THE EFFECTS OF CHARACTER EDUCATION IN VOCABULARY

UNIVERSIDAD DEL TURABO

SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER EDUCATION THROUGH

VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION FOR THE ENHANCEMENT

OF ORAL COMMUNICATION OF

HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS

By

Eneida Rivera Colón

DISSERTATION

Presented in fulfillment of the requirements for the

Doctor of Education Degree

Gurabo, Puerto Rico

December, 2013

UNIVERSIDAD DEL TURABO

CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL OF DISSERTATION

The dissertation of Eneida Rivera Colón was reviewed and approved by the

members of the Dissertation Committee. The Doctoral Academic Requirements

Compliance form, signed by the committee members, has been deposited in the

Register’s Office and at the Center of Graduate Studies & Research in the Universidad

del Turabo.

DISSERTATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS

María A. Irizarry EdD

Universidad del Turabo

Dissertation Committee President

Evelyn Lugo EdD


Member

Vilma Pizarro EdD


Member

©Copyright, 2013

Eneida Rivera Colón. All Rights Reserved

iv

THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHARACTER EDUCATION THROUGH

VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF

ORAL COMMUNICATION OF HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS

By


Maria A. Irizarry, Ed. D

Dissertation Committee President

ABSTRACT

The learning of a second language is inevitable when students are given

motivation through moral values and vocabulary instruction (Corder, 1967; Nazari,

2007). Learning vocabulary settles the human being into reading skills, oral

communication, and vocabulary word gain, even though vocabulary instruction has been

examined in theory, there is discussion about the best teaching methodologies for

language learners.

This quasi experimental study examined the development of the implementation

of a combined methodology of Character Education through Vocabulary Instruction and

the enhancement of Oral Communication (CEVIOC) of High School Seniors of a public

v

school in Puerto Rico. It also explored the vocabulary gain of high school students with

short stories and character count traits.

A Pre Test and Post Test were administered as an assessment of key vocabulary

words given in short stories and a Character Count Education Survey based on six

character count pillars (trustworthy, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring and

citizenship).

The study sample was of 91 students, distributed in four groups: two (2)

experimental groups and two (2) control groups. The experimental group was exposed to

a five week CEVIOC methodology and the control groups followed a traditional

methodology of the twelfth grade curriculum.

The results of the inferential analysis demonstrated a significant difference

between the percent results of the pre-test and post-test from the two (2) experimental

groups and the two (2) control groups. The data analysis validated the experimental

groups percent gain was higher than the control group (16.04 vs. 15.38). This suggests

there was a vocabulary gain for participants of the CEVIOC methodology.

The correlation analysis demonstrated no significant relation between the results

of the Character Education Survey and the vocabulary gain. The students learned

keywords, through short story readings and character count pillar traits, even with low

language abilities. Oral reading and vocabulary enrichment represented a development in

language skills and encouraged language growth in L2 learning. Suggestions indicate

further investigations should to explore the closeness of character education, vocabulary

gain, and oral communication with the development of the methodology being used with

high school students and other levels of educational knowledge.

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to give thanks to God, for allowing me to achieve a personal goal. I

owe a huge debt of gratitude to those who made possible this investigation. The support

and love of all those near me was vital to reach my goal. The dissertation committee

members’ motivation and encouragement, Dr. María A. Irizarry, Dr. Evelyn Lugo, and

Dr. Vilma Pizarro, were of great help, which I value significantly.

I would like to recognize the high school seniors who were willing to participate

in the study and their parents for consenting their participation. I would also like to

recognize their teachers, Tamar Núñez and Johanna Collazo’s disposition, engagement

and responsibility with the study. The school director’s support with the investigation

and Elizabeth Rodriguez’s assistance, who also made it possible. The statistician, Nelson

Colón was transcendent for the achievement of the study. Also, I would like to recognize

friends who provided insight and guide in the revision of documents, understanding of

key terms, and support.

Finally, I would like to thank my family, my dear husband Juan, for being my

rock in times of need. Also my loving daughters, Ashley and Alexa, for encouraging me

to complete my studies. My gratitude extends also to my loving parents Ana and Victor,

for their encouragement to complete the process, my brother and sisters, Victor, Nilda,

and Anita and their children. This means a lot to me.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................x

LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................xiii

APPENDICES LIST .....................................................................................................xiv

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................1

Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................8

Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................17

Justification of the Study .....................................................................................18

Research Questions ..............................................................................................21

Definition of Terms..............................................................................................22

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ..............................................................24

Theoretical Perspectives of Character Education in High School Students ........24

Theoretical Perspectives of Character Education and Communicative

Competence..........................................................................................................26

High School Seniors and Attitudinal Behavior ....................................................31

Theoretical Perspectives of Vocabulary Development ........................................34

Importance of Vocabulary Development and Oral Communication ...................43

Vocabulary Word Knowledge and Communicative Competence .......................44

High School Seniors’ Vocabulary Learning ........................................................47

Vocabulary Instruction and Oral Communication ...............................................54

Vocabulary Development and Oral Reading of Short Stories .............................55

Oral Reading and Communicative Competence ..................................................60

viii

Teaching and Learning of Vocabulary ................................................................63

Repeated Exposure of Vocabulary Words ...........................................................65

Enriched and Explicit Vocabulary Instruction .....................................................72

Vocabulary Word Choice and Oral Communication ...........................................84

Evaluation and Significance of Word Choice ......................................................86

Summary ..............................................................................................................90

CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY .............................................................................93

Design of the Study ..............................................................................................97

Independent Variables .........................................................................................97

Dependent Variables ............................................................................................98

Sample..................................................................................................................98

Validity ................................................................................................................101

Measurement Instruments ....................................................................................101

Procedure .............................................................................................................102

Pre and Post Vocabulary Test ..............................................................................110

Administration of Measurement Instruments ......................................................112

Selection of Short Stories.....................................................................................115

Selection of Vocabulary Words ...........................................................................116

Vocabulary Development Techniques .................................................................118

Vocabulary Enrichment .......................................................................................119

Analysis of Statistical Data ..................................................................................120

Ethical Characteristics .........................................................................................120

Confidentiality Dispositions ................................................................................121

ix

Limitations ...........................................................................................................121

CHAPTER IV. FINDINGS .........................................................................................125

Profile of Student Sample ....................................................................................129

Findings................................................................................................................129

Descriptive Analysis of Data ...............................................................................129

CHAPTER V. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................168

General View of Research ...................................................................................168

Discussion of Descriptive Analysis of Sources ...................................................171

Discussion of Findings .........................................................................................172

Conclusion of the Study .......................................................................................182

Recommendations ................................................................................................185

Suggestions for Future Research .........................................................................187

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................189

x

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1. Keywords of Short stories ..............................................................................116

Table 2. Group Participant’s Distribution (n-91) .........................................................126

Table 3. Participant and Gender Distribution (n=91) ..................................................127

Table 4. Participapants’Age Distribution (n=91) .........................................................128

Table 5. Average, Deviation, Standard and Variable of the Pre Test

Administered to participants (n=91) ..............................................................130

Table 6. Average, Deviation, Standard and Variable of the Post Test

Administered to participating Groups (n=91) ................................................131

Table 7. Average, Deviation, Standard and Variable of Study Instrument

“Tus Valores Cuentan” – Character Education Survey for the

Experimental Group 1 (n=24) ........................................................................133

Table 8. Average, Deviation, Standard and Variable of Study Instrument

“Tus Valores Cuentan” – Character Education Survey for the


Table 9. Frequency and Percent of Items Answered Correctly by Control Group 1

on the Pre and Post Tests (n=21) ...................................................................135


on the Pre and Post Tests (n=23) ...................................................................137

Table 11. Frequency and Percent of Items Answered Correctly by Experimental

Group 1 on the Pre Test and Post Tests (n=24) .............................................139

xi


Group 2 on the Pre and Post Tests (n=23) .....................................................141

Table 13. Relation of High and Low Components of First Instrument

Scale “Character Education Survey” (Components 1-25 for

Experimental; Group 1 (n=24) .......................................................................143

Table 14. Components of High and Low Average of Instrumental

Scale. “Character Education Survey” (Components 31-39) for

Experimental Group 1 ....................................................................................147

Table 15. Relation of High and Low Components of Third Instrument Scale

“Character Education Survey” (Components 40-56) for Experimental

Group 1 (n=24) ..............................................................................................149

Table 16. Relation of High and Low Components of Fourth Instrument Scale


Group 1 (n=24) ..............................................................................................152

Table 17. Frequency of Answers to Question: How many questions were

answered honestly? (Component 64) Instrument “Character Education

Survey” for Experimental Group 1 (n=24) ....................................................154

Table 18. Frequency of Responses to Question: (Components 65 and 66) Instrument

“Character Education Survey” for Experimental Group 1 (n=24).................155

Table 19. Relation of High and Low Components of First Instrument Scale


Group 2 (n=23) ..............................................................................................157

Table 20. Relation of High and Low Components of Second Instrument Scale


Group 2 (n=23) ..............................................................................................158

xii



Group 2 (n=23) ..............................................................................................161

Table 22. Relation of High and Low Components of Fourth Instrument Scale


Group 1 (n=23) ..............................................................................................163

Table 23. Frequency of Answers to Question: How many questions were answered

honestly? (Component 64) Instrument “Character Education Survey” for


Table 24. Frequency of Responses to Question: (Component 65 and 66) Instrument

“Character Education Survey” for Experimental Group 1 (n=23).................166

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Group Participant’s Distribution (n=91) ...............................................126

Figure 2. Participant’s Distribution ......................................................................127

Figure 3. Participant’s Age Distribution (n=91) ..................................................128

Figure 4. Average of Pre tests Administered to Participants by Group (n=91) ...130

Figure 5. Average Deviation, Standard and Variables of Post Tests

Administered to Participating Groups (n=91).......................................132

xiv

APPENDIX LIST

Page

Appendix A. Pre Test and Post Test ...........................................................................223

Appendix B. Administration Guide for the Pre Test and Post Test ...........................229

Appendix C. Protocols for Experimental Groups ......................................................230

Appendix D. Letter of Authorization by the Department of Education of

Puerto Rico............................................................................................267

Appendix E. Parent and District Consent form of Study ...........................................269

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The Research Measurement Corporation (RMC), a center of instruction in

research, measurement and evaluation of literacy evaluated various approaches for

character development and academic achievement of English as a Second Language

(ESL) in high school seniors. RMC worked with the Josephson Institute Center for

Youths (JICY) through the Character Education Program, Character Counts Program

(CCP) along with the Puerto Rico Department of Education (PRDE) to enhance language

communication with six character pillar values (Josephson Institute Center, 2004, 2010;

PRDE, 2010; RMC, 2005).

In their evaluation of different programs they found two important outcomes

stemming from vocabulary building and oral communication in ESL. The first,

vocabulary learning, is distinct in language learners: Vocabulary learning is knowledge of

rich and varied words and word meaning that integrated oral language and productive and

receptive forms in students’ vocabulary development needed for success in academics

and in life (Kosanovich, 2010; Reed, 2008; Windle and Miller, 2010; RMC, 2010). The

learning of vocabulary skills in English language learners (ELL’s) enhanced their

academic achievement and opportunities to use words in communicative situations that

follow students’ vocabulary performance, particularly in second language development

(Josephson Institute Center for Youths [JICY], 2004, 2010; RMC, 2005).

The second finding reviewed by the RMC, is the development of proficiency in

ELL’s communicative competence and their vocabulary skills (RMC, 2010). The

teaching of vocabulary instruction and communicative competence in an enriched

2

environment expands ELL’s knowledge and moral and academic achievements in the

outcomes of instruction models and strategies developed for character education,

vocabulary learning and communicative competence according to, Rivera, Francis, and

Moughamian (2009).

The ability to build communicative competence is an important element in the

learning of a second language, mainly for vocabulary expansion, production,

comprehension and extensive reading (Burt, Peyton, & Adams, 2003; RMC, 2009).

Communicative competence is the degree to which a communicator’s goals were

achieved throughout effective and appropriate interaction by a formation of behaviors in

language learning (Rubin, 1990). By communicating with others we learn language and

acquire linguistic competences; similarly, we obtain non-verbal codes essential for non-

verbal competence. In the discipline of communication, a person’s culture and behavior

is his or her communicative competence (Lustig & Koester, 2010). In more ways than

one, communication played a central role in student’s oral communication. Via

communication, not only did we acquire character education and behavior, we also

transmitted our character education and behavior to vocabulary development.

The revised literature by the Research Measurement Corporation and Josephson

Institute Center for Youths singled out vocabulary development in second language

learning as a main factor in teenagers’ language gains and behavioral values like:

trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring and citizenship (RMC, 2009;

CCP, 2010).

As Pit Corder (1967) stated forty years ago “given motivation values, it is

inevitable that a human being will learn a second language if he is exposed to the

3

language” Corder (1967) in Nazari,(2007). Furthermore, vocabulary development

enhances communicative competence and fosters learning in L2 students. (Gardner,

2001; Murcia, 2003; Richards, 2001, 2006; Savignon,2001;Ushioda & Dornyei,2009).

The content present in different theoretical perspectives in education is therefore based on

character education and vocabulary learning in communicative competence in high

school seniors L2 learners’.

Even though advances in the past two decades have created awareness of

character education and vocabulary instruction in oral communication situations, there is

more to be learned on the subject (The Josephson Center for Youths; Character Counts

Program; 2004, 2010). Unfortunately there is ambiguity in how teenagers learn new

words in the L2, communicate orally in given situations and develop their attitudinal

behaviors in high school as English language learners (Schmitt, 2002, 2008; Beck &

McKeown, 2007; Beck, McKeown & Kucan, 2007). However, Groot (2006) indicated

the best means of acquiring vocabulary are still unclear, partly because of the wide

variety of factors in second language learning, the numerous approaches adequate for

high school students age and communication skills, and the effectiveness of evaluation in

the learning of character education in research (RMC,2005,2009; NCLB,2001;

Review,2009).

Learning vocabulary is an essential part of mastering a second language as a

hallmark of an educated individual (Beck, Mckeown & Kucan, 2002). The awareness in

vocabulary acquisition provides students’ encounters with words in various contexts as

fundamental in the enhancement of language growth (National Institute of Child Health

and Human Development [NICHHD], 2000).

