1. 1. Amanda Sauer University of Arkansas Old Wire Road Elementary Spring 2015 The Impact of Explicit Instruction using Semantic Maps on Cross-Curricular Vocabulary
2. 2. Introduction
3. 3. Rationale Mentor teacher recommendation because the whole school is currently focusing on improving their students vocabulary. The National Assessment of Education Progress (2011) reported that Arkansas was only one of three states that scored lower than the national average in vocabulary knowledge. Students reading scores on the MAP were, on average, below grade level Personal interest
4. 4. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of explicit instruction using semantic maps on cross-curricular vocabulary in a second-grade classroom.
5. 5. Definition of Terms Term Definition Cross-Curricular Information that has great use across multiple contexts and academic disciplines (Beck & McKeown, 2007). -For this study, I chose words that I could see being in at least two different academic texts (literacy, math, social studies, science). Example words: Absorb, Beam, Cycle, & Necessary Explicit instruction Clear, organized, purposeful, and precise teaching (Radford, 2012; Wasik & Iannone-Campbell, 2012). -For this study, this meant using child-friendly definitions, examples and non examples. Semantic Maps Any visual that helps students notice correlations between words (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2006; Buis, 2004). Vocabulary The words we use to show the meaning of words in a language (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHHD], 2000). Expressive Vocabulary Words used orally or in writing (Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2002).
6. 6. Research Question Does explicit instruction using semantic maps improve the vocabulary knowledge of students in one second-grade classroom?
7. 7. Review of Literature Source Research on Importance of Vocabulary Graves, 2006; Lubliner, 2005; NICHHD, 2000 Cross-curricular vocabulary is connected to students reading skills. Vocabulary instruction is necessary for students reading comprehension to increase. Source Problems Related to Vocabulary Knowledge Beck & McKeown, 2007; Biemiller, 2001; Coyne, Simmons, Kameenui, and Stoolmiller, 2004; Graves, 2006; Hart & Risely, 1995; Juel, Biancarosa, Coker, and Deffes, 2003; Lester, 2011 Many students in the United States score below average in their vocabulary knowledge needed to succeed with the complex texts that Common Core has brought into the elementary classroom. Several experts point to the increasing number of English Language Learners (ELLs) and students living in poverty. Research and other experts believe that a
8. 8. Review of Literature Source Research on Explicit Instruction Beck, 2005; Coyne et al., 2004; Penno, 2002 Experts suggest teachers to explicitly teach vocabulary and use rich, multi-faceted language, for students to more fully comprehend a word. Research shows that explicit instruction has greater gains than did storybook reading in students with low receptive vocabulary knowledge.Source Research on Semantic Maps Blachowicz and Fisher, 2005; Buis, 2004; Lubliner, 2005 Experts state that the purpose of a semantic map, a type of graphic organizer, is to help students use their background knowledge to make relations with newly learned words. Furthermore, they explain that semantic maps are used for students to notice correlations between words.
9. 9. Methodology
10. 10. Research Question Does explicit instruction using semantic maps improve the vocabulary knowledge of students in one second-grade classroom?
11. 11. Participants 21 second-grade students 100% return rate of Informed Consents, with one student declining 20 participants 11 males, 9 females 3 males in Reading Recovery 10 English Language Learners, 4 are pulled out for ESL assistance. A confidential code was established by drawing names from a hat and assigning each name a letter. 45% 35% 10% 5% 5% Hispanic White Asian Marshallese Biracial These demographics mirror the demographics of the school.
12. 12. Data Collection Pre- and Post-Assessments Montgomery Assessment of Vocabulary Acquisition (MAVA) Researcher-created, word-specific vocabulary test Ongoing Assessments Daily Scores Bi-weekly tests Anecdotal records
13. 13. Evaluation Instrument: MAVA The MAVA contains two subtests: an expressive vocabulary test and a receptive vocabulary test. These tests measure students overall vocabulary knowledge. The basal, on each test, was 8 consecutive correct responses in a specific set, while the ceiling was 6 consecutive incorrect responses. Students point to a picture to match a word on the Receptive test. On the Expressive test, the student must say the correct word to match the picture. The test was untimed and administered to each child individually over the span of several days. The testing lasted approximately 30 minutes with each student. Students chronological age was found by using a calculator on SuperDuperInc.com The raw scores were calculated and then turned into standard scores using the MAVA examiners manual.
14. 14. Montgomery Assessment of Vocabulary Acquisition
15. 15. Examples of MAVAs subtests Receptive Expressi ve
16. 16. Evaluation Instrument: Researcher- created, Word-specific Assessment The Researcher-created, word-specific assessment was given pre- and post-intervention to measure students knowledge of the specific vocabulary words used in the study. The test was untimed and administered to the entire group at one setting. The testing lasted approximately 25 minutes. The scores were calculated according to a percentage of accuracy.
17. 17. Researcher-created, Word-specific Assessment Example
18. 18. Other Data Collection Daily scores were collected on the vocabulary knowledge of the learned words. 3 Established 2 Acquainted 1 Unfamiliar Weekly scores were obtained by averaging daily scores. Bi-weekly tests were given to assess students ongoing vocabulary knowledge. Scores were also rated using the 3, 2, 1, scale. Anecdotal records were taken daily.
19. 19. Intervention Schedule Day Instruction Procedures One Four or five words were introduced. Through a PowerPoint Presentation, explicit instruction was used to teach word meaning. Two Reviewed a vocabulary words meaning and then gave a semantic map to each student to complete with a partner. Listened to students share synonyms, antonyms, pictures, sentences, etc. Three Same as Day 2 Four Same as Day 2 and 3 A quiz was also given on day 4 every other week to assess students ongoing vocabulary knowledge.
20. 20. Intervention Schedule Continued Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Blistering Irritate Narrow Process Sway Analyze Beam Equality Gather Contribute Divert Recognize Rise Apply Distribute Erupt Necessary Weeks Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Vocabulary words for each week Assist Capture Discard Expand Mixture Aware Complex Deliver Pour Acquire Community Dome Express Gaze Absorb Core Cycle Diagram Words chosen for intervention came from Flocabulary.com, New Yorks Hyde Park Central School Districts word list for second grade, and several read-aloud books used in the districts current literacy unit.
21. 21. Explicit Instruction
22. 22. Semantic Maps - Student Work
23. 23. Example of Assessment of Vocabulary Knowledge - 3
24. 24. Example of Assessment of Vocabulary Knowledge - 2
25. 25. Example of Assessment of Vocabulary Knowledge - 1
26. 26. Research Question Does explicit instruction using semantic maps improve the vocabulary knowledge of students in one second-grade classroom?
27. 27. Results
28. 28. Results for Expressive Vocabulary 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T Pre- Test Post- Test 55-70 very low 71-77 low 78-85 borderline 86-114 average 115 and above advanced Pre-Test Post-Test Mean: 91.5 - 96.4 Median: 92 - 100 Mode: 90 - 93 & 108
29. 29. Expressive t-test Results N Mean N Mean t t Stat p 20 91.55 20 98 2.09 3.84 0.001107121 Pre-test Post-test 85 90 95 100 105 Pre-test Post-test Class Average The mean increased 6.45 points on the post-test scores, which was a significant increase. p=