Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:07:56.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Language proficiency, home-language status, and English vocabulary development: A longitudinal follow-up of the Word Generation program*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2012

JOSHUA F. LAWRENCE ,
LAUREN CAPOTOSTO ,
LEE BRANUM-MARTIN ,
CLAIRE WHITE  and
CATHERINE E. SNOW
JOSHUA F. LAWRENCE*
Affiliation:
Harvard University
LAUREN CAPOTOSTO
Affiliation:
Harvard University
LEE BRANUM-MARTIN
Affiliation:
University of Houston
CLAIRE WHITE
Affiliation:
SERP Institute
CATHERINE E. SNOW
Affiliation:
Harvard University
*
Address for correspondence: Joshua F. Lawrence, Department of Education, University of California, Irvine, 3200 Education Building, Irvine, CA 92697-5500, USAjflawren@uci.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This longitudinal quasi-experimental study examines the effects of Word Generation, a middle-school vocabulary intervention, on the learning, maintenance, and consolidation of academic vocabulary for students from English-speaking homes, proficient English speakers from language-minority homes, and limited English-proficiency students. Using individual growth modeling, we found that students receiving Word Generation improved more on target word knowledge during the instructional period than students in comparison schools did, on average. We found an interaction between instruction and home-language status such that English-proficient students from language-minority homes improved more than English-proficient students from English-speaking homes. Limited English-proficiency students, however, did not realize gains equivalent to those of more proficient students from language-minority homes during the instructional period. We administered follow-up assessments in the fall after the instructional period ended and in the spring of the following year to determine how well students maintained and consolidated target academic words. Students in the intervention group maintained their relative improvements at both follow-up assessments.

Keywords

vocabularyinstructionlongitudinal analysis
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , July 2012 , pp. 437 - 451
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The SERP–BPS field site and thus the original planning for Word Generation were supported by grants to the Strategic Education Research Partnership (SERP) from the Spencer Foundation and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation; further development and evaluation of Word Generation were supported by a Senior Urban Education Fellowship awarded to Catherine Snow by the Council of Great City Schools. Joshua Lawrence was supported by funds awarded to Catherine Snow by the Spencer Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York. We also acknowledge the funding to SERP from the Lowenstein Foundation, to develop professional development opportunities through www.wordgeneration.org. The first author was supported by Grant Number R305A090555, Word Generation: An Efficacy Trial from the Institute of Educational Sciences (IES), US Department of Education (USDE) during the preparation of this paper. Additional support was received from Grant Number R305A050056, National Research and Development Center for English Language Learners. The contents do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of IES or USDE and readers should not assume endorsement by the federal government for any of the positions or statements expressed herein. Our thanks to the anonymous reviewers of this journal for their insightful comments.

