Treated to Language (with video)

If language is valued by the teacher, students know it. They sense that the teacher is unusually aware of words -- otherwise overlooked, as water streaming continuously away. Their teacher treats language like a fabulous dessert, greeting especially scrumptious expressions with delight.  It is possible for educators to ignite an interest in words and phrases that is almost tangible.

This type of teaching behavior is situated within the four-ply framework for  effective vocabulary programs, proposed by Michael Graves (2006). Creating a love for language falls under the first component: Providing rich and varied language experiences. It also falls under the fourth component: Developing word consciousness. (See description of the four components.) Helping children and adolescents learn to treasure words does not replace explicit vocabulary instruction, but it is thought to enhance such instruction. Explicit vocabulary instruction is the second instructional component in the framework proposed by Graves.

How can teachers create a love for language, especially for words and phrases? First, take a sincere interest in the words a student uses. For example, one might tell a student, "I'm so glad to hear someone say kaboodle. That word always makes me smile!" This is gratifying -- having someone pay attention to our own words. It is also motivating to realize that our words have the power to make someone smile--to feel, to think, perhaps even to take action. This type of word-power is conveyed in Donavan's Word Jar.

“Also, make a note of the word gobbledygook. I like it. I want to use it more often in conversation” (General Melchett, in the BBC comedy Black Adder).

Another way to convey the power and presence of words is through poetry, as done with deliberation and enthusiasm in an urban school in Florida, briefly described by Niles (2004). Poetry can also provide a way to showcase the playful value of words. (See prior post for resources for teaching poetry.)

Teachers also promote language through song. In one study, Hines (2010) successfully used lyrics as one tool to teach word decoding and word meaning to adolescents with learning disabilities. In similar manner, when I was a middle school teacher, I invited a different pair of students to discuss their selected song lyrics, every other Friday, for about 15 minutes. After ensuring the lyrics were not offensive, I facilitated as needed, encouraging the pair to lead the class in a discussion, explaining why the lyrics were important to them, and which words were most meaningful. The lyrics were printed in advance. The audio track was played.

Some teachers instill a love for language through storytelling and theater, including reader's theater. For instance,  Keehn, Harmon, and Shoho (2008) found that, compared to traditional (mainly definitional) means of teaching vocabulary to eighth graders, a brief theatrical enactment resulted in significantly greater word learning.

Teachers and librarians share a love for words when they read aloud from news clippings, short stories, excerpts and entire books, both fiction and nonfiction, and when they encourage learners to participate in extended discussions. When peer conversations are prompted that focus on a specific segment of text, word-learning is likely to occur, and this is true for native speakers as well as ELLs.

In a language-friendly learning atmosphere, students and teachers do not use words or rules to shame or to punish. Classroom norms can help ensure that words are used responsibly. Denning, Kessler, and Leben (2007, p. 182) stated:

Ultimately, an enhanced and enlarged vocabulary, like any part of the complex phenomenon called language, is a multipurpose tool. Like a hammer, it can be used either to build or to injure. The individual is responsible for the use to which it is put. 

These ideas are neatly captured by Stephen Fry, English author, journalist, and comedian, who holds assorted honorary titles from the University of Dundee, Cambridge University, Anglia Ruskins, etc.  Fry speaks with humor and insight on the splendor of language, arguing against pomposity and pedantry pertaining to rules and words. To hear his entire discussion, titled Language, visit Steven Fry's Podgrams at iTunes (Series 2, Episode 3). Also, visit his blog: The New Adventures of Mr. Steven Fry. This brief film was created by Matthew Rogers; he set a portion of Fry's lecture to words, cleverly creating a kinetic typography.

Enjoy!

Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography - Language from Matthew Rogers on Vimeo.

References:

Denning, K., Kessler, B., & Leben, W. (2007). English Vocabulary Elements, second edition. Oxford University Press. 

Graves, M.F. (2006). The vocabulary book: Learning and instruction. New York: Teachers College Press. 

Hines, S. (2010). Name that word: Using song lyrics to improve the decoding skills of adolescents with learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(1), 16-21. 

Keehn, S. Harmon, J., & Shoho, A. (2008). A study of readers theater in eighth grade: Issues of fluency, comprehension, and vocabulary. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 24(4), 335-362. 

Nile, S. (2004, April). A celebration of words. Teaching Pre K-8, 4(7), 56-57.

Helping Parents Become Strong Language and Literacy Partners (Berg)

Michele Berg, Ph.D. contributed the following post. Michele is the Director of the Center for Learning Disorders at the Family Service and Guidance Center in Topeka, Kansas (visit FSGC). Dr. Berg formerly founded and directed the Center for Learning Disabilities at the Menninger Clinic and served on the faculty of the Karl Menninger School of Psychiatry for over twenty years. She specializes in the diagnosis and treatment of complex learning disorders in children and adults and is a frequently invited presenter on the topics of early literacy development, dyslexia, memory disorders, nonverbal learning disorder, and ADHD at the state and national level. She served as the head of professional development for two Early Reading First grants and is a consultant to the FSGC Early Childhood Intervention Program.

When Susan asked me to write something for her awesome Vocabulogic site, I thought I would address preschool language and literacy interventions; however, Christie Cavanaugh provided such a wonderful and thorough piece on this topic that I decided to do an “infomercial” for a powerful program available through the American Library Association. And … if you have not yet read Part I and Part II of Dr. Cavanaugh’s post, I urge you to do so! 

