficial meaning of a word quickly, sometimes after just one exposure. The second phase, extended mapping, involves word learning over a period of multiple encounters with the word. During this phase, an individual gains full understanding of a word's meaning. Carey asserted that school-aged children may be working on as many as 1,600 word mappings simultaneously, and can be at various levels of mapping. As such, if a student learns the meaning of eight new words per day, the majority of those words are learned at only a very basic level of understanding. What it means to know a word is a complicated process that has important implications for how words are both taught and measured. The Role of Context in Learning New Words Research has suggested that the major means for developing vocabulary should emphasize learning words in context (Beck, McKeown & Kucan, 2002). Although words are learned from context, research shows that the learning of unfamiliar words occurs in small increments, and not all words encountered in text will be learned (Nagy, Anderson, & Herman, 1987). Schatz and Baldwin (1986) examined the extent to which context assists students in learning the meanings of unknown words. The results indicated that context clues were ineffective in assisting students in inferring word meanings. Schatz and Baldwin noted that context clues do not always provide appropriate information and are likely to result in confusion. 13 Beck, McKeown and McCaslin (1983) described a comprehensive continuum of natural story contexts that prove problematic to the intended meanings of words: (a) misdirective contexts, (b) nondirective contexts, (c) general contexts and (d) directive contexts. A description of the story contexts and examples of each follows as presented in Beck, McKeown and Kucan (2002). 1. Misdirective contexts mislead the reader by directing the reading to an incorrect meaning of the word. ?Sandra had won the dance contest, and the audience?s cheers brought her to the stage for an encore. ?Every step she takes is so perfect and graceful,? Ginny said grudgingly as she watched Sandra dance.? (p.4). The context would likely lead the reader to apply a positive connotation to grudgingly. Ginny?s comments might lead the reader to believe that she liked Sara?s dancing. 2. Nondirective contexts are those, which provide no assistance to the reader in deriving a word?s meaning. ?Dan heard the door open and wondered who had arrived. He couldn?t make out the voices then he recognized the lumbering footsteps on the stairs, and knew it was Aunt Grace.? (p.5). Here lumbering has many connotations: light, heavy, and noisy which would all fit within the context, but would convey a different meaning. 3. General contexts provide only enough information for the reader to categorize the unknown word. ?Joe and Stan arrived at the party at seven o?clock. By 9:30, the evening seemed to drag for Stan, but Joe really seemed to be having a good time at the party. ?I wish I could be as gregarious as he is,? thought Stan.? (p.5). 14 The reader might conclude that Joe is gregarious because he enjoys parties, but the specific meaning remains unclear. 4. Directive contexts lead the reader to the specific, correct meaning for a new word. ?When the cat pounced on the dog, he leapt up, yelping, and knocked down a shelf of books. The animals ran past Wendy, tripping her. She cried out and fell to the floor. As the noise and confusion mounted, mother hollered upstairs, ?What?s all that commotion??? (p.5). The reader is led to the word?s correct meaning through clues in the text: noise and confusion. Using contexts to derive word meanings is a traditional part of vocabulary instruction, but as demonstrated, story contexts are not sufficient in providing clues to promote vocabulary knowledge. As such, directly teaching the meanings of unknown words is needed to promote word learning. Gaps in Vocabulary Knowledge Research studies have revealed significant gaps in vocabulary knowledge in the primary grades well before enrollment in school. Becker (1977) was among the first to highlight the importance of vocabulary development by linking vocabulary size and achievement among disadvantaged students. Vocabulary growth varies tremendously among students, and many economically and linguistically disadvantaged children acquire vocabulary knowledge at much lower rates than other students. Vocabulary differences between students appear early and the vocabulary gap increases over time. In a pioneering longitudinal study, which addressed the effect of early family experiences on intellectual growth, Hart and Risley (1995) found several disparities in 15 children?s language development. The study group consisted of 13 professional, 23 working class and 6 welfare families. Hart and Risley found that the widening gap between the vocabulary growth of children from professional, working class and welfare families across the first three years of the children's lives could be attributed to the overwhelming differences in the amount of verbal interaction the parents had with their children. They noted a difference of almost 300 words spoken per hour between professional and welfare parents. As a result, by age 3, the professional families' children had a larger recorded vocabulary than the welfare families' parents. Data revealed that although children from both groups started to speak at about the same time, their vocabulary, as measured by the number of different words used, varied significantly. Three-year-old children in higher socioeconomic status (SES) families had vocabularies as much as five times larger than children in lower SES families. By age three, the observed cumulative vocabulary for children in the professional families was about 1,100; for the working class families it was about 750, and for the welfare families it was just above 500. Moats (2001) also noted how variations in home experiences greatly affect the growth of children?s vocabulary. Moats examined kindergarten students in a large city district and found that many children were unable to name pictures that showed the meanings of words such as sewing or parachute. Evidence shows that the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged children continues to widen during the elementary years and once established, those differences are difficult to improve (Hart& Risley, 1995). Unfortunately, schools provide little or no language support in the primary grades to compensate for these differences. 16 Explicit Vocabulary Instruction In recent years, a strong research base in vocabulary acquisition has allowed researchers to make practical recommendations for effective vocabulary instruction. This research indicates that direct instruction in vocabulary can increase vocabulary learning and comprehension. Beck, McCaslin, & McKeown (1983) developed an explicit vocabulary program that aimed at producing deep and through word knowledge. The aim of explicit instruction was to have students engage in active thinking about words, how the words could be used in different situations, and relationships among words. The main premise of explicit vocabulary instruction is to promote thought about words and for students to become involved with word learning at a more meaningful level. Students engage in interactions by comparing words and discussing their meanings and uses. Research indicates that the intentional, explicit teaching of specific target words and word-learning strategies improves reading comprehension of text containing those words (McKeown, Beck, Omason, & Pople, 1985; Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986). This intentional instruction is important for all students, but is especially important for students who lack comprehension and decoding skills needed for wide reading (Lehr, Osborn, & Hiebert, 2005). Selecting Words to Teach To capitalize on the benefits of explicit instruction, Beck et al. (2002) propose that teachers place careful consideration on words? usefulness and frequency of use. To assist in making word-choice decisions, they categorized words into three categories or tiers: 1. Tier One (established) consists of familiar, basic words such as clock, happy, 17 baby, and run. Words in this tier rarely require instructional attention because they are already well established. 2. Tier Two (versatile) is comprised of words such as diligent, industrious, and impatient that are ?likely to appear frequently in a wide variety of texts and in written and oral language of mature language users? (2002, p. 16). Tier-two words are versatile words that can be worked with in a variety of ways so students can build connections to them. 3. Tier Three (specialized) is made up of words such as retinue, peninsula, and integer that rarely appear in text. They are specialized within content areas and not versatile across the language. Beck and McKeown suggest that teachers concentrate on versatile, tier two words because they can be used in a variety of ways so that students can build in-depth knowledge and formulate connections to other words and concepts. Also, versatile words provide precision and specificity in describing a concept for which the students already have a general understanding (Beck et al., 2002). In conjunction with selecting versatile words for instruction, Beck and McKeown recommend the use of creating student- friendly definitions for words by characterizing words how they are typically used by explaining the meanings of words in everyday language. Using Storybooks to Promote Primary Vocabulary Development Despite the evidence that supports the correlation between vocabulary levels and reading comprehension, few classroom research studies pertaining to vocabulary acquisition in the primary grades have been conducted. The National Reading Panel?s (2000) inquiry into recent research studies revealed that there are relatively few studies 18 outside the range of third to eighth grade. Biemiller and Slonin (2004) noted that vocabulary development is crucial for school success, but it has not received the attention and interest that work on identifying printed word has received. Of the studies that address vocabulary instruction in the primary grades, most utilize storybook readings and story contexts to promote vocabulary learning. Studies have revealed that children can acquire vocabulary knowledge from storybook readings (Robbins & Ehri, 1994; Elley, 1989; Nicholson & Whyte, 1992; S?n?chal & Cornell, 1993). Elley (1989) suggested that young children acquire vocabulary incidentally when storybooks were read to them. In the first facet of his two-part study, he investigated the use of storybook readings on vocabulary learning of unknown words. A 20-item pretest of target vocabulary words was administered to 178 seven-year-old students. A storybook was read to the students three times over a one-week period. In the first reading, the teacher led a discussion of the title, cover picture, and main characters without providing definitions of the target words. The second reading of the story followed the same pattern. The third reading followed the same pattern and allowed for student remarks. The same 20-item test was administered as a posttest measure, two days after the third reading. Students scored higher on most target words on the posttest than the pretest, with a mean increase of 15.4 percent. Subjects were divided into four groups on the basis of their pretest scores. Students in the low group showed the most gains, with little difference among the higher groups. The second part of Elley?s work examined the effects of the teacher explanation of unfamiliar words above the effects of story reading alone. The sample consisted of 178 8-year-old students, who were assigned to three instructional groupings: 19 1. Reading with explanation: The teachers read two storybooks and explained the meanings of target words as they occurred. The teacher explained each word based on guidelines in one of three ways: By using a synonymous phrase, by role-playing and by pointing to a picture. 2. Reading without explanation: The teacher provided a reading of the story without an explanation of the target words. 3. Control group: 51 children of similar age and background were included as a control group. The control group did not hear the two stories. The two treatments were crossed with the two stories for the treatment groups. The first group heard the storybook three times over a period of seven days, with explanation of the vocabulary words. The second group heard the same story read three times over the same week, but without an explanation of the target words. Pictures were briefly shown to both groups as the story was read. A posttest was administered one week after the treatments. The study found that students who received storybook reading with explanation of target vocabulary words made greater vocabulary gains. Also, students in the lowest group improved more than the other groups. Elley noted that regression effects and ceiling effects could have contributed to this trend. In addition, students with weaker vocabularies were less experienced at listening to stories and as a result, attended to the plot rather than the words. Student interest and motivation may have also played a factor. In a replication of Elley?s work, Nicholson and Whyte (1992) examined children?s ability to learn new words by listening to a story. The central aim of their study was to investigate the issue of Matthew effects or ?rich-get richer effects? 