Effects of Vocabulary Instruction on the

Language Gap in Kindergarten

Undergraduate Thesis Submitted for High Honors Consideration
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gabriela De Oliveira
Spring 2016

Abstract
Prior to entering schooling, childrens language is based on the interactions with the
adults around them, thus children experience different amounts of social interactions. These
varying interactions shape the vocabularies of children entering kindergarten causing many
students to suffer from the language gap upon entering schooling. Without intervention, these
vocabulary differences remain throughout their elementary school years. This component of
instruction is frequently overlooked and it is often assumed that implicit learning is appropriate
for this age group. The goal of this project is to examine age appropriate instructional strategies
to introduce vocabulary learning in the primary grades. The instructional strategies reviewed
focus on read-aloud strategies to introduce and reinforce target words through the use of
authentic childrens literature.

Introduction: Vocabulary for Communication

Vocabulary is defined as having access to the meanings of words that teachers, or their
surrogates (e.g., other adults, books, films, etc.), use to guide them into contemplating known
concepts in novel ways (i.e., to learn something new) by Baker, Simmons, & Kame'enui (p.195,
1998). Communication cannot be accomplished without the use of effective and efficient
vocabulary. Factors important to acquiring vocabulary to communicate are children's exposure to
various words through interaction with family members, interactions in their environment, and
the frequency of those interactions. As children, learning to talk is conducted through a social
dance as defined by Hart and Risley (1999); this social dance is largely conducted through
conversation with family members, peers, or caretakers. The amount of time spent dancing
with the language directly influences the amount of time children practice using the language,
thus affecting their overall acquisition of the language (Hart & Risley, 1999). Participation in
conversation requires the child to listen to what is being said, while also constructing a response
that shares the same topic and adds something to which the first can respond. Conversation
exposes the child to vocabulary that can be used to communicate, while also prompting the child
to practice selecting appropriate responses given the circumstances. Communication begins as
informal conversations, then over time develops to include academic language and more formal
language structures.
Hart and Risley (1999) define talking as a social context that is influenced by cultural norms,
socioeconomic status, the context of the interaction, and the people participating in the
interaction. The frequency of verbal social interaction directly influences the development of
children's language. The more language experiences to which the child is exposed during their
developmental years leads to increasingly more sophisticated social dances, thus acquiring
3

more vocabulary. This aspect of the childs upbringing not only affects language development,
but also the size of their vocabulary and the range of expression used in conversations. Hart and
Risley continue to discuss that, by age three, children demonstrate early predictors of academic
success in terms of IQ scores, vocabulary growth rates, and vocabulary use. The differences in
predicted outcomes are determined by the interaction with varied vocabulary through the form of
conversation and the talkativeness of their caretakers throughout the first three years. Hart and
Risley (1995) studied the aspects that affect a childs language interaction and acquisition and
determined that by age four, a child in a family receiving welfare would experience a deficit of
13 million words over a child in a working-class family. This deficit is coined the "language gap"
due to the substantial deficits these children face. Professional families and working-class
families tend to provide more varied vocabulary, positive feedback, and subtle guidance when
participating in conversations with their children; children in families receiving welfare do not
typically receive this extra talk from their parents thus creating this language gap. Furthermore,
there are systematic differences in oral vocabulary due to race, gender, and socioeconomic status
that have accrued over the first three years of life (Farkas, 2004). Each of these variables effect
vocabulary independently, but also interacts to affect oral language in a detrimental manner.
Neuman and Maurlis (2010) suggest that poverty is the most serious risk factor, thus proving the
detrimental effects of the language gap. In a later study, Neuman and Maurlis (2013) determined
that students in high-poverty show the smallest gains in vocabulary acquisition, and often contain
the lowest baseline scores, thus perpetuating the language gap.
Importance of Vocabulary
Vocabulary is not only used to communicate orally and converse with those around you, but
is also used to acquire knowledge and comprehend academic material in written form. For young
4