EVERY CHILD READY TO READ @ your library is a joint project of the Public Library Association and the Association for Library Service to Children. A series of parent and caregiver workshops have been developed to help prepare parents for their critical role as their child’s first teacher; these workshops are offered by community libraries using resources incorporating the latest research. Drs. Grover C. Whitehurst and Christopher Lonigan, eminent researchers in early literacy, developed the ECRR curriculum and workshop tools which have been refined by library demonstration projects around the country. All of the information presented in the workshops has been approved by NICHD. The workshops are also appropriate for early childhood educators, child advocates, and policy makers. Three different workshops target a range of developmental needs: Early Talkers targets ages 0 to 2 years; Talkers targets 2 to 3 year olds; and Pre-Readers addresses the needs of 4 to 5 year olds.

Visit the Site

The ECRR program was developed as an outreach program to help to address the national crisis in reading. Roughly, about 35% of children who enter kindergarten do not possess the early language skills necessary for learning to read (Waldorf, 1994). Children who struggle the most come from low income/low education families regardless of race or ethnicity. These families often do not have books, newspapers, or magazines at home and live in neighborhoods that do not contain much environmental print. One study found that 47% of parents receiving public aid reported no alphabet books in their home in contrast with only 3% of professional parents. Other studies suggest that children from middle to upper income families have anywhere from 1,000 to 1,700 hours of shared book time with a parent or caring adult during their preschool years as opposed to 25 hours or less in low income or low education families (Adams, 1990).

The lack of shared reading is alarming since reading books to children is the most effective way to build vocabulary … and strong vocabulary skills are necessary for reading comprehension. Typically, an adult will use only about 9 “rare” words per 1,000 words when speaking to a child under 5 years of age. Three times as many rare words are encountered in children’s books (Trelease, 2001). While regular family conversations will help build basic vocabulary, reading books to children helps them leap into the rare words that are essential when it’s time for school and formal learning.

As a culture that values school and views education as one of the major routes to job and financial stability, we need to help parents gain access to the skills, books and other resources needed to create language-rich experiences in their homes. We cannot afford to wait until at-risk children enter kindergarten to begin efforts to level the language playing field. Pre/post testing demonstrates that parents who attend ECRR at the Library workshops make huge gains in the quality of reading and language activities they provide their children. Parents with the lowest income and parents with the least education made the largest gains in terms of implementing new skills; teen-age parents and parents of very young children also demonstrated significant gains.

What do the workshops target? The workshop curriculum stresses Six Skills to Get Ready to Read: Print Motivation, Print Awareness, Vocabulary, Phonological Awareness, Narrative Skills, and Letter Knowledge. The emphasis is on simple, fun, developmentally appropriate ways to increase language skills and comfort with books in order to better prepare children for later success in school. Participants actively explore materials and practice new skills matched to the age of their child. A broad range of resources to be used at home are provided. Parents are taught how to select books to reinforce different skills such as phonological awareness, vocabulary, or narrative skill; they learn how to read picture books with two and three year olds and/or Dialogic Hear and Say strategies to use with preschool-age children. Simple songs paired with movement are introduced. Tip sheets are sent home as are colorful activity sheets.

Community agencies around the country are pairing with local libraries to make ECRR available. Many parents of low education or low income are not comfortable with literacy environments and may visit libraries only to access music and movies. For this reason, it may be best to offer the parent workshops at other sites such as Head Start, Salvation Army, community-based preschools, or church-affiliated child care and preschools. Parents as Teachers staff can also be trained to offer the ECRR workshops. The possibilities are many. Visit the American Library Association website for additional information. Call your local library and promote the availability of ECRR in your area. Let’s support this important early literacy initiative!

And please remember … the information presented and the skills learned in the ECRR workshops are beneficial and enjoyable for all adults involved in the care of young children regardless of income or education level … parents, grandparents, early childhood educators, child care providers, Sunday school teachers … I am sure you can think of more.

Note: This post  builds on prior entries pertaining to the invaluable relationship between libraries and literacy. Fran Mancino's post urges us to support public libraries and Susie Goodin's post illustrates the relationship between school libraries and reading motivation. 

Preschool Language Intervention, Part 1 (Cavanaugh)

Christie L. Cavanaugh, Ph.D. has been an educator for 30+ years, earning her degrees from Tusculum College, Vanderbilt University, and The University of Texas at Austin. She spent many of her 30+ years in early childhood settings, preparing future teachers, and providing professional development to educators in the areas of language and literacy. She continues this work as an educational consultant and also as a literacy consultant for a reading intervention project at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as part of the National Research Center on Rural Education Support. This is the first of a two-part series on preschool language intervention (read Part Two here).

"Oh, I've got it!" These were the sentiments one of my former students expressed when I was sharing a model of a language and literacy-enriched play center for preschool. These centers provided multiple opportunities to build vocabulary and background knowledge (with little monetary investment). The model's theme, a flower shop named "Flower Power," generated rich vocabulary for young children: 

arrangement, bouquet, garden, dish garden, dozen, floral, florist, fragrant, greetings, celebrations, decorations, purchasing, deliver, tending, order, place an order, pruning, soil, vase, bud vase, planter, nutrients, mist, moss, embellishment (as well as specific flower names and parts)

Upon discussing prompts for language and modeling scenarios that are likely to occur in a flower shop, including writing notes to place on plastic holders that are often inserted into floral arrangements, my student asked, 

"What if my children have never been to a flower shop? How will they know what to do?" 

My reply was simply, "Exactly!" That's precisely why we do what we do when we create these centers. We think through the language and the actions that are important components of a particular setting and then model it in a center. 

