English learners (ELs) with reading disabilities (RDs) have been among the lowest performers on academic achievement tests that assess vocabulary. To meet academic demands and prepare for college or careers, ELs with RDs clearly need support in terms of vocabulary acquisition; however, relevant research is scarce. This study investigated the effects of the CLUES strategy, a generative vocabulary strategy, on the ability of students to analyze and define unknown science terms relating to biology. The study further evaluated students’ ability to maintain vocabulary gains over time and to generalize the CLUES strategy. The results showed that participants benefited from the use of the CLUES approach to define novel science terms and maintain their ability to use this strategy over time. The participants themselves generally expressed satisfaction with the CLUES strategy and recommended it to their peers.
AugustD.ArtziL.BarrC. (2016). Helping ELLs meet standards in English language arts and science: An intervention focused on academic vocabulary. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 32(4), 373–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2015.1039738
2.
AugustD.Branum-MartinL.Cárdenas-HaganE.FrancisD. J.PowellJ.MooreS.HaynesE. F. (2014). Helping ELs meet the Common Core State Standards for literacy in science: The impact of an instructional intervention focused on academic language. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 7(1), 54–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2013.836763
3.
AugustD.ShanahanT. (2010). Response to a review and update on developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the national literacy panel on language minority children and youth. Journal of Literacy Research, 42(3), 341–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/1086296X.2010.503745
4.
BaddeleyA.GathercoleS.PapagnoC. (1998). The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review, 105(1), 158–173.
5.
BarrettM. T.GravesM. F. (1981). A vocabulary program for junior high school remedial readers. Journal of Reading, 25(2), 146–150.
6.
BaumannJ. F.EdwardsE. C.BolandE.OlejnikS.Kame-enuiE. J. (2003). Vocabulary tricks: Effects of instruction in morphology and context on fifth-grade students’ ability to derive and infer word meaning. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 447–494. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312040002447
7.
BaumannJ. F.EdwardsE. C.FontG.TereshinskiC. A.Kame’enuiE. J.OlejnikS. (2002). Teaching morphemic and contextual analysis to fifth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 150–176.
8.
BeckI.McKeownM.KucanL. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. Guilford Press.
9.
BeckI. L.PerfettiC. A.McKeownM. G. (1982). Effects of a long-term vocabulary instruction on lexical access and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 506–521.
10.
BowersP. N.KirbyJ. R.DeaconS. H. (2010). The effects of morphological instruction on literacy skills: A systematic review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 80, 2144–2179. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309359353
11.
BravoM. A.HiebertE. H.PearsonP. D. (2007). Tapping the linguistic resources of Spanish-English bilinguals: The role of cognates in science. In WagnerR. K.MuseA. E.TannenbaumK. R. (Eds.), Vocabulary acquisition: Implications for reading comprehension (pp. 140–156). Guilford Press.
12.
BrownV. L.WiederholtJ. L.HammillD. D. (2009). Test of reading comprehension (TORC-4). Pro-Ed.
13.
BryantD. P.GoodwinM.BryantB.HigginsK. (2003). Vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities: A review of the research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26, 117–128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1593594
14.
CampbellN. A.WilliamsonB.HeydenR. (2003). Biology: Exploring life. Upper Saddle Pearson Education.
15.
CaravolasM.ViolinJ.HulmeC. (2005). Phoneme awareness is a key component of alphabetic literacy skills in consistent and inconsistent orthographies: Evidence from Czech and English children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 107–138.
16.
CarloM. S.AugustD.McLaughlinB.SnowC. E.DresslerC.Lippman, D. N., & et al,. (2004). Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 188–206. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.39.2.3
17.
ChiappeP.SiegelL. S.Wade-WoolleyL. (2002). Linguistic diversity and the development of reading skills: A longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6(4), 369–400.
18.
DavidsonJ.MillerJ. (2002). Scholastic’s READ 180: A heritage of research. Scholastic.
19.
DeshlerD. D.SchumakerJ. B.LenzB. K.BulgrenJ. A.HockM. F.KnightJ.EhrenB. J. (2001). Ensuring content-area learning by secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 96–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/0938-8982.00011
20.
EbbersS. M.DentonC. A. (2008). A root awakening: Vocabulary instruction for older students with reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23(2), 90–102.
21.
EllemanA. M.LindoE. J.MorphyP.ComptonD. L. (2009). The impact of vocabulary instruction on passage-level comprehension of school-age children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740802539200
22.