4

Vocabulary is important because it encompasses all the words a human being

must know to access background knowledge, express ideas, and communicate effectively

in the learning of new concepts. “Vocabulary is the glue that holds content

together”(p.33). It is the stuff of life to ignite knowledge in the secondary level learner

(Rupley, Logan & Nichols, 1999, 2,(1) 33-45, 2005; NICHHD, 2000). Vocabulary

building is necessary for oral communication in the L2 to develop appropriately in

educational standards and general cognitive purposes of high school students (NCLB,

2001). The information acquired through communicative competence and vocabulary

skills, and the development of behavioral attitudes assist in the process of developing L2

proficiency in the learner (NCLB, 2001). Standards, Expectations and Goals of the Puerto

Rico Department of Education [PRDE] describe the connection as a direct one in the

integration of vocabulary and verbal communication (PRDE, 2007; RMC, 2005, 2010).

Also the integration of Character Education in language development promotes gain in

L2 education in English language learning high school students to correlate with the

supposition that word knowledge is linked strongly to academic progress through reading

comprehension, vocabulary knowledge, and behavioral attitudes (Chall & Jacobs, 2003;

PRDE, 2010; CCP, 2010).

The National Education Association (NEA, 2007), in its Focus on Hispanics

Report reveals ELL’s achievement gains in vocabulary instruction in the L2 as a capacity

to become better word learners (Doherty, Hilberg; Nagy, 2005; Pinal and Tharp, 2002).

The Focus on Hispanics Report describes a hypothesis of ELL’s as students’ with lack of

Basic English skills, verbal communication skills in academic settings, lack in

motivation, and vocabulary retention(2007). The report specifies ELL’s development of

5

basic communication and acquisition of L2 proficiency in language learning outcomes in

the target language skills as complex. Knowing other words and ideas related to the

original word produces different results in communicative aptitude (Focus on Hispanics

Report, 2007).

A second report from The Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL) on the Reading

of Adult English Language Learners, reviews an additional hypothesis to single out the

influence of vocabulary instruction as one of the components of language proficiency that

have a strong effect on second language acquisition (SLA) (Coady, 1997, 2002). The

research to develop the hypothesis describes ELL’s gain of a minimum of 3,000 words in

the target language in order to facilitate language learning, moving on to 5,000 and 7,000

words for vocabulary knowledge (Grabe & Stoler, 2002; Nation, 2001). The number of

words the adolescent identifies in the target language indicates comprehension of the L2.

The vocabulary knowledge of the learner is based on the breadth or size of the students’

vocabulary and the knowledge of students’ pronunciation, a word’s meaning and

appropriateness to achieve comprehension in the language and progress in oral

communication skills (Qian, 2002). The opportunities in the reviews hypothesis suggest

help for students to increase vocabulary skills through pronunciation, spelling, multiple

meanings, contexts in which the word can be used, frequency with which it is used, word

association, motivational patterns in communicative situations, among others (Center for

Adult English Language Acquisition[CAELA],2003).

A third review of the hypothesis connector by CAELA recognizes the role of

three areas in L2 research (2003). The three positions discussed are the effects of

behavioral attitudes in second language learning, the role of interaction, and the

6

development of vocabulary building. The first role supports the integration of motivation

and attitudinal behaviors in high school learners’ motivation of the second language

(Dornyei, 2003). The second role identifies interaction between communication and

second language acquisition. The interaction facilitates language by input (what learners

hear) and output (what learners produce). The communication in a second language

incorporates new and supplementary structures into language use to facilitate knowledge

(Ellis, Basturkmen, & Loewen, 2001). Language is to be advanced through specific

vocabulary building with behavioral attitudes in effort to improve communicative

competence. The third role integrating the two positions is vocabulary instruction. More

recently, a number of authors interested in vocabulary have become aware of the

realization that vocabulary is an important area worthy of effort and the heart of

communicative competence (Coady & Huckin,1997; Richards & Renandya, 2002;

Hedge, 2008). Canning (2004) also sustains that word knowledge is a component in

communicative situations that helps develop learning and linguistic skills in support of

language learning. Reviews in vocabulary building and communicative situations

recommend vocabulary instruction in reading and communicative skills to enhance

language (CAELA, 2003; NEA, 2007). Hence, vocabulary building increases multiple

opportunities in ESL learners where students internalize, produce, and acquire words in

reading for communicative situations and language increase (Wesche & Paribakht,

2000[Moss, 2003]). The many roles of the target language support meaningful learning

of the L2, behavioral values, and context activities in which students integrate skills in

their learning process and learn the words that lead to vocabulary growth (Coady &

Huckin, 1997; Moss, 2003).

7

The position and efforts of character education, through vocabulary instruction in

the enhancement of communicative competence by NEA, CAL, and CAELA establish

“support in learning a L2”. The Intercultural Development Research Association (IRDA)

acknowledges significance in multiple exposures to words in a variety of rich content for

vocabulary learning for ELL’s (IRDA, 2004). The professional educational organizations

like: NEA, CAL and CAELA review the components of vocabulary acquisition,

communicative competence in L2 high school learners and behavioral attitudes like:

responsibility, respect, and trustworthiness among others to encourage language

development. The improvement of vocabulary skills in ESL therefore, builds awareness

in attitudinal behavior gain and interactions in L2 learners’ support of language

expansion (Chan, 2006; CAELA, 2003).

The Circular Letter (11- 2011-2012), Curricular Framework (PRDE, 2003), and

Standards and Expectations of grade level for the English Program of the Puerto Rico

Department of Education(2007), promote and practice the development of ELL’s

attitudes and motivation by exposing students to authentic communication experiences in

second language learning. Circular Letter, 2011-2012 of the English Program establishes

the importance of motivation, language expansion, and strategies in the development of

critical thinking, creativity, and the communicative and oral approach in the English

language. The Curriculum Standards and Grade Level Expectations for the PRDE

English Program (2007) also emphasize the importance of behavioral attitudes,

vocabulary instruction, and oral competency in students’ appreciation and interaction in

ESL. Verbal and non-verbal listening and communication skills accentuate the

significance of expressions of ideas with confidence, vocabulary enrichment and

8

expansion, higher levels of confidence in the language and transfer of vocabulary

acquisition by communicative situations in high school learners. The learning of

vocabulary and communicative competence correspond then to the elementary and

secondary school curriculum in support of language improvement, vocabulary word gain

and behavioral values for the language learner to be aware of a good deal of vocabulary

in support of oral communication (CAL, 2003; CAELA, 2003; JICY,2010). Therefore,

the development of communicative competence is significant in the advancement of

vocabulary growth for Puerto Rican students of the Island.

Statement of the Problem

The No Child Left Behind Act [NCLB], the Research Measurement Corporation

and Josephson Institute Center for Youths: Character Counts Program, and the CAELA

and CAL Reports indicate that vocabulary instruction and positive behavioral attitude

towards the L2 are key components in the development of communicative competency in

ELL’s. Both vocabulary knowledge and oral communication skills in L2 learning are

associated with attitudinal behaviors and academic achievement (Beck, Mckeown, &

Kukan, 2002; Green, 2004; JICY, 2004, 2010; NCLB, 2003; RMC, 2005, 2009; Rupley,

Logan, & Nichols, 1999, 2000). The research supports the development of character

education expansion through vocabulary building for the enrichment of oral

communication (Beck et al., 2002; CAELA, 2003; CAL, 2003; CCP, 2010, Green, 2004;

RMC, 2005, 2009; Rupley et al., 1999, 2000; Wesche & Paribakht, 2000). If the goal of

vocabulary instruction is for students to express the words acquired and make use of that

knowledge, inadequacy in language development is to be connected to the learner’s

academic achievement as an ELL and focus of attitudinal behavior is to be originated

9

(Nagy, 2005). The power of words is seen as an influence in high school grades to score

well on given standardized tests for following post secondary language learning (IRDA,

2004). Hence, high school students with limitations in vocabulary skills will not be

proficient because of weaknesses in language development and background knowledge

stemming from elementary grades (Scarborough, 2001).

Although the RMC (2005, 2009), the Josephson Institute (CCP), and NCLB

(2001, ESEA Review, 2009) also agree that the use of character education with

vocabulary instruction promotes success in language learning; the development of

specific vocabulary strategies for high school learners language growth has not become a

potential strength of oral communication as meaningful language learning and behavior

attitude. Recent studies have reviewed data of public schools of the PRDE in providing

successful curriculums, and positive outcomes in instructional practices such as character

education in the Character Counts Program (JICY, 2004, 2010; RMC, 2005, 2009).

However, the studies based on the NCLB and CCP present little evidence in validation of

vocabulary instruction and oral communication in school curriculum as a part of the

quality of the objectives developed in the acquisition of a L2 and the standards and

expectations established in the English language setting. The instruction of vocabulary

for ESL learners is a significant factor in high school (Greenwood, 2002). Long ago

before the National Reading Panel identified vocabulary as one of the components of

reading and language learning, vocabulary was recognized as an important contributor to

communicative competence ((Baumann, Kame`enui, & Ash, 2003).

Research on the importance of knowing sufficient vocabulary to communicate

orally in the second language develops in the 20th

century (Duin and Graves, 1987;

10

Walker, Greenwood, Hart and Carta, 1994; Nation, 2001; Read, 2004; Tschirner, 2004;

Zimmerman, 2005). The position of promoting meaningful communicative situations in

supportive environments is acknowledged by the vision and mission of the English

Program of the Puerto Rico Department of Education and in reaching the goal of students

becoming bilingual citizens (PRDE English Program Circular Letter, 2012).

The use of definitions to construct language in vocabulary teaching with the

purpose of achieving language gain, communicative competence, and word recognition

has been unfavorable for students’ development and vocabulary expansion in word

acquisition (Beck et al., 2002; Greenwood, 2002, 2005). The use of various components

to access word recognition through multiple exposures of vocabulary for oral proficiency

enrichment and growth in students’ moral character is seen in high levels of education

(Lawrence, 2009). Some of the components in the development of vocabulary building

and word recognition are seen by: rich and varied language experiences, direct teaching

of specific words, and instruction in independent word learning strategies and

opportunities to promote word consciousness in the expansion of vocabulary and

communicative competence in positive environments (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2000;

Baumann & Kame’enui,2004; Graves, 2006; Nation, 2001; National Reading

Panel[NRP],2000; Torgesen, Houston & Risseman, 2007).

On the other hand, vocabulary instruction research indicates students with

disadvantages in language learning have become barriers for school success (Biemiller &

Slonim, 2001; Hart,& Risely, 2003). Biemiller,Hart and Risely (2003 ) viewed less

advantaged students’ small vocabularies as a limitation in word expansion. The research

identified ELL’s from diverse backgrounds and low income homes struggling with

11

vocabulary instruction. Students from low income and linguistically diverse backgrounds

tend to have limited vocabulary than advantage peers (Cunnings, 1984, Hart & Risely,

2003). The work establishes students’ from disadvantaged homes and linguistic

backgrounds when in high school with limitations in vocabulary instruction develop little

word gain. The relationship is rather difficult to unravel. There are several hypotheses

that attempt to explore the correlation of students limitations (Nagy, 2005).

Moats (2001) assumption indicates in relation to previous studies that word gap in

disadvantaged ESL learners’ is identified in “word poverty,” meaning lack in vocabulary

instruction and word recognition in ELL’s with linguistically varied backgrounds and low

income homes. Many advantaged students report knowledge of 2,500 additional words

more than disadvantaged students and low income homes. Students with vocabulary

knowledge acquire 3,000 more words than those with language barriers.

The differences in high school students’ vocabulary is based on testing the

learners’ word knowledge (Beck et al, 2002; Nation and Laufer, 1999, 2001). By high

school, students with a diversity of backgrounds and skills are immersed in instruction,

particularly, those who are struggling with vocabulary and concepts unfamiliar or

misunderstood while others are immersed in robust vocabulary instruction and word

recognition to benefit from prior knowledge in L2 learning (Beck, Mckeown & Kukan,

2002; Marzano, 2007).

Fortunately, research shows students’ language abilities are remediated through

interventions designed to promote language proficiency in Early Head Start, Tutoring

Programs by ESL teachers’ in elementary and secondary levels and Supplementary

Educational Programs for low income families and students’ with low proficient test

12

scores. The results foster students’ vocabulary development and oral proficiency in

language learning (Love, 2005; Nation, 2001; PRDE, 2004). Students’ acquiring

vocabulary have more difficulty than peers with ample vocabulary knowledge for

vocabulary instruction is provided by incidental learning in word use in communicative

situations in the ELL environment (Campbell et al. 2001; Love et al. 2005). The

limitations students present in vocabulary instruction and oral communication in relation

to academic achievement make language growth complex, over time (NCELA, 2006;

Love et al, 2005). The learners’ experiences create an achievement gap, hence,

complications of behavioral attitudes in characters values in the use of vocabulary words

in communicative contexts. Students with vocabulary achievement continue to expand

knowledge by learning new words and integrating into academic content, especially

ELL’s (Blachowicz, Fisher, Ogle, & Watts-Taffe, 2006). Other reasons for language

development are provided by Butler and Hakuta (2006), by low achievement students’

engaging in vocabulary acquisition rapidly in the secondary level to comprehend the

multiple subjects being learned and whose gaps are not readily apparent, but seen as a

struggle to develop academic vocabulary and grade level achievement. Even though

students’ vocabulary instruction is engaged, the ESL learner faces challenges in language

skills to identify behavioral attitudes in communicative situations (RMC, 2005, 2009).

The School System in Puerto Rico administers proficiency tests in the evaluation of

students’ progress in English language learning according to the No Child Left Behind

Act. In the year 2005-2006 the Puerto Rico Academic Achievement Tests [PRAAT]

revealed 45% of eleventh grade high school students’ have a basic proficiency of English

skills. The PRAAT for eleventh grade students identified a 27% proficiency of

13

achievement and a proficiency of 23% in the advanced level. The results for the English

achievement tests of 2006-2007 reflect a 45% basic proficiency score, a 30% of students

completed the proficient skills and learners with 25% of advanced skills. The 2007-2008

PRAAT results provide variances in scores of basic proficiency with 42% of eleventh

grade students’ completing skills. The Puerto Rican Academic tests reflect a 29% of

students being proficient. A third group of proficiency is seen as an advanced level in

students with a 21% of achievement.