Her emphatic response, "Oh, I've got it!" became an acronym for Opportunities to Impact Vocabulary Elaboration and Growth Intentionally through Incidental Teaching.

   
I asked my student-teachers to develop thematic and language-prompting play centers for preschool. In doing so, they prepared "prompts" to help integrate vocabulary and build background knowledge. Prompts are comments and questions that teachers use to invite children to talk about the experience. "Mands" are used to elicit more elaborative discussion. The teachers also created a list of actions or scenarios that serve as anchors for using the language, and of course, opportunities to embed written language (collection of theme-related books, signs, labels, resource books, calendars, appointment books, menus, writing pads, or notes, etc.). 
     
The early childhood period spans birth to eight years and promoting language should begin early in infancy. Early childhood is the time to establish a strong foundation for oral vocabulary development and this goal is accomplished without tremendous effort and expense. 

However, despite the apparent simplicity of the model, similar language-rich experiences are not consistently provided in early childhood education. Conversing with young children is essential yet I continue to hear preschool teachers and other professionals use simplistic language in terms of semantics and syntax and conversing about topics that are limited to children's current and/or past experiences. This is particularly worrisome when we consider the vocabulary gap that exists among children at risk for academic difficulties and it further contributes to an academic achievement gap.
     
Policies and lessons for young children that reflect a deep understanding of the language-literacy connection are needed. Educators and parents must recognize that building oral language and background knowledge in early childhood predicts eventual comprehension of the written word. It is important to build relationships between phonology, morphology, semantics, syntax, and pragmatics. Make explicit connections across these language components throughout and beyond the early childhood years.
     
The National Association for the Education of Young Children's (NAEYC) shifting philosophy articulated in the most recent position statement on Developmentally Appropriate Practice (2009) recognizes the value of teacher input and a balance between teacher-directed and child-centered activities. A quick examination of pre-kindergarten standards in several states reveals that we have a responsibility to teach deliberately and appropriately (see Texas, Nebraska, Florida, Illinois, Virginia state standards or guidelines for Pre-K for examples). A more purposeful and conscientious role of the "teacher" for promoting language and literacy development among other developmental domains is not only supported but encouraged. Furthermore, Hart and Risley's longitudinal study (1995) revealing the varied quantity and quality of language experiences for young children and how language experiences in the home relate to school success actually built upon work they began more than four decades ago. Their work serves as the basis for one of the most established bodies of research in early childhood. Revisiting this body of research (that includes vast work from A. Kaiser and colleagues) reminds us of some basic principles that can guide our actions in education, described below:

Incidental teaching as a language intervention was first implemented with groups of preschoolers considered at-risk based on socioeconomic status or identified as "impoverished" in the 1960's. We can extend the meaning of "impoverished" beyond socioeconomic status into language or vocabulary or background knowledge and recognize that the strategies are ageless.
     
Incidental teaching as a language intervention aims to increase young children's opportunities to talk (particularly spontaneous language use). Strategies that promote spoken language include following children's leads, determining children's skill level and scaffolding for growth, modeling, expanding, elaborating, providing feedback in the form of additional mands or models, and using the child's environment to elicit language strategically. Connections can be drawn between this work and others that share common characteristics such as naturalistic intervention, environmental arrangement strategies, the features of effective instruction, embedded learning opportunities, and other vocabulary enhancing strategies for young children. Below, I provide examples to illustrate a few of these strategies:

      Child: (points to flowers) Flowers are pretty.
      Teacher: (following child's lead): Yes, those flowers are colorful and gorgeous (Elaboration and extension) instead of "Yes, the flowers ARE pretty (repetition and slight extension).
     
      Child: (chooses the bakery center for play) I want to cook something.
      Teacher: (again, following child's lead after arranging an inviting center): Great! Let's create something delicious together. Do you have a special recipe in this cookbook to guide us (elaboration, embedded vocabulary with support)? Tell me how we'll make it (open-ended prompt) instead of "I want to cook with you."
     
The teacher continues to converse, narrate, and model vocabulary and syntax during play and also uses opportunities for the child to say key vocabulary words using mands and models (to emphasize the important connection between phonology and semantics).  For example, the teacher might prompt, "These chocolate-flavored biscuits you created are scrumptious! Scrumptious is another word for delicious. Say 'scrumptious' (model). 

The teacher might scaffold by allowing the young child to first say the word in two parts by syllable and then model putting it together. Later, the teacher might prompt by saying, "This cake is not only delicious, it's ______," (mand or prompt) waiting patiently for the child to insert the new vocabulary word.
     
Starting with a theme or topic allows teachers to create webs of connections so children see relationships between concepts, experiences and language. If more adults who spend any time with young children embrace these fundamental yet implicit instructional principles we just might be able to chunk (not chip) away at the vocabulary gap. 
     
Responses are encouraged and appreciated, especially if they include examples to share with early childhood teachers. I will elaborate more on these ideas in next Sunday's issue of Vocabulogic. Read Part Two here.

Building Oral Vocabulary in Primary-Grade Students with Very Small Oral Vocabularies (Graves)

This post is courtesy of Dr. Michael Graves, Professor Emeritus of Literacy Education at the University of Minnesota. As a researcher, Mike has examined--and continues to examine--variables related to vocabulary development and instruction. His most recent books on vocabulary are written for teachers as well as researchers, including Teaching Individual Words: One Size Does Not Fit All (2009), and The Vocabulary Book (2006). To read about Mike's comprehensive plan for vocabulary instruction, detailed fully in The Vocabulary Book, see my post: Four Ply Vocabulary Plan.