20 (Stanovich,1986) in vocabulary learning. Applied to vocabulary growth, this means that as children get older, the differences between those with larger vocabularies and their less fortunate peers grows larger and larger. More specifically, the study sought to examine if individual differences in reading ability would influence word learning. The study designed differed from Elley?s (1989) in that it (a) included 8-, 9-, and 10-year old children with different levels of reading ability, (b) involved one story read which was read once, (c) the words were tested both in and out of story context and (d) the children were asked to retell the story. The findings of the study revealed that the largest effects were for high ability, above-average readers. This evidence suggests that because good readers have a strong knowledge base and larger vocabularies, they are better able to infer the meanings of new words. Robbins and Ehri (1994) also reported contradictory findings in a study of six-year old non-readers, which focused on verifying the results of Elley?s study (1989). These researchers divided 38 kindergarteners into three achievement groupings based on their Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT-R) standard scores. Children in each group heard one of two stories twice, 2-4 days apart, and completed a posttest measuring knowledge of 22 unknown words, half which appeared in the story. Word meanings were not discussed. Children recognized the meanings of more words from the story than words that did not appear in the story. Results indicated that nonreaders acquire vocabulary when they listened to stories at least twice and unfamiliar words repeated in the story with no explanation of word meanings. Students with larger vocabularies learned more words than children with smaller vocabularies as measured by the PPVT-R. 21 S?n?chal, Thomas, and Monker (1995) noted similar results in a two-part study to assess how 4-year old children who differ in vocabulary knowledge learn new vocabulary incidentally from listening to stories read aloud. Thirty-two children participated in Experiment 1 and were classified as either high in word knowledge or low in word knowledge on the basis of Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT-R) standard scores. Children who differed in vocabulary knowledge were randomly assigned to one of two book-reading conditions: 1. Listening condition: The experimenter read the test as presented and children listened passively as the adult read the story. 2. Labeling condition: The experimenter asked a ?what? or ?where? question after reading each target word in the narrative and required them to label illustrations representing the target words. Two storybooks were used in the study and were read twice, each book containing 13 target words. A comprehension vocabulary test was constructed for each book, and a production vocabulary test was administered that required children to label illustrations of target items in the storybooks. Children who answered questions during the reading (labeling condition) performed better on the comprehension vocabulary posttest than children who listened to the story (listening condition). Children in the labeling condition produced more words than children in the listening condition and children with larger vocabularies produced more words than children with smaller vocabularies. These findings provide limited support for the hypothesis that high vocabulary children may have more efficient memory processes than low-vocabulary children (S?n?chal, Thomas, & Monker, 1995). 22 In the second experiment, 48 four-year-old children were classified as having either high word knowledge or low word knowledge based on the PPVT-R and randomly assigned to the following conditions: 1. Listening condition: The experimenter read the story and repeated the sentence introducing each target word. 2. Pointing condition: The experimenter asked questions requiring the children to point to the illustration of the target word after reading the sentence containing each target word, thus allowing each target word to be heard a second time. This condition provided nonverbal opportunities to practice retrieval of the words? meanings. 3. Labeling condition: The procedure for the labeling condition was identical to that of Experiment 1 where the experimenter asked a ?what? or ?where? question after reading each target word in the narrative and required students to label illustrations representing the target words. Analysis indicated a significant main effect for reading condition: Children who actively responded during the reading performed better on the comprehension posttest than did children who listened to the story. The results indicated that children were able to produce more words in the active responding conditions than they did in the listening condition. In addition, there was a significant main effect for word knowledge, p<.02. Children with larger vocabularies obtained higher scores than children with smaller vocabularies. Penno, Wilkinson and Moore (2002) noted similar results in their examination of listening to stories on young children?s vocabulary growth as it relates to the Matthew 23 effects. Forty-seven children listened to stories on three occasions. The children were randomly assigned to one of two groups: 1. Explanation: The teacher read the story and explained the meanings of the 10 target vocabulary words. The explanation consisted of the use of a synonym and definitional information. 2. No Explanation: The teacher read the story and gave no explanation of the 10 target vocabulary items. Vocabulary learning occurred incidentally while listening to stories and students made greater gains when the teacher provided an explanation. These findings are consistent with the views of Elley (1989) and Stahl and Fairbanks (1986) that a combined approach with incidental learning from story contexts and direct instruction is more beneficial than either in isolation. These results support the results of Robbins and Ehri (1994) and are consistent with the findings that children with greater word knowledge acquire more words than children with less developed vocabularies. Brett, Rothlein, and Hurley (1996) examined the effects of three conditions on fourth grade students? vocabulary acquisition: listening to stories with a brief explanation of the unfamiliar target words, listening to stories with no explanation of the words, and having no exposure to the stories or vocabulary. Data revealed that students who heard stories once along with a teacher explanation of words learned the meaning of an average of three new words and remembered them better six weeks later than students who heard stories with no teacher explanation and students in the control group. This is consistent with the findings of Biemiller and Boote (2006) who examined the effect of two versus four readings on word acquisition. No significant differences in gains were 24 noted when text was read two versus four times. These results suggest that repeated rereading of the same story may not be necessary if new words are explained as they are encountered in the story. However, further research is needed to determine if students can use the words as a part of their written and spoken vocabularies. Wasik and Bond (2001) investigated an interactive book reading approach on the language skills of four-year-old at-risk preschool children. Teachers read two storybooks to children in the intervention group and reinforced the vocabulary in the books by presenting concrete objects representing the words. The teachers read one book twice and the second book once. The teachers provided multiple opportunities for children to use the book-related words and asked open-ended questions to engage the children in conversations about the book. Teachers in the control classrooms read the same books used in the intervention classrooms and read the books the same number of times that they were read in the intervention group. At the end of the 15-week intervention, the PPVT-III (1998) was administered. Results of the study indicated that children in the intervention group scored significantly better on the PPVT-III compared with children in the control group. Hargrave and S?n?chal (2000) conducted a similar study with 36 preschool children with limited expressive vocabulary skills. Two reading conditions were included: a traditional reading condition in which teachers read the story, and a dialogic reading condition in which students were read the same books in groups of eight. Each book in each condition was read twice to provide repeated exposure. The dialogic reading intervention group was designed to actively involve children during the book reading by (a) encouraging the children to participate, (b) providing teacher feedback, 25 and (c) the adaptation of teacher reading styles to the linguistic needs of the student. Children in the dialogic reading condition made greater gains in vocabulary introduced in the books than did children in a regular book-reading situation. Hargrave and S?n?chal also examined the number of children in each reading group to extend the ratio of children to teacher from 5:1 to 8:1. The findings indicated that dialogic reading could be beneficial in groups larger than those previously examined. Brabham and Lynch-Brown (2002) noted similar results in an investigation of teachers? reading aloud styles (just reading, performance reading, and interactional reading) on vocabulary acquisition and comprehension of first and third grade students. The interactional reading involved the teacher reading the story verbatim and pausing to discuss student comments about the story. Greater vocabulary gains were made for students in the interactional reading group. The performance reading and interactional reading styles resulted in greater vocabulary learning than just reading. The interactional reading produced higher gains than performance reading. These results support Beck and McKeown?s (2002) emphasis on explicit instruction with focus on teacher explanations of target vocabulary words. These findings verify teacher explanations and students discussions as important factors that enhance vocabulary learning of students in the primary grades. S?n?chal and Cornell (1993) examined whether 4 and 5-year-old children learned new vocabulary from a single storybook-reading encounter. In addition, they investigated the effect of adult reading practices on vocabulary acquisition. Reading the text verbatim was expected to be the least effective intervention due to the absence of student dialogue 26 and discussion during the reading. Children were assigned to one of four reading conditions: 1. Questioning condition: The adult asked -what and -where questions when target words were introduced. 2. Recasting condition: The adult read the sentence introducing the target item and repeated the sentence but replaced the target item with a synonym. 3. Word-repetition condition: The adult repeated the sentence introducing target words, giving children a second opportunity for word exposure. 4. Verbatim reading condition: Children listened to the story and were not encouraged to participate. Results indicated that active participation in the book-reading interactions did not boost vocabulary learning. Reading the book verbatim was as effective as asking questions or recasting new vocabulary words as it was likely that that the introduction of new words in the story context was sufficient in producing receptive vocabulary learning. Summary The importance of vocabulary knowledge has long been recognized in the development of reading skills. As early as 1924, researchers noted that growth in reading produces growth in word knowledge (Whipple, 1925). Vocabulary knowledge has been examined for many years, but only in recent decades has solid research provided an understanding of the issues in vocabulary acquisition. Guidance for meaningful vocabulary instruction has surfaced as a result of the need to examine vocabulary acquisition within the broader context of language learning. This literature review has examined the following (a) factors related to vocabulary development, (b) the assessment 27 and evaluation of vocabulary knowledge, (c) gaps in vocabulary knowledge, (d) selecting words to teach (e) elements of effective instruction, (f) and the use of storybook readings to promote vocabulary knowledge. Central to the design of the present study, the review of the literature emphasized the research evidence on promoting vocabulary development in the primary grades with storybooks. Studies of teaching word meanings using storybooks in the primary grades reported gains of 20%-25%. The intervention studies presented in this literature review differ in: (a) the ages of children (preschool to Grade 6), (b) instructional group size (from 1:1 to whole class), (c) child vocabulary size, (d) number of readings of stories (from one to four), (e) number of word meanings tested, and (f) the number of meanings taught in the study per reading. The general findings are as follows: 1. Single storybook readings with word meaning explanations resulted in a 15% gain in word meanings of those tested (Nicholson & Whyte, 1992). 2. Repeated readings without word meaning explanations lead to an average 9% word gain in word meanings (Brabham & Lynch-Brown, 2002; Brett, Rothlein & Hurley, 1996; Elley, 1989; Hargrave & S?n?chal, 2000; Penno, Wilkinson, & Moore, 2002; Robbins & Ehri, 1994). 3. Repeated readings with word meaning explanations led to an average 26% gain in word meanings (S?n?chal, Thomas, & Monker, 1995; Brett et al., 1996; Elley, 1989; Hargrave & S?n?chal, 2000; Penno et al., 2002; Robbins & Ehri, 1994). 4. Repeated readings with interactive discussions lead to an average of 17% word gain in word meanings (Hargrave & S?n?chal, 2000; Brabham & Lynch-Brown, 2002). 