students in the primary grades, comprehension is a critical component of their reading abilities.
In 2000, the National Reading Panel (NRP) described comprehension as critically important to
the development of childrens reading skills and therefore to the ability to obtain an education
(pg. 13). In order to achieve comprehension, the reader must be able to interact with the text.
This can only be done once the reader is able to visually identify the words located within the
text itself, and then process these words for meaning. For students in the primary grades, their
oral vocabulary is considerably larger than their print vocabulary; therefore, a student can
comprehend a larger selection of texts when they are read to them. Beck and McKeown (2007)
discuss the variations of oral and print vocabularies in kindergarteners, indicating their listening
and speaking competencies to be much larger than their reading and writing competencies. Thus,
more complex language structures and vocabulary can be introduced in the form of oral
language. Researchers have concluded that children experience a "vocabulary spurt" where the
pace of word learning increases rapidly as early as 18 to 24 months, therefore it is recommended
that earlier implementation of vocabulary instruction is most beneficial (McMurray, 2007). As
students encounter printed language, they must "map" the language encountered with the oral
language they already have; this process varies depending on the oral language the student brings
(Neuman & Marulis, 2013). As a student hears a story read to them, the child must monitor his or
her own comprehension of the story, make inferences about the novel words, and store the new
words in memory; students struggling with the language gap find this process to be much more
difficult than their peers (Senechal, Thomas, & Monker, 1995).
Active participation of students during repeated readings of a story further facilitated the
acquisition of vocabulary; this is largely due to the act of producing the target words in oral
language (Senechal, 1993). Children performed better on vocabulary post-tests when allowed to

participate throughout the readings with opportunities to orally say the target words; the
repetition of the target words made production of the words more seamless (Senechal, Thomas,
Monker, 1995).
Vocabulary, in addition to word-identification, is a major factor that limits students'
comprehension of texts (Biemiller & Slonin, 2001). At the end of second grade, students have
acquired, on average, 7,100 root words. These students were considered in the highest quartile of
the study, whereas the lowest quartile acquired only 3,000 root words. This disparity in
vocabulary persisted throughout their education; by fifth grade, these students had not reached
the equivalent of their second grade peers in words learned. The impact of the language gap
becomes more apparent in grades 3-5 where students transition from learning to read to reading
to learn. This language gap affects the students' overall academic achievement, and by fourth
grade, 37% of students fail to achieve basic levels of reading achievement (National Reading
Panel, 2000).
Vocabulary in Education
The goal of vocabulary instruction in schools is primarily to increase reading comprehension
and overall academic ability. Oral vocabulary, letter-sound correspondence, sound-blending, and
segmentation skills are building blocks for development of reading skills (Farkas, 2004). These
building blocks are introduced throughout the preschool years with oral vocabulary acquisition
as the primary achievement task. The NRP (2000) deems vocabulary important to
comprehension and the complex processes associated with reading. According to the NRP, there
are two types of vocabulary- oral and print. The larger a readers vocabulary (oral or print), the
easier it is to make sense of a text. Upon entering formal school, childrens oral vocabulary is

considerably larger, thus enabling them to comprehend material that is spoken aloud more easily.
Most importantly, however, the instruction of the vocabulary needs to be appropriate to the age
and ability of the reader. Vocabulary instruction can help to minimize, but not eliminate, the
Matthew Effect, and lessen the gap of vocabulary acquired prior to schooling between students'
of different socioeconomic status. Children who do not receive this instruction and experience a
lack of oral language development, are considerably behind when beginning their education.
Students can make considerable gains when engaged in vocabulary instruction, both implicit and
explicit, however they do not completely overcome the Matthew Effect (Penno, Wilkinson, &
Moore, 2002). Students with limited vocabulary are considered at high risk for later reading
difficulty, as vocabulary is recognized as a strong predictor of later reading achievement
(Spencer, Goldstein, & Kamiski, 2012). Thus, vocabulary instruction in classrooms is
implemented to assist in maximizing comprehension, overall academic ability, and minimizing
the effects of the Matthew Effect.
Vocabulary Instruction
Vocabulary instruction is implemented through two methods: implicit and explicit
instruction. Instructors often choose one method that best accompanies their teaching style;
however, the NRP argues that a combination of implicit and explicit instruction is most effective
for vocabulary acquisition. Implicit instruction occurs within the context of a read aloud;
however, students are left to derive meaning from their own comprehension of the target words.
The instructor does not provide any definition for the target words, this is the main difference
between explicit and implicit instruction. Explicit instruction provides students with a student
friendly definition and a more holistic understanding of the target word through discussion
regarding word meaning.
7