      
Vocabulary has been my major scholarly interest for something like 30 years, and over that period of time we have learned a huge amount about teaching vocabulary (see, for example, Baumann, Kameénui, & Ash, 2000; Blachowicz & Fisher, 2000; Graves & Silverman, in press). Most of what we have learned, however, is about teaching reading vocabulary. Recently, we have come to recognize that some students come to school with very small oral vocabularies (Hart & Risley, 1995, 2001). While most students arrive at school with oral vocabularies of perhaps 10,000 words, some English learners and some children of poverty arrive knowing just a fraction of that number of words. Building oral vocabulary in students who enter school with very small oral vocabularies is tremendously important and vital to their becoming successful readers (Biemiller, 2009, DeTemple & Snow, 2004; Graves, 2009).
       
Two key questions we face in helping these children are "How do we teach them oral vocabulary? and "Which words do we teach them?"  In this blog, I address each of these in turn.
 

How Do We Teach Oral Vocabulary to Primary-Grade Students with Very Small Vocabularies?     
Both observations of mothers reading to their young children and studies with preschool and primary grade students have repeatedly revealed a successful pattern of reading aloud and build oral vocabulary that goes by the name of interactive oral reading or shared book reading (DeTemple & Snow, 2004). There are several versions of the technique, but one of the best documented is that described by Biemiller (2009). It consists of selecting a number of short books, each of which contain 20 or so words that are not likely to be in your students' oral vocabularies, and working with each book over a five day cycle like this one.

• On day one, probably a Monday, read the book once without stopping to define any words.
• On days two-four, read it three more times, each time briefly defining about six unknown words as they come up in the reading so that over the three days you define about 20 words.
• On the fifth day, review each of the 20 or so words taught in a different context but with the same meaning.

    
As Biemiller notes and as I would emphasize, because these children need to add a large number of words to their oral vocabularies, this is a long term process, extending over several years for many students.

Mike Graves, Pa ai Beach

Which Words Should We Teach Primary-Grade Students with Very Small Oral Vocabularies?     
Here, I consider two different groups of students and suggest a different source of words for each of these two. The first group is students with extremely small oral vocabularies, probably fewer than 2,000 words. There are not many of these students in a single classroom, probably only 2-4 of them even in a class with quite a few newcomers and children of poverty. However, those students who do fall into this group desperately need our help. The most important words for these students to learn are those that occur most frequently, those that they will stumble across repeatedly as they are reading if they don't know them. 

My colleague Greg Sales and I (Sales & Graves, 2009) have identified a set of about 4,000 words that we term The First 4,000 Words and created a web-based program to teach them. These words make up about 80 percent of the words in a typical text. This list, which ranks the words by frequency, and a description of the web-based program for teaching them are available at thefirst4000words.com. The list is in pdf format and available for download. To give you an idea of the words the list contains, the five most frequent words on it are the, of, and, to, and a; five middle-frequency words on it are file, boots, reflect, custom, and background; and the five least frequent words on it are abuse, loving, generous, excessive, and arteries. As I just said, you are likely to have very few students in your class that don't already know these words, but for students who do not already know them learning them is crucial.
    
The second group of students who need special help with oral vocabulary consists of students who already know most of The First 4,000 Words but whose oral vocabularies are still far smaller than those of average students. This is a considerably larger number of students, and if you teach a class that includes a number of newcomers and children of poverty a significant number of students in your class may fall into this group. Fortunately, Biemiller (2009) has developed a list of words specifically designed for building oral vocabulary in these students. It is called Words Worth Teaching in Grades K-2 and includes about 2,000 words, most of which are less frequent than those on The First 4,000 Words.  Some of the words from this list, which is not sequenced by importance or frequency, are absorb, against, laboratory, language, stumble, and study. The complete list is available in Biemiller (2009).
    
In summary, the main message here is that while most students come to school with large oral vocabularies, other students—some English learners and some children of poverty—come with very small oral vocabularies, and these students need special help. A technique called Interactive Oral Reading has been shown to be an effective teaching tool, and Sales and Graves (2009) The First 4,000 Words and Biemiller's (2009) Words Worth Teaching in Grades K-2 provide appropriate words to teach.

I look forward to your comments and suggestions. 

Mike Graves

References:

• Baumann, J. F., Kame'enui, E. J., & Ash, G. E.  (2003).  Research on vocabulary instructing:  Voltaire redux.  In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, & J. M. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook on research on teaching the English language arts (2nd ed., pp. 752-785.  Mahwah, NJ:  Erlbaum.
• Biemiller, A.  (2009).  Words worth teaching.  Columbus, OH:  SRA/McGraw-Hill.
• Blachowicz, C., & Fisher, P.  (2000).  Vocabulary.  In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), The handbook of reading research, Vol. III.  New York:  Longman.
• De Temple, J., & Snow, C. E.  (2004).  Learning words from books.  In A. van Kleeck, S. A. Stahl, and E. B. Bauer (Eds.), On reading books to children (pp. 16-36).  Mahwah, NJ:  Erlbaum.
• Graves, M. F.  (2009).  Teaching individual words:  One size does not fit all.  New York:  Teachers College Press and IRA.
• Graves, M. F., & Silverman, R.  (in press).  Interventions to enhance vocabulary development.  In R. Allington & A. McGill-Franzen (Eds.), Handbook of reading disabilities research.  Mahwah, NY:  Erlbaum.
• Hart, B., & Risley, T. R.  (2003, Spring).  The early catastrophe:  The 30 million word gap.  American Educator, 27 (1), 4-9.
• Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experiences of young American children. Baltimore: P. H. Brookes.
• Sales, G. C., & Graves, M. F.  (2009).  Web-based pedagogy for fostering literacy by teaching basic vocabulary.  Information Technology, Education and Society, 9 (2). 5-30.