The PRAAT in English as a Second Language for the year 2008-2009 was

currently aligned with the Standards and Expectations of Grade Level Content approved

by the Federal Department of Education in accordance to regulations established by the

NCLB Act (2001). The comparisons of previous annual test results are not developed for

variables in present 2009 test, but reviewed to establish a relevant position within the

English priorities in order to identify variables that influence the effectiveness in how

ESL is taught in Puerto Rico, including those aspects related to oral communication, and

vocabulary enrichment. Findings in communicative competence and vocabulary

instruction in the Puerto Rican setting will help L2 reading students enhance knowledge

and awareness of the English language; the proficiency will make language essential for

students in a contemporary world of challenge (Walsh, 2010).

The results of Pre-Basic Proficiency incorporated in the PRAAT presented 27%

of students’ aptitude of skills. The ability to accomplish academic skills in basic

proficiency reflected 28% in ESL learners’. The students’ response is 23% in proficient

ability on ESL scores. A 21% of high school eleventh grade students’ corresponded to

advanced level of achievement on the PRAAT. The PRAAT for the year 2009-2010

14

results emphasize a pre-basic proficiency of 31%, and a basic proficiency of 33%. The

proficient scores were of 23% and the advanced proficiency gain was of 14%. The

PRAAT for the year 2010-2011 results emphasize a pre basic proficiency of 54 % and

basic proficiency of 47%. The proficient scores were of 27% and the advanced

proficiency gain was of 19%. The results of the PRAAT present awareness of language

learning and comprehension ability. The validation of reviews of the circular letter with

the standards and expectations aligned with the Curriculum of the English Program

sustain requirements in the use of communicative competence and vocabulary growth as

essential in language learning.

The validation of standards present in the educational reform of the Elementary

and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, 2009), and the Puerto Rico Department of

Education review for the 2008 - 2009 school year (PRDE, 2008) comply with the NCLB

Act (2001) to grant exemptions in test score results for the first three years or until

students have reached proficiency on the English language proficiency assessment

(ESEA, 1965, 2009; NCLB, 2001, Review, 2009; PRDE, 2010, 2011). The PRAAT

identifies the achievement of students’ academic skills in ESL. The ability of students to

develop English as a Second Language evaluates their social and academic purposes for

personal growth. The PRDE presents standards in accordance with character education

in response to vocabulary enrichment and enhancement for ELL’s communicative

competence in high schools (CCP, 2004, 2010; PRDE, 2010; CCP, 2004, 2010).

The ability to develop vocabulary instruction opens doors in direction to

particular settings at given moments of the learners’ education. The settings permit the

15

integration of various vocabulary techniques for high school learners’ (PRDE, 2007,

2009; PRAAT, 2010).

Each day studies confirm a poor performance in communicative competence in

ELL’s in Puerto Rico. The results of PRAAT tests and Grade level evaluation determine

students’ academic progress (PRAAT, 2011; PRDE, 2010). Since 1957, the acquisition

of vocabulary in a second language has been discussed based on students’ knowledge of

vocabulary, communication in the L2, and behavioral attitudes. A study from the PRDE

found 57% low proficient students’ identifying deficiency in ESL communication skills.

The data found limitations in the L2, opposition of ESL learners to communicative

situations and an uncertain focus of students’ goals in language learning. The PRDE

based on the Goals 2000 Program established educational requirements in L2 learners of

Puerto Rico to implement and enhance language learning and reinforce communicative

skills and vocabulary building in students’ (Goals 2000, 1998 Report).

According to various studies, the acquisition of vocabulary showed that L2 high

school learners developed awareness of word recognition. The need to create awareness

of vocabulary building limitations and effectiveness in students’ L2 were present in Beck

and Mckeown’s study of language development and reading (2007). In early stage

learners, Nagy (2005) and Scott (2006) specify in study effective vocabulary instruction

techniques in the use in teaching vocabulary to develop ESL high school students’ L2

acquisition. The use of techniques for vocabulary enrichment provides additional

resources for ELL’s to achieve effective communicative skills and character education

values. Hinkel (2006), Nation (2005), and Soakmen (1997) also recognized vocabulary

learning benefits through reading in L2 learning. The research suggested vocabulary

16

learning by natural and indirect ESL methods for language enrichment. The PRDE in

efforts to increase ELL’s proficiency resulted supports to Supplementary Educational

Services to provide learners with specific language skills (PRDE, 2001, 2007). The

studies, in addition, review vocabulary and the “power of the word” in spoken language

(Graves, 2006). The importance of providing students with the opportunity to grow in

their appreciation of the power of words, gain understanding of why some were used

instead of others, and add important, colorful, and useful words to their vocabularies was

to increase communication and engage in rich language activities of a second language

(Graves,2006). The research on the effects of vocabulary instruction and oral

communication skills provides ESL learners’ recognition of the word and awareness of

language in a challenge to enhance L2 learning. The Josephson Institute Center for

Youths and the Character Counts Program with the Department of Education of the

United States and PRDE promote vocabulary instruction strategies for language

acquisition to engage in ELL’s academic achievement. Students need direct and explicit

vocabulary to comprehend, motivate and feel engaged in essential vocabulary

components that promote language (JICY, 2010; NCLB, 2001; Review, 2009; PRDE,

2010; Circular Letter PRDE, 11-2011-2012).

Furthermore the development of vocabulary for oral communication through

character education provides effective academic achievement for senior high school

learners. The English Program Circular Letter (2011-2012), the Curriculum Framework

of the Puerto Rico Department of Education (2003) and Character Counts Program

(2010) distinguish the importance of ELL’s and the use of vocabulary instruction for oral

communication purposes.

17

In enriched vocabulary scenarios where natural and incidental vocabulary is

developed, a support of approaches and strategies encourages word knowledge to apply

to real life communicative situations and Second Language Acquisition (Stahl, 2004). In

the development of oral skills and vocabulary growth language performance is significant

for ELL’s progress.

The development of character education in vocabulary instruction and

communicative competence in high school seniors represent L2 development; the

awareness is a gain in language skills and attitudes according to students’ growth at

school. The increase of vocabulary was an important component related to

communicative competence and character education. The attention given to vocabulary

building was a diverse strategy to facilitate learning through behavioral values and

comprehension ability (NICHHD, 2000).

The main concern of this work was to study the learning of the English language

based on behavioral attitudes high school students present when achieving oral

communication and vocabulary instruction. The task to review the relevance of character

education through vocabulary instruction in the enhancement of oral communication in

high school English language learners is a promotion of language development. The task

needed to review behavioral attitudes and communication in high school ELL’s who were

future employees of the Island (Walsh, 2010).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this research was to investigate the improvement of behavioral

attitudes through vocabulary expansion for oral proficiency in high school seniors. The

research compared between the development of the integration of character education

18

through vocabulary building and the enrichment of communicative competence for ESL

learners in two groups. The scope of the study was within the progress of character

education and vocabulary instruction for the enrichment of ESL seniors’ language skills.

The adoption here was of the Character Counts Program by the Josephson Institute

Center for Youths (2002), with Beck (2001), Graves (2006), Hedge’s and Nation’s

(2008) definitions of vocabulary instruction, which they used to “refer to vocabulary

development that enriches communicative competence and learning of a L2 in students”.

The study proposed to research the development of character education through

vocabulary instruction in high school senior students of the public school system of

Puerto Rico using the Character Counts Values Survey prepared by the Josephson

Institute Center for Youths (JICY, 2005). It also proposed to determine if there was a

difference between the group exposed to the studying of character education and

vocabulary instruction for the development of communication skills and the group

exposed to traditional classroom teaching of ESL high school seniors. Furthermore, it

proposed to analyze if there was improvement between the scores obtained in the pre and

post-test research results of twelfth grade students’ and gain in key vocabulary.

Justification of the Study

The proposed study aimed to simultaneously enhance behavioral attitudes,

vocabulary instruction, and oral communication skills through the use of character values

in oral reading from a collection of Puerto Rican short stories. By replicating methods

previously implemented by the Josephson Center for Youths (2007), and Character

Counts Program (2010), this intervention aimed to enhance the development of English

in high school seniors vocabulary instruction and oral communication, both predictors in

19

language learning (Graves, 2006) using behavioral attitude enriched short stories. By

integrating character Pillars (Josephson Institute Center for Youths, 2010), vocabulary

words from “Boricuan Times “(2001), and oral communication skills to facilitate

language development and vocabulary gain, this intervention aimed to enhance the

development of high school Seniors behavioral expressions, vocabulary word gain and

communicative competence; to create positive character values similar to those reported

in the Character Counts Program (2010) and in the stories in “Boricuan Times” (2001).

By incorporating high school students direct classroom practices with the Character

Counts Program Pillars (2010), and the “Boricuan Times” short stories (2001) a link of

behavioral attitudes and social competence and practices were created.

This research has proven helpful for high school seniors for two reasons in particular.

First, it addressed important shortcomings highlighted by previous research. Regarding

the development of character education, previous research had dictated a need for

promoting students’ behavioral attitudes by implementing Character Count Pillars (CCP,

2010) in the classroom. Regarding vocabulary instruction for high school students, Beck

and McKeown (2002), Moje-Birr (2006), and Graves (2006) had dictated a need for

further research study outcomes related to students’ language skills as well as literacy

development. The results of the proposed intervention facilitated both behavior attitudes

and language growth by encouraging communication with practices previously

documented as effective in enhancing high school senior’s vocabulary and

communicative skills.

Second, this research had proven to be helpful for high school English language

learners such that its success offers English High School Programs effective means of

20

simultaneously enhancing both high school students literacy, behavioral attitudes, and

vocabulary skills, thus allowing time and resources to achieve educational goals. The

implementation of many successful character programs, such as the Josephson Institute

Center for Youths (JICY, 2002), and the Character Counts Program (Josephson Institute

Center for Youths-JICY; CCP, 2010) require efforts and resources. In contrast, variations

in reading methods had been shown effective when implemented within a number of

contexts (e.g. high school students classrooms, and students homes, Beck & Mckeown,

2002), within a varied timeframe (e.g. 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, Beck &

Mckeown, (2002), Josephson Institute Center for Youths (2002) and with language

limitations (NCLB Act; 2001).

Currently the Josephson Institute for Youths (JICY, 2002; CCP, 2010) initiative,

the NCLB Act (2001), and English Program Circular Letter (2013-2014) specifically aim

to enhance language, values and attitudinal skills simultaneously. The JICY Program

specifically targets adolescents ranging from kindergarten through grade 12 and requires

a substantial effort on facilitators’ parts, including teacher training , and ongoing student

activities for use in daily class readings and at home behavioral attitudes. The Character

Counts Program intervention was focused on increasing behavioral attitudes through the

use of vocabulary instruction in readings and communicative skills. No research had

been conducted to date to evaluate the efficacy of the CCP (JICY,2010) in Puerto Rico

Department of Education with vocabulary gain and enhancement of oral communication

skills in high school seniors’ English class (Circular Letter; 2013-2014; NCLB, 2001;

PRAAT, 2011).

21

Because the study evaluated the development of character education through

vocabulary enrichment in the enhancement of oral communication in high school seniors,

the current research intervention furthered the efforts of increasing oral communication

with the Character Counts Program (2010), the English Program Curriculum of the

Puerto Rico Department of Education (2007), and the No Child Left Behind Act (2001).

Because no previous intervention had merged behavioral attitudes with vocabulary

instruction and oral communication skills in the high school English classrooms, the

current intervention study added literature because it may effectively achieve the goals of

the English Program ;(2011-2012), the CCP; (2010), and the NCLB Act; (2001) in

communicating effectively in the English language, while minimizing required exposure

to resources and maximizing high school students vocabulary and language outcomes.

Research Questions

The research aimed at answering the following questions:

1. Are there significant differences between the results of the pre and post-tests of

students who are being exposed to character education through vocabulary

instruction and oral communication methodology (CEVIOC)?

2. Are there significant differences between the results of the pre and post-tests of

students who are being exposed to the control groups of the traditional

methodology?

3. Are there significant differences in vocabulary gain between the experimental and

control group?

4. Is there a significant relation between the scores of the pre and post-tests and the

students gain in key vocabulary?

22

5. Is there significant relation between oral communication enhancement and

vocabulary gain in experimental and control groups?

Considering the questions mentioned above, and based on the previous research

that proved a positive change that character education and vocabulary instruction have in

the enrichment of oral proficiency in ESL high school learners; the investigation followed

the theoretical framework related to the research.

Definition of Terms

In the process of facilitating comprehension of this research, the following

concepts were defined according to their use in the study:

1. Character Education: Values to enrich moral guidance in language learners in

specific styles of teaching (Lickona, 1991).

2. CCP: Character Counts Program integrated into the PRDE Curriculum

Program, designed for high school learners (PRDE: Tus Valores Cuentan,

2010).

3. Explicit Vocabulary Teaching: Formal teaching, direct, and intentional

vocabulary expansion which includes significant word gain, a variety of

vocabulary techniques to determine significance of words in context, the

analysis of the structure of the word through suffixes and affixes, and others

(NICHD, 2000; Graves, 2006).

4. Expressive Vocabulary: Lexicon students produce orally or written to express

ideas (NICHD, 2000; Pikulski & Templeton, 2004).

23

5. Indirect or Incidental Teaching of Vocabulary: The association of incidental

exposition of vocabulary which occurs spontaneously without direct

instruction, systematic or explicitly (Nagy & Anderson, 1985).

6. Vocabulary: The words individuals should know to communicate effectively

(Armbruster, Lehr and Osborn, 2001; Kamil, 2005).

7. Vocabulary Instruction: The teaching of and meaning of words (Shanahan,

2003).

8. Vocabulary Instruction: A direct teaching of words and word consciousness

(Graves, 2006).

9. Oral Communication: The ability to comprehend and produce all significant

speech acts based on cultural knowledge, linguistic, actionable, and strategic

competence (Celce-Murcia, 1995, 2007).

24

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This chapter presented the theoretical framework for the research study. The

research developed the theoretical perspectives of character education in high school

seniors, vocabulary instruction and oral communication.