A study that investigated the relationship between the Matthew Effect and vocabulary
instruction found that vocabulary gains improved as students were exposed to explanations of the
target words within the context of a story read orally (Penno, Wilkinson, & Moore, 2002). Thus
far, researchers have determined that parallel gains in vocabulary would not be sufficient to close
the language gap. The study also found that students had a more comprehensive understanding of
the word meaning after second and third readings of the text with explanations of the target
words.
Although there are various factors that determine whether vocabulary will be acquired by
students, researchers also found that certain variables affected the acquisition more than others.
The variables determined most crucial to vocabulary acquisition were the frequency of the word,
the depiction in illustrations, and the redundancy in surrounding contexts (Elley, 1989). This
study also concluded the motivation factor to be crucial to acquiring vocabulary. The book
selection plays a large role in the activation of schema thus increasing motivation. In Elleys
second study, it was noted that there was a lack of involvement on the behalf of students due to
the inability to identify with the text. The text, The White Crane, was set in a place where the
lifestyle was foreign, the characters were difficult for students to identify with, and there was
little action or humor; therefore, the benefits of repeated readings were lost due to the lack of
student engagement and motivation throughout the text. The book, Gumdrop at Sea, in this study
was read to the students three times over a seven day period. The first reading consisted of a
discussion of the title, main characters, and cover picture. The second reading, 3 days later,
followed the same protocol as the first reading. The third reading, 7 days after the first reading,
provided students the opportunity to make predictions and comments about the story. Students
were then given a post-test, identical to the pre-test, the students showed a mean increase of

15.4% on the target words, the lower group of students showed the most gain. These findings
demonstrate the effectiveness of implicit vocabulary instruction through repeated readings and
the context of literature. Beck (1996) also explored the effects of repeated readings and
interactive instruction on vocabulary acquisition. The interactive instruction consisted of oral
practice with the target words, as young students' listening and speaking competencies are in
advance of their reading and writing skills. This study found that students are better able to
answer comprehension questions about the target words when asked to talk about what they saw
happening within the illustrations, thus utilizing the target terms in their productive vocabularies
(Beck, 1996). Repeated exposures can help to minimize the effects of the language gap.
Researchers determined that through small group shared readings, students with lower receptive
vocabulary skills demonstrated greater vocabulary gains than those with higher receptive
vocabulary skills (Coyne et al., 2004). Explicit instruction within repeated shared readings helps
to narrow, or halt, the widening of the language gap among students. This study also noted that
this form of vocabulary instruction was not equally effective for all students and should be used
as a form of intervention for students that enter formal schooling with less language skills than
their peers.
Coyne and his colleagues deemed the various methods of instruction applicable to different
words depending on the depth of word knowledge desired. Embedded instruction is for the
purpose of introducing as many target words as possible (Coyne et al, 2009). This form of
instruction provides students with brief definitions within the context of an experience or story.
However, this method provides multiple limitations to actively engaging students in learning
tasks that require them to interact with the word meanings. Of the various limitations, the lack of
multiple and repeated exposures is most critical to the acquisition of vocabulary, students are less