Blends, Word Play Offs, Sweet Tooth Fairies

Types of Blends
Click to enlarge.
(Gries, 2004)

Slanguage. Spanglish. Vocabulogic. Linguists call these types of words "blends" but they are more like collisions, because two words are smashed together, leaving out at least one letter in the process, merging sounds and meanings.  A blend is also called a portmanteau, a two-sided suitcase, so coined by Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland.  Michael Quinion describes blends more fully at World Wide Words. Examples include brunch (breakfast + lunch) and spam (spiced + ham). The other day, I encouraged a friend to "Enjoy the bruncheon" (thus using an established blend to spontaneously create a new blend). Click the image above to learn about different types of blends, but see my footnote. Read how blends reflect pop culture at the Lewis Carroll Society. 

Like churnalism, many of the neologisms "spied upon" by Paul McFedries are blends, reflecting the fact that blending has become fairly common. Word blending is a morphological process, just another way to create words. I have yet to read a study that measures the ability to construct or deconstruct a blend. Probably of low priority, but something to think about.

Note: A blend is similar to -- but not the same as -- a contraction: isn't, she's, you'll, etc. A blend is like a contraction in that they both involve smashing words together and omitting letters. However, a blend creates a new meaning. For instance, the blend emoticon denotes (and connotes) more than simply emotion + icon. In contrast, a contraction restates the meaning of the two words (wasn't denotes was not). Furthermore, in a contraction an apostrophe is inserted where the missing letter(s) would have been. 

The clever concoction fantabulous, used in the banner below to advertise the philanthropic and free (!!) vocabulary quiz-game Free Rice, is a blend of fantastic and fabulous.
 

Somewhat like a blend, a "sweet tooth fairy" is a new kind of word, created by Graham Hidderley/Burgess (see WordNik and Boston Globe). To create a sweet tooth fairy one combines two concepts (e.g., sweet tooth + tooth fairy). The final word of the first concept must match the first word of the second one. Delete the duplicated word, hence sweet tooth + tooth fairy  >>>  sweet tooth fairy (xy + yz = xyz).

Some popular sweet tooth fairies:
stop sign language
world peace train
magnetic personality disorder
complete chaos theory
social butterfly kisses
false economy size (see comments)

Want to interest students in words and phrases? Add blends and sweet tooth fairies to your fresh bread basket of ideas. Let the class construct and deconstruct them with peers, discussing them, rating their utility and appeal, using them in writing samples. Who knows where it might end! Start a contest, where the most creative inventors go to the word play offs.This is lots of fun should boost verbal proficiency. 

 Learn more about word play in chapter three of The Word Conscious Classroom (Scott, Skobel, & Wells, 2008). Scott et al. suggest that fostering an interest in words is especially promising for learners who are not surrounded with an enriched verbal environment at home. They say: 

An awareness of words, a love of words, and a curiosity about words do not just develop by themselves. Students who can recognize powerful language and use it themselves in their writing have developed this awareness through scaffolding by adults in their lives" (p. 12).

Depending on the skill level, the act of constructing and/or deconstructing a blend should deepen linguistic insight. Over the holiday, why not create a few blends and sweet tooth fairies. Engage in a little verbal volley. Go on, make some jelly bean soup! Be an Easter egg head.


 
Note: There are at least three types of blends and linguists do not always agree on what constitutes a blend, but for the purpose of understanding English words, it should be sufficient to simply identify the words that combine to form the blend and discuss the new meaning created by the blend.


REFERENCES 

• Aronoff, M., & Fudeman, K. (2005). What is morphology? Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.  
  
• Gries, Stefan Th. (2004) Some characteristics of English morphological blends. Andronis, Mary A., Erin Debenport, Anne Pycha, Keiko Yoshimura, eds. Papers from the 38th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society: Vol. II. The Panels. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society, 201-216.
• Scott, J., Skobel, B., & Wells, J. (2008). The word-conscious classroom: Building the vocabulary readers and writers need. New York: Scholastic - Theory into Practice Series.  

Infer: Make Bricks WITH Straw! (video)

Hirsch (2006) describes a knowledge deficit in rich and poor alike, yet most severe in impoverished conditions. This deficit is troubling because knowledge facilitates comprehension and cognitive processing (Willingham, 2006). The good news? With informational reading materials educators can promote content knowledge and vocabulary simultaneously (earlier post). 

For example, consider the second-grade book pictured left, part of the Seeds of Science/Roots of Reading curriculum discussed in a prior post. I display a primary text because educational psychologists like Neitzel, Alexander, and Johnson (2008) have demonstrated that young children eagerly absorb new content, manifesting burgeoning interest along with a verbal and academic advantage over peers not comparably enriched by engaging content. By exploring interesting yet readable texts, including digital materials, students can further their facility with decoding, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. They potentially become both word savvy and world savvy even as they develop interest in a specific topic.  

Topic knowledge is essential to inference and inference is essential to comprehension. Readers are almost always required to draw an inference, connecting what they know with what was written to make sense of what was NOT written. Authors omit information, assuming the reader will "get it" but if we have frail or faulty knowledge of the topic we cannot easily infer. We cannot make bricks without straw! (To fully understand that figurative expression prior knowledge was required.)