28 Findings suggest that combining rereadings with word meaning explanations is an effective method for fostering vocabulary acquisition. Reading stories with word explanations has been shown to be more effective than simply reading stories. In summary, when word meanings are learned in context and explained, they appear to promote vocabulary development. However when examining the impact of storybook readings with explicit instruction on students with different entering vocabularies, many inconsistencies were noted. Elley?s work indicted larger gains with students with lower entering vocabularies, which contradicts the findings of S?n?chal, Thomas, & Monker (1995), Robbins & Ehri (1994) and Penno, Wilkinson & Moore (2002). As such, the present study investigates two issues: a) the effect of storybook readings with and without teacher explanation of word meanings (explicit instruction) and b) the influence of entering vocabulary knowledge on vocabulary learning of students who are exposed to storybook readings with and without teacher explanation of word meanings. The present study is designed to extend the research on methods to enhance vocabulary acquisition of kindergarten students with different levels of entering vocabulary knowledge. 29 III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES This chapter presents the research methods of the study. It is organized into five sections, which include an overview of the study, description of the setting and participants, data collection procedures, instrumentation, and data analysis methods. Overview of the Study This study seeks to determine the effect of reading storybooks to kindergarten students with and without explicit instruction of target words on vocabulary growth. The study also examines the effect of initial vocabulary size on the learning of new vocabulary words. The design for this study was informed by previous research on storybook reading to young children. The following research questions guided this study. 1. To what extent does a storybook read-aloud method with explicit instruction improve children's semantic knowledge of words used in the storybook? 2. To what extent is there a difference in children's knowledge of new vocabulary words as measured by the vocabulary posttest when children are grouped by vocabulary ability? The following null hypotheses will be tested at the alpha =.05 level. 1. Data will reveal that a storybook read-aloud method with explicit instruction will not improve children's semantic knowledge of word meanings used in the storybook. 2. Data will reveal that children with higher initial vocabularies will not make greater gains in vocabulary by listening to storybooks with explicit vocabulary instruction than children with smaller initial vocabularies. 30 Setting and Participants The study was conducted in the first nine-week grading period of the 2005-2006 school year. The participating school district is located in a suburban area in north central Alabama. The school has an enrollment of 715 students in pre kindergarten through second grade. The student population comprises of 68% Caucasian, 23% Hispanic, 7% Black, and 2% Asian students. Students who receive free or reduced lunch make up 37% of the population. The Alabama Reading Initiative (ARI) has influenced literacy instruction in the school since 2003. Accordingly, reading instruction in the kindergarten classes features small and whole group activities with an emphasis on letter identification, phonemic awareness, and phonics instruction. Five regular-education self- contained kindergarten classes participated in the four-week study. A total of 78 students (46 girls and 32 boys) were included in the study. The 78 participants ranged in age from 5 to 6 years, with a mean age of 5.5. Only students who returned signed consent forms participated in the investigation. Data Collection Procedures The Research Randomizer computerized random number generator (Urbaniak & Plous, 2001) was used to randomly assign students to one of three groups within each classroom setting: (1) storybook reading with instruction of target words, (2) storybook reading without instruction of target words, and (3) a control group that participated independently with phonics activities. I developed lesson scripts for all lessons taught in the study for the two groups receiving storybook readings. The scripts were field-tested and revised based on these preliminary efforts. The lesson scripts for the storybook reading with instruction of target words group were developed based on the vocabulary 31 component of the Text Talk approach to reading storybooks (Beck and McKeown, 2001). Text Talk has two main goals. One goal is to enhance comprehension through interspersed open questions that ask children to consider the ideas in the story, talk about them, and make connections among them as the story moves along. The second goal is to enhance vocabulary development, which is the focus in the present study. A key component of Text Talk emphasizes the explicit teaching of sophisticated vocabulary words in storybooks with student discussion and use of the words after the story has been read. To examine Text Talk as it relates to vocabulary development, Beck and McKeown (2004) compared the extent of learning that occurred when the experimental group of kindergarten and first grade children received instruction on a specific set of sophisticated words to the control group that did not receive instruction. The study took place over a 10-week period in a lower SES school population with four classrooms (two experimental and two controls) from each grade for a total of 98 children. Posttest results indicated that within each grade level, the treatment group showed a significantly higher gain in learning the target words. For Text Talk, Beck and McKeown identified 80 children?s trade books, and for each one, selected about three words per story for direct teaching following the reading of the story. The Text Talk method highlights versatile words such as reluctant, drowsy, and desperately as featured in A Pocket for Corduroy. These words display instructional potential and can be worked with in a variety of ways so students can build connections to other words and concepts. An example of the Text Talk method using the word reluctant would entail the following instructional sequence: 32 1. First, the word is contextualized for its role in the story. (In the story, Lisa was reluctant to leave the laundromat without Corduroy.) 2. The children repeat the word in order to create a phonological representation of the word. (Say the word with me.) 3. The meaning of the word is explained using a "student-friendly" definition that characterizes the word and explains its meaning in everyday language. (Reluctant means you are not sure you want to do something.) 4. The word is decontextualized; examples in contexts other than the one used in the story are provided. (Someone might be reluctant to eat a food that they never had before, or someone might be reluctant to ride a roller coaster because it looks scary.) 5. Children interact with examples of the word?s use or provide their own examples. (Tell about something you would be reluctant to do. Try to use reluctant when you tell about it. You could start by saying something like "I would be reluctant to _______.") 6. Finally, children say the word again to reinforce its phonological representation. (What?s the word we?ve been talking about?) Consistent with the Text Talk method, the lesson scripts consisted of sequenced lessons designed to engage students in rich opportunities to interact with three target vocabulary words in each storybook. The lesson scripts are located in Appendix A. In selecting storybooks, I sought books that would be both appealing to kindergarten students and that would provide exposure to versatile words. Kindergarten teachers were also surveyed to determine books that were engaging to kindergarten students and that 33 contained opportunities for rich interactions with words. I also included books and target words that were used in a Text Talk study by Beck and McKeown (2001). A list of the books and target words used in the present study are found in Appendix A. Five kindergarten teachers volunteered to participate in the four-week study. The teachers possessed various levels of experience and knowledge about vocabulary instruction in the primary grades; three teachers had more than 10 years of teaching experience and two teachers were first year teachers. These teachers expressed an interest in gaining insights into vocabulary instruction as it related to storybook readings. The teachers received two hours of training and agreed to implement the storybook lesson interventions for the storybook reading groups based on the teaching scripts. The lessons for the storybook reading group that received explicit teaching of the target words were sequenced into five days of instruction: 1. On day one, the teacher conducted a picture walk and introduced the first storybook and the three target words. The teacher then read the storybook to the children pausing briefly to point out the target words as they were presented in the story. The teacher provided the students with a student-friendly definition for each word. 2. On day two, the teacher reread the story, reviewed the definitions of the target words and gave examples of the words as they might be used in other contexts. This allowed the children to connect the three target words to different situations outside of the text, allowing for opportunities to decontextualize the words. 34 3. On day three, the teacher presented a picture walk and the second storybook for the week was read. The three target words were introduced as they were presented in the story. 4. On day four, the teacher reread the story, reviewed the meanings of the target words, and provided examples of the words in other contexts. 5. On day five, the teacher presented a lesson that included a review of the six target words without the storybook. The lesson focused on integrating and applying the six target vocabulary words to generalized texts and situations. The students participated in word association activities to foster deep comprehension of the word meanings. For example, when the students were exposed to the word reluctant, they were asked the following: Show us how you might look if you felt reluctant about putting your toys away. Students in the second experimental group did not receive vocabulary instruction as the teacher read the storybooks. On day one, the teacher introduced the first storybook to the students through a picture walk. The teacher instructed the students to look at the pictures on each page and think about what might be happening in the story. Before reading the story, the teacher asked the students to think about the setting, the characters, the problem, and the solution as the story was being read. The students were instructed to listen as the teacher read the story. The teacher read the story without stopping to discuss the target words with the students. At certain points in the story, the teacher would pause to entertain questions and comments as the story was read. At the conclusion of the storybook reading, the students were asked to retell what happened in the story. On day two, the teacher reread the storybook to the students and reviewed the events in the story. 35 On day three, the students were introduced to the second storybook for the week and followed the same plan as day one. On day four, the teacher reread the second storybook and the events of the story were again discussed and the students were asked to retell the story to the teacher. On day five, the students drew pictures highlighting one event from the two storybooks that were read to them. The control group did not listen to the storybook readings and were not exposed to the target words. The students in this group participated in phonics and phonemic awareness games. These games were designed as a part of literacy center activities that were done independently. Instruments The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III (Dunn & Dunn, 1997) and a researcher- developed vocabulary knowledge posttest provided data for this study. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Third Edition (PPVT-III) was administered in October of the 2005-2006 school year to measure the receptive vocabulary levels of the study participants. The test contained 204 items grouped into 17 sets of 12 items of 4 black and white illustrations forming a picture plate. Each picture on the picture plate was numbered. The participants were asked to identify a selected item on each picture plate that corresponded to the stimulus word. The examiner said a word while the subject looked at the plate of four numbered black-and-white drawings. The subject pointed to or stated the number of the picture that best depicted the word. A spoken response was not required, and the test required no writing or reading from the participants. The examiner gave directions: ?I will say a word and show you some pictures in this book. Your job is to tell me which picture number best tells what the word means. I want you to try your 36 best. You can take time to think about an answer. If you don?t know the answer, you may guess. You may also tell me you don?t know. That?s OK. Do you understand? Do you have any questions? Great. Let?s get started. What number is____________? [or] Point to the____________.? Administration time ranged from 7-10 minutes for most subjects. The basal level for the PPVT-III was determined by the lowest set of items administered in which the subject made one (1) or no errors. The test was administered until a ceiling level was established, which was determined by the highest set of items administered in which the subject made eight (8) or more errors. Standard scores range from 40 to 160. The test administration revealed that 24 subjects scored less than 60, while 54 students scored higher than 60. Posttest Measure of Target Vocabulary Words The vocabulary posttest was designed to assess the receptive vocabulary knowledge of 24 target vocabulary words that were presented in the storybooks for the first experimental group. The classroom teachers who implemented the lessons administered the tests to each participant. The test was administered during the conclusion of the four-week research period. The test consisted of 24 forced-choice items and the administration time ranged between 3-5 minutes. Each question was read orally to the students and two possible answer choices were provided. The examiner read the testing prompt followed by the 24 test items: ?We will play a question and answer game. I will ask you a question and you will give me an answer. I will give you two answer choices. If you do not know the answer, you may say, I do not know. Question: Which would be unattractive? 