FoxB. J. (1996). Strategies for word identification: Phonics from a new perspective. Merrill.
23.
FukkinkR. G.BlokH.De GlopperK. (2001). Deriving word meaning from written context: A multi-componential skill. Language Learning, 51, 477–498.
24.
GarciaG. E. (1991). Factors influencing the English reading test performance of Spanish speaking Hispanic children. Reading Research Quarterly, 26(4), 371–392.
25.
GarciaG. E.NagyW. E. (1993). Latino students’ concept of cognates. In LeuD. J.KinzerC. K. (Eds.), Examining central issues in literacy research, theory, and practice (pp. 367–373). National Reading Conference.
26.
GoodwinA. P.AhnS. (2010). A meta-analysis of morphological interventions: Effects on literacy achievement of children with literacy difficulties. Annals of Dyslexia, 60(1), 183–208. https://doi.org/10;1007/s11881-010-0041
27.
GravesM. F. (2006). The vocabulary book: Learning and instruction. Teachers College Press.
28.
GravesM. F.AugustD.Mancilla-MartinezJ. (2012). Teaching vocabulary to English language learners. Teachers College Press.
29.
HarmonJ. M.HedrickW. B. (2005). Research on vocabulary instruction in the content areas: Implications for struggling readers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21(3), 261–280.
30.
HarrisM. L.SchumakerJ. B.DeshlerD. D. (2011). The effects of strategic morphological analysis instruction on the vocabulary performance of secondary students with and without disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 34(1), 17–34.
31.
HasselerN. P. (2005). Vocabulary vine: A spiral study of Latin and Greek roots. Hasseler.
32.
HelmanA. L.CalhoonM. B.KernL. (2015). Improving the science vocabulary of English language learners with reading disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 38(1), 40–52.
33.
HwangJ. K.LawrenceJ. F.MoeE.SnowC. E. (2015). Differential effects of a systematic vocabulary intervention on adolescent language minority students with varying levels of English proficiency. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(3), 314–332.
34.
JitendraA. K.EdwardsL. L.SacksG.JacobsonL. A. (2004). What research says about vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 70, 299–322.
KamilM. L. (2008). How to get recreational reading to increase reading achievement. In KimY.RiskoV. J.ComptonD. L.DickinsonD. K.HundleyM. K.JimenezR. T.Well RoweD. (Eds.), 57th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 31–40). National Reading Conference.
37.
KatzL. A.CarlisleJ. F. (2009). Teaching students with reading difficulties to be close readers: A feasibility study. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40, 325–340.
38.
KiefferM. J.LesauxN. K. (2008). The role of morphology in the reading comprehension of Spanish-speaking English language learners. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21, 783–804.
39.
KlingnerJ. K.VaughnS.BoardmanA. (2015). Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning difficulties, 2/E. Guilford Press.
40.
KratochwillT. R.HitchcockJ. H.HornerR. H.LevinJ. R.OdomS. L.RindskopfD. M.ShadishW. R. (2013). Single-case intervention research design standards. Remedial and Special Education, 34(1), 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932512452794
41.
KuhnM. R.StahlS. A. (1998). Teaching children to learn word meanings from context: A synthesis and some questions. Journal of Literacy Research, 30(1), 119–138.
42.
LeeJ. (2005). Tracking achievement gaps and assessing the impact of NCLB on the gaps: An in-depth look into national and state reading and math outcome trends. The Civil Rights Project of Harvard University.
43.
LeongC. K.SimmonsD. R.Izatt-GambellM. (1990). The effect of systematic training in elaboration on word meaning and prose comprehension in poor readers. Annals of Dyslexia, 40, 192–215.
44.
LesauxN. K.KiefferM. J.FallerS. E.KelleyJ. G. (2010). The effectiveness and ease of implementation of an academic vocabulary intervention for linguistically diverse students in urban middle schools. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 196–228.
45.
LoniganC. J.BurgessS. R.AnthonyJ. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36, 596–613.
46.
McKeownM. G.BeckI. L.OmansonR. C.PerfettiC. A. (1983). The effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on reading comprehension: A replication. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15, 3–18.
47.
McKeownM. G.BeckI. L.OmansonR. C.PopleM. T. (1985). Some effects of the nature and frequency of vocabulary instruction on the knowledge and use of words. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 522–535.
48.