In the videoTeaching Content Is Teaching Reading, Daniel Willingham, cognitive scientist, illustrates the process of inference. Be sure to note the baseball study and the stats on time not dedicated to subject matter inquiry in primary grades. Credit the source as www.danielwillingham.com (video references here.). To further explore the topic, read Willingham's Washington Post blog entry about comprehension strategies. Willingham describes why strategy research is conducted more readily than content knowledge research, thus influencing reading curriculum. 



Morphological note: The word infer contains the prefix in- meaning 'in' plus the Latin root fer meaning 'to bear, to carry.' Thus, to infer is to carry input into one's mental schema and merge it with one's knowledge, perceptions, and experiences, thereby drawing a conclusion. Explore more words with the root fer at this site, included in Vocabulogic's Useful Links (in page footer), labeled Affixes (and some roots).
 
Happy spring!

References:

• Hirsch, E.D., Jr. (2006). The knowledge deficit: Closing the shocking education gap for American children. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
• Willingham, D. T. (2006, Spring). How knowledge helps: It speeds and strengthens reading comprehension, learning—and thinking. American Educator, 30-37.
• Neitzel, C., Alexander, J. M., & Johnson, K. E. (2008). Children's early interest-based activities in the home and subsequent information contributions and pursuits in kindergarten. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 782-797. 

Analogize This! (videos)

When life throws something extraordinary at us, we invent a new word to express our amazement and awe. Today brought several new words describing a snowstorm. Meteorologists went wacko. On Sunday we can expect to hear more newly minted words describing the Super Bowl and the soaring achievements of the Who Dat Nation. Ever notice how creatively sportscasters and meteorologists craft words? Do students realize that word wizardry may help them get a job in these fields? 

Even heads of state have been known to coin a cool one. According to the Washington Post (hyperlink defunct), President Obama described DC's storm as Snowmageddon (but see comment, crediting a meteorologist in Duluth). In order to understand Obama, we must have prior knowledge of the Biblical term Armageddon, of Hebrew origin. It's a battleplace and also the final battle between good and evil.

When we analogize we find points of comparison between things that are otherwise dissimilar. We draw an analogy, mentally moving from the known concepts snow and Armageddon to understand the unknown Snowmageddon. Again, we can only draw this analogy if we know a bit about Armageddon and snowstorms. Background knowledge is critically important.

Another cool weather word is Snowpocalypse, seen in the title of a viral video with crazy meteorologist, Jim Kosek. 



Like Armageddon, the Apocalypse refers to Biblical end times, but it is of Greek origin. Apocalypse also refers to nuclear war, signaling devastation, destruction, doom. Here again, background knowledge is essential yet taken for granted--the wordcrafter assumed that everyone would understand apocalypse--probably a safe bet for many of us. Movie titles include Apocalypse Now, Apocalypse How and Apocalypse Cow (no joke) and let's not forget the apocalyptic film 2012. Teachers can help students draw an analogy from the known concepts snow and Apocalypse to understand the new concept Snowpocalypse. Critical thinking skills are at work when we analogize. By thinking aloud, teachers can transparently demonstrate how to draw an analogy. "Hmm...I don't know this word, but this part makes me think of...."

Encourage students to notice new words (neologisms) in film, books, websites, etc. Prompt students to invent words. Kindle interest. Awaken awareness. Inspire word consciousness, which should eventually promote vocabulary and comprehension (Graves, 2006; Nagy, 2007). Maintain a lighthearted yet explicit tone. Motivate. Get expressive! Prompt students to use words and gestures emphatically. In the video above, meteorologist Jim Kosek serves as a model for over-the-top drama as he theatrically gets his point across. Note the quote, "Yeah, I've been reading the dictionary."

Finally, many children in warmer climes have never experienced snow. They tend to be children of poverty, rarely traveling far from home. Optimally, a field trip is best. Alternatively, use the rich resources of the web to build knowledge; digital clips potentially pack a lot into two-minutes. Show the class the snowball fight, below. Afterward, engage in rich discussion and read Keats' 1963 Caldecott Winner, The Snowy Day. Create a word web, graphically connecting related concepts: snow, snowflake, snowstorm, snowball, snowball fight, snowplow, snowman, snow angel, weather, blizzard, storm, precipitation, frosty, silver, crystalline, symmetrical, cold, shovel, scrape, sculpt, etc. Use the semantic map as a prompt for peer discussion and a scaffold for writing.

That's all, folks. Stay safe in the snow. Go Saints!


References

Graves, M.F. (2006). The vocabulary book: Learning and instruction. New York: Teachers College Press.

Nagy, W.E. (2007). Metalinguistic awareness and the vocabulary-comprehension connection. In R.K. Wagner, A.E Muse, & K.R. Tannenbaum (Eds.),Vocabulary acquisition: Implications for reading comprehension (pp. 52-77).New York: Guilford Press.

The English Language: Complex (poll)

The poll has closed. Thank you for participating! Exactly 50% of the 98 voters viewed English as more complex than German, Spanish, and French, at least from a reading and spelling perspective. Yes, several researchers would agree. I show the poll below, and discuss the relative difficulty associated with spelling -- and reading -- English words.

poll by twiigs.com

 

 (Click image to enlarge)

Orthography has to do with the writing and spelling system. Seymour, Aro, and Erskine (2003) analyzed various European writing systems. Table 1 provides their hypothetical classification of each language by syllabic structure (simple or complex) and orthographic depth (deep or shallow). The chart shows that Finnish is probably the least challenging language for learning to read words. Finnish employs simple syllable patterns within a shallow orthography; each grapheme represents one phoneme, one sound only. (How elegant! How simple!) At the right end of the chart, English is hypothesized to be the most complex in both syllable structure and orthographic depth. Consider the varied ways we spell the sound known as Long A: day, prey, name, rain, eight, paper, bouquet, fiancée and matinee. (How challenging! How muddled!) But hey! C'est la vie! 