Theoretical Perspectives of Character Education in High School Students

The development of character education in high school students was a complex

instructional approach (Billig, Jesse, & Grimley; 2008). Character Education had been

associated to multiple youth development areas including socio/emotions and academic

performance (Billig, Root, & Jesse, 2005). The United States Department of Education

funded Character Education in only three schools in 2002. In 2007 more than half of the

schools in the United States and Territories were using primary character education

approaches. Billig, Root, and Jesse (2005) and Billig and Root (2006) found character

education approaches in high school learners increased their academic knowledge in

writing, oral communication, reading, values, and educational engagement. Davidson

and Lickona (2005) conducted research assessment identifying effective character

education in 24 high schools. The research contributed with strategies to increase

character education in high school learners and their academic achievement. Arnett

(2004), a believer in character education promoted the instructional approach in students

as a “shaping of their lives” and lifelong awareness. The shaping of life in the student

included general standards like: listening/speaking, reading and writing. The standards

were developed according to essential elements in character and youth education with

particular elements such as: clear educational goals that required the application of

25

concepts, skills and academic content, the construction of one’s knowledge, students

engagement in educational tasks, and the assessment to enhance student learning and

skills (Billig of RMC Research, 2002; Furco, 2002).

In addition, Character Education in high school students was not a simple task

(Greene & Forster, 2003). High School students’ acquired vocabulary based on

educational standards. The standards developed through the No Child Left Behind Act

state the importance of academic achievement for ELL’s and their need to restructure to a

more constructivist and interdisciplinary culture of the 21st Century (Folse, 2002; New

Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce [NCSAW], 2006; NCLB, 2001).

Hence, Character Education was the integration of academic standards and skills

in the achievement of students’ thinking skills, ability to converse in another language,

and the ability to enhance vocabulary for academic progress (NCSAW, 2006). The

Character Education approach intensified in the NCLB (2001) promoting also

achievement in key academic areas; it reinforced aspects of student learning and

development in the acceptance of character values and integration in social and cultural

environments (Comer, 2004). The definition of Character Education established the

attitudes and beliefs students were committed to acquire in high schools. One of the

principles of character education were schools meaningful and challenging academic

curriculum that respected all learners, developed their character, and helped them succeed

(Character Education Principles Review, 2010). The use of moral values encouraged

debates, journals, and discussions in support of ESL learners’ academic achievement.

The main purpose of the approach was to integrate character education within the

educational field. Ginott stated that “reading, writing, and arithmetic were important only

26

if they served to make our children more humane” (p.51). Learning to integrate values

with vocabulary instruction and oral communication was not new, but a part of education

in ESL. The perspective of character education and vocabulary building increased in

research by Historians like Berkowitz, Biers and Leming (2006). The affirmation of

character education in language learning was an effort to encourage academic

achievement in fields such as vocabulary building for ESL students (Davidson, Lickona,

& Khmelkov, 2007) and the NCLB (2001) testing. As a result, students’ engagement in

character education with an academic mission to increase vocabulary instruction was part

of the learning process accomplished by seniors.

Theoretical Perspectives of Character Education and Communicative Competence

For many years studies have discussed the importance of oral communication

with character education. Oral language was a small subset when developing character

education in high school students (Cummins, 1994). Often, students who were

competent users of social language were also assumed to be able to function in academic

environments which required specific language skills.

Richards (1985, 2008), an advocate of oral communication, recognized that the

English language was a complex issue that included various elements such as: culture,

linguistics, and educational curriculum. The importance of effective program planning

and the use of methods to develop oral communication; made it eligible to consider

different aspects of character education in high school learners such as: motivation,

interest, learning styles, needs and abilities of the student. Lightbown and Spada (1999)

in previous investigations considered effective to learn to communicate orally in English

as a relation of factors such as: motivation, assessment skills, learning styles and learning

27

environment conducive to the teacher in the classroom. Freeman (2008) and Moss

(2000) stated the development of oral communication skills was to be taken into account

when establishing language as individual differences, (importance of what to learn, what

learning was, and who learners were for communicative skills) age, and motivation for

language learning, beliefs, emotional states, and personality of students. Jordan (2005)

gave emphasis to universal education, by affirming that teaching methods, and activities

applied to all learners regardless of needs and attention to diversity are required. In 2003,

John Hattie indicated the key to learning to communicate orally lies in the structure and

process of the mind and learning needs.

Other advocates of oral communication and character education, like Dudley

(2004), and Castellanos (2006) stressed the need to promote oral communication through

the activation of students learning process, language structures, and emotional

experiences that encouraged abilities to communicate in the foreign language. Schirmer,

Casbon, and Twiss (1996) also stated the importance of students’ behavioral attitude

when promoting language proficiency as one academically able to be developed in

ELL’s. The learner was capable of developing a positive attitude in the classroom when

clarity of instruction became an important aspect of communication for language

development.

According to Blum and Libbey (2004), school bonding, school climate, and

student engagement were connections that influenced a positive attachment to school, but

also to communication development in a second language. Blum (2004) mentioned

qualities that were consistent in students character education and oral communication:

1. Having a sense of belonging in the classroom

28

2. Liking the English language

3. Perceiving support and care for communication skills

4. Having friends to clarify doubts

5. Participating in extracurricular activities that encourage oral communication

Wong and Olsher (2000) and Marzano (2003) discussed the development of

relationships and consistent modeling of procedures or practices such as politeness

towards others and support for oral proficiency skills. The procedure was to be beneficial

in creating social and moral competence that built connectedness with students

communicative competence (Cohen, 2006). Maslow and Lowry (1998) in reference to

character education, classified human needs into various categories which were:

physiological, security, affiliation estimation, reporting and fulfillment by saying: “But

behavior in the human being was sometimes a defense, a way of concealing motives and

thoughts, as language can be a way of hiding your thoughts and preventing

communication” (p.226).

The purpose of communication development was well-known in the contribution

of oral proficiency in the English language among students; it stimulated the development

of the human beings’ personality, it motivated the learner, influenced learning the

communicative functions and removed deficiencies that did not allow the student to

speak. The procedures were part of the interest and motivation of L2 learning (English

Program Circular Letter; 10- 2011-2012; 8-2013-2014).

The English Program Curricular Framework (2003) recognized the motivation of

verbal communication in ELL’s as it stated, “the teaching and learning of English in

Puerto Rico must move away from the concept of a subtractive approach.” The

29

pedagogy must vigorously move forward towards an additive approach where the

learning of English as a second language was genuinely perceived as desirable additional

knowledge, which opened up new opportunities for learners, and was not seen as a socio

psychological or political threat (p.9).

The Puerto Rico Department of Education English Program Circular Letter

(PRDE, 2013) in review of the Curriculum Framework (2003), the Lesson Planning

Circular Letter (14-2013-2014), and the results from the PRAAT Scores (2012), also

stated the importance of motivating students in the English language in a globalizing

world, emphasizing on methods to be developed, and oral and communicative

approaches. The two approaches encouraged the learner to develop the following

language skills:

1. Phonetic language skills to practice oral communication

2. Learn the different sounds and letters that each symbol represents.

3. Reading skills that allow oral practice.

4. Oral Practice directed to provide a formation of correct pronunciation.

5. Order in listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills to be effective in

acquiring achievement of language skills.

6. Structure and modeled forms of grammar

7. Presentation of communicative forms giving emphasis to linguistic structures.

8. Oral pronunciation and fluency during spontaneous situations.

The Department of Education English Program Circular Letter (2012; 2013) goals

were to develop a human being capable of communicating effectively in the English

language. It also clarified ethical values, morals and attitudes through educational

30

experiences harmonizing learning styles as part of the learning process experience in the

language to allow language learning. For students to achieve communicative competence

it was necessary to:

a. Comprehend the language spoken.

b. Express ideas clearly in formal and informal conversations with correct grammar,

pronunciation and appropriate intonation.

c. Comprehension and interpretation of reading for enjoyment.

d. Make use of language communication mechanisms for different purposes and

contexts.

e. Write with clarity, precision and correction.

It was necessary for students to learn concepts and use English as they studied

challenging content of the language (Echevarria & Short, 2008). To enrich and stimulate

students development of specific language; skills were designed. Both oral

communication and character education allowed further opportunities for language

growth “and enabled learners to do useful things.” (Nakanishi, 2002). Many students

today value English and hold positive attitudes toward learning the language,

communicating in the language and socially operating in the L2 context (Camara, 2006;

Garcés 2004; Lockwood, 2004; Rodríguez, 2002). Rodríguez (2002) found that

bilingualism was highly valued as an educational goal by the participants and that there

was a great need to learn English in Puerto Rico. A most recent investigation of attitudes

was the one by Pizarro (2006), who studied the relation between attitudes and ethno

linguistic identity. The information disclosed students’ attitudes toward English and

31

those students who studied in Spanish as a first language in high school, who were

interested in learning English and thus have a positive attitude toward the L2 (p.89).

Research, furthermore, found that having a personal or professional goal for

learning English influenced the need and desire for native-like pronunciation (Bernaus,

Masgoret, Gardner, & Reyes, 2004; Nin, R.). Therefore, in addition to focusing on

pronunciation, it was the motivation to learn the L2 and values of linguistic achievement

that fulfilled language skills in the ESL student. It was also the desire to learn the

language and work harder at developing communicative skills because of the interest and

desire to appreciate the English language. Once the students understood how the

language worked, they focused on and built upon awareness in supporting

communication and behavioral attitudes.

High School Seniors and Attitudinal Behavior

It was a well-established belief among researchers that attitudinal behavior was

crucial in students’ learning. However, the concept of attitudinal behavior, proved

complex since it took discipline to arrive at reasonable understanding of the general

education to contribute to the understanding of ESL high school students and

appreciation of the English language (Dornyei, 2001).

Behavioral attitude orientations provided basis for action to take place in the

learner. Nevertheless, if behavioral attitude was not intense enough, action would never

take place (Chen, 2005). In a globalizing world where English became an international

language, and where a behavioral attitude factor emerged as “international posture,” it

was the integration with the global community rather than assimilation with native

speakers where the language was shaped.

32

Student’s commitment to behavioral attitude existed in the engagement and

motivation of critical elements in student’s success. The National Research Council

(2000) showed a direct link between levels of engagement and achievement in reading

and language skills. Students’ engagement in the field identified higher levels of

commitment as important predictors of standardized achievement tests, classroom

learning, and student persistence. Several studies from Hart and Fegley (1995), Heath

(1999), and Oyserman and Markus (1990) documented how the roles young people

played in any given context could shape their language use, and that language use

signaled realities to behavioral attitude. In situations where they were experienced, youth

acquired registers of “responsible teenagers” and “responsible students,” whereas young

people who did not know the vocabulary or the task at hand selected a quiet observing

role or strategies where they could learn the language. Teenage students who developed

a purpose in life were viewed as culturally valued competency that was linked to

participation in dialogues with others (Berk, 2009; Rogoff,1998). Consequently, Moran

(2009) conceived youth’s purpose of responsibility and behavior as a form of

“intrapersonal intelligence,” where purpose was not just a sense, but a demonstration of a

skill or ability with cognitive and behavioral components. For adolescents, purpose

involved accomplishments that did not make a difference in a person’s life, but impact

the world beyond the self (Damon, 2003; Bronk, 2005; Damon, 2008).

The development of behavioral attitudes in ESL learners was an essential part of

language learning. Students’ prior knowledge of the English language was a significant

factor in their current learning. A student who possessed communication skills acquired

language from informal conversations and grammar instruction from prior knowledge.

33

Language attitudes in the learner had an enormous effect on the second language learning

process. It was vital students examine and understand these attitudes. In particular, they

needed to understand that learning a language did not mean giving up the first language.

Rather, it involved adding interest to the second language. For example, when high

school students knew the second language increased language proficiency, relevance was

given to communicative settings in appropriate contexts of the language learning process

and awareness of the English language.

A recent extension of character education research considered theoretical

potential involving the study of L2 speakers of communication and attitudinal behavior in

high school learners (Macyntire, Baker, Clement, & Donovan, 2001, 2003). An

additional powerful variable was the learner’s tendencies to affiliate with linguistic and

psychological variables.

Even though, high school learners struggle with character related challenges, such

as academic responsibility, behaviors, and character attitude schools had not made a

strong case for the relevance of attitudinal behavior in academic learning (Davidson,

Lickona, & Khmelkov, 2007). Students affirmed the complimentary roles of

performance of behavior and moral character in educational learning. There were signs

that integrate moral behavior in learning that pursuit excellence and performance. Each

sign aligned with behavior attitudes in schools beginning in elementary level, moving

forward and identifying attitudes in middle school and hitting walls in high school

(Davidson, et al. 2007).

High school students were receptive at first when discussing behaviors and

observing character morals in academic learning. Students were to discover learning

34

needs, and work to achieve excellence. Booker Washington (2007) said “character was

power.” If students wanted to unlock the power of behavioral attitude, they must have

conceived the integration of doing things right in every school phase- from classroom

learning to extracurricular events. In this vision, the mission of attitudinal behavior was

to develop performance and moral character within learners.

Theoretical Perspectives of Vocabulary Development

The development of vocabulary was a significant challenge for the second

language learners’ academic success (Graves, 2000, Hiebert, & Kamil, 2005). Words

were complex and possessed various meanings, and at the same time, numerous in the

fostering of word consciousness. Vocabulary was not ever fully mastered; it was

something that expanded and deepened over the course of a lifetime (Kamil & Hiebert,

2005; Stahl, 2005). In addition, the acquisition of vocabulary was not a developed skill

with expectations and possibilities of complete dominance; it was the learning of

vocabulary as students met new and different contexts that allowed the word to fit into

the world (Stahl, 2005). The research of words indicated there were more words to be

learned and repetition of definitions of words, which did not imply necessarily, the

knowledge of meaning of the words. Vocabulary required background knowledge that

encompassed much more than words; it involved organizational procedures, even though

it was measured by dominance.

Words were used to develop vocabulary enrichment, that in certain circumstances

were not precise even in a dictionary (Phythian-Sense & Wagner, 2007). Definitions of

vocabulary words were limited to space in dictionaries, resulting in limitations for

learners. The development of vocabulary through dictionary use in class resulted in

35

different definitions that interfered with vocabulary comprehension and the meaning of

the words. Investigations by Stahl (2005) and Graves (2000) implied no single research

based method for vocabulary definitions existed. However, the National Reading Panel

(2000) indicated instruction of vocabulary word definition; it did not begin with a clear

definition, for giving a definition was the result of knowing what the word meant.

Vocabulary goes beyond definitional knowledge, it got students actively engaged

in using words, thinking about word meaning, and creating relationships with words.

Authors like Beck (2002) stated dictionary use about multiple word meanings, as well as

choosing the appropriate definition to fit the particular context were attempts to abstract

the meaning from actual context. Some definitions were not precise; did not establish

differences and were not necessary points of reference towards vocabulary association.