MillerM. (2009). Teaching for a new world: Preparing high school educators to deliver college and career-ready instruction. Alliance for Education.
49.
MoatsL.TolmanC. (2009). Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling (LETRS): The speech sounds of English: Phonetics, phonology, and phoneme awareness. Sopris West.
50.
MuterV.HulmeC.SnowlingM. J.StevensonJ. (2004). Phonemes, rimes, vocabulary, and grammatical skills as foundation of early reading development: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 40, 665–681.
51.
NagyW. E.BerningerV. W.AbbottR. D. (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle school students. Educational Psychology, 98, 134–147.
52.
NagyW. E.ScottJ. A. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In BarrR.KamilM. L.MosenthalP.PearsonP. D (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 269–284). Longman.
53.
NashH.SnowlingM. (2006). Teaching new words to children with poor existing vocabulary knowledge: A controlled evaluation of the definition and context methods. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 41, 335–354.
54.
NationI. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Heinle & Heinle.
55.
NationI. S. P. (2008). Teaching vocabulary: Strategies and techniques. Heinle Cengage Learning.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
58.
ParkerR. I.VannestK. (2009). An improved effect size for single-case research: Nonoverlap of all pairs. Behavior Therapy, 40(4), 357–367.
PearsonP. D.SpiroR. (1982). The new buzz word in reading is schema. Instructor, 91(9), 46–48.
61.
PérezA. M.PeñaE. D.BedoreL. M. (2010). Cognates facilitate word recognition in young Spanish-English bilinguals’ test performance. Early Childhood Services, 4(1), 55–67.
62.
ProctorC. P.CarloM.AugustD.SnowC. (2005). Native Spanish-speaking children reading in English: Toward a model of comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 246–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.246
63.
ProctorC. P.DaltonB.GrishamD. L. (2007). Scaffolding English language learners and struggling readers in a universal literacy environment with embedded strategy instruction and vocabulary support. Journal of Literacy Research, 39(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862960709336758
64.
ProctorC. P.UccelliP.DaltonB.SnowC. E. (2009). Understanding depth of vocabulary online with bilingual and monolingual children. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25(4), 311–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560903123502
65.
ReedD. K. (2008). A synthesis of morphology interventions and effects on reading outcomes for students in grades K-12. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23(1), 26–49.
66.
RichardsJ. C.SchmidtR. (2002). Longman dictionary of applied linguistics and language teaching. Longman.
67.
RodriguezT. A. (2001). From the known to the unknown: Using cognates to teach English to Spanish-speaking literates. The Reading Teacher, 54(8), 744–746.
68.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (2000). The effectiveness of mnemonic instruction for students with learning and behavior problems: An update and research synthesis. Journal of Behavioral Education, 10(2–3), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016640214368
69.
SinatraR.Stahl-GemakeJ.BergD. (1984). Improving reading comprehension of disabled readers through semantic mapping. The Reading Teacher, 38, 22–29.
70.
SnowC. E.LawrenceJ. F.WhiteC. (2009). Generating knowledge of academic language among urban middle school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 24(4), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/193345740903167042
71.
SwansonH. L.OroscoM. J.LussierC. M. (2012). Cognition and literacy in English language learners at risk for reading disabilities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 838–856. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026225
72.
TawneyJ.GastD. L. (1984). Single subject research in special education. Charles Merrill.
73.
TerrillC.ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A. (2004). SAT vocabulary instruction for high school students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39, 288–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512040390050501
74.
TomesteM.ArnoutseC. (1998). Effects of an instructional programme for deriving word meanings. Educational Studies, 24, 107–128.
75.
TownsendD.CollinsP. (2009). Academic vocabulary and middle school English learners: An intervention study. Reading and Writing, 22(9), 993–1019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-008-9141-y
76.
VaughnS.Linan-ThompsonS.ReutebuchC. K.CarlsonC. D.FrancisD. J. (2009). Enhancing social studies vocabulary and comprehension for seventh grade English language learners: Findings from two experimental studies. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 24(4), 297–324.
77.
WagnerR. K.TorgesonJ. K.RashotteC. A. (1994). Development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30, 73–87.
78.
WeiZ.NationP. (2013). The word part technique: A very useful vocabulary teaching technique. Modern English Teacher, 22(1), 12–16.
WittJ. C.ElliottN. S. (1985). Acceptability of classroom management strategies. In KratochwillT. R. (Ed.), Advances in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 251–288). Lawrence Erlbaum.