For more on the difficulties associated with spelling and reading in English, see English is Difficult, a humorous article by Michael Quinion of World Wide Words. 

But keep in mind, some would argue that English orthography is not wierd or random. They make the case that the English orthorgraphic system is orderly, logical -- even elegant. For example, see this brief  You Tube video featuring Gina Cooke, an expert in Real Spelling. (Be advised, some comments use rough language, not suitable for school. The video is also available at TED.com, but without the comments.)

Implications for Teachers and Students:
Learning to read and write in English is no cakewalk -- even if you take the approach suggested by Gina Cooke. When learning English compared to Spanish, for example, sight word identification will probably be more difficult. Errors are more likely. Phonological awareness instruction is more essential (Frost, 2005). The challenge is great, especially for children who experience reading difficulties like dyslexia, and for children of poverty, particularly if they have few encounters with books in the home. The challenge may also confound English language learners. Thus, we must make phonemes, graphemes, morphemes, and word meanings explicit. Devote time to reading, writing, and word study. Read and explore informational texts to build content knowledge, discussed in a prior post.

In a language this complex, fluency may not come easily. As Dr. Hasbrouck mentioned in the prior post, readers who are fluent are more apt to read a lot, resulting in greater vocabulary expansion. Who knows? Avid readers and seekers might even develop a lasting interest in a particular topic and become über-motivated. Attentive and alert. Curious and increasingly confident. Hopefully, the development of interest is still a prime goal of education, as described years ago by Edward Thorndike (1906) and John Dewey (1913).

Pass the word along. Tell students they struggle with English because it is complex, but remind them also that they can solve this fascinating puzzle if they sort out the patterns and practice daily. Affirm every attempt. Help every teacher and parent understand the nature of this fabulous beast.

PS. Grammar is another story. Believe it or not, English grammar is relatively simple when compared to other large languages. Science Daily reports on pertinent new research from the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Memphis.

References:

Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and Effort in Education. Riverside Press, Boston.  

Frost, R. (2005). Orthographic systems and skilled word recognition processes in reading. In M. J. Snowling, & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A   handbook. (pp. 272-295). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.  

Seymour, P.H.K., Aro, M., & Erskine, J.M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143-17.  

Thorndike, E. L. (1906). The Principles of Teaching: Based on Psychology. A. G. Seiler: New York.  

University of Pennsylvania (2010, January 21). Language structure is partly determined by social structure. ScienceDaily. Retrieved January 23, 2010.

Holiday Hodgepodge

Greetings! Hodgepodge served here, a savory seasonal mix. Hodgepodge is an alteration of Middle English hochepot, from an Old French word for 'stew' (American Heritage Dictionary).

**************************** 

Ever wonder about the meaning and etymology of nowell? With this word, we see how Latin, French, and English intermix within a family of words, and how spelling can deviate from the root. Click image to enlarge or print.

***********************

Cashmas is coming! Consider the logic behind this slang term, quoted from the interactive but unofficial Urban Dictionary (beware, some content not suitable for school). "Cashmas is a celebration of materialism in which its celebrants attempt to flatter or impress relatives, friends, and acquaintances with the extent of their purchasing power." When last checked, approval ratings for this term were 1020 thumbs up, 427 down. Having students rate novel words in similar fashion should build word consciousness, resulting in vocabulary growth.

****************************

Dickens is in the public domain. Visit Gutenberg.org to read A Christmas Carol, no charge. Visit Librivox.org to listen to the audio version, no charge. Hundreds more titles and authors are available. As educators, we can share these links with families and use them in schools. Prompt wide reading and active listening to expand word and world knowledge, something poor children typically lack (Biemiller, last post; Hart & Risley, 1995).

**************************** 

Now, lest Dickens sic his spirits on us, let’s make merry! Bring on the figgy pudding (aka plum pudding, plum porridge, Christmas pudding, steamed pudding). Joyeux Noel!

Vocabulary for Preschoolers: The Martha Speaks Program (Biemiller)

This post is courtesy of Dr. Andrew Biemiller, Professor Emeritus, University of Toronto. Andy is an eminent vocabulary researcher and the author of Words Worth Teaching: Closing the Vocabulary Gap (see references). For more about his research and his book on words worthy of instructional time in elementary grades, also see the post by Michael Graves.

By the end of the primary grades, English-speaking children with the weakest vocabularies (lowest 25%) are already four years behind those with the largest vocabularies (highest 25%).1  English Language Learners are often even further behind. What can be done to reduce this “gap”? 

Clearly, schools could do more.  The gap widens during the primary grades.  Little vocabulary is taught in kindergarten, grade one, or grade two.  I know, teachers will assure me that they teach a lot of vocabulary.  Maybe 50 or 100 word meanings.  But each year disadvantaged children need to acquire 300 or 400 more meanings than “average” English speaking children.  At present, they usually acquire 300 or 400 fewer meanings in the primary grades! Until now, primary grade educators have left vocabulary development to parents.  So middle class parents have provided lots of language in the normal course of living at home.  Less advantaged homes have provided a lot less.2 

One support for less advantaged children could be television.  Children watch a lot of television.  But to teach vocabulary, we have to do more than assume children will acquire words from exposure.