likely to retain the target word without repeated exposures. This method also does not require
students to discriminate, manipulate, and interact with the target words and their meanings, thus
limiting their understanding of the target words. This study also determined that multiple and
repeated exposure is critical to vocabulary instruction.
This is considered to be the most time efficient method where students are exposed to as
many new words as possible. Coyne et al. (2009) found that during read alouds of the chosen
story, students were asked to raise their hand when they heard target words in Goldilocks. Upon
hearing the term, the students received a brief definition of the word identified. The teacher
would then reread the sentence replacing the target word with a synonym appropriate for their
instructional level. Finally, students are asked to pronounce the target word in unison, this
process was repeated for all target words. On average, the instructional time spent on each word
was 30 seconds over three readings. This style of embedded instruction was found to be effective
when compared to implicit instruction.
Within explicit vocabulary instruction, there is a notable difference between embedded
instruction and extended vocabulary instruction as coined Coyne and colleagues (2009). In the
latter method, students are exposed to the target vocabulary more frequently, and obtain a deeper
understanding of the word itself. Prior to reading, students are introduced to the target words;
during the reading, students receive the same instruction as embedded instruction for each of the
target words. Students then interact with the target words outside of the storys context in the
form of guided activities. These activities begin by reintroducing the target words using the
context of the story and a supporting picture; once reviewed, additional examples of the word are
introduced. Within these activities, both group and individual responses were required, occurring
through yes/no questions, analyzing pictures, and questions combining target words.
10

This

increases word consciousness of students and prepares them for encountering unfamiliar words
across texts. Within explicit instruction, the focus is on fewer words at a time, and the time spent
on each word is considerably more than in implicit instruction. Explicit instruction is often
embedded within the context of a story, using this as a base for word understanding. Students are
given the opportunity to interact with the specific text, target words, and provided definitions.
Coyne et al. (2009) determined this method of vocabulary instruction to be more effective than
that of embedded and implicit instruction. Students demonstrated a more complete understanding
of the target words, while also retaining this understanding for longer periods of time as
compared to embedded and implicit instruction.
Vocabulary interventions are needed to accelerate childrens vocabulary development to
help narrow effects of the Matthew Effect (Neuman & Marulis, 2010). Past research emphasized
an increase in reading to build vocabulary skills; however, a student with poor reading skills will
gravitate towards less challenging texts thus heightening vocabulary differences. Their
counterparts are reading texts with more varied vocabularies; therefore the deficits are furthered
for readers who are not as confident. When selecting texts, students are likely to choose texts
within their independent reading level, which they can read with 95-100% accuracy. Poor readers
tend to choose texts based on their perceived abilities when reading independently, therefore
their text selection is likely to be at lower levels of complexity which lack sophisticated
vocabulary. Neuman and Marulis continue to argue that implicit and explicit instruction, in
combination, best cultivates vocabulary knowledge. However, it is important to note that explicit
instruction is more effective than implicit instruction on its own. Instruction can be delivered in
short time spans, with exposure to multiple rich contexts; this allows students to gain a better
understanding of the target vocabulary. Within the two types of vocabulary instruction, various

11

strategies are used to effectively portray the various elements of the target vocabulary. These
include open-ended questions where students determine the appropriate usage of the target word,
teacher led think alouds to derive meaning from context, and re-reading the sentence with a wellknown synonym. It is possible that the person delivering the intervention, or instruction, largely
affects the vocabulary gains made by students (Neuman & Marulis, 2010). Vocabulary gains
were greater when the instruction was delivered by the teacher, rather than a paraprofessional or
caretaker.
Another facet of vocabulary instruction is the depth of word explanation and exposure
provided to students. This distinction led researchers to test the relationship between explicit
instruction and length of interactions with the target words. A study found that when students
were exposed to the target words over a period of a school week, averaging 27.6 minutes per
word, the students usage and comprehensive understanding of the word increased (Beck &
McKeown, 2007). This form of vocabulary instruction occurred within the context of a trade
book read aloud to students. Rich instruction of the target words occurred after the story was
read and discussed. In this study, instruction occurred after the story because the goal was overall
vocabulary development rather than comprehension of the story. Instruction began with
contextualizing the word within the story, defining the word, children were asked to orally repeat
the word, and then other examples were given. Children were asked to make judgments on
examples using yes/no questions, and then they were asked to create their own examples.
Teachers were then asked to reinforce the words throughout the week in regular classroom
activities. Additional instruction, coined "more rich instruction," provided students with more indepth instruction for a subset of the target words over the course of a school week. This
instruction was delivered in the same manner as rich instruction but the instruction was more