37 Answer choices: Getting a shot from the doctor? or Going shopping at the toy store?? The vocabulary posttest measure used in this study is located in Appendix C. Data Analysis Procedures The following research questions guide the study. 1. To what extent does a storybook read-aloud method with explicit instruction improve children's semantic knowledge of word meanings used in the storybook? 2. To what extent is there a difference in children's knowledge of new vocabulary words as measured by the vocabulary posttest when children are grouped by vocabulary ability? The following procedures were used for the data analysis. Research Questions 1: A one-way ANOVA was used to examine the effect of storybook readings with the explicit instruction of target words on children?s knowledge of words. Research Question 2: A 2X3 ANOVA (2 levels of vocabulary knowledge by 3 experimental conditions) was used to examine the extent of the difference in children?s knowledge of new vocabulary words when grouped by vocabulary ability. The results of these analyses and procedures are found in the next chapter. 38 IV. DATA ANALYSIS The purpose of the study was to determine the effect of reading storybooks on the vocabulary acquisition of kindergarten students. First, it sought to determine if reading storybooks with direct explanations of target vocabulary words with explicit instruction fostered vocabulary learning. Secondly, it examined students? entering vocabulary knowledge as it relates to the learning of new words when explicit instruction is provided. Review of the Research Questions The following questions directed the study: 1. To what extent does the exposure to target words in a storybook reading with explicit instruction improve children?s knowledge of words? 2. To what extent is there a difference in children?s knowledge of new vocabulary words when children are grouped by vocabulary ability? Data Analysis and Results The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III scores and the 24-item vocabulary posttest scores for 78 student participants were entered into an SPSS data file (11.5 version for Windows) for analysis. Analyses included all participants, as well as those categorized receiving storybook readings with explicit instruction of target words (n=28), storybook reading without explicit instruction of target words (n=27), and those who 39 participated in phonics activities (n=21). Demographic data pertaining to socioeconomic status, student age, and gender was also entered. The following research hypotheses addressed the research questions presented in this study. Hypothesis 1. There will be no statistically significant difference in the vocabulary posttest scores for children who received storybook readings with explicit instruction of target vocabulary words and those who did not receive storybook readings with explicit instruction of target vocabulary words. To test this hypothesis, a one-way ANOVA was used to examine differences in the mean scores of the three groups on the vocabulary posttest. The means and standard deviations by group are presented in Table 1. Table 1 Means and Standard Deviations of Vocabulary Knowledge by Instruction Instruction Posttest Scores M SD Explicit Instruction 18.03 2.91 Nonexplicit Instruction 16.43 3.29 Control 15.76 3.05 The overall F-test (2, 4.096) was significant at the .02 alpha level. The Bonferroni post hoc tests revealed a statistically significant difference between the storybook readings with explicit instruction group and the control group. The mean score for the storybook 40 readings with explicit instruction group (18.03) compared to the mean score of the control group (15.76) was significant at the .025 level of probability. Based on the p value for the differences between these two groups, the null hypothesis was rejected. There were no statistically significant differences found between the storybook reading group with explicit instruction and the storybook reading group without explicit instruction of the target words. However, there is a trend in the results based on the type of instruction provided noting higher mean scores for the reading with explicit instruction and reading book without explicit instruction. Students receiving instruction in the explicit storybook reading group obtained the highest means scores (18.03) followed by the students who listened to storybooks without explanation of the target words (16.43). However, the differences were not statistically significant, perhaps due to a relatively small sample size. Data revealed that there were no statistically significant differences in scores for students in the storybook reading only group and those in the control group. Table 2 presents the results of the statistical tests on the effect of instruction on vocabulary acquisition. Table 2 Analysis of Variance of Type of Instruction by Group Source df Sum of Squares Mean of Squares F Group 2 70.522 35.261 4.096* Error 75 645.632 8.608 Total 78 22852.000 *p<.05 41 Hypothesis 2. There will be no statistically significant difference in children?s knowledge of new words as measured by the vocabulary posttest when children are grouped by ability level (<60 or ? 60). Table 3 Means and Standard Deviations by Group and Level of PPVT Instruction Posttest M SD Explicit Instruction <60 15.75 2.550 ? 60 18.90 2.606 Nonexplicit Instruction <60 16.13 3.758 ? 60 16.55 3.187 Control <60 15.25 2.188 ? 60 16.08 2.532 A 2 x 3 factorial design [two levels of the PPVT (<60 or ? 60) and three levels of the groups (Explicit Instruction, Nonexplicit Instruction, and Control)] was used. The data were analyzed using the multivariate analysis of variance statistical procedure to test for differences in the mean scores. Administration of the PPVT-III revealed that 24 students obtained a standard score less than 60, while 54 students obtained a standard score greater than 60. Mean scores and standard deviations by group and Level of PPVT are presented in Table 3. The mean score for subjects in the explicit instruction group with initial vocabulary scores ? 60 produced the highest mean scores (18.90) and the lowest mean scores were produced by the control group for the subjects with PPVT scores < 60. 42 Subjects in the nonexplicit, storybook reading-only group with PPVT scores ?60 produced a similar mean score (16.55) to subjects with PPVT scores <60 (16.33). Table 4 presents the statistical analysis of children?s knowledge of new words as measured by the vocabulary posttest when children are grouped by ability level (<60 or ? 60). The overall F value (5, 3.272) was significant at the .01 alpha level. There were no statistically significant main effects for group. The F value (2, 1.870) was not statistically significant at the .05 alpha level. Table 4 Analysis of Variance of Type of Instruction and Level of PPVT Source df Sum of Squares Mean of Squares F Corrected Model 5 132.596 26.519 3.272* Group 2 30.31 15.155 1.870 Level/PPVT 1 35.336 35.336 4.360 Group* Level/PPVT Total 2 24.709 12.355 1.524 Error 72 583.558 8.105 Total 78 *p<.05 However, there was a statistically significant main effect for level of PPVT. When student scores were analyzed based on the level of PPVT (< 60 or ? 60), statistically significant differences were revealed (F = 1, 4.360). Students in the PPVT group with scores ? 60 had higher posttest scores on the vocabulary posttest. There was no statistically significant interaction between group and a student?s PPVT level (F = 2, 1.524). Based on the overall p value and the p value for the main effect of PPVT level, the null hypothesis was rejected. 43 V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Chapter I of this study provided the introduction and purpose of the study. Chapter II included a review of the literature relating to factors in vocabulary instruction. It addressed factors related to vocabulary development, gaps in vocabulary knowledge, the assessment and evaluation of vocabulary, selecting words to teach, and explicit vocabulary instruction. It concluded with empirical support for using storybooks to aid in vocabulary acquisition. Chapter III described the research methodology for the study. Chapter IV presented the data analysis and research findings. This chapter includes a summary of the purpose, design, and findings of the study. The chapter concludes with implications and recommendations for further research. Restatement of the Purpose of the Study Research indicates that while vocabulary knowledge plays an important role in reading comprehension and achievement, what we have learned has had limited application in terms of effectively teaching vocabulary. Evidence also shows that a gap in vocabulary knowledge develops between at-risk students and their peers before they enter kindergarten, and continues to grow in the early grades. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of storybook reading on the vocabulary acquisition of 44 kindergarten students. Specifically, the study sought to determine whether or not reading storybooks to kindergarten students with explicit instruction of the target words improved the students? knowledge of those words. The secondary focus of the examined storybook reading interventions with explicit instruction related to students? entering vocabulary knowledge. It investigated the differences in children?s knowledge of new vocabulary words when children were grouped by vocabulary ability. The study sought to address the conflicting research findings pertaining to vocabulary instruction as it relates to vocabulary size. Elley (1989) found no evidence of ?rich-get-richer? effects which contradicts subsequent research studies (Nicholson & Whyte,1992); (S?n?chal, Thomas, & Monker, 1995); (Robbins & Ehri, 1994); and (Penno, Wilkinson & Moore, 2002). Would kindergarten students with higher initial vocabularies make greater knowledge gains with storybook readings than students with lower initial vocabularies? Would ?richer-get-richer effects? emerge in the data? The study intended to add to the existing body of knowledge that has examined the effect of storybook readings on students at risk of experiencing reading difficulties. Restatement of the Research Design and Methods The population consisted of 78 kindergarten students who were randomly assigned to one of three groups: storybook reading with explicit instruction of target words, storybook reading without explicit instruction of target words, and a control group that participated independently in phonics games. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III was administered to all students to assess receptive vocabulary abilities before initiating the interventions. I created two sets of teaching scripts for the storybook lesson interventions; one with explicit instruction of the target words and one without explicit 45 instruction of the target words. Students in the storybook reading with explicit instruction of target words heard a total of eight stories and received teacher explanations of 24 target words; an average of three target words per book. Students in the storybook reading intervention without explicit instruction heard the same eight stories, but no instruction or explanation of the target words was provided. Students listened as the story was read and focused on the events that occurred in the story. Students in the control group worked on file folder phonics games and did not hear storybook readings or receive vocabulary instruction. The treatments were administered in five-day cycles for four weeks. At the conclusion of the four-week treatment, a researcher-created posttest was administered to assess vocabulary gains for the 24 target words presented in the storybook readings. Restatement of the Findings of the Study First Research Question The first research question investigated the effect of storybook readings with explicit instruction on the vocabulary acquisition of kindergarten students. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine student scores on the vocabulary posttest and the type of instruction received (Explicit Instruction, Nonexplicit Instruction, and Control). The ANOVA found statistical differences between the students who were instructed in the storybook readings with explicit instruction group and the control group. Students who received storybook readings with direct explanations of target vocabulary words gained more vocabulary knowledge than students who did not receive storybook readings with instruction. Students in the nonexplicit storybook-reading-only group 46 made gains, but those gains were not as great as those of the students in the explicit instruction group. These differences were not statistically significant, which may have resulted from the small sample size. These results are consistent with those of Penno, Wilkinson & Moore (2002) in which gains in vocabulary knowledge were made when storybooks were read twice with teacher explanation of vocabulary words. Vocabulary learning did occur incidentally while listening to stories, but students made greater gains when the teacher provided an explanation. These findings are consistent with the views of Elley (1989) and Stahl and Fairbanks (1986) who found that a combined approach with incidental learning from story contexts and direct instruction produces more vocabulary gains. Stahl and Fairbanks found that teaching word meanings significantly improved children?s vocabulary knowledge. These results are also consistent with Robbins & Ehri (1994) who found that kindergartners expanded their recognition vocabularies when they listened to stories at least twice and heard unfamiliar words repeated in the story. The present study adds to our research base as gains were noted for students who listened to storybook readings twice and received explicit instruction and interaction with vocabulary words heard in the story. Second Research Question The second research examined differences in children?s vocabulary knowledge gains from storybook readings when children were grouped by vocabulary ability. A 2 x 3 factorial design [two levels of the PPVT (<60 or ? 60) and three levels of the groups (Explicit Instruction, Nonexplicit Instruction, and Control)] was used. The mean score for subjects in the explicit instruction group with initial vocabulary scores ? 60 produced the highest mean scores. There were no statistically significant main effects for 47 group. However, there was a statistically significant main effect for level of PPVT. When student scores were analyzed based on the level of PPVT (< 60 or ? 60), statistically significant differences were revealed. Children with larger vocabularies obtained higher scores on the posttest measure than children with smaller vocabularies. These findings are consistent with those of (Nicholson & Whyte,1992); (S?n?chal, Thomas, & Monker, 1995); (Robbins & Ehri, 1994); and (Penno, Wilkinson & Moore, 2002) who found that subjects with larger vocabularies learned more new words than children with smaller vocabularies. The present study contributes to the research in that children who had higher entering vocabularies made greater gains in vocabulary learning. Limitations This study was limited in its scope and strength by the following: 1. This study research was limited to kindergarten students in one school in a suburban area outside a major metropolitan city in Alabama; therefore, the results of this study are not generalizable to the world?s student population. 2. The design included no rotation of teachers due to the age of the children and the time that the study was conducted. It was hoped that careful planning and execution of teacher scripts would minimize any significant teacher differences. 3. Five teachers and the researcher administered the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and the vocabulary knowledge posttest measure individually to students. Possible inconsistencies in the administration and scoring of these two assessments may exist. 4. Teachers with varying levels of teaching experience from ranging from 0-15 years participated in the study. The level of teaching experience may have influenced the 48 vocabulary learning outcomes. Again, it was hoped that careful planning and implementation of teacher scripts would reduce any pertinent teacher differences. 5. The study was limited in its duration as it was conducted over a period of four weeks at the onset of the academic school year. 6. The intervention lessons were conducted in small groups of 4-6 students within each classroom setting while other students engaged in literacy center activities and phonics games. The noise levels during center activities and games posed distractions. These interferences and movement about the classroom may have affected student attention spans and ultimately learning outcomes. Implications The implications for the present study pertaining to the use of storybook reading interventions related to vocabulary acquisition and are centered on the following themes: (a) Explicit and sequenced instruction (b) storybook rereadings and frequency of encounters with instructed words, and (c) active student engagement with words. Explicit and Sequenced Instruction The storybook interventions presented in this study consisted of lessons developed to accompany eight children?s books. The lesson design exposed students to three new vocabulary words within the context of each storybook. The selections of the words were central to the design of the intervention. Versatile words were selected based on the following criteria as noted by Beck, McKeown, & Kucan (2002): (a) importance and utility, (b) instructional potential, and (c) conceptual understanding. The lessons were sequenced in a manner that would allow for direct and explicit instruction of the 49 three versatile words. The scientific research on vocabulary instruction reveals that most vocabulary is learned indirectly and that some vocabulary must be taught directly (National Reading Panel, 2001). This teacher-centered, direct instruction offered opportunities for children to learn new words as presented in the story context. Findings of this study indicate that reading storybooks aloud to young children in a purposeful and sequenced manner with teacher explanations of versatile target words will enhance students? vocabulary knowledge. These findings support previous recommendations that teachers and parents should read aloud to primary grade children to promote literacy and language development. Results also indicate that children with larger vocabularies are more apt to learn new words listening to stories than their peers with weaker vocabularies. Interventions that increase the effectiveness of storybook reading through explicit teaching of word meanings are promising in decreasing language differences among primary grade students. As a result, teachers should provide additional explicit instruction and language interactions to students with weaker vocabularies. Storybook Rereadings and Frequency of Encounters with Instructed Words The storybooks presented in the lesson intervention were read two times each during the five-day cycle. During the first storybook reading, the teacher introduced three target vocabulary words and provided a student-friendly definition when the word appeared in the storybook. In the second storybook reading, the students were exposed to the words in a context beyond the storybook. Students decontextualized words to different situations. The repeated readings of the storybooks contributed to the vocabulary knowledge gains of the students in the storybook reading with explicit 50 instruction group. These findings are consistent with previous research that examined the effect of two rereadings with teacher explanation of target words in which knowledge gains were noted (S?n?chal, Thomas, & Monker, 1995; Brett et al., 1996; Elley, 1989; Hargrave & S?n?chal, 2000; Penno et al., 2002; Robbins & Ehri, 1994). The storybook readings provided the students with multiple encounters with the 24 target words, both within and beyond the context of the storybook text. Elley (1989) suggested that the number of text occurrences of a word is the most important predictor of children?s learning new words. Word learning can be promoted when teachers provide multiple exposures to words in various situations and create rich verbal environments. Rich verbal environments include frequent use of words that have been taught and opportunities to add words to students? vocabularies. Exposure will provide students with a chance to learn new words and recognize words that will be encountered in subsequent situations. The introduction of words should occur within formal and informal learning encounters in the classrooms, and students should be encouraged to refine and elaborate on their understandings of words in a word rich environment. As such, educators can assist students in developing word consciousness that not only creates student appreciation for words and language, but foster vocabulary growth and comprehension. Active Student Engagement with Words The storybook intervention lessons were designed to promote rich student interactions with words. It provided opportunities for students to derive word meanings from instructional contexts and to establish an initial understanding of word meanings. 51 The lesson design consisted of lively activities that required students to deeply process word meanings. These activities allowed the children to explain and respond to word meanings in an engaging and interactive manner. Children engaged in extended talk and developed connections and associations among newly introduced words. These activities also required students to attend to a word?s meanings in order to apply it to a new situation. Central to active student engagement involves providing the kindergarten students with a ?user-friendly definition? in which they could form a schematic connection. The NRP (2001) found that when students were actively engaged in rich tasks while learning vocabulary words, greater vocabulary gains were noted. Language- rich instructional encounters provide students with opportunities to relate new information to known information. Findings from the study indicate that by incorporating meaningful and short word activities, teachers can capitalize on opportunities to enrich the language development of kindergarten students. Active and deep processing of words distinguishes between instruction that promotes comprehension and other methods that do not. Direct, explicit instruction that engages students in the construction of word meanings by using both context and prior knowledge holds promise for effective vocabulary learning and comprehension. Recommendations for Future Study 1. Further storybook- reading studies are needed to document the effect of explicit vocabulary instruction on word knowledge. More specifically, research should aim to clarify how storybook readings can be successfully used as an intervention for at-risk students with limited vocabularies. 52 2. The present study was conducted over a four-week time period. Replication studies could examine the effect of the storybook intervention when it is implemented over an extended period of time. 3. The study did not utilize a delayed posttest to measure vocabulary gains and retention after the storybook interventions were provided. Future research is needed to examine vocabulary retention and usage of newly learned vocabulary words over an extended duration of time. 4. Further storybook investigations with students who are learning English as a second language are needed. 5. Further studies which include the presentation of five or six words during the storybook reading intervention may provide additional insights and implications for practice. 53 REFERENCES Baker, S. K., Simmons, D. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1995). Vocabulary acquisition: Synthesis of the research (Technical Report No. 13). Eugene, OR: National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators. Baumann, J. F., & Kameenui, E. J. (1991). Research on vocabulary instruction: Ode to Voltaire. In J. Flood, J. J. D. Lapp, & J. R. Squire (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 604-632). New York: MacMillan. Beck, I., McKeown, M., & McCaslin, E. (1983). Vocabulary development: All contexts are not created equal. Elementary School Journal, 83, 177-181. Beck, I., & McKeown, M. (1991). Conditions of vocabulary acquisition. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 789-814). New York: Longman. Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the benefits of read aloud experiences for young children. The Reading Teacher, 55, 10-20. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G. & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life. New York: Guilford Press. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G. & Kucan, L. (2004). Direct and rich vocabulary instruction, In J.F. Baumann & E.J. Kame?enui (Eds.), Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice (pp. 13?27). New York: Guilford Press. 54 Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G. and Omanson, R.C. (1987) The effects and uses of diverse vocabulary instructional techniques. In McKeown and Curtis, The nature of vocabulary acquisition. (pp.147-163). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum Associates. Becker, W.C. (1977). Teaching and reading language to the disadvantaged: What we have learned from field research. Harvard Educational Review, 47, 518-543. Biemiller, A., & Menyuk, P. (1999). In Jeanne S. Chall (Series Ed.), From Reading research to practice. Language and reading success. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books. Biemiller, A., & Slonin, N. (2001). Estimating root word vocabulary growth in normative and advantaged populations: Evidence for a common sequence of vocabulary acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 498?520. Biemiller, A. (2004) Teaching Vocabulary in the Primary Grades: Vocabulary Instruction Needed, In J.F. Baumann & E.J. Kame?enui (Eds.), Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice (pp. 159?176). New York: Guilford Press. Biemiller, A. & Boote, C. (2006). An effective method for building meaning vocabulary in primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 44-62. Brabham, E. G., & Lynch-Brown, C. (2002). Effects of teachers' reading aloud styles on vocabulary acquisition and comprehension of students in the early elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 465-473. Brett, A., Rothlein, L., & Hurley, M. (1996). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories and explanations of target words. Elementary School Journal, 96, 415?422. 55 Carey, S. (1978). The child as word-learner. In M. Halle J. Bresnan and G. A. Miller (Eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Dunn, Lloyd M., & Dunn, Leota M. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. Elley, W. B. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 174-187. Freeman, D. (1978). A pocket for corduroy. Viking: New York. Hargrave, A. C. & Senechal, M. (2000). A book reading intervention with preschool children who have limited vocabularies: The benefits of regular reading and dialogic reading. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 75-90. Hart. B., & Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experiences of young american children. Baltimore: Brookes. Lehr, F., Osborn, J., and Hiebert, E. (2004). A focus on vocabulary. Honolulu, HI: Pacific Resources for Education and Learning. McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Omanson, R. C., & Pople, M. T. (1985). Some effects of the nature and frequency of vocabulary instruction on the knowledge and use of words. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 522-535. Moats, L. C. (2001). Overcoming the language gap. American Educator, 25, 5, 8-9. Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304-330. 56 Nagy, W.E. & Herman, P.A. (1987). Breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge: Implications for acquisition and instruction. In M. McKeown and M. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 19-35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates. Nagy, W. E., Anderson, R. C., & Herman, P. A. (1987). Learning word meanings from context during normal reading. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 237- 270. National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implication for reading instruction. Washington, D.C.: US National Institute for Literacy. Nicholson, T., & Whyte, B. (1992). Matthew effects in learning new words while listening to stories. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 41, 499?503. Penno, J. F., Moore, & Wilkinson, I. A. (2002). Vocabulary acquisition from teacher explanation and repeated listening to stories: Do they overcome the Matthew effect? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 23-33. Robbins, C., & Ehri, L. C. (1994). Reading storybooks to kindergartners helps them learn new vocabulary words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 54-64. Scarborough, H.S. (1998). Early Identification of Children At-risk for Reading Disabilities: Phonological Awareness and Some Other Promising Predictors. In .K. Shapiro, P.J. Accardo, & A.J. Capute (Eds.), Specific reading disability: A view of the spectrum (pp. 77-121). Timonium, Md.: York Press. Schatz, E. & Baldwin, R.C. (1986). Context clues are unreliable predictors of word meanings. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 440-453. 57 S?n?chal, M., & Cornell, E. H. (1993). Vocabulary acquisition through shared reading experiences. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 360-374. S?n?chal, M., Thomas, E., & Monker, J. (1995). Individual differences in 5-year- olds acquisition of vocabulary during storybook reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 218?229. Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M.(1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72?110. Stahl, Steven A. (1999). In Jeanne S. Chall (Eds.), From reading research to practice: Vol. 2. Vocabulary development. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71. Urbaniak, G. C. and Plous, S. 2001. Research Randomizer. http://www.randomizer.org/. Site accessed 9/25/05. Wasik, B., & Bond, M.A. (2001). Beyond the pages of a book: Interactive book reading and language development in preschool classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 243-250. Whipple, G. (Ed.). (1925). The twenty-fourth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education: Report of the National Committee on Reading. Bloomington, IL: Public School Publishing. 58 APPENDIX A Book Selections and Words Book Title Vocabulary/Versatile Words Week One Snowy Day ? firm Ezra Jack Keats ? adventure Swimmy ? fierce Leo Lionni ? invisible ? swift ? swaying Week Two Click, Clack, Moo: Cows That Type ? furious Doreen Cronin ? impossible ? impatient Doctor Desoto ? timid William Steig ? morsel ? protect Week Three Olivia and the Missing Toy ? unattractive Ian Falconer ? exhausted ? awful A Pocket for Corduroy ? reluctant Don Freeman ? insisted ? drowsy Week Four Make Way for Ducklings Robert McCloskey ? enormous ? delighted ? beckoned Owen ? essential Kevin Henkes ? absolutely ? perfect 59 APPENDIX B Week One: Day One Lesson Script Storybook: Snowy Day Focus: Read aloud, introduce words with student-friendly definitions Story Introduction 1. Point to the title on the cover. The title of this story is Snowy Day. The story was written by Ezra Jack Keats. The pictures were drawn by Ezra Jack Keats. 2. Conduct a picture walk. What do you think this story is about? Stories that we read have characters, problems, and settings. Thinking about these will help you remember what happens in the story. When I read this story, I am going to read and say a lot of words. I want you to listen for two special words in the story. Point to each word on the card as you read it. When you hear these special words in the story, I want you to raise your hand. Say firm. Say adventures. The Reading 1. Pay attention to volume, speed, enunciation, and intonation. Pause once the vocabulary words appear in the story. Target Word One: firm He packed it round and firm and put the snowball in his pocket for tomorrow. Good, some of you raised your hands! What word did you hear? Yes, ?firm?. OR Did anyone hear one of the special words? The words are firm and adventure. Provide a student friendly definition. Peter packed the snowball round and firm. Firm means the snowball was hard and solid. Say the word with me?firm. Target Word Two: adventures He told his mother all about his adventures while she took off his wet socks. Provide a student friendly definition. Peter told his mother about his adventures. An adventure is a time when we do something we have not done before or when we do something exciting. Say the word with me?adventure. Closure In this story Peter went on an adventure and we learned two special words. What words are we learning? (firm and adventures). You will be hearing more stories and learning new words. 60 Week One: Day Two Lesson Script Storybook: Snowy Day Focus: Review the definitions and give examples in other contexts Read the story 1. Story Rereading. No Pauses. Today we will revisit the story Snowy Day. After reading the story ask: Who can tell us what Peter did in the story? What did you enjoy about the story? What were the special words that we learned in our story on yesterday? (firm and adventure) Review of the Definitions (5-10 Minutes) Today, we will review the special words that we talked about on yesterday. Firm: In the story, Peter picked up a handful of snow and packed it round and firm. Firm means that the snowball was hard and stiff. A baseball would be firm or a pencil might be firm. They are solid. Someone could also hold something in a firm way. Say the word with me?firm. Adventure: In the story, Peter told his mother all about his adventures. An adventure is a trip or an exciting activity. You might go on an adventure in your backyard or do something fun. Let's say the word aloud?adventure. Word Association Activity Ask the following: Look at our words. firm and adventure Which word goes with stiff? (firm) Which word goes with Disney World? (adventure) Which word goes with frozen? (firm) Closure What words are we learning? Firm and adventure. We will be reading more stories and learning new words. 61 Week One: Day Three Lesson Guide Storybook: Swimmy Focus: Read aloud and introduce words with student-friendly definitions Story Introduction 1. Point to the title on the cover. The title of this story is Swimmy. Leo Lionni wrote the story. Leo Lionni also drew the pictures. This book won an award for its pictures. 2. Conduct a picture walk. What do you think this story is about? Stories that we read have characters, problems, and settings. Thinking about these will help you remember what happens in the story. Say: When I read this story, I am going to read and say a lot of words. I want you to listen for four special words in the story. Point to each word on the card as you read it. When you hear these special words in the story, I want you to raise your hand. Say swift. Say fierce. Say invisible. Say swaying. The Reading Target Word One: swift One bad day a tuna fish, swift, fierce, and very hungry, came darting through the waves. Good, some of you raised your hands! What word did you hear? Yes, ?swift?. Or Did anyone hear one of the special words? The words are swift, fierce, invisible, swaying. Provide a student friendly definition. The tuna fish was swift as it darted in the water and swallowed the fish. Swift means that the tuna fish swam quickly or in a fast way. Say the word with me...swift. Target Word Two: fierce One bad day a tuna fish, swift, fierce, and very hungry, came darting through the waves. Provide a student friendly definition. The tuna fish was fierce as it darted through the waters.Fierce means that the tuna fish darted through the waters in an angry or mean way. Say the word with me?fierce. Target Word Three: invisible (He saw)?? strange fish, pulled by an invisible thread. Provide a student friendly definition. An invisible thread pulled the strange fish in the story. Invisible means that the thread was hidden or was out of sight. Say the word with me? invisible. Target Word Three: swaying ?and sea anemones, who looked like pink palm trees swaying in the wind. Provide a student friendly definition. The sea anemones were swaying in the water. Sway means to lean or bend. They were moving back and forth in the water. Say the word with me?swaying. Closure In this story Swimmy came up with a plan to keep himself and the other smaller fish safe. What words are we learning? swift. fierce. invisible. swaying. You will be hearing more stories and learning new words. 62 Week One: Day Four Lesson Script Storybook: Swimmy Focus: Reviewing the definitions and giving examples in other contexts Read the story. 1. Story Rereading. No pauses. Today we will revisit the story Swimmy. After reading the story, ask: Who can tell us what Swimmy did in the story? What were the special words that we learned in our story on yesterday? swift, fierce, invisible, and swaying Review of the Definitions (5-10 Minutes) Today, we will review the special words that we learned on yesterday. Decontexualization of the words swift: The tuna fish was swift as it darted in the water and swallowed the fish. Swift means that the tuna fish swam fast or quickly. You may run swiftly on the playground or drink swiftly. fierce: In the story, the tuna fish was fierce and very hungry. Fierce means that the fish was strong and powerful as it swam through the waters. A lion is a fierce animal or a thunderstorm might be fierce because it is powerful and has a lot of force. invisible: In the story, the strange fish in the story was pulled by an invisible thread. Invisible means something that cannot be seen or that is not easily seen. A house may be invisible from the street if it is hidden by trees. sway(ing): In the story, the sea anemones were swaying in the wind. Swaying means to bend or rock. You might see a beach ball sway in a swimming pool or you may sway as you are swinging on a swing. Have You Ever Have you ever done something swiftly or in a swift way? Tell me about it. Have you ever seen a fierce lion at the zoo? Word Associations Which word goes with fast? (swift) Which word goes with hidden or unseen? (invisible) Which word goes with strong? (fierce) Which word goes with lean? (sway) Closure What words are we learning? swift, fierce, invisible, and swaying ?We will be reading more stories and learning new words. 63 Week One: Day Five Lesson Script Storybooks: Snowy Day and Swimmy Focus: Students participate in engaging wrap-up activities Wrap-Up Review Activities (5-10 minutes) Applause, Applause! Please clap to show me if you would like to do the following? ? go on an adventure at Oak Mountain State Park? Why? ? play outside during a fierce thunderstorm? Why? ? be invisible for a day? Why? Questions, Reasons, and Examples When might you see a tree sway in the wind? Have you ever done something in a swift way? Why was it done that way? Have you ever eaten something that was firm? What was it? Making Choices If any of the things I say might be firm, say firm. If not, don?t say anything. -wood -muscles -a cotton ball -a marshmallow -a marker 64 Week Two: Day One Lesson Script Storybook: Click, Clack, Moo: Cows that Type Focus: Read aloud, introduce words with student-friendly definitions Story Introduction 1. Point to the title on the cover. The title of this story is Click, Clack, Moo: Cows that Type. Doreen Cronin wrote the story. Betsy Lewin drew the pictures. This book won a special award for its pictures. Conduct a picture walk. What do you think this story is about? Stories that we read have characters, problems, and settings. Thinking about these will help you remember what happens in the story. When I read this story, I am going to read and say a lot of words. I want you to listen for three special words in the story. Point to each word on the card as you read it?furious, impossible, impatient. When you hear these special words in the story, I want you to raise your hand. The Reading 1. Pay attention to volume, speed, enunciation, and intonation. Pause once the vocabulary words appear in the story. Target Word One: impossible At first he couldn?t believe his ears. Cows that type? Impossible! Good, some of you raised your hands! What word did you hear? Yes, ?impossible? OR Did anyone hear one of the special words? The words are furious, impossible, and impatient. Provide a student friendly definition. The farmer thought that it was impossible for cows to type. Impossible means that something cannot happen or be done. Say the word with me?impossible. Target Word Two: impatient The cows were growing impatient with the farmer. Provide a student friendly definition. The cows became impatient with the farmer. Impatient means to get tired of waiting. Say the word with me....impatient. Target Word Three: furious Farmer Brown was furious. Provide a student friendly definition. Farmer Brown became furious with the cows and the hens. Furious means to get very angry or mad. Say the word with me?furious. Closure In this story the cows and the hens went on strike, etc. What words are we learning? furious, impossible, and impatient. You will be hearing more stories and learning new words. 