The uses of definitions were ambiguous and allowed misinterpretations of the word and

its use in specific situations. Moreover, vocabulary definitions did not allow the

integration of meanings to develop a specific interpretation of a word and its significance.

Also, in agreement with the National Reading Association (2008) in which Gilbert and

the Mid Continent Research for Education and Learning (2008) specified limitations in

vocabulary meanings accede to limitations in vision and future in vocabulary acquisition

of students’ background knowledge and assimilation of words and meanings (Rohn,

2005).

Vocabulary words were defined by particular styles and use of words more

complicated than the given definition. However, instruction had been seen more as

cyclical rather than sustained in language learning classrooms changing views upon

methods of use in the second language classroom (Manzo & Manzo, 2006). Reaching

36

effective significance of words, instead of definitions provided by dictionaries, was seen

in a variety of methods of vocabulary words, like in previous knowledge, in the

development of meanings and in instructional context and opportunities to interact with

words and meanings (NRP, 2000). Hence, vocabulary meanings were to be robust for

deeper knowledge of the word (Beck, Mckeown & Kukan; 2002).

A definition was not enough to determine words significance (Stahl, 2005).

Learning the meaning of a word from one encounter with the word in context was slim

(Nagy, Anderson & Herman; 1986). Daily experiences, life opportunities and vocabulary

learning increased word meaning in high school students. It was possible to gain

vocabulary knowledge in different contexts, even though information did not make sense,

knowledge about vocabulary words was relevant in the comprehension of words and

meanings (Nagy, Anderson & Herman, 1986). The knowledge of words was essential in

language ability development. The learning of vocabulary words implied awareness of

definitions and knowledge of how the word fit into the world. It was the expansion and

or depth over the course of life. Words strengthen a person’s communication ability to

consequently become a potential speaker (Nakamura, 2000; Stahl, 2005). The learning of

words was gradual, deep, and flexible in learning of vocabulary more than simple context

(Stahl,1999; Chall, 2000). On the other hand, it was not necessary for a student to know

all the meanings of words discussed and developed the knowledge domain, and context

areas (Biemiller & Slonim, 2001; Stahl, 1999, 2005).

Learning vocabulary involved knowledge of a word. What did knowing a word

mean? The question had been discussed in studies by Stahl (2003), Walsh (2003), and

Beck (2002). Vocabulary word meaning was envisioned in different forms. It could be

37

strongly founded by the root and academic content built up for multiple exposures and

comprehension and knowledge of a word (Stahl, 2003; Walsh, 2003). Furthermore, the

more words students knew, the more likely they were to learn new words easily

(Shefelbine, 1990).

Various studies about the topic of vocabulary words and meaning had provided

theory about the dimension of the word, grade level vocabulary, contexts and

measurements of meaning, and comprehension of words, for example: Chall and Jacobs

(2003) with the domain of vocabulary meaning in students, and the acquisition of

vocabulary words and meanings by Biemiller (2003). Fuch and Fuchs, (2002) measure in

growth of vocabulary knowledge and word meaning resemble other researchers like

Beck, Mckeown, and Kukan (2002) who presented views upon the effectiveness and

comprehension of learning of new words and meanings, Stahl (1999) gave significance to

words and meanings in the combination of several types of knowledge such as the

importance of knowing a word, not only its literal definition but also knowing its

relationship to other words, its connotation in different contexts and its power of

transformation into other forms.

The varied approaches used to develop word meaning and significance was not

only lexical, it did not know the proper meaning of a word. That was why, when

discussing vocabulary development, the levels of knowledge of the words and the varied

meanings and awareness were a continuum in learning.

Dale (1965) stated that word knowledge followed four stages of comprehension

of vocabulary meaning. The four stages presented by Dale were: (a) never seeing the

word, (b) hearing the word, but not knowing what it means, (c) recognizing it in its

38

context; it had something to do with, (d) knowing the word in one or several of its

meanings.

Stahl (1986, 1999) expanded Dale’s stages of comprehension by pointing out the

importance of knowledge of a word, the core meaning of a word, and how it changed

different contexts. The significance given to words and meanings was seen in

encountered repetition in contexts to promote three stages of learning word meaning by

Stahl and Fairbanks (1986). The stages were (a) the associative stage, (b) the

comprehension stage, (c) the productive stage. In the first stage, students established

association, even though they did not know the meaning of the word. In the

comprehension stage the students were capable of understanding the meaning and

management of information related to definition. In the final productive stage, the

student was able to use the word in context, apply its definition in personal context and

formulate sentences that developed understanding of the word.

Curtis (1987; 2005) indicated knowledge of words was a progressive and a

gradual process in vocabulary instruction. The meaning of words was developed also in

four stages like Dale’s work (1965): (a) Not ever seeing the word, (b) emergent

knowledge, (c) contextual knowledge of the word, (d) complete knowledge of word

meaning and use in different contexts. Similar to Dale’s (1965) and Curtis’ (1987, 2005)

reviewed about a word and meaning; Baumann and Graff (2003), presented four levels of

word knowledge such as: (a) never seeing the word, (b) seeing the word, not knowing

what it means, (c) seeing the word, and it had something to do with …;(d) knowing the

word and using it in reading, writing, listening skills.

39

In addition to previous studies about a word and its meaning, Beck, Mckeown,

and Kukan (2002) and Graves (2006) provided information about knowledge of words in

the following manner:

1. How useful is the word? Can you use the word in different situations or

contexts?

2. Is the word used frequently? Do you think the word can appear in different

texts?

3. Is the word meaning easy to explain in every language?

4. Does the word refer to something concrete or abstract?

5. Does the word have multiple meanings?

6. Does the word have a prefix, suffix, or identifiable root?

A variety of studies also analyzed the qualitative dimensions of knowledge a

person has about words. Some of the dimensions were: (a) general idea (knowledge to

define the word); (b) purpose (appropriate use of the word); (c) amplitude in form

(knowledge of multiple meanings of a word); (d) precision (ability to use the word

correctly and acknowledge incorrect use of the word); (e) availability (use given to a

word in speech); (f) accessibility (ability to access meaning of the word and use); and

(g) application, creation, value, and comprehension of word order, communicative

competence, language structure and word use (Beck, Mckeown, & Kukan, 2002).

On the other hand, Nagy and Scott (2000) emphasized the importance of five

basic aspects in learning the process of vocabulary growth to effectively assist such

growth of vocabulary word knowledge. The five complexities of word knowledge were:

growth, multi dimension, polysemy, interrelatedness, and heterogeneity.

40

Word learning was incremental, it proceeded by steps. Initially words were given

meanings; over time these meanings became refined until adulthood where the

integration of words was used to develop specific vocabulary knowledge. The second

aspect was similar to the first, in which there was no single dimension of word

knowledge to be considered. The ability to articulate one’s understanding, the flexibility

of word knowledge, and the appreciation of metaphors, analogy, word play, synonyms,

definitions and word expression were the depth of knowing a word. The third aspect,

polysemy was the development of multiple word meanings. The use of particular words

and the knowledge of the meaning were necessary for comprehension of use in sentences

and communicative situations. Interrelatedness was the fourth aspect of a word. The

knowledge of one word was the connection to other words. The last aspect related to

word and meaning was heterogeneity. It was to know the function of the word, the

knowledge acquired previously, and the use of the word in context. The aspect of word

learning was central to consider as one plans vocabulary instruction (Nagy & Scott,

2000).

A consensus in research reviewed the investigations of the components of

vocabulary instruction. The formulations found by Blachowicz, Fischer, and Watts-Taft

(2006); Graves (2006) and Nagy and Scott (2000) entailed three basic components

necessary for effective teaching of vocabulary words: (a) takes place in language- and

word rich environment and fosters what has been referred to as “word consciousness” (b)

included intentional teaching of selected words, providing multiple types of information

about each new word as well as opportunities for repeated exposure, use, and practice,

41

and (c) included teaching generative elements of words and word-learning strategies in

ways that give students the ability to learn new words independently.

Another view of components of vocabulary knowledge by Manyak (2007)

specified that existing knowledge and experiences for ESL students in vocabulary words

and meanings were important for: (a) gain of language; (b) use of socio-cultural

background, existing knowledge, and language skills to develop effective and precise

vocabulary,(c) literacy skills in one language assist English word growth in the other

language.

The development of vocabulary words and meaning in students’ language

according to Beck and Mckeown (2002, 2007), requires vocabulary development through

active learning. This form required motivation, analysis of a word and the connection to

be made by the learner in what was needed to be known of a word. Also the views of

Beck, Mckeown, and Kukan (2002) stated the need to define learning expected from

vocabulary words and meanings, according to the different characteristics presented in

words, the student’s grade level, and age. The characteristics were to be according to

teaching strategies and standards and expectations for high school students. The

expectations of these characteristics came from knowing the word and having a general

idea of its meaning or a superficial idea until deep knowledge was presented. The

possibility of knowing a word was reflected on the precision and students’ use of a word,

how quickly the word was understood and its use in different means (Beck, Mckeown, &

Kukan, 2002; Nagy & Scott, 2000). If the purpose of vocabulary meaning was for

students to achieve understanding and communicate effectively, vocabulary gain was to

be evaluated with words that developed proper word gain. If on the contrary, the purpose

42

was to obtain basic knowledge, various evaluative factors like pairing antonyms,

synonyms, and use of homonyms were numerous alternatives to develop effective

vocabulary meaning (Stahl, 2005).

Beck, Mckeown, and Kukan (2002), proposed teachers to place major

consideration on words’ usefulness and frequency of use, categorizing the purpose into

three major tiers: (a) meanings students were likely to know; (b) words that appeared

frequently in a wide variety of forms and in written and oral language of mature language

users, but meanings students were less likely to know; (c) words that rarely appeared in

text and appearances were limited to one or two occurrences, and because they were

limited to particular content, students could use in content of texts to establish their

meaning. Beck et al. (2002) developed awareness on tier 2 for students work with other

text words and were also able to use them in a range of oral communication activities.

The identification of vocabulary knowledge was determined by vocabulary

elements such as receptive and expressive or productive form. The expressive

vocabulary referred to vocabulary formed orally or written for expression by the student

(Kamil & Hiebert, 2005; NICHHD, 2000). The component is based on words derived

from the students’ previous knowledge and most frequently used. On the other hand,

receptive vocabulary referred to students’ knowledge of words when spoken to or read to

from a text, and when reading was completed by the student, it was words confronted

when listened or heard of by the learner (Stahl, 1999; Pikulski & Templeton, 2004).

Expressive vocabulary was said to be greater than receptive vocabulary, for receptive

vocabulary was not necessary to understand the message. Even though receptive

vocabulary was more abundant, than the expressive form, students recognized words

43

rarely used in conversations and related to meaning (NICHHD, 2000; Pikulski &

Templeton, 2004).

The words were of less comprehension and minor frequency in spontaneous

actions (Kamil & Hiebert, 2005). Students did not relate to the understanding of

meaning, the uncertainty of word characteristics, and distinctions in meanings that

applied to the proper use of a word (Kamil & Hiebert, 2005; Stahl, 2005).

The research developed by Kamil and Hiebert (2005) ,NICHHD (2000) and

Pikulski and Templeton (2004) evaluated knowledge of receptive vocabulary by a written

test with multiple choice words that used brief definitions, synonyms, antonyms, and

images representing the meaning of the key word. The test used did not evaluate insight

and knowledge of the words.

Importance of Vocabulary Development and Oral Communication

The National Reading Panel (2000) explained the process of vocabulary

expansion necessary for vocabulary development. The integration of the NCLB (2001)

examined the role of vocabulary words and oral communication in an effort to integrate

vocabulary words and communicative competence in significance of language gain. A

study by Francis and Simpson (2003) alleged that one of the first things teachers needed

to do to increase vocabulary acquisition was to incorporate oral expression activities.

Types of activities for oral communication included practicing pronunciation,

discussing the characteristics of the word, and discussing the definitions. After students

practiced oral activities with the words, created sentences with the confidence that they

thoroughly comprehended of the vocabulary word to communicate; they were prepared

to promote the idea of vocabulary skills in the acquisition of oral proficiency (Swain,

44

2005). Teachers should have also incorporated non- traditional types of materials for

use with the textbooks. Moreover, Stahl, and Fairbanks (1986), completed a meta-

analysis to examine the effects of vocabulary instruction. The conclusions specified an

increase in teaching of vocabulary meaning, oral communication and reading skills. A

student’s vocabulary predicted a certain level of speaking skills (Sternberg, 1987).

Stahl and Fairbanks (1986) found that the teaching of vocabulary word meanings and

speaking skills out of context did not help learning words and meanings effectively.

Listening comprehension depended upon lexical knowledge (vocabulary). The meaning

of words contributed therefore, to the meaning of sentences, which made up much of

oral communication. Much of vocabulary growth occurred as a result of oral

communication ensuring continuum in language development and word knowledge

(Beck & Mckeown, 2007).

Vocabulary Word Knowledge and Communicative Competence

Studies in the development of vocabulary words and word meanings suggested

learning in context for adolescents (Beck, Mckeown, Kukan, 2002; Francis & Simpson,

2003; Levin, Levin, Glasman, & Nordwall, 1992; Nagy & Scott, 2000; Pikulski &

Templeton, 2004; Stahl, 1999, 2005; Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986; Sternberg, 1987).

Beck, McKeown, and Kukan (2002) developed a relationship with vocabulary words in

semantic categories using words in meaningful contexts, and application of words in new

contexts. Beck, McKeown and Kukan (2002) concluded that both word learning and

comprehension were impacted by the semantic relatedness of words. Highlighted words

to understand passages were another factor in students learning and the ability to have

had frequent, meaningful encounters with words.

45

Other studies by Levin, Levin, Glasman, and Nordwall (1992) focused on specific

techniques for supporting word learning with adolescents. The authors examined the

keyword method, a mnemonic device, which had a solid research base in the

development of effective word meaning. The keyword method favored efficacy as a

definition remembering technique consistent and robust for adolescent learners. Semantic

mapping and semantic feature analysis also appeared to be effective in the learning of

new words that lie within a semantically related category of which students were familiar

according to Levin, et.al (1992). The technique was effective and promoted

comprehension with learners of diverse ages and ethnic backgrounds.