12

frequent and occurred for a longer duration. Based on the outcomes, the researchers concluded
more rich instruction to be the ideal form of vocabulary instruction. It is important to note the
criteria used for selecting texts within this study, the primary criterion was that it be conceptually
challenging so students are required to take an active stance towards constructing meaning. Beck
and McKeown also looked at the complexity of events, subtleties in expressing ideas, and the
presentation of unfamiliar ideas. Furthermore, the books chosen did not rely heavily on the
illustrations to communicate the story; they wanted to ensure that students were relying on the
text of the story.
Thus far, researchers have determined the connection between oral language and
vocabulary acquisition to be an instrumental factor in determining the most effective form of
instruction. Students acquire book language as stories are read to them, allowing them to hear the
nuances of language (Eller, Pappas, Brown, 1988). It is also important to note the differences
between authentic children's literature and books designed for emergent readers. Children's
literature, which is recommended for vocabulary instruction, utilizes higher level sequencing and
vocabulary. Authentic children's literature is meant to be read to children, and to enhance their
oral vocabularies. Whereas books for emergent readers are written with vocabulary that is easily
decodable, thus not targeting tier two words. These books are designed for children to read
independently or with minimal guidance, and contain minimal grammatical structures. Therefore,
vocabulary instruction within the context of storybook reading should occur within authentic
children's literature, thus providing students with meaningful contexts for target words.
In addition to the importance of language nuances, researchers have found that
illustrations are only extensions of the linguistic message but are not necessary for
comprehension of the text (Eller, Pappas, Brown, 1988). Most importantly, students arrive at the
13

conclusion that words create meaning. As students are exposed to repeated readings, children use
constructive cognitive and linguistic strategies to retell the story themselves. This retelling often
includes the target words or synonyms of the target words, thus improving their comprehension
of the story with accuracy in retellings.
Application
The goal of this application project was to determine the effects of vocabulary
intervention on the acquisition of six targeted tier two words in kindergarteners. In particular, the
application was designed to lessen the effects of the language gap. The application designed was
based heavily on the research presented above, in particular, Beck & McKeown, Coyne et al, and
Neuman & Marulis. The intervention included explicit instruction of target words chosen from
authentic childrens literature and was conducted in a small group of students, in order to
simulate the effects on a classroom.
Participants
Participants in this application included four five- and six-year old students drawn from a
kindergarten classroom in Alachua County. The school is a Title One school and students receive
both free breakfast and lunch. The classroom chosen was an inclusive classroom within a rural
community. This classroom has 18 students ranging in ages from 5-7. The sample included two
girls and two boys; one student of African American descent, one of Hispanic descent, and two
Caucasian students. The students were chosen to represent a range of ability, similar to that seen
in a classroom, from low, moderate, and high.
Procedures

14

The vocabulary intervention was conducted with a targeted group of students following the
reading of authentic childrens literature. As per prior researcher, the context of the story was
used as a basis for initial understanding for each word, and then extended into other contexts.
Texts were chosen following the criterion previously mentioned according to the research of
Beck and McKeown (2003). Students were given the opportunity to interact with the text in a
whole group setting, while also participating throughout the reading in the form of predictions
and comments. The instruction followed the model of rich instruction as coined by Beck and
McKeown. There were 3 target words identified for each text read to the students. The
instructional sequence was: identifying the context of the target words, providing student friendly
definitions, determining examples and non-examples, and finally brainstorming their own
examples. Examples were focused on providing varying contexts of the target words, and
allowing students to discriminate, manipulate, and interact with the target words meanings.
Examples ranged in the form of scenarios, yes/no questions, and open-ended questions.
Instruction was delivered in a small group in short time spans of approximately 10 minutes
following the whole group read aloud, thus providing positive word learning experiences
(Neuman & Marulis, 2010). After each read-aloud, the teacher and students met to discuss the
target words and derive meaning from the context of the text. After the meanings were
determined for each of the three target words, the students interacted with their meanings in the
form of examples and non-examples. Students listened to various examples and determined if
each was an appropriate usage of the target word, then gave reasoning as to why or why not; thus
eliciting a higher level of word consciousness (Coyne et al, 2009). Furthermore, the instruction
was delivered by an adult identified as their teacher as recommended by Neuman and Marulis.