65 Week Two: Day Two Lesson Script Storybook: Click, Clack, Moo: Cows that Type Focus: Reviewing the definitions and giving examples in other contexts Read the story 1. Story Rereading. No Pauses. Today we will revisit the story Click, Clack, Moo: Cows that Type. After reading the story ask: Who can tell us what happened in the story? What did you enjoy about the story? What were the special words that we learned in our story on yesterday? furious, impossible, and impatient Review of the Definitions (5-10 Minutes) Today, we will review the special words that we talked about on yesterday. Decontexualization of the words furious: In the story, Farmer Brown was furious with the hens and the cows. Furious means that he was very angry or upset. You might become furious if someone did something to hurt you. Or your parents might become furious if you did not tell them the truth about something. Say the word with me?furious. impossible: In the story, the farmer thought that it was impossible for cows to type. Impossible means that something cannot happen or be done. It would be impossible for a fish to bark or for a dog to meow. impatient: In the story, the cows became impatient with the farmer. Impatient means to get tired of waiting. You might get impatient while waiting for your mother to pick you up from school. Or you might get impatient while waiting to open your birthday presents. Word Associations Activity Ask the following: Look at our words. furious, impossible, and impatient. Which word goes with unhappy? (furious) Which word goes with being in a hurry? (impatient) Which word goes with pigs flying? (impossible) Closure What words are we learning? furious, impossible, and impatient. We will be reading more stories and learning new words. 66 Storybook: Doctor DeSoto Week Two: Day Three Lesson Script Focus: Read aloud, introduce words with student-friendly definitions Story Introduction 1. Point to the title on the cover. The title of this story is Doctor DeSoto. William Steig wrote the story. William Steig drew the pictures. 2. Conduct a picture walk. What do you think this story is about? Stories that we read have characters, problems, and settings. Thinking about these will help you remember what happens in the story. When I read this story, I am going to read and say a lot of words. I want you to listen for three special words in the story. Point to each word on the card as you read it. When you hear these special words in the story, I want you to raise your hand. Say timid, morsel, protect. The Reading 1. Pay attention to volume, speed, enunciation, and intonation. Pause once the vocabulary words appear in the story. Target Word One: timid They wouldn?t admit the most timid-looking cat. Good, some of you raised your hands! What word did you hear? Yes, timid. Or Did anyone hear one of the special words? The words are timid, morsel, and protect. Provide a student friendly definition. Dr. DeSoto was did not treat the most timid looking animal because he did not want to be tricked and eaten. Timid means scared or weak. Say the word with me?timid. Target Word Two: morsel Despite his misery, he realized he had a tasty little morsel in his mouth, and his jaw began to quiver. Provide a student friendly definition. Dr.DeSoto (mouse) was much smaller than the fox. He was very tiny. The word morsel is used to describe something that is very small. Dr.DeSoto was a morsel as he stood inside the mouth of the fox. Dr. DeSoto was very small compared to the fox. Target Word Three: protect ?But we must do something to protect ourselves,? said the wife. Provide a student friendly definition. Mrs. DeSoto and Doctor DeSoto wanted to protect themselves from the fox. They did not want to be harmed or hurt by the fox. Closure In this story Dr. Desoto treated the fox and other animals. We learned three special words. What words are we learning?...timid, morsel, protect. You will be hearing more stories and learning new words. 67 Week Two: Day Four Lesson Script Storybook: Doctor DeSoto Focus: Reviewing the definitions and giving examples in other contexts Read the story 1.Story Rereading. No Pauses. Today we will revisit the story Doctor DeSoto. After reading the story, ask: Who can tell us what happened in the story? What were the special words that we learned in our story on yesterday? timid, morsel, protect. Review of the Definitions (5-10 Minutes) Today, we will review the special words that we learned on yesterday. Decontexualization of the words timid: In this story, Dr. DeSoto would not treat the most timid-looking cat. Timid means that something or someone is very scared or fearful. You may be timid or shy when you meet someone new. You may be timid when you try something new or different. protect: In the story, Mrs. De Soto told Dr. DeSoto that they must do something to protect themselves. Protect means to keep safe from harm. Your parents protect your skin from the sun by putting on sunscreen. They also protect you from insect bites by putting on insect spray. morsel: In the story, the fox had a morsel of food in his mouth. A morsel is a small piece of something. You might leave small morsels of food on your plate. Or you might eat a small chocolate chip morsel. Have You Ever? Have you ever ran from a bumblebee? Why did you do that? (to protect myself from a sting) Have you ever eaten a morsel of cake? Did you want more? Why? (a morsel is so small) Have you ever been timid in a big room full of people? Why? (I was afraid, shy) Word Associations Which word goes with a cookie crumb? (morsel) Which word goes with umbrella on a rainy day? (protect) Which word goes with afraid? (timid) Closure What words are we learning? timid, morsel, protect We will be reading more stories and learning new words. 68 Week Two: Day Five Lesson Script Storybooks: Click, Clack Moo: Cows that Type and Doctor DeSoto Focus: Students participate in engaging wrap-up activities Wrap-Up Review Activities 5-10 minutes Questions, Reasons, and Examples If a little boy walked into a room full of people, would he be timid or morsel? Would someone wrap a small baby in a blanket to timid him or protect him? Is furious a way you might feel or a way you might sleep? Would an impatient boy want to wait for a long time to visit the toy store? Why/why not? Making Choices If any of the things I say is a small piece of food, say morsel. If it isn?t a morsel, don?t say anything. ? a bowl of spaghetti ? a slice of pizza ? an M&M ? a birthday cake ? a Cheerio What?s our word? morsel If any of the things I say could not happen, say impossible. If it is not impossible, don?t say anything. ? eating cereal for breakfast ? kindergartners driving their own busses to school ? finding an elephant in your bathroom ? brushing your teeth in the morning What?s our word? impossible 69 Week Three: Day One Lesson Script Storybook: Olivia and the Missing Toy Focus: Read aloud, introduce words with student-friendly definitions Story Introduction 1. Point to the title on the cover. The title of this story is Olivia and the Missing Toy. The story was written by Ian Falconer. The pictures were drawn by Ian Falconer. 2. Conduct a picture walk. What do you think this story is about? Stories that we read have characters, problems, and settings. Thinking about these will help you remember what happens in the story. When I read this story, I am going to read and say a lot of words. I want you to listen for three special words in the story. Point to each word on the board/card as you read it?. unattractive, exhausted, and awful. When you hear these special words in the story, I want you to raise your hand. The Reading 1. Pay attention to volume, speed, enunciation, and intonation. Pause once the vocabulary words appear in the story. Target Word One: unattractive Olivia?s uniform comes in a really unattractive green. Good, some of you raised your hands! What word did you hear? Yes, unattractive. Or Did anyone hear one of the special words? The words are unattractive, exhausted, and awful. Provide a student friendly definition. Olivia did not like her uniform because she thought it was unattractive. Unattractive means that something is not pretty or good. Say the word with me?unattractive. Target Word Two: exhausted Olivia waited, and waited, and waited, till she was too exhausted to wait any longer. Provide a student friendly definition. Olivia was exhausted from waiting. Exhausted means that Olivia was very tired. It means being so tired that you don?t want to move. Say the word with me?.exhausted. Target Word Three: awful Olivia was practicing her piano when she heard an awful sound. Provide a student friendly definition. Olivia heard an awful sound. Awful means very bad or unpleasant. Say the word with me?.awful. Closure In this story Olivia lost her favorite toy, but luckily, she found it. In today?s story, we learned three special words. What words are we learning? ?... unattractive, exhausted, and awful. You will be hearing more stories and learning new words 70 Week Three: Day Two Lesson Script Storybook: Olivia and the Missing Toy Focus: Reviewing the definitions and giving examples in other contexts Read the story 1. Story Rereading. No Pauses. Today we will revisit the story Olivia and the Missing Toy. After reading the story ask: Who can tell us what happened in the story? What did you enjoy about the story? What were the special words that we learned in our story on yesterday? unattractive, exhausted, and awful Review of the Definitions (5-10 Minutes) Today, we will review the special words that we talked about on yesterday. unattractive: In the story, Olivia thought that her green soccer shirt was unattractive. Unattractive means that her soccer shirt was ugly or not pretty. You might think that eating spinach is unattractive because it is unpleasant or not good. You might think that going to the doctor is unattractive because you do not like to get shots. Say the word with me unattractive. exhausted: In the story, Olivia was exhausted from waiting on her mother to make her a red soccer shirt. Exhausted means to be so tired that you might want to go to sleep. You might be exhausted from playing all day or from riding in a car for a long time. awful: In the story, Olivia heard an awful sound. Awful means that the sound was very bad or terrible. You might think that going to the dentist is awful because you do not like to see the dentist. You might think that having to go to bed is awful because you don?t like bedtime. Word Associations Activity Ask the following: Look at our words. unattractive, exhausted, and awful Which word goes with worn out? (exhausted) Which word goes with an ugly or not pretty? (unattractive) Which word goes with very bad? (awful) Closure What words are we learning? unattractive, exhausted, and awful We will be reading more stories and learning new words. 71 Week Three: Day Three Lesson Script Storybook: A Pocket for Corduroy Focus: Read aloud, introduce words with student-friendly definitions Story Introduction 1. Point to the title on the cover. The title of this story is A Pocket for Corduroy. Don Freeman wrote the story drew the pictures. 2. Conduct a picture walk. What do you think this story is about? Stories that we read have characters, problems, and settings. Thinking about these will help you remember what happens in the story. When I read this story, I am going to read and say a lot of words. I want you to listen for three special words in the story. Point to each word on the board/card as you read it. When you hear these special words in the story, I want you to raise your hand. Say reluctant, insisted, drowsy. The Reading 1. Pay attention to volume, speed, enunciation, and intonation. Pause once the vocabulary words appear in the story. Target Word One: reluctant Lisa was reluctant to leave without Corduroy, but her mother insisted. Good, some of you raised your hands! What word did you hear? Yes, insisted. Or Did anyone hear one or two of the special words? The words are reluctant, insisted, drowsy. Provide a student friendly definition. Lisa was reluctant to leave the Laundromat without Corduroy. Reluctant means that you are not sure you want to do something. Say the words with me?reluctant. Target Word Two: insisted Lisa was reluctant to leave without Corduroy, but her mother insisted. Lisa?s mother insisted that she leave the Laundromat. Insisted means to say that something MUST be done, you won?t take no for an answer. Say the word with me?insisted. Target Word Three: drowsy But by now, Corduroy felt drowsy, and soon he nodded off to sleep. Provide a student friendly definition. Corduroy felt drowsy in the Laundromat. Drowsy means feeling like you are going to fall asleep. Say the word with me?.drowsy. Closure In this story the cows and the hens went on strike, etc. We learned three special words. What words are we learning?? reluctant, insisted, drowsy. You will be hearing more stories and learning new words. 