In another study Francis and Simpson (2003) investigated the weaknesses high

school students had in academic forms including oral communication skills. The

limitations were a direct reflection of students’ limited vocabularies. Research discussed

the significance of students’ prior knowledge, self learning strategies, dictionary use and

mnemonics in vocabulary words and meanings. The authors concluded that vocabulary

meanings and word learning were critical components in oral communication and

strategies for vocabulary growth.

Authors Nagy and Scott (2000) believed that vocabulary knowledge existed on a

continuum and that it involved more than memorizing a definition. Students learn new

words in a variety of contexts, including reading, writing, and oral communication. The

authors explored students’ knowledge of specific words and words in general that can be

applied in the encounter of new words. The study of word schema and its uses in high

school related to students ability to distinguish plausible vocabulary meanings, from less

plausible meanings. Nagy and Scott introduced five components of word knowledge: (a)

46

word learning was incremental by word meanings, learned gradually, internalizing of

meaning of words, (b) learning words at various levels of no knowledge to some

knowledge to a complete and thorough knowledge which served well in speaking and

writing, (c) different types of knowledge of a word like, oral and written language and

grammar usage, (d) the notion that learning a word meaning was inextricably related to

knowledge of other related words, (e) and word knowledge differed according to the type

of word, knowing the meaning of specific words. The study concluded therefore

knowledge of words according to meaning and relation of new words could be used in

high school according to levels of vocabulary used by teachers and subject matter.

Stenberg’s work (1987) stated the importance on effective vocabulary learning

through context. The words a student needed to know “were so great” that the encounter

of words and meanings occurred through various forms: (a) the many times words were

seen and not known, (b) the use of the word in different contexts, (c) the importance of a

word and use in context, (d) the words used in context that help decode meaning, (e)

quantity of unknown words in text, and (f) knowledge of word in previous context.

Stenberg also indicated the importance of students needs to learn vocabulary words and

decode meanings for daily life situations and levels of intelligence when continuing

studies in college.

The author gave relevance to students’ experiences when learning and working

with Dimagio and Powell (1983) in three processes formed when learning new words

from context: (a) selective encoding, (b) selective combination, and (c) selective

comparison. The three forms engaged the learner in identifying new words but in

different contexts like: spatial, temporal and functional knowledge. Stenberg’s guidance

47

in vocabulary word knowledge increased students’ perceptions about vocabulary learning

and definition when seeing the word in different forms.

High School Seniors’ Vocabulary Learning

The learning of vocabulary in high school students was seen in the process of

word knowledge, association, comprehension, and generation depending on the purpose

of vocabulary instruction (Stahl, 1999, 2005). Vocabulary in high school was important

for success. A strong vocabulary was given to high school students in benefit of tasks

like: oral communication, reading and listening skills (Polloway, Smith, & Miller, 2003).

The differences in a child’s vocabulary learning reflected a gap between the vocabulary

they need and the one they have to expand in their adolescence (Biemiller, 1999).

Students in adolescent levels experienced oral and literature exposition of vocabulary

words, while not all students from elementary level shared the same experiences; a lack

of oral communication skills and vocabulary words and meanings was observed in

secondary level ESL learners and disabled learners of the L2 (Biemiller, 1999).

Longitudinal studies (Cunningham, & Stanovich, 1997; Lee & Burkam, 2002) had

demonstrated that the size of an individual’s vocabulary knowledge was related not only

to these skills in the elementary grades, but to fluency and comprehension in high school

(Stahl & Nagy, 2006).

It established that students’ from lower socioeconomic levels had less knowledge

of words and concepts before they entered school (Hart & Risley, 1995; Hoff, 2003).

Vocabulary differentials lie at the heart of the achievement gap between poor and middle

income children. Therefore, a lack in higher levels was observed by standardized

vocabulary tests in receptive and expressive forms. The vocabulary measurement most

48

used in high school students was the Expressive Vocabulary Test (Dunn, 2007) that

developed oral proficiency and effectiveness in language learners.

As children get older, they would increasingly need academic vocabularies

(Spycher, 2009) that consisted of words and precise meanings that were often central to

content area understanding and different from general meanings of even the same terms

(Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2002; Neuman, 2006; Neuman & Celano, 2006). These

academic terms, and their specialized meanings posed the greatest challenges to children

who lacked a rich vocabulary and a network of concepts (Stahl & Nagy, 2006). The

validation of vocabulary knowledge was measured by two forms, the first, the Peabody

Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R; PPVT-IV) (Dunn & Dunn, 1997; Dunn &

Dunn, 2006). The test measured receptive vocabulary in scholastic aptitude, high and

low verbal abilities, speech or reading problems and assessment of verbal intelligence.

The second was the measurement test in vocabulary known as the Expressive Vocabulary

Test 2 (EVT-2) (Dunn, 2007). The test encouraged ELL’s improvement in vocabulary

gain. Stahl and Nagy (2006) investigated the importance of vocabulary and its

effectiveness in adolescents. Their work identified an increase of 2,000 to 3,000 words a

year in oral communication and reading vocabulary. A barrier found in the study

presented differences in reading and the language students heard spoken. Thus, attention

given to students’ vocabulary growth was crucial for verbal ability.

Verbal ability was one of the key components of vocabulary acquisition in the

learner. Words recognized by students in print were to match students’ oral vocabulary

in order to be understood. It was important for students’ who were developing oral

proficiency and learning of vocabulary in order to gain new knowledge of subject matter

49

(Nagy & Scott, 2000). The authors provided three practical applications in vocabulary

knowledge: (a) Direct and Indirect methods of vocabulary, direct instruction giving word

definitions and pre-teaching vocabulary, (b) repetition and multiple exposures to

vocabulary items (e.g. through speaking, listening and writing) were important. It was

important it be done with authentic learning tasks, (c) vocabulary learning involved

active engagement in tasks (e.g. learning new vocabulary by completing class projects),

(d) word definitions in texts and vocabulary development, (f) multiple methods, not

dependence on a single method, resulting in vocabulary improvement (Anderson &

Zhang,1995; Nagy & Scott, 2000).

Milton and Meara (1995) completed a Vocabulary Size Test ( Meara & Jones,

1988, 1990) demonstrating that significant vocabulary growth occurred if learning was in

the second language environment. The study showed that 53 students approached an

increase in proficiency of 2,500 words per year. The estimate was compared to the

estimates of first language growth in adolescence.

A second study by Hirsh and Nation (1992) presented vocabulary acquisition

through novel reading and vocabulary repetition. The aim of adolescence reading had a

tendency for writers to use simple vocabulary, repetition of words, and one topic

guideline. The revision provided favorable conditions for second language learners for

reading and oral communication skills.

A research study for middle school students’ addressed the impact of

comprehensive vocabulary, word knowledge, and appreciation (Baumann, Ware &

Edwards, 2007). The action study focused on Graves (2006) four basic components of

vocabulary instruction: providing rich and varied language experiences, teaching of

50

vocabulary words, teaching word learning strategies, and fostering word consciousness.

The findings provided benefits for low level grade students, integration of vocabulary

growth, and writing and reading enrichment for adolescent middle school learners.

On the other hand, recent studies indicated that even-though students presented

low verbal skills, they acquired vocabulary on an equal proportion and were superior to

students with verbal abilities. Elley (1989) determined students with low verbal abilities

in language learning achieved major gains in vocabulary words than those students with

high verbal abilities.

The Ideal Oral Proficiency Test developed by Ballard, Tighe, and Dalton (1980)

presented in a comparable study in 1998 four parts of English oral language proficiency:

(a) vocabulary, (b) comprehension, (c) syntax, and (d) verbal expression. The study

presented evidence of concurrent validity in oral language proficiency, vocabulary

knowledge and limited English speakers. The results also identified different measures in

oral language proficiency, vocabulary knowledge in synonyms and antonyms and

pronunciation in words, sentences and short sentences related to oral communication

skills.

Other studies observed vocabulary word gain in adolescents and the promotion of

motivation in vocabulary learning completed by Paul Nation (2006). The study

calculated the amount of vocabulary necessary to function in an ESL classroom using a

98% coverage figure of words (Nation & Hu, 2000). Nation’s work identified the need

of vocabulary and the mastering of words more than what is thought for grade level. A

highlight in the study presented low frequency vocabulary as unknown and mid

51

frequency vocabulary (extreme levels of vocabulary) as a necessity in learners’

vocabulary gain and word meaning.

August, Carole, Dressler, and Snow (2008) in reference to Beck’s, and

Mckeown’s (2002) work on word meaning in specific contexts, report a yearlong teacher

action study that addressed the impact of vocabulary comprehension in students’ word

knowledge and appreciation. The study used Graves’ (2006) four components of

vocabulary instruction: providing rich and varied language experiences, teaching of

individual words, teaching word learning strategies, and fostering word consciousness

that developed students’ knowledge of word meaning and vocabulary building. The

results of the study marked signs of improvement and growth in the integration of

vocabulary development in adolescents’ language acquisition.

Biemiller and Boote (2006) indicated in a similar study that knowledge on typical

language acquisition, in students with low verbal capacity learned at the same pace as

those with high verbal capacity, even though learners did not have the same

developmental lexicon and were at the same level. To reduce students’ risks of word

knowledge and language development, Biemiller and Boote (2006) and the National

Reading Panel (2000) promised practices in the direct instruction approach with

vocabulary being taught through modeling and guided practice (Carnine, Silbert,

Kame'enui, & Tarver, 2010; Marzano & Marzano, 1988; National Reading Panel, 2000).

Biemiller and Boote (2006), Carnine , Silbert, Kame enui, and Tarver (2010) and

Nagy (2006) suggested vocabulary provided in context improved understanding of

words. Also, Nagy (2006) indicated in studies the importance of providing students’ with

intensive and rich vocabulary instruction required giving students definitional and

52

contextual information and opportunities to process information and apply it in ways that

required creativity and connections with their existing knowledge.

According to Bromley (2007), an advocate in vocabulary gain and word meaning,

knowledge of vocabulary acquisition stems from oral communication. The information

developed vocabulary building and facilitation of unfamiliar words and meanings.

Knowledge of specific terms was crucial in the understanding of vocabulary

words and meanings. Stahl (1999, 2005) provided propositions in support of vocabulary

building for high school learners in effort to enhance word recognition and meaning. The

principal guidelines in teaching vocabulary were:

1. Introduction and activation of word meanings. The goals were seen in the

promotion of word knowledge, skills with explicit instruction and discussion for further

connections between new information and prior knowledge. The guideline emphasized

vocabulary meaning making connections instead of one single identity.

2. Presentation of words in a variety of contexts. Vocabulary words in context and

feedback allowed success in language gain. The application of words in various contexts

facilitated vocabulary building in the adolescent.

3. Multiple provisions to expand and learn new meanings. The discussion of word

relation encouraged vocabulary expansion and challenge in learners’ enhancement of

meanings and word recognition.

4. Promotion of active and generative processing. Improvement of sentence writing

is fundamental in word choice and vocabulary selection. The process of organization of

ideas and selection of words according to meaning provide vocabulary enrichment in

writing skills.

53

5. Providing ongoing assessment and communication about progress. The learning

difficulties ESL students’ present in daily surroundings indicated the benefits of the

incorporation of vocabulary intervention. The identity of specific vocabulary areas for

improvement was essential in the acquisition of assessment skills and oral

communication activities for student vocabulary gain.

The integration of Stahl’s guidelines was also seen in the National Reading

Panel’s report (2000) of vocabulary instruction in eight findings that provided foundation

for rich vocabulary instruction. These findings were:

1. Provide direct instruction of vocabulary words for a specific text. Anderson and

Nagy (1991) pointed out “there were precise words students’ may had needed to know in

order to comprehend particular lessons or subject matter.”

2. Repetition and multiple exposures to vocabulary items were important. Stahl

(2005) cautioned against “mere repetition or drill of the word,” emphasizing that

vocabulary instruction should have provided students with opportunities to encounter

words repeatedly and in a variety of contexts.

3. Vocabulary words should be those the learner found useful in many contexts.

Instruction of high-frequency words known and used by mature language users could add

productively to an individual’s language ability (Beck, McKeown, & Kucan, 2002).

Research suggested that vocabulary learning follows a developmental trajectory

(Biemiller, 2001).

4. Vocabulary tasks should be restructured as necessary. “Once students knew what

was expected of them in a vocabulary task, they often learned rapidly” (Kamil, 2004).

54

5. Vocabulary learning was effective when it entailed active engagement that went

beyond definitional knowledge. Stahl and Kapinus (2001) stated, “When adolescents

‘knew’ a word, they not only knew the word’s definition and its logical relationship with

other words, they also knew how the word functioned in different contexts.

6. Computer technology could be used effectively to help teach vocabulary.

Encouragement existed but relatively few specific instructional applications could be

gleaned from the research (NICHD, 2000).

7. Vocabulary could be acquired through incidental learning. Reading volume was

very important in terms of long-term vocabulary development (Cunningham &

Stanovich, 1998). In later work, Cunningham (2005) further recommended structured

read-alouds, discussion sessions and independent reading experiences at school and home

to encourage vocabulary growth in students.

8. Dependence on a single vocabulary instruction method did not result in optimal

learning (NICHD, 2000).

Vocabulary Instruction and Oral Communication

Much research had been conducted on the typical sequence of word recognition

and communication proficiency (Biemiller, 2005; Biemiller & Slonim, 2001). Research

exposed the typical rate at which students’ acquired words (Biemiller & Slonim, 2001).

Of course, this did not mean students had the same developmental lexicon, just as it was

not expected for students to have the same oral skills. But knowing what was typical

could bring focus on vocabulary instruction and communication proficiency in

adolescence.

55

Two essential studies provided information necessary in the comprehension of

word recognition and oral communication. The first was a report by the National

Reading Panel (NRP, 2000) establishing vocabulary as an essential component in

students’ learning, development practices to comply with word recognition and

integration in oral communication settings. There were significant amounts of

vocabulary skills in the development of communicative competence and academic

growth in the research to sustain academic growth in higher grade levels for investigation

focused on elementary grade students’ (Beck et al, 2002; Biemiller, 2005; Carnine,

Silbert, Kame’ enui & Tarver, 2010; NRP, 2000).

The second study by Bromley (2007) discussed the improvement of word

recognition in middle and secondary grades as a principle contributor in fluency,

comprehension, and academic achievement. Some of the research evidenced vocabulary

gain and positive communication skills in ESL (Bromley, 2007). The research built

students’ independent word learning strategies to empower them for lifelong learning.