15

The target words were then reinforced throughout the day by the teacher, in the context of their
classroom activities.
The post-test occurred the following day using the Coyne Vocabulary Assessment Protocol.
(Coyne, McCoach, & Kapp, 2007; Coyne, Simmons, & Kameenui, 2004). The post-test was
administered individually to each participant. First, students are asked to define the target word.
For example, what is a cat? Then the student is asked a follow up question to further explain
the meaning of the word such as what does a cat like to do? Finally, students are asked to look
at four pictures and determine the one that most accurately depicts the target word. For example,
point to the picture of the cat, and student will view pictures of a mouse, dog, cat, and gerbil.
Students were awarded 2 points for a full response, 1 point for a partial response, and 0 points for
a response that was unrelated. Student responses were recorded verbatim as they were given. The
post-test took approximately 10 minutes per each student for three target words. Each post-test
can be found in the appendices.
Results and Discussion
When beginning instruction, a post-test was conducted in the form of student interviews.
Students were asked about the meaning of the word following the read aloud of the story. Each
time, students were unable to give a meaning based solely on the context of the story. Following
this interview, small group instruction took place wherein students were provided with explicit
instruction. Figure 1 demonstrates the total number of points scored per the Coyne Vocabulary
Assessment, this outlines the growth in vocabulary knowledge per each participant.
Figure 1

16

Participant

Coyne Vocabulary Protocol Total score out of

30

AM

20

AS

23

BC

21

JD

25

The interaction of the words provided for a better basis when determining word meaning in
the form of the Coyne Vocabulary Assessment. Responses to the picture aspect of the assessment
proved to be easier for the students in this study. When asked to simply identify the word
meaning, students struggled to determine the exact meaning. This could be due to the definitions
provided during instruction, or that the pictures provided a context for students to draw upon.
Based on the post-tests, students were best able to acquire target words that were verbs as
compared to adjectives. For example, the target words identified in Little Cloud by Eric Carle
were huddle, drift, and dash. Based on their post-test scores, it can be determined that word type
affected their acquisition of the target word (figure 2). This could be due to the ability to
visualize the action being done; whereas adjectives are more obscure for them to visualize and
define.
Figure 2- Score Based on Word Type
Word Type
2 Noun

2 Adjective

17

2 Verb

Coyne Vocabulary
Protocol Score Based
on Word Type (Total
48pts)

30

23

37

For example, the target words identified in The Extraordinary Egg by Leo Lionni were
commotion, astonished, and triumphantly. Each of the students struggled with the concept of
triumphant and commotion, this is possibly due to the context of the story. In the instance of
commotion, the main character needed help and was causing a commotion. Therefore, 50% of the
responses revolved around helping someone who is causing a commotion, rather than the focus
being on the noise of the commotion itself. The students struggled with the concept of
triumphant and the definition of prideful. Perhaps pride could have served as the initial target
word prior to introducing triumphant.
Following the analysis of the post-test, it can be determined that this form of vocabulary
instruction is effective for kindergarten students. Students made significant gains in target word
knowledge, and are better equipped to derive meaning from context.
Limitations
The main limitation of this application project was the amount of time allowed for
instruction. Ideally, the instruction would have been given on Monday and reinforced throughout
the week with the post-test occurring on Friday; however, given schedules of the classroom this
was not possible. Therefore, students did not receive multiple repeated exposures to the target
words as recommended by Beck and McKeown (2007) and Coyne et al (2009). In addition, the

