Jennifer L. Cooper, MEd; Amy M. Elleman, PhD Middle Tennessee State University

1. Defining moments: An examination of using definition supported authentic texts to improve reading comprehension and increase vocabulary acquisition REPLACE THIS BOX WITH YOUR ORGANIZATION’S HIGH RESOLUTION LOGO Jennifer L. Cooper, MEd; Amy M. Elleman, PhD Middle Tennessee State University ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION DISCUSSION RESULTS Vocabulary, or the level of vocabulary that a person possesses, directly influences one’s ability to comprehend text, and vocabulary and reading comprehension have been strongly correlated in multiple studies. Vocabulary-comprehension correlations have been repeatedly demonstrated to be in the .85-.95 range (Baumann, 2009). Stahl & Nagy (2005) indicated that teaching unknown words to students can significantly and positive impact reading comprehension. However, the researchers also elaborated that due to the vast number of words the typical student learns per year, 2000-3000 by the researchers’ estimates, all words necessary to enhance comprehension cannot be explicitly instructed. Furthermore, vocabulary instruction necessary to gain complete understanding of a word is labor intensive; however, wide reading is the single most influential factor in developing vocabulary. Wide independent reading can provide the student with definitional and contextual information along with the multiple exposures necessary to acquire understanding of words. In fact, Nagy & Stahl report the majority of vocabulary words are learned in context through wide reading (Stahl & Nagy, 2005). The meta-analysis complied by Abraham (2008) examined the effect of glosses (computer-mediated) in authentic texts with regard to the level of instruction, genre of the text, reading comprehension, and vocabulary assessments in SLA. Providing the reading glosses reduces the cognitive load required to comprehend a text with unfamiliar words by providing the meaning of the unknown vocabulary. This study examines whether or not reading comprehension can be improved by utilizing authentic texts with embedded glosses as a replacement for vocabulary instruction. ANCOVA analysis of posttest data utilizing the related pretest measure and ACT reading score as covariates reveals the following: Vocabulary Acquisition F3,13=13.360, p<.001 Control M=21.14±9.703 Treatment M=22.60±11.862 Novel Comprehension F3,14=1.469, p=.266 Control M=15.88±1.126 Treatment M=15.50±1.716 SAT Reading Subtest F3,13=2.705, p=.085 Control M=36.34±11.207 Treatment M=30.60±8.782 Although analysis of data does not demonstrate a significant improvement in either novel comprehension or SAT reading subtest scores for the treatment condition above the control condition, it is important to note that there was considerable growth in SAT critical reading scores for both treatment and control groups between pretest and posttest (Mpretest=1.97±2.91, n=19; Mposttest=33.15±10.06, n=18). The underlying cause for this growth should be examined further with additional testing. One potential cause for this growth would be the exposure to the vocabulary in the texts as wide reading has been previously demonstrated to promote vocabulary acquisition. An additional consideration is the use of different versions of the SAT reading subtest which may have been unequal. This will be addressed in subsequent studies by utilizing only one version of the SAT reading subtest. Treatment did result in greater vocabulary acquisition over the control condition. There is an unexpected directional discrepancy between vocabulary pretest and posttest measures (Mpretest=35.33±16.37, n=18; Mposttest=22.00±10.72, n=17). The pre- and post- test vocabulary knowledge measures were identical measures, and it is assumed that the decline in vocabulary knowledge as demonstrated on the measure is likely due to test fatigue; the vocabulary knowledge measures will be reworked for subsequent studies. Given the strong positive correlation between vocabulary size and reading comprehension abilities, increasing the vocabulary size of a student has the potential to benefit the student’s comprehension levels. However, while vocabulary instruction may provide significant improvement in comprehension levels, explicit vocabulary instruction is labor intensive and time consuming. It is difficult to determine which words to instruct, and it is impossible to provide in depth explicit instruction on all words necessary to enhance comprehension. Wide reading may be a potential solution to this difficult conundrum because it provides readers exposure to vocabulary with multiple exposures of contextual information which facilitates vocabulary acquisition. Additionally, prior research has demonstrated that incorporating glosses into narrative texts aids increases both reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition (Abraham, 2009). This study seeks to examine the effectiveness of utilizing novels with embedded glosses, i.e. Kaplan SAT Score-Raising Classic novels, which have vocabulary target words bolded and defined on facing pages. Students in this study were individually randomly assigned to the treatment condition or control group in which the students read the same novel without definitional support. The conditions were compared on standardized and researcher created outcomes for reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition. Results showed no advantage for using embedded glosses on vocabulary or comprehension outcomes. However, this may have been due to the sensitivity of the measures used. Limitations to the study as well as future directions for this line of research will be discussed. PARTICIPANTS • The subjects for this study were recruited from honors English III classes in a rural high school (n=19). The students were randomly assigned to treatment or control condition. • Independent t-tests were conducted to confirm equivalence of the treatment and control groups. Measures used to compare groups were English III EOC scaled score (EOCSS) and ACT Composite Score (ACTComp) • This analysis revealed the groups to be equivalent on both measures, EOCSS t17=-.593, p=.561; ACTComp t17=.700, p=.493. CONCLUSIONS Chart 1. Pretest versus posttest measures This study failed to demonstrate that the use of authentic texts with embedded glossaries increases reading comprehension on standardized or researcher created measures. Increased vocabulary acquisition was demonstrated in this study. Over a greater time period, increased vocabulary knowledge has the potential to influence reading comprehension, and subsequent studies may address this factor. Further testing of the use of authentic texts with glosses may also be appropriate as the sample analyzed in this study may represent an extreme end of the distribution, and results may be different with a sample more representative of the population. The pilot study did reveal several refinements that will be made in future studies. METHODS After random assignment, the participants received one of two versions of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: Kaplan’s SAT Novel version with embedded glosses (treatment) and a traditional version that did not contain a glossary or definitional support (control). Students were assigned nightly reading. Classroom instruction and discussion were not engaged to avoid confounding of results. As pre-test measures, students completed a comprehension test over the content of Frankenstein to test for pre-awareness of the material, a baseline vocabulary knowledge assessment, and a critical reading portion of a practice SAT test to generate a baseline score for comparison of groups. After completion of the novel, students completed the same battery of assessments. CONTACT REFERENCES Abraham, L. B. (2008). Computer-mediated glosses in second language reading comprehension and vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 199-226. Baumann, J. F. (2009). Intensity in vocabulary instruction and effects on reading comprehension. Topics in Language Disorders, 29(4), 312-328. Stahl, S., & Nagy, W. (2005). Teaching word meanings. New York: Routledge. Jennifer Cooper ME.d. Middle Tennessee State University Email: jls2cy@mtmail.mtsu.edu Phone: (931) 639-9454 Amy Elleman, Ph.D. Middle Tennessee State University Email: amy.elleman@mtsu.edu Phone: (615) 898-5688 Chart 2. Outcome measures Amy Elleman, Ph.D. Middle Tennessee State University Email: amy.elleman@mtsu.edu Phone: (615) 898-5688 Amy Elleman, Ph.D. Middle Tennessee State University Email: amy.elleman@mtsu.edu Phone: (615) 898-5688