WGBH in Boston has developed a program intended to support vocabulary development.  They adopted Susan Meddaugh’s books about Martha—a talking dog.  These books provide both good stories and many opportunities to explain needed words.  There are six books about Martha.  The television program incorporates these stories and adds many more.  The series is now in its second year on PBS television, and third year of production.  I am an advisor to this program. 

The series has drawn a wide audience, mainly of children ages 3 to 7.  Research to date has shown that children learn words from the Martha Speaks shows at about the same rate as they learn words from stories read in school—without vocabulary instruction.  In other words, children acquire the meanings of about 10% of the words explained.  This is not as high as we would hope for, but is a lot better than having no story experience, which many children experience.

At present, we are hoping to increase the rate of word learning by highlighting words explained.  We are also hoping that teachers might reinforce some of the vocabulary addressed in the program.  WGBH has created a video for teachers on ways of doing this.

A lot of children need to learn a lot more vocabulary.  Past research in classrooms shows that most of these children can learn more vocabulary from meaningful texts.   We have a pretty good idea what vocabulary is needed.3  Now I’m hoping that parents, teachers, and Martha Speaks will all contribute to better vocabulary growth!

For videos and background on the television program, see the Martha Speaks web site. Visit this link for parent and teacher materials. Also, note the series of short videos called “The Experts Speak".

1  Biemiller, A. (2005). Size and sequence in vocabulary development: Implications for choosing words for primary grade vocabulary instruction.  In A. Hiebert. & M. Kamil,  (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice  (pp 223-242).   Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 

2  Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1995).  Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children.  Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. 

3  One good listing of needed words is in my book, Words Worth Teaching, available from SRA/McGraw-Hill:  Biemiller, A. (2009).  Words worth teaching: Closing the vocabulary gap.  Columbus, OH:  SRA/McGraw-Hill.

Invest in Vocabulary

THE MAIN GOAL of this blog is to prompt vocabulary instruction, because word knowledge facilitates comprehension (RAND Reading Study Group, 2002). "The learning characteristics that have the strongest causal connection to academic failure are rooted in the area of language” (Coyne, Kame’enui, & Carnine, 2007, p. 38). What is needed is a persistent and consistent investment in word knowledge. That is not what is occurring. In general, vocabulary is given minimal time in schools. This is particularly troublesome in primary grades when the mind is most apt to assimilate new words. “Until schools are prepared to emphasize vocabulary acquisition, especially in the primary grades, less advantaged children will continue to be handicapped even if they master reading written words” (Biemiller & Boote, 2006, p 44). A feckless approach to vocabulary at any grade level is felt most by children of poverty and English language learners.

feck·less (adjective)
1. Lacking purpose or vitality; feeble or ineffective. 2. Careless and irresponsible. 

[Scots feck, effect (alteration of effect) + -less.

Seasonal Word Reasoning (poll)

Readers beware! Here be invented words on several topics, created for budding vocabulogicians. Verbiventing is a great way to develop word logic in children and adolescents. Invent words. Interpret other's inventions. Grow in word sense.

1) Naming the season: Whether we call it harvest, autumn, or fall, it's the most brightific season of all! Could the term fall simply refer to falling leaves? Yes. Fall was originally “fall of the leaf.” For example, in 1545 Ascham wrote “Spring tyme, Somer, faule of the leafe, and winter” (OED online). A century later, the truncated form 'fall' was used. Today, the term ‘fall’ for autumn is commonly used in America but rarely in Great Britain. 

 

2) Food! Wishing you pantries plenished and replenished with abundant nourishments! Sadly, PBS reports that 1 in 7 American households have insufficient eatings. At present, words like starvation and famished are not frequently used to describe Americans, but poverty exists. Related books: The Glass Castle (Walls), Angela’s Ashes (McCourt).

Speaking of food, this traditional Thanksgiving picture is a cornucopia, literally meaning ‘horn of plenty’ because corn means ‘horn’ as seen in unicorn (one horn), cornet (the instrument, a horn), and in the Zodiak sign Capricorn (look it up at Etymology Online). Less obviously, we see corn=horn in tricorn and corner. Is a corner like a horn?  Does the other part of cornucopia (-copia) bring any abundance-related words to mind? 

3) Native Americans: November is National American Heritage Month (resources). Related to that, note the brilliant design of the secret code, created and used with tremendous success by the Navajo Code Talkers during WWII. Browse the extensive, student-friendly museum of the Navajo Code Talkers. Help students crack a few codewords; it's logical and answers are provided. Check out the marvelous illustrations in the children's book, The Unbreakable Code.

4) Opining on homework: It's nearly Thanksgiving! Time to vacate the schools! Time for family and/or friends, feasting, festing, football, and refeasting (possibly followed by fasting). Let’s hope all students can enjoy vacation sans schoolwork. My opinion? Hyperhomeworking is counterproductive. Entire families, including parent(s), have become homeworkaphobic and/or ultracompetitive. A new film documents the problem; see trailer.   

poll by twiigs.com

Thanks, visitors! I count you as fellow philologists. Here's hoping few readers unfriend me! The New Oxford American Dictionary has named unfriend the word of the year for 2009 (ABCnews) but it’s not totally new. Fuller wrote in 1659, “I hope, Sir, that we are not mutually Unfriended by this Difference which hath happened betwixt us” (OED online). 

PS. I planned to write about context, but seasonal spirits fell upon me!