Teaching Community College Students Strategies for Learning Unknown Words as They Read Expository Text
An experiment was conducted to investigate methods that enable college students to learn the meaning of unknown words as they read discipline-specific academic text. Forty-one college students read specific passages aloud during three sessions. Participants were randomly assigned to three vocabulary learning interventions or a control condition. The interventions involved applying context, morphemic, and syntactic strategies; applying definitions; or applying both strategies and definitions to determine word meanings. Word learning and comprehension were measured during the interventions and in a transfer task to assess treatment effects on independent text reading. Results revealed that students in all three intervention groups outperformed controls in learning words and comprehending passages. However, the treatment groups did not differ from controls on the transfer task. Teaching both strategies and definitions was especially effective for learning unknown words and comprehending text containing those words.
Anderson, T., & Kim, J. Y. (2011). Strengthening college students’ success through the RAC. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 42(1), 61–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2011.10850348
Ayers, W. (1995). To become a teacher: Making a difference in children’s lives. New York: Teachers’ College Press.
Baumann, J.F., Edwards, E.C., Boland, E.M., Olejnik, S., & Kame’enui, E.J. (2003). Vocabulary tricks: Effects of instruction in morphology and context on fifth-grade students’ ability to derive and infer word meanings. American Educational Research Journal, 401(2), 447–494. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040002447
Baumann, J. F., Edwards, E. C., Font, G., Tereshinksi, C. A., Kame’enui, E. J., & Olejnik, S. (2002). Teaching morphemic and contextual analysis to fifth grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(2), 150–176. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.37.2.3
Beech, J. R. (2005). Ehri’s model of phases of learning to read: A brief critique. Journal of Research in Reading, 28(1), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2005.00252.x
Brown, J. I., Fishco, V. V., & Hanna, G. (1993). Nelson-Denny reading test: Technical report, forms G&H. Chicago, IL: Riverside Publishing Company.
Carlisle, J. F. (2010). Effects of instruction in morphological awareness on literacy achievement: An integrative review. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(4), 464–524. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.45.4.5
Chall, J. (1983). A proposal for reading stages. In J. Chall, Stages of reading development (pp. 9–39). New York: McGraw Hill.
Cromley, J. G., & Wills, T. W. (2014). Flexible strategy use by students who learn much versus little from text: Transitions within think-aloud protocols. Journal of Research in Reading, 39(1), 50–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12026
Datta, S., & Macdonald-Ross, M. (2002). Reading skills and reading habits: A study of Open University undergraduate reservees. Open Learning, 17(1), 68–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680510120110193
Dougherty, K. J., & Townsend, B. K. (2006). Community college missions: A theoretical and historical perspective. New Directions for Community Colleges, 136 (5–13). https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.254
Ehri, L. C. (1998). Grapheme-phoneme knowledge is essential for learning to read words in English. In J. L. Metsala & L. C. Ehri (Eds.), Word Recognition in Beginning Literacy (pp. 3–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Falk-Ross, F. C. (2001). Toward the new literacy: Changes in college students’ reading comprehension strategies following reading/writing projects. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(4), 278–288.
Fukkink, R. G., & de Glopper, K. (1998). Effects of instruction in deriving word meaning from context: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 68(4), 450–469. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068004450
Graham, S. (2010, Winter). Want to improve children’s writing? Don’t neglect their handwriting. American Educator, 33(4), 20–23.
Greene, B. (2001). Testing reading comprehension of theoretical discourse with cloze. Journal of Research in Reading, 24(1), 82–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00134
Guo, Y., Roehrig, A. D., & Williams, R. S. (2011). The relationship of morphological awareness and syntactic awareness to adult’s reading comprehension: Is vocabulary a mediating factor? Journal of Literacy Research, 43(2), 159–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X11403086
Hadley, N. J., Eisenwine, M. J., & Sanders, M. G. (2005). Teaching reading strategies to adult learners: An interactive approach addressing standardized testing. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 7, 65–78.
Honig, A. S. (2007). Play: Ten power boosts for children’s early learning. Young Children, 62(5), 72–78.
Kelly, J. G., Lesaux, N. K., Kiefer, M. J., & Faller, E. (2010). Effective academic vocabulary instruction in the urban middle school. The Reading Teacher, 64(1), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.64.1.1
Kolesnikova, N. A. (2009, Fall). The changing role of community colleges. Bridges. Retrieved from https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/bridges/fall-2009/the-changing-role-of-community-colleges
McDevitt, T., & Ormrod, J. (2009). Child development and education (4th ed.). New York: Pearson.
Macdonald-Ross, M. & Scott, B. (1997). A postal survey of OU students’ reading skills. Open Learning, 12(2), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268051970120204
Nagy, W. E. (1988). Teaching vocabulary to improve reading comprehension. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: National.
Neal, H. N. (2015). Theory to practice: Cultivating academic language proficiency in developmental reading classrooms. Journal of Developmental Education, 39(1) 12–34.
Nist, S. L., & Holschuh, J. L. (2000). Comprehension strategies at the college level. In R. F. Flippo & D. C. Caverly (Eds.), Handbook of College Reading and Study Strategy Research (pp. 25–42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nist, S., & Olejnik, S. (1995). The role of context and dictionary definitions on varying levels of word knowledge. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(2), 172–193. https://doi.org/10.2307/748031 GS Scholar
Ocal, T., & Ehri, L. (2017). Spelling ability in college students predicted by decoding, print exposure, and vocabulary. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 47(1), 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2016.1219242
Paul, G. & Verhulst, S. (2010). Improving the reading comprehension skills of adults from educationally disadvantaged backgrounds. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 54(2), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.54.2.5
Pearlman, S. J. (2013, December 11). It's not that they can't read; It's that they can't read: Can we create "citizen experts" through interactive assessment? Across the Disciplines, 10(4). Retrieved from: https://wac.colostate.edu/atd/reading/pearlman.cfm
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Pugh, S., Pawan, F., & Antommarchi, C. (2000). Academic literacy and the new college learner. In R. F. Flippo & D. C. Caverly (Eds.), Handbook of College Reading and Study Strategy Research (pp 25–42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rosenthal, J. & Ehri, L. C. (2008). The mnemonic value of orthography for vocabulary learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-06220.127.116.11
Scarborough, H. S. (2002). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Nueman & D. K. Dickenson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97–110). New York: Guilford Press.
Shanahan, C., Shanahan, T., & Misichia, C. (2011). Analysis of expert readers in three disciplines: History, mathematics, and chemistry. Journal of Literacy Research, 43, 393–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X11424071
Simpson, M. L., & Randall, S. L. (2000). Vocabulary development at the college level. In R. F. Flippo & D. C. Caverly (Eds.), Handbook of College Reading and Study Strategy Research (pp. 43–61). Mahwah. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, (56)1, 72–110. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543056001072
Stanovich, K. E., & Cunningham, A. E. (1992). Studying the consequences of literacy within a literate society: The cognitive correlates of print exposure. Memory & Cognition, 20(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208254
Taraban, R., Rynearson, K., & Kerr, M. (2000). College Students’ academic performance and self-reports of comprehension strategy use. Reading Psychology, 21(4), 283–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/027027100750061930
Whitt, M. (1993). The effect of reading rate on vocabulary. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 20(1), 72–78.
Wilson-Fowler, E. B.; & Apel, K. (2015). Influence of morphological awareness on college students' literacy skills: A path analytic approach. Journal of Literacy Research, 47(3), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X15619730
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with HLRC agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and publishing rights without restrictions and grant the journal right of first publication. Authors grant Laureate Education, Inc. a license to publish and distribute the work under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in HLRC.
- Authors who submit manuscripts are to declare that their submission to HLRC is not simultaneously under consideration for publication in another journal and has not been published elsewhere previously.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the HLRC's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in HLRC.
- Pre-refereeing and pre-publication: To ensure consistency in the information available to researchers and to safeguard the blind peer-review process, authors are asked to abstain from self-archiving or posting online the submitted manuscript before the review process is complete.
- Post-refereeing and post-publication: Authors are free to self-archive and distribute the peer-reviewed and editorially reviewed version of their work. As a full open access journal, there is no embargo period. Authors are encouraged to archive the published PDF version, which includes a suggested citation with all pertinent information, including a digital object identifier (DOI). If the author decides to self-archive or distribute the work in a format other than the published PDF, the author must include the assigned DOI and acknowledge the work was first published in HLRC.