The two studies did not analyze the association of word recognition and oral

communication, but did investigate word learning in communicative competency and

effective instruction. Throughout the two studies the discussion of vocabulary

enrichment and word recognition encouraged students to increase vocabulary knowledge

in communicative settings in language growth.

Vocabulary Development and Oral Reading of Short Stories

The significance of oral reading in the improvement of communicative

competence had one purpose. It was to develop communicative competence in the

progress of word gain in students’ English documented in research studies (Carver, 1990;

56

Chomsky, 1976; Fischer, 1999; Lieb & Bilhart, 1982; NRP, 2000; Savignon, 1983). The

benefits in vocabulary development and oral reading of short stories for adolescents were:

(a) attention on meaning of text, (b) connections with words and meanings, (c) practice in

oral reading fluency, (d) promotion in comprehension and communication skills, (e)

extensive and repetitive exposures to words in reading and speaking, (f) strength in work

knowledge and recognition, (g) strong print in vocabulary recognition above grade level,

(g) students’ prior knowledge, (h) capacity to solve problems and, (i) basic reading

elements.

Another important element in oral reading of short stories was the increase of

vocabulary knowledge in adolescents. Oral reading in middle and secondary schools was

a challenge in adolescents’ vocabulary and fluency skills. It was an increase in students’

maturity and within grade levels, necessary for oral reading fluency performances

(Rasinski, Padak, Mckeon, Wilfong, Friedauer & Heim; 2005) The study in oral reading

provided students’ with fluency and vocabulary gains, that were not typically used in

middle and high school for readings of higher grade levels (Rasinski, 2003)

Dowhower (1994), Kuhn and Stahl(2000), NICHD (2000), and Rasinski and

Hoffman (2003) highlighted the significance in repeated reading drills in the emphasis of

oral reading fluency and vocabulary enrichment. Students increased fluency and

comprehension in repeated or practiced passages. Also, research identified importance of

students’ gain in knowledge by listening simultaneously to another person’s previous

recorded readings and assistance to teachers in classroom hence, learners’ awareness in

fluency and vocabulary.

57

An additional study by Goering and Baker (2010) examined the repetition of oral

readings in secondary level students. The authors found participation in research that

engaged learners in the process of reading, increased in fluency, and comprehension

skills.

Mckenna and Stahl (2003) confirmed reading in middle and secondary levels as

an enriched form to gain vocabulary and become proficient readers and achieve word

recognition. The readings for the grade levels were to be enhanced with word

recognition, higher levels of vocabulary and a challenge in communicative skills for ESL

learners. Also teachers focused on the three based literacy strategies like: vocabulary

development, understanding of text structures, and recognition and analysis of discourse

features in support of adolescent literacy for ELL’s. Students needed assistance in

learning the concepts and important terms of words to continue with word recognition

and vocabulary knowledge (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2000). Even though, studies found

vocabulary development enrichment in students’ language, the organization of concepts

and strategies in learning new words, was not sufficient for most students’ because of the

meanings they took away from their readings. These readings were not profound and

enduring in the learner, nor were they helping gain strategies for becoming independent

word learners in ESL (Shostak, 2002).

In other investigations, feedback of vocabulary acquisition through reading skills

for middle and secondary students developed and changed views of word recognition

(Beck et al, 2000; Graves, 2000; Kamil, 2004; National Reading Panel, 2000; Scott &

Nagy, 2004; Stahl, 2005). The studies revealed measures of word meaning

improvements with reading comprehension skills and in depth learning of new words in

58

the acquisition of vocabulary (McGuinness, 2000). Also oral communication developed

interests in students’ learning when use of new vocabulary words were developed in real

conversations with peers to expand the best and deepest understanding and learning of

reading (Davis, 2002). In addition to prior knowledge, the learning of new words

strengthened vocabulary development and independent skills in learning tasks (Boreman,

Dole, Kamil, Kral, Salinger, & Torgesen; 2008).

The importance given to investigations of word recognition in reading and

communicative competence had expanded for years. Biemiller and Slonim (2005) found

word recognition in elementary levels expanding further on in fluent word recognition

skills and average or greater vocabulary. Both did not ensure reading comprehension, but

the absence of either insured low level reading comprehension, hence, limitations in word

recognition. In many studies the exposure of various words guaranteed recognition and

oral language efficacy. A concurrent vocabulary was a stronger predictor of reading

comprehension in higher grades emphasizing repetition drills in reading of three and four

times in learners (Biemiller, 2005; Scarborough & Brady, 2002; Storch & Whitehurst,

2002). ). A number of these investigations studied only one repetition of reading for

word recognition forming assumptions in relation to oral reading repetition and word

knowledge (Biemiller, 2003; Brabham & Lynch-Brown, 2002; Elley, 1989; Penno,

Wilkinson, and Moore, 2002; Robbins & Ehri, 1994; Senechal & Cornell, 1993). Studies

recognized up to four oral repetition drills of reading to increase word recognition

(Biemiller & Boote, 2006). Even though there were no repetition drills students engaged

in word recognition by merely using a strategy given by teachers to increase vocabulary

knowledge (Pressley, 1998).

59

Several researchers criticized studies in oral repetition of readings for students’

boredom in listening to the story three or four times did not specify automatic word

recognition (Beck & Mckeown, 2007; Biemiller, 2004; Penno, 2002). Studies

demonstrated increase in word recognition when students selected readings, in favor of

vocabulary enrichment and language (NICHHD, 2000).

Authors Biemiller (2005) and Graves (2006, 2008) in recent studies provided

characteristics of oral readings with adolescents to be effective choices in the acquisition

of word recognition and communication skills. Some of the alternatives given were: (a)

interaction between the reader and receivers of information, (b) oral repetition of

readings,(c) focus on words in context given to adolescents in middle and secondary

levels, (d) a proficient reader with fluency, intonation, vivid expressions and tone, (e)

selection of readings according to grade level and of character values that prompt the

learners interest in acquiring words. The characteristics promoted listening,

comprehension and communication skills in second language learners. Biemiller and

Graves (2005, 2006, 2008) recommended in their work activities encouraged interests in

vocabulary enrichment in students with small vocabularies.

The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHHD,

2000) singled out problems teachers faced in the integration of vocabulary instruction in

the secondary level curriculum and stated guidelines to increase word recognition in

students. According to the NICHHD, the barriers in word recognition and fluency in

language were yet to be reviewed in learners. The National Institute acknowledged

barriers in the development of students’ vocabulary instruction in the integration of

reading comprehension and grasp in meanings. Graves (2006) recognized the importance

60

of studying word learning and strategies to fit into adolescent learners’ interests in

achieving vocabulary gain and efficient communication skills; although, teachers

identified various strategies to put word recognition into practice, a limitation in two or

three activities was to be focused on for effectiveness (Graves, 2008).

The research developed by Graves (2008) provided rich and varied words to

ELL’s who were essential in the achievement of vocabulary improvement and oral

communication skills in secondary grades. The instruction and deliberate vocabulary for

middle and secondary level students presented interactive teaching, and learning

multifaceted programs in word acquisition and development of rich vocabularies (Graves,

2006, 2008). The instruction of vocabulary was built on the following needs learners of

intermediate level had in word recognition: (a) teaching of words already in their oral

vocabularies, (b) teaching new labels for known concepts, (c) teaching of words for new

concepts and, (d) clarifying and enriching the meanings of already known words. These

needs were considered pertinent for the research and reviews.

The study was completed in an authentic classroom environment, according to

daily routine activities and grade level expectations. The procedure was developed in a

verbal communication setting with vocabulary building for word recognition, and short

story oral readings.

Oral Reading and Communicative Competence

The relationship between oral reading and oral communication were situations

that happened when a student reads a great deal (Day & Barnford, 2004). Oral fluency

was one of those positive effects in the development of oral reading and in extension of

communicative competence. Communicative competence enables students to convey,

61

interpret messages and negotiate meanings interpersonally with specific context (Hymes,

1972). Savignon, (1983), noted communicative competence as relative, not absolute, and

a dependent on students of language acquisition. Furthermore, communicative

competence was characterized by attention given to language use and practice, fluency,

accuracy, authentic language and context, and the need to apply the language in real

communication settings for ELL’s. The information above highlighted communicative

competence as: (a) teaching of grammar, discourse and vocabulary, (b) demands in

teaching how to use the language in accordance with its function and social needs, (c)

teaching of pronunciation, (d) learners fluent as well as accurate in using the language,

(e) learners exposed to authentic language and context and, (f) learners able to

communicate in the real world. As stated, communicative competence was broad and

related to knowledge.

A review of literature revealed oral reading instruction in high school students

was facing an increased need for a high degree in literacy skills, including the capacity to

comprehend texts (National Assessment of Educational Progress [NAEP], 2002).

Despite the problems related to adolescents and literacy, the Reading of the Arts Project -

RAND report, researchers Snow and Biancarosa (2003), IRA (2001), and Reading

Research and Instruction Association (2003) stressed the knowledge people had about

reading comprehension, good decoders, fluency in readers that became good

comprehenders, and language knowledge in connection with social and cultural

components to succeed in oral reading skills. The National Reading Panel (2000)

conducted a meta-analysis in relation to comprehension of text to identify various areas

of knowledge: (a) phonemic awareness (the ability to manipulate sounds in oral language

62

(b) phonics (knowledge of letters and sounds, (c) fluency (reading accompanied by

feedback to correct errors and, (d) vocabulary (knowledge of words).

Character and self-accuracy were other concepts that surfaced as an important

focus in adolescents, their word recognition and reading comprehension. Character

motivation was defined as values and beliefs with regard to topics, processes and

outcomes that an individual possessed (CCP, 2004, 2010; Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000;

Research Measurement Corporation, 2007). The review also presented Curtis and

Longo’s (1999, 2004) research identifying students’ difficulties in identifying words.

The study in addition denoted problems from phonological aspects of word analysis and

adolescents tendency to abandon the process of trying to read a word and (instead)

guessing it in context. In addition Curtis and Longo (1999; 2004) provided suggestions

for students’ struggles with word identification. These suggestions were:

1. Systematic, explicit and direct instruction in the production of results.

2. High frequency sound spelling relationships and words focus of instruction.

3. Instruction to be reflective.

4. Opportunities to practice identification of words in context and frequency.

5. Connections among word analysis, word recognition and semantic access were

to be emphasized.

Adolescents in middle and high school grades with basic reading skills had

opportunities to develop reading comprehension skills with appropriate motivation and

access age appropriate materials. The National Reading Panel (NICHHD, 2000)

recommended pre teaching of vocabulary as an important pathway to reading

comprehension. Without word knowledge and the strategies to analyze words, students

63

were not able to accomplish the goal of making meaning from contexts. Knowledge of

words revealed students’ knowledge of the subject. Curtis (2004) adjoined focus of free

spelling to words in context, connections in phonics, phonemic awareness, word analysis,

word recognition, and semantic awareness. Research based instruction strategies

according to Curtis addressed the alphabetic principle of high school learners in word

recognition.

The comprehension of word strategies promoted reading and communication

skills in students. Once learned, a student used and re used word strategies when they

encountered barriers to understand diverse texts and communication efficiency.

Furthermore, adolescents made use of text beyond literal means to express thoughts

(Moore, 1999; Snow, 2002; Deschler, Schumaker, &Woodruff, 2004).

In brief, oral reading and communicative competence promoted oral

communication, and development of word recognition (Snow, 2002). Oral reading and

guided reading helped fluency, increase repetition, gain in vocabulary and support of

active engagements in learning to continue prior knowledge and strategy instruction for

effective communication (National Assessment of Educational Process (NAEP, 2002).

Teaching and Learning of Vocabulary

The references high school students used to learn word recognition varied

according to the stages of development in communicative settings presented in every day

classrooms. In high school students, vocabulary thus played an interesting role in word

recognition as a continual process and non-development in nature (Biemiller & Boote,

2006; NRP, 2000). In high school, vocabulary gain was presented as an excellent

resource in the development of communication and reading skills (one may understand a

64

word if spoken, but not when read) (Biemiller, 2004; Kamil & Hiebert, 2005; Stahl &

Dougherty, 2004). Furthermore, when students were in higher levels of study,

achievement was observed under students’ abilities to grasp target instruction (Kamil &

Hiebert, 2005). Secondary level students’ learned new words by direct instruction and

explicit approaches. Time was saved in the process and the student was able to make

more connections with words (Bromley, 2007; Hemmings, 2000; Marzano & Marzano,

2004).

The increase in lexicons was the opportunity to introduce vocabulary instruction.

The learning of words was a continuum, giving learners the opportunity to process word

recognition and connect with prior knowledge (Biemiller & Boote, 2006). Studies in

word recognition had not been able to determine a specific amount of words to be known

each year, yet in the secondary level students continued to add 1,000 to 1,500 words each

year (Biemiller & Slonim, 2001; Nation, 2000; National Reading Panel, 2000; Stahl,

2005). Laufner (1997) stated a specific amount of 5,000 vocabulary words were needed

for academic purposes. Nation (2001) argued that at least 95% of vocabulary in reading

needed to be known to gain adequate understanding of text, identifying 1000 words per

year. In addition, Rasinksi (2001) identified 1,000 to 4,000 words learned by a student in

a year. This meant students learned vocabulary according to homes, social environment,

and cultural surroundings in addition to formal settings (Hart & Risely, 1995; Nagy &

Scott, 2000).

Vocabulary was also learned in schools, allowing explicit learning to be

developed. There were various studies that presented explicit instruction in secondary

levels at school (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2009). The investigations stated vocabulary

65

learning also occurred implicitly in language art classrooms as well as content area

classrooms, especially with regard to incidental word learning through context. Research

studies showed that upper grade students across ability levels acquired vocabulary

incidentally through reading and listening (Nagy & Herman, 1987; Sternberg, 1987). On

the other hand, Nation (2001) recognized that from 1000 to 1500 words known and

taught in school by explicit learning; many students learned them incidentally. The

learning of vocabulary words in school was not a contribution of explicit and intentional

word knowledge, but only a part of the learners’ instruction (United States Department of

Education, 2008). Therefore, practitioners stated the relevance of teaching vocabulary,

and the dependence of different instructional goals that were put into practice as critical

for vocabulary acquisition that, in turn, lead to maintenance and generalization. In

addition a specific demand was set for vocabulary development as students’ progressed in

grades. As Moats (2001) stated, it was clear that rich oral language environments had

been created in promotion of vocabulary words (Beck & McKeown, 2000; NRP, 2000;

Moats, 2001).

