Previous research examining frontloading academic vocabulary establishes it as an effective instructional activity for students who are English learners. This article extends and builds from those earlier findings, showing the relevance and importance of explicit vocabulary instruction for all students identified with specialized learning needs, especially for students who are English learners with disabilities. Drawing from research-based practices as well as practitioner training to provide ideas of how to frontload academic terms using techniques that incorporate visuals and technology in an integrated classroom setting.
AbediJ. (2014). English language learners with disabilities: Classification, assessment, and accommodation issues. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 10(2), 1–30.
2.
AugustD.Branum-MartinL.Cardenas-HaganE.FrancisD. J. (2009). The impact of an instructional intervention on the science and language learning of middle grade English language learners. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2, 345–376.
3.
BakerS.LesauxN.JayanthiM.DiminoJ.ProctorC. P.MorrisJ.. . . Newman-GoncharR. (2014). Teaching academic content and literacy to English learners in elementary and middle school: IES practice guide. Princeton, NJ: What Works Clearinghouse.
4.
BrandesD. R.McMasterK. L. (2017). A review of morphological analysis strategies on vocabulary outcomes with ELLs. Insights into Learning Disabilities, 14, 53–72.
5.
CampbellE.CubaM. (2015). Analyzing the role of visual cues in developing prediction-making skills of third- and ninth-grade English language learners. The CATESOL Journal, 27, 53–93.
6.
ConnorC. M.AlbertoP. A.ComptonD. L.O’ConnorR. E. (2014). Improving reading outcomes for students with or at risk for reading disabilities: A synthesis of the contributions from the institute of education sciences research centers (NCSER 2014-3000). Washington, DC: National Center for Special Education Research.
7.
GonzálezN. (2005). Beyond culture: The hybridity of funds of knowledge. In GonzálezN.MollL. C.AmantiC. (Eds.), Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms (pp. 29–46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
HaagerD.OsipovaA. V. (2017). Enhancing academic instruction for adolescent English language learners with or at risk for learning disabilities. Insights into Learning Disabilities, 14, 7–26.
9.
JozwikS. L.DouglasK. H. (2017). Effects of multicomponent academic vocabulary instruction for English learners with learning difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 40, 237–250.
10.
KennedyM. J.AroninS.O’NealM.NewtonJ. R.ThomasC. N. (2014). Creating multimedia-based vignettes with embedded evidence-based practices: A tool for supporting struggling learners. Journal of Special Education Technology, 29(4), 15–30.
11.
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, 196–228.
12.
LesauxN. K.KiefferM. J.KelleyJ. G.HarrisJ. R. (2014). Effects of academic vocabulary instruction for linguistically diverse adolescents: Evidence from a randomized field trial. American Educational Research Journal, 51, 1159–1194.
13.
MitchellK. (2012). English is not all that matters in the education of secondary multilingual learners and their teachers. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 14, 1–21.
14.
ReyesR.VillarrealE. (2016). Wanting the unwanted again: Safeguarding against normalizing dehumanization and discardability of marginalized, “unruly” English-learning Latinos in our schools. The Urban Review, 48, 543–559.
15.
SilvermanR.HinesS. (2009). The effects of multimedia-enhanced instruction on the vocabulary of English-language learners and non-English-language learners in pre-kindergarten through second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 305–314.
16.
TolbertJ. B.LazarusB. D.KilluK. (2017). Flashcards and guided visual vocabulary practice: Experiences of students with learning disabilities when introduced to concrete Spanish nouns. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 22(2), 24–37.
17.
ValenzuelaA. (2010). Subtractive schooling: U.S.-Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany: State University of New York Press.
18.
WangM. (2017). Learning a second language. In MayerR. E.AlexanderP. A. (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (2nd ed., pp. 131–153). New York, NY: Routledge.
19.
WanzekJ.SwansonE.VaughnS.RobertsG.FallA. (2016). English learner and non-English learner students with disabilities: Content acquisition and comprehension. Exceptional Children, 82, 428–442.
20.
Ya-yuL.AndersonA. L.Bunch-CrumpK. (2016). Building vocabulary of English learners with reading disabilities through computer-assisted morphology instruction. Intervention in School and Clinic, 52, 133–140.
21.
ZwiersJ. (2008). Building academic language: Essential practices for content classrooms. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