18

texts chosen were chosen by the classroom teacher and therefore did not meet all of the criteria
identified. The group of students was selected by the classroom teacher, therefore she selected
students she believed would best benefit from this form of intervention. One of the students in
the application was identified with a Specific Learning Disability, which affects to her ability to
access information. In order to best accommodate her needs, the Coyne Vocabulary Assessment
Protocol procedures were shifted in order to frame her thinking. She was provided with the
picture portion of the assessment first, and then asked the defining questions. Another of the
participants refused to participate on one of the post-test days, he was unable to give any
responses and simply replied with I cant. This proved to be problematic when analyzing the
data but speaks to the true nature of children who can often have a bad morning leaving them
unwilling and unable to participate in learning activities.
Implications
Following this application, it can be concluded that this form of vocabulary instruction is
effective for kindergarten students in learning the targeted words. In theory, learning more words
will begin to minimize the language gap. Most importantly, classrooms should keep a library full
of authentic childrens literature to expose children to rich language. In a classroom of 20
students, the instruction can be delivered in a whole group manner with the teacher following up
with small groups of students determined to be suffering from the language gap. The students
whose language skills are below their peers would benefit from listening to the discussion by
their peers and provide them with more varied experiences with the target words, thus narrowing
the language gap. When choosing the students to participate in the small group as a form of
vocabulary intervention, it is important to note the composition of the group. Homogeneous
groups of students who all struggle with the detriments of the language gap would not be
19

beneficial, therefore, comprising groups of low and medium-low vocabulary abilities is

recommended. This will provide a positive learning experience for all students, while also
ensuring the students suffering from the language gap will hear a variety of oral language used in
the context of vocabulary acquisition. In addition, repeated readings within a primary classroom
should be implemented, as this aspect of vocabulary intervention had large effects on minimizing
the language gap and increasing acquisition.
After read alouds and vocabulary instruction has been implemented, texts should be used for
retelling activities where students focus on retelling the text with accuracy. This will provide
students with the opportunity to interact with texts and the vocabulary outside of the traditional
read aloud. Eller et al. (1988) concluded these activities to be beneficial for both target word use
and synonym usage when retelling the story.
As a classroom teacher, it is important to begin vocabulary interventions immediately in
order to lessen the effects of the language gap. It is recommended to employ both explicit and
implicit vocabulary instruction as this is determined to be the most effective method for all
students. Furthermore, the classroom itself should be a print rich environment to encourage
questions about vocabulary.

20

References
Baker, S. K., Simmons, D. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1998). Vocabulary acquisition: Research
bases. In D. C. Simmons & E. J. Kameenui (Eds.) What reading research tells us about
children with diverse learning needs: Bases and basics (pp. 183-217). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2007). Increasing young low-income childrens oral vocabulary
repertoires through rich and focused instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 107(3),
251-271.
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary
instruction. New York: The Guilford Press.
Biemiller, A., & Slonim, 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(3), 498-520.
Brett, A., Rothlein, L., & Hurley, M. (1996). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories and
explanations of target words. The Elementary School Journal, 96(4), 415-422.
Coyne, M. D., McCoach, D. B., & Kapp, S. (2007). Vocabulary intervention for kindergarten
students: Comparing extended instruction to embedded instruction and incidental
exposure. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 74-88.
Coyne, M. D., McCoach, D. B., Loftus, S., Zipoli , R., & Kapp, S.. (2009). Direct Vocabulary
Instruction in Kindergarten: Teaching for Breadth versus Depth. The Elementary School
Journal, 110(1), 118.
Coyne, M. D., Simmons, D. C., Kameenui, E. J., & Stoolmiller, M. (2004). Teaching vocabulary
during shared storybook readings: An examination of differential effects. Exceptionality,
12(3), 145-162.
Eller, R. G., Pappas, C. C., & Brown, E. (1988). The lexical development of kindergartners:
Learning from written context. Journal of Reading Behavior, 20(1), 5-24.
Elley, W. B. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research
Quarterly, 24(2), 174-187.
Farkas, G., & Beron, K. (2004). The detailed age trajectory of oral vocabulary knowledge:
Differences by class and race. Social Science Research, 33(3), 464-497. Chicago.
doi10.1016/j.ssresearch.2003.08.001
Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1999). The social world of children learning to talk. Baltimore, Md.: P.H.
Brookes Pub.
Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young
American children. Baltimore: P.H. Brookes.