Repeated Exposure of Vocabulary Words

Studies found vocabulary words were learned only after they appeared several

times. Researchers estimated that it took about 17 times for students to learn a new word.

Exposure of words was effective if they appeared over an extended period of time. There

were different forms of repeated exposure of words in the development of recognition

(Kamil, Boreman, Dole, Kral, Salinger, & Torgeson, 2008). The exposures were in:

1. Sufficient opportunities to use vocabulary in a variety of contexts.

2. Variety of strategies to make them independent vocabulary learners.

66

3. Variance in responses to different vocabulary instruction strategies.

4. Importance of words for the adolescent learner.

This model demonstrated appropriateness in adolescents learning and academic

purposes ( Kamil et al, 2008). The use of oral communication also presented word

recognition in repeated oral drills for adolescent learners to be motivated and encouraged

in word knowledge (Butler & Hakuta, 2006; Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986).

Stahl, Butler, and Hakuta (2005, 2006) restated the importance of word

recognition in adolescents’ oral reading. Investigators indicated words learned by

students contributed to explicit and direct learning, but also to incidental learning of

vocabulary words since oral reading allowed repetition of words to enhance students’

prior knowledge skills and engagement in language development (Stahl, 2005, Graves,

2006).

The importance of creating a print rich environment of vocabulary was provided

by opportunities of words heard and recognized meaning. The listening of oral readings

permitted students to engage in natural settings in class environments. Use of diverse

vocabulary helped students learn more words in detection of incremental learning (Stahl,

1999, 2005). Vocabulary at early stages allowed students in middle and secondary levels

to make contact with teachers and was necessary for word knowledge to expand over the

years (CCP, 2010; Graves, 2006; National Reading Panel, 2000; NCLB, 2001; Stahl,

2005). In a verbal and linguistic environment words were introduced by curriculum

standards of the secondary level in accordance to students’ language, interest, knowledge,

word recognition, and motivation (Beck et al. 2002; Butler & Hakuta, 2006; Stahl, 2005).

67

One of the primary goals of vocabulary development in middle and secondary

grades was to increase the depth of word knowledge in repetition of words. Vocabulary

instruction insured a deep level of word understanding that permitted them to apply this

knowledge to real life situations. Stahl’s work (1986, 1999, & 2005) with vocabulary

made the distinction with definitional and contextual word knowledge in relation to word

recognition. The use of word knowledge offered students’ opportunities to identify

words and meanings. The definitional knowledge was when the student knew a

dictionary meaning for the word. The contextual meaning was when students gained

meaning from the context whether it was from a picture or graph, an example, an

explanatory paragraph or students’ background knowledge of the topic. Giving students

tools to expand word recognition allowed recognition and use of words in repertoire

(Baumann & Boland, 2004; Graves, 2004).

In previous studies, Brown’s (2008) measured of word knowledge showed gains

to be small and to decay over time; for word knowledge to be lasting, learners needed to

hear the word 30 times or more in recognition of meaning according to context. The

extent to which vocabulary was repeated in oral communication relied on teacher talk and

short conversations with vocabulary words.

In two recent studies, investigations identified word recognition through beliefs

and motivation contexts in reading and communicative skills. In the first study, Birr

(2006) investigated adolescents’ vocabulary knowledge and word recognition throughout

motivation contexts, motivation practices and role of adolescent literacy in practices and

development. The study in middle and high school settings discussed the roles that

different contexts (such as the demanded by the academic content areas) played in

68

motivating youths persisted in language development. The study identified motivation

and development as both successful in language and integration of literacy and verbal

skills a source for adolescents’ word gain. Finding adolescent development as a

multistage and recursive process in which youth moved back and forth among different

levels of context, own background experiences and knowledge (Alexander, 2003). These

dynamic stages included acclimation, competence, and proficiency. Alexander described

the use of stages in youths as highly competent in linguistic knowledge and sufficient

body of prior experience. The motivation and word knowledge in adolescents gave

opportunities to learners in literacy development and oral communication skills to expand

values in learners and awareness of word recognition in academic context. The review in

adolescent learners presented questions in relation to literacy abilities, access to context

words, and interventions in secondary school teaching practices that supported fluency

and content in vocabulary instruction.

In other words the study revealed lack in classroom environments, motivation in

adolescents and struggles in academic and vocabulary domain. In the second study,

Moore, Bean and Birdyshaw (1999) emphasized three areas of instruction: (1) word

study, fluency and, vocabulary, (2) comprehension, and (3) motivation and engagement.

The research showed that when values and word recognition were implemented youths

succeeded (Edmonds, 2009 and Roberts, 2008). The applied research used the Edge

language arts program in secondary students. Throughout the innovative program

multiple opportunities were provided in word study and vocabulary development. Edge

explicitly taught academic vocabulary and strategies for learning such words. The

learning of vocabulary strategies built consciousness as well as motivation in

69

development of vocabulary incidentally. The Edge program also provided vocabulary

routines, targeted vocabulary words in context and reinforcement of understandings

through various experiences. It also integrated reading fluency routines as time repeated

readings, coach links (feedback and record keeping of students’ oral reading) and re-

teaching opportunities in the assessment of academic efforts. In the second step of the

research, comprehension was developed within the Edge program by a seven step

strategy plan. The seven strategies developing fluency in language proficiency were:

1. Plan and Monitor

2. Determine Importance

3. Ask Questions

4. Make Inferences

5. Make Connections

6. Synthesize

7. Visualize

These strategies helped the students respond to what was being emphasized and

developed according to contexts. The third step in the research presented students’

beliefs in what they learned and courage to apply strategies and enrich their word study,

vocabulary, comprehension and motivation in word recognition ,and reading skills with

optimistic outcomes (Edmonds et al. 2009; Fagella-Ruby & Deschler, 2008, Moore &

Smith, 2009; Roberts, 2008).

The results of the two studies displayed vocabulary knowledge, values and

communication skills in high school students, that constituted a well- planned acquisition

of vocabulary with the use of various strategies integrated by the teacher in an ELL

70

environment. Even, when vocabulary skills were reviewed for word recognition, students

gained motivation in acquiring vocabulary enrichment. Also, incidental vocabulary

learning demonstrated to be relatively stable in English language learners’.

The Organization of Alliance for Excellent Education presented a report of

“Every Child a Graduate: The Adolescent and Reading for the 21st Century” (2003),

which differed from Moore, Smith’s and Birr’s argument (1999, 2003), which was about

vocabulary instruction, comprehension and motivation. Kamil (2003) indicated that

students, who received intensive focused literacy and motivation belief, graduated from

high school. Despite these findings, few high school students had comprehension in

vocabulary instruction and motivational beliefs. The article stated that reading skills had

not increased in the past 30 years, identifying students reading at 25 % below level and

interests in vocabulary gain (Kamil, 2003). Along with this report, studies by Moore and

Smith were taken into consideration to determine the impact of factors like: fluency,

communication skills, motivation, vocabulary knowledge, and literacy instruction (Moore

& Smith, 2003). The use of vocabulary words to recognize meaning and prior knowledge

in high school students was evidenced in the report “Every Child a Graduate” to

determine students needs in higher levels, vocabulary recognition, and motivation skills.

After analyzing the results, reports showed that teachers affected students’ achievement

in readings and investments that were to be made to encourage learners to read from early

age (Beck et al, 2001).

Long, Monoi, Harper, Knoblauch and Murphy (2007) evaluated the effects of

motivation values, academic achievement and word recognition from middle to high

school learners. The study identified middle school students entering high school with an

71

increase in stress levels, decreased self esteem (Alvidrez & Weinstein, 1993), academic

under achievement and social maladjustment (Reed, McMillan & McBee, 1995). The

revised work discusses the determination of learning behaviors and academic

achievement as a predictive factor in adolescents’ academic performance across changing

environments (Eccles & Midgley, 1989). The learning performance was distinguished by

the students’ determination to master skills necessary for their own learning, and

confidence to be developed eventually (Brophy, 2004). These findings contrasted with

studies in college students self efficacy and academic goals, but supported middle and

high school learners’ academic gains in language learning and interests (Gehlbach, 2006).

Unfortunately, achievement across cultures was lower in middle school eighth graders

and interests did not empower learning goals at middle school levels (Schiefele, 1992).

Although the declines in achievement affect motivation, self-efficacy can affect students’

academic skills in word knowledge leading acquired interest to be affected in the learner.

These results facilitate self-efficacy and behavior attitudes in the learning of word

knowledge during academic progress in the learning of vocabulary skills.

Other investigations show interests in vocabulary instruction with complimentary

methods that explore the relationship among words and word structure, origin, and

meaning (Moats, 2001). Research showed there were many words to be learned that were

directly taught in different programs of vocabulary instruction. Not surprisingly,

vocabulary development was important for ELL’s when identifying strengths and needs

in language teaching (Calderón, August, Slavin, Duran, Madden and Cheung 2005).

Biemiller and Boote (2006) also identified direct instruction as effective in the acquisition

of vocabulary for elementary and middle school learners. Their beliefs of oral readings

72

and repetition contributed to vocabulary development, even though studies indicated it

was not enough and work recognition was limited for continuum of vocabulary gain

(Biemiller & Boote, 2006; Beck & McKeown, 2007 & Stahl, 2005).

In the present investigations, findings highlighted the National Reading Panels

(2000) implementation of combined teachings in readings for vocabulary development.

The different discussions in vocabulary instruction oriented learners to participate in

word recognition activities to increase word knowledge and meaning for elementary and

middle schools curriculum.

Enriched and Explicit Vocabulary Instruction

The No Child Left Behind Act (2001) diagnosed deficiencies in adolescent

English language learners’ growth and oral reading proficiency. The elements noted by

the NCLB Act were: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and

comprehension. All components of enriched vocabulary teachings were in the

development of language for academic achievement purposes in L2 environments (Irvin,

2006). The Resource Guide for Adolescent Literacy (2006) in the investigations

completed demonstrated the benefits of word recognition through enriched oral readings

and vocabulary acquisition (Irvin, Buehl, & Kemp, 2003). Biancarosa and Snow (2006),

also, alleged that vocabulary recognition was somewhat neglected in secondary levels of

education, challenging vocabulary development through oral proficiency. Research and

studies developed in the last ten years focused primarily on elementary grades oral

reading and vocabulary building, limiting high school learners’ opportunities to had

achieved practice in oral readings that identified meanings of unfamiliar words,

73

integration of new words, previously known words, and production of language skills

(Beck & McKeown, 2001; Biemiller & Snow, 2006; Blachowicz & Fisher, 2000).

Some studies also suggested secondary level students learned according to selected

readings in favor of students’ motivations, word knowledge, and experience in class oral

readings. It was also a challenge to ensure Reading Next skills to track learning

(following levels of education and life purposes) (Beck & McKeown, 2001; Biancarosa

& Snow, 2006; Graves, 2006; Nation, 2000; Snow & Shatuck, 2004). The technique was

developed in direct- explicit instruction, for it provided instruction in strategies and

processes that proficient vocabulary learners had in reading to comprehend, accomplish

and keep track of vocabulary growth (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006). In addition, there were

motivation and self-direct learning which include building motivation to read and learn

by providing students with the instruction that supported independent learning and

interaction with others around a variety of texts (Ainley, Hidi, & Berndorff , 2002). Also,

extensive time for learning and flexibility in vocabulary growth was key in secondary

students’ language growth. In recent studies word knowledge with reading

comprehension identified favorable components in vocabulary acquisition, but also stated

that if students do not adequately and steadily acquire vocabulary knowledge; reading

comprehension was to be affected (Chall & Jacobs, 2003). It was important that efforts

were made for additional vocabulary development in all levels by teachers (Beck,

McKeown, & Kukan, 2002). The teachings of explicit, extensive, and direct methods

were to be profound for word recognition and meanings (Beck, Mckeown, & Kukan,

2002; Hart, & Risely, 1995).

74

The teaching of direct and explicit vocabulary was the teaching of ordinary

learning. The explicit form was for learners to focus on vocabulary that was specific to

the content area. This was building knowledge of high frequency words through

listening, speaking, reading and writing (NICHD, 2006, Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986).

Explicit learning also required time for students to use vocabulary in a variety of

contexts, such as working in groups, individual tutoring projects, and activities to

increase word knowledge through oral skills (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006; Biemiller &

Slonim, 2001; NICHD, 2006).

The exposition of explicit vocabulary identified various instructional strategies

that implemented explicit vocabulary: explicit vocabulary instruction (level of evidence

strong for learners to achieve knowledge), specific teaching of strategies (modeling,

scaffolding, comprehension modeling, and meta-cognition instruction), extended

discussion of text meaning and interpretation (reasoning and critical thinking), increased

students’ motivation (awareness of individual strengths) and individualized interventions

in learning (teachers verified students’ needs to model and explain) (Biancarosa & Snow,

2006; Langer, 2001; NCLB, 2001; August & Shanahan, 2006; ). The implementation of

the NCLB (2001) students vocabulary knowledge and reading skills had improved.

Significant changes provided access for interventions in literacy responsive to high

quality instruction.

A study by Hasbun (2005) evaluated the effects of explicit vocabulary and

attitudes towards reading orally in an EFL classroom. The investigation designed

supplementary readings to be practiced in class. The statistics revealed students’

acquired vocabulary and at the end of the study claimed knowledge of additional words,

75

making them better readers with positive attitudes towards learning. The exposure to

explicit vocabulary was developed through the text Active: Skills for Reading 4 (2003)

by Neil J. Anderson which was intended for high level students. The results of the

investigation expressed interest in the exposition of vocabulary through reading and

stimulation of learners’ work knowledge to be continued in growth. Hasbun (2005)

claimed learners achieved goals in acquired vocabulary and reviewed prior knowledge to

deal with unfamiliar words that empowered students.

Folse (2010) completed a study of explicit vocabulary learning with secondary

level students, with the purpose of studying the amount of vocabulary words learned in a

25 hour course. The course provided valuable reading sessions with vocabulary focus

based on curriculum standards. Folse, reported teachers needed to prepare classes for

students to obtain a fraction of what Nation (2001), identified as a native speakers

vocabulary of 70,000 