72 Week Three: Day Four Lesson Script Storybook: A Pocket for Corduroy Focus: Reviewing the definitions and giving examples in other contexts Read the story 1.Story Rereading. No Pauses. Today we will revisit the story A Pocket for Corduroy. After reading the story, ask: Who can tell us what happened in the story? What were the special words that we learned in our story on yesterday? reluctant, insisted, and drowsy. Review of the Definitions (5-10 Minutes) Today, we will review the special words that we learned on yesterday. Decontexualization of the words reluctant : In this story, Lisa was reluctant to leave the Laundromat without Corduroy. Reluctant means that you are not sure you want to do something. Someone might be reluctant to eat a food that he or she never had before. Someone might be reluctant to ride a roller-coaster because it looks scary. insisted: In the story, Lisa?s mother insisted that she leave the Laundromat when it was closing. Your mother might insist that you eat your vegetables. She doesn?t just tell you to eat them; she makes sure that you eat them. drowsy: In the story, Corduroy felt drowsy when he landed in the laundry basket. You might get drowsy while riding in a car or while listening to soft music. You feel very sleepy. Word Associations Which word goes with wanting to take a nap? (drowsy) Which word goes with not wanting to clean your room ? (reluctant) Which word goes with your mother telling you to go to bed or to brush your teeth? (insisted) Closure What words are we learning ? reluctant, insisted, drowsy. We will be reading more stories and learning new words. 73 Week Three: Day Five Lesson Script Storybooks: Olivia and the Missing Toy A Pocket for Corduroy Focus: Students participate in engaging wrap-up activities Wrap-Up Review Activities (5-10 minutes) Using all Three Words Show us how your mother might look if she insisted that you go to bed? Show us how you would look if you felt reluctant about putting your toys away? Show us how you would look if you sat down in a soft, comfortable chair and started to feel drowsy. Show us how you might look if you ate something that tasted awful. Show us how you might look if your mother told you to wear an unattractive shirt to school. Show us how you might look if you were exhausted from climbing stairs. 74 Week Four: Day One Lesson Guide Storybook: Make Way for Ducklings Focus: Read aloud, introduce words with student-friendly definitions Story Introduction 1. Point to the title on the cover. The title of this story is Make Way for Ducklings. Robert McCloskey wrote the story and drew the pictures. 2. Conduct a picture walk. What do you think this story is about? Stories that we read have characters, problems, and settings. Thinking about these will help you remember what happens in the story. When I read this story, I am going to read and say a lot of words. I want you to listen for three special words in the story. Point to each word on the card as you read it?. enormous, delighted, and beckoned. When you hear these special words in the story, I want you to raise your hand. The Reading 1. Pay attention to volume, speed, enunciation, and intonation. Pause once the vocabulary words appear in the story. Target Word One: enormous Just as they were getting ready to start on their way, a strange enormous bird came by. ?Good, some of you raised your hands! What word did you hear? Yes, enormous.?or Did anyone hear one of the special words? or The words are enormous, delighted, beckoned. Provide a student friendly definition. Mr. and Mrs. Mallard saw an enormous bird in a boat. Enormous means big or large. Say the word with me?enormous. Target Word Two: delighted ?Good,? said Mr. Mallard, delighted that at last Mrs. Mallard had found a place that suited her. Provide a student friendly definition. Mr. Mallard was delighted that Mrs. Mallard found a home for the ducklings. Delighted means that Mr. Mallard w was very pleased. It means that he was very happy. Say the word with me?.delighted. Target Word Three: beckoned Michael planted himself in the center of the road, raised one hand to stop the traffic and beckoned with the other hand. Provide a student friendly definition. Michael beckoned for Mrs. Mallard and her ducklings to cross the street. To beckon means to call or to signal. Say the word with me?.beckoned. Closure In this story Mr. and Mrs. Mallard found a home for their ducklings. In today?s story, we learned three special words?. enormous, delighted, beckoned. 75 Week Four: Day Two Lesson Guide Storybook: Make Way for Ducklings 1. Story Rereading. No Pauses. Today we will revisit the story Make Way for Ducklings. After reading the story ask: Who can tell us what happened in the story? What did you enjoy about the story? What were the special words that we learned in our story on yesterday? enormous, delighted, beckoned Review of the Definitions (5-10 Minutes) Today, we will review the special words that we talked about on yesterday. enormous: In the story, Mr. and Mrs. Mallard saw an enormous bird in a boat. Enormous means that the bird was large or big. A bear is an enormous animal. You could have an enormous plate of spaghetti. Say the word with me?enormous. delighted: In the story, Mr. Mallard was delighted that Mrs. Mallard found a home for the ducklings. Delighted means that Mr. Mallard was happy or pleased. You might be delighted to get a lot of presents for your birthday. Say the word with me?delighted. beckoned: In the story, Michael beckoned for Mrs. Mallard and her ducklings to cross the street. To beckon means to motion or to call someone. Your mother might beckon you when she wants to come to her. Mrs. Sherer, our crossing guard, might beckon you to the crosswalk. Say the word with me?beckoned. Word Associations Activity Ask the following: Look at our words. enormous, delighted, beckoned Which word goes with excited? (delighted) Which word goes with elephant? (enormous) Which word goes with call? (beckoned) Closure What words are we learning? enormous, delighted, beckoned We will be reading more stories and learning new words. 76 Week Four: Day Three Lesson Guide Storybook: Owen Story Introduction 1.Point to the title on the cover. The title of this story is Owen. The story was written by Kevin Henkes. The pictures were drawn by Kevin Henkes. 2. Conduct a picture walk. What do you think this story is about? Stories that we read have characters, problems, and settings. Thinking about these will help you remember what happens in the story. When I read this story, I am going to read and say a lot of words. I want you to listen for three special words in the story. Point to each word on the card as you read it. When you hear these special words in the story, I want you to raise your hand. Say essential, absolutely, perfect. The Reading 1. Pay attention to volume, speed, enunciation, and intonation. Pause once the vocabulary words appear in the story. Target Word One: absolutely In the morning Fuzzy would be gone, but the Blanket Fairy would leave an absolutely wonderful, positively perfect, especially terrific big-boy gift in its place. Good, some of you raised your hands! What word did you hear? Yes, ?absolutely.? or Did anyone hear one or two of the special words? The words are essential, absolutely, perfect. Provide a student friendly definition. Owen wanted an absolutely wonderful big-boy gift from the Blanket Fairy. Absolutely means complete or in every way. It means to be sure or certain. Say the words with me?absolutely. Target Word Two: perfect In the morning Fuzzy would be gone, but the Blanket Fairy would leave an absolutely wonderful, positively perfect, especially terrific big-boy gift in its place. Provide a student friendly definition. Owen wanted perfect big-boy gift from the Blanket Fairy. Perfect means just right or great. Say the word with me?perfect. Target Word Three: essential Fuzzy was essential when it came to nail clippings and haircuts and trips to the dentist. Provide a student friendly definition. Owen wanted Fuzzy to be with him when it came to nail clippings, haircuts, and trips to the dentist. Essential means that it was very important for Fuzzy to be with Owen. Owen needed Fuzzy to be with him so that he would not be afraid. Say the word with me?. essential. Closure In this story, Owen had a blanket called Fuzzy. We learned three special words. Essential, absolutely, perfect. You will be hearing more stories and learning new words. 77 Week Four: Day Four Lesson Guide Storybook: Owen Focus: Reviewing the definitions and giving examples in other contexts Read the story 1. Story Rereading. No Pauses. Today we will revisit the story Owen . After reading the story, ask: Who can tell us what happened in the story? What were the special words that we learned in our story on yesterday? essential, absolutely, perfect Review of the Definitions (5-10 Minutes) Today, we will review the special words that we learned on yesterday. Decontexualization of the words absolutely: In this story, Owen wanted an absolutely wonderful big-boy gift from the Blanket Fairy. Absolutely means complete or in every way. It means to be sure or certain. If you are really tired, you might be very tired in every way. You may be absolutely afraid of visiting the doctor. Afraid in every way or really afraid. perfect: In the story, Owen wanted a perfect big-boy gift from the Blanket Fairy. Perfect means just right. It means that you would not want to change something because you like it just the way it is. If you drew a picture and you liked everything about the picture, then you would think it was perfect. essential: In the story, Owen wanted Fuzzy to be with him when it came to nail clippings, haircuts, and trips to the dentist. Essential means that it was very important for Fuzzy to be with Owen. It is essential for you to eat food each day. It is also essential for you to come to school in order to learn. These things are very important. They are things that you must do. Word Associations Which word goes with getting everything that you have wanted for Christmas? (perfect) If you are really thirsty, which word would you use to tell how thirsty you are? (absolutely thirsty) Which word goes with looking both ways before you cross the street or wearing a raincoat when it is raining outside? (essential) Closure What words are we learning?... essential, absolutely, perfect. We will be reading more stories and learning new words. 78 Week Four: Day Five Lesson Guide Storybooks: Make Way for Ducklings and Owen Wrap-Up Review Activities 5-10 minutes Questions, Reasons, Examples wrap-up activities Would you get a little hungry or absolutely hungry if you do not eat for one week? Do you think it is essential to brush your teeth? Why? Why not? Describe a perfect summer day or summer vacation. What makes it perfect? Show me how you might look if you beckoned your friend during recess. When might your mother or father beckon you? Name something that is enormous. What makes it enormous? Why might you be delighted to see your grandparents or your aunt or uncle? 79 APPENDIX C Multiple Choice Posttest to Measure Vocabulary Knowledge Directions ?We will play a question and answer game. I will ask you a question and you will give me an answer. I will give you two answer choices. If you do not know the answer, you may say ?I do not know.? Let?s try one?which do you like best?. pizza or chicken fingers? Great?let?s begin our question and answer game?. 1. If your mother gave you a morsel of cake, would you have? A. a little bit of cake B. a lot of cake 2. If you went on an adventure, would you probably? A. do something new B. do something you had done before 3. Would you be reluctant to? A. pick up your toys B. buy new toys 4. Would you be exhausted from? A. taking a nap B. playing all day 5. If you were a swift runner, would you probably finish the race? A. first B. last 6. If you were a timid child, would you probably? A. be quiet a lot B. talk a lot 7. Would having Santa Claus bring you everything on your list be? A. perfect B. swift 8. If you were absolutely tired from playing on the playground, would you? A. be a little tired B. or tired a lot 80 9. Which would be firm? A. an apple B. a soft teddy bear 10. Which would be unattractive? A. getting a shot from the doctor B. going shopping at the toy store 11. Which would be impossible? A. singing a song B. seeing an elephant sing a song 12. Would a fierce tiger be? A. a weak tiger B. a strong tiger 13. If your mom insisted that you put away your toys, would she? A. demand that you put away your toys B. beg you to put away your toys 14. If you were drowsy, would you want to? A. go outside to play B. take a nap 15. Would you find an enormous animal? A. in your backyard B. in the zoo 16. If your teacher beckoned you to the door, would you? A. walk to the door B. walk away from the door 17. Would getting a shot from the doctor be? A. exciting B. awful 18. Would you get impatient while waiting in a long line at the toy store? A. yes B. no 19. Would you be delighted to get $100.00 for your birthday? A. yes B. no 81 20. Would your teacher be furious if you did not do your schoolwork? A. yes B. no 21. Is it essential to learn your telephone number? A. yes B. no 22. Would you want to protect yourself from bumblebees? A. yes B. no 23. Would you be able to see something if it were invisible? A. yes B. no 24. If you saw a swaying tree, would you see? A. a tree that is tall B. a tree that is leaning 82