21

Marulis, L. M., & Neuman, S. B. (2010). The effects of vocabulary intervention on young
childrens word learning a meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 80(3), 300335.
McMurray, B., (2007). Defusing the Childhood Vocabulary Explosion. Science, 317(5838).
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (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. (NIH
Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Penno, J. F., Wilkinson, I. A. G., & Moore, D. W. (2002). Vocabulary acquisition from teacher
explanation and repeated listening to stories: Do they overcome the Matthew effect?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 23-33.
Snchal, M., & Cornell, E. H. (1993). Vocabulary acquisition through shared reading
experiences. Reading Research Quarterly, 28(4), 360-374.
Snchal, M., Thomas, E., & Monker, J.-A. (1995). Individual differences in 4-year-old
childrens acquisition of vocabulary during storybook reading. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 87(2), 218-229.
Spencer, E. J., Goldstein, H., & Kaminski, R. (2012). Teaching vocabulary in storybooks:
Embedding explicit vocabulary instruction for young children. Young Exceptional
Children.

22

Appendix A
Coyne Vocabulary Assessment Protocol

Part 1
Im going to say some words, and you are going to tell me if it is a real word or a make-believe
word.
Lets try one: Is cat a real word or a make believe word?
If student answers correctly

If student answers incorrectly

Yes, thats right! Cat is a real word. A cat is a

furry animal that says meow.

Cat is a real word. A cat is a furry animal that

says meow.
Lets try again. Is cat a real word or a makebelieve word?

Lets try another one: Is blep a real word or a make-believe word?

If student answers correctly

If student answers incorrectly

Yes, thats right! Blep is a make-believe word.

Blep doesnt mean anything.

Blep is a make-believe word. Blep doesnt mean

anything.
Lets try again. Is blep a real word or a makebelieve word?

Lets try some more. Im going to say some words, and you are going to tell me if it is a real word or
a make-believe word.
Correct

Here is the first word: Apple.

Is apple a real word or a make believe word?

AS
AM
JD
BC

23

Incorrect

Mellet (mell et) (make-believe)

(If needed say: Is mellet a real word or a make believe word?)

AS
AM
JD
BC

Triumphant (real)

AS
JD

Inkee (in kee) (make-believe)

AS
AM
JD
BC

Nuggle (nug gle) (make-believe)

AS
AM
JD
BC

Astonished (real)

AS
AM
JD

BC

Commotion (real)

AS
JD

AM
BC

AM
BC

Part 2
Im going to ask you about some words.
So if I said, What is a cat? you could say, A cat is an animal that says meow.
If I said, What does a cat like to do? you could say, A cat likes to chase mice.
Lets try some.
Question

Response (verbatim)

1. What is a huddle?

What would a class do in a huddle?

Point to the picture showing a huddle

(show stimulus sheet 1)

Football team huddle

Cloud in the sky

singular student

Students sitting at their desks

24

2. What does dash mean?

How would you dash on the playground?

Point to the picture where someone is

dashing.

Children running

Children sitting quietly

Children napping

Children playing ball

Hopping Bunny

Race car

Seal Drifting

Children napping

Kids yelling

Lion sleeping

Children learning in a
classroom

Children whispering

Child triumphantly

Quietly reading

3. What does drift mean?

Tell me how something drifts.

Point to the seal drifting on ice

(show stimulus sheet 3)

4. What is a commotion?

What would you do if you heard a

commotion?
Point to the kids causing a commotion
(show stimulus sheet 4)

5. What does triumphant mean?

How would you feel if you were

triumphant?
Point to the person who is feeling

25

triumphant.
(show stimulus sheet 5)

showing assignment
Child hiding

Angry child

Astonished

Whispering

Bored

Learning

6. What is astonished?

What would you do if you were feeling

astonished?

Point to the person who is astonished

(show stimulus sheet 6)

26