References

Alexander, K., Entwisle, D., & Olson, L. (2001). Schools, achievement, and inequality: A seasonal perspective. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 23 (2), 171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, K., Entwisle, D., & Olson, L. (2007). Lasting consequences of the summer learning gap. American Sociological Review, 72 (2), 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aud, S., Hussar, W., Planty, M., Snyder, T., Bianco, K., Fox, M., Frohlich, L., Kemp, J., & Drake, L. (2010). The condition of education 2010 (NCES 2010–028). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
August, D., Branum-Martin, L., Cardenas-Hagan, E., & Francis, D. (2009). The impact of an instructional intervention on the science and language learning of middle grade English language learners. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2 (4), 345–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2006). Synthesis: Instruction and professional development. In August, D. & Shanahan, T. (eds.), Developing literacy in a second language: Report of the National Literacy Panel, pp. 351–364. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Stringer, D. (2010). Variables in second language attrition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32 (1), 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, I., McKeown, M., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Biancarosa, G., Bryk, A. S., & Dexter, E. R. (2010). Assessing the value-added effects of literacy collaborative professional development on student learning. Elementary School Journal, 111 (1), 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlo, M. S., August, D., McLaughlin, B., Snow, C. E., Dressler, C., Lippman, D. N., Livey, T. J., & White, C. (2004). Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English-language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 39 (2), 188–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, R. (1994). Percentage of unknown vocabulary words in text as a function of the relative difficulty of the text: Implications for instruction. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26 (4), 413–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chall, J., & Jacobs, V. (2003). Poor children's fourth-grade slump. American Educator, 27 (1), 14–17.Google Scholar
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34 (2), 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de la Fuente, M. (2006). Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition: Investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form-focused instruction. Language Teaching Research, 10 (3), 263–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Entwisle, D., Alexander, K., & Olson, L. (1997). Children, schools and inequality. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Francis, D., Rivera, M., Lesaux, N., Kieffer, M., & Rivera, H. (2006). Practical guidelines for the education of English language learners: Research-based recommendations for instruction and academic interventions. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.Google Scholar
Fukkink, R., Blok, H., & de Glopper, K. (2001). Deriving word meaning from written context: A multicomponential skill. Language Learning, 51 (3), 477–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukkink, R., & de Glopper, K. (1998). Effects of instruction in deriving word meaning from contexts: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 68 (4), 450–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heyns, B. (1978). Summer learning and the effects of schooling. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kieffer, M. (2008). Catching up or falling behind? Initial English proficiency, concentrated poverty, and the reading growth of language minority learners in the United States. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100 (4), 851–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, J. F. (2009). Summer reading: Predicting adolescent word learning from aptitude, time spent reading, and text type. Reading Psychology, 30 (5), 445–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, J. F. (in press). English vocabulary learning trajectories of students whose parents speak a language other than English: Steep learning and deep summer setback. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, doi: 10.1007/s11145-011-9305-z. Published online by Elsevier, March 27, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, J. F., White, C., & Snow, C. E. (2010). The words students need. Educational Leadership, 68 (2), 22–26.Google Scholar
Lutkus, A. D., Rampey, B. D., & Donahue, P. (2005). The nation's report card: Trial urban district assessment reading 2005 (NCES 2006-455). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
Min, H. (2008). EFL vocabulary acquisition and retention: Reading plus vocabulary enhancement activities and narrow reading. Language Learning, 58 (1), 73–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007. Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
Nagy, W., & Scott, J. A. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In Kamil, M., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, P. D. & Barr, R. (eds.), Handbook of reading research (vol. III), pp. 269–284. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD]. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NICHD 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Proctor, C., Dalton, B., Uccelli, P., Biancarosa, G., Mo, E., Snow, C. E., & Neugebauer, S. (2009/2011). Improving comprehension online: Effects of deep vocabulary instruction with bilingual and monolingual fifth graders. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 24 (5), 517–544. [Online publication 2009, print publication 2011.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework. http://www.lmri.ucsb.edu/publications/03_scarcella.pdf (retrieved October 20, 2008).Google Scholar
Singer, J., & Willett, J. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and even occurrence. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, C. E., Lawrence, J. F., & White, C. (2009). Generating knowledge of academic language among urban middle school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2 (4), 325–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suárez-Orozco, C., Suárez-Orozco, M., & Todorova, I. (2008). Learning a new land: Immigrant students in American society. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Townsend, D., & Collins, P. (2009). Academic vocabulary and middle school English learners: An intervention study. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22 (9), 993–1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Education. (2001). No child left behind. http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml (retrieved May, 2004).Google Scholar
Uchikoshi, Y. (2006). English vocabulary development in bilingual kindergarteners: What are the best predictors? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9 (1), 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaughn, S., Martinez, L., Linan-Thompson, S., Reutebuch, C., Carlson, C., & Francis, D. (2009). Enhancing social studies vocabulary and comprehension for seventh-grade English language learners: Findings from two experimental studies. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2 (4), 297–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhallen, M., & Schoonen, R. (1993). Lexical knowledge of monolingual and bilingual children. Applied Linguistics, 14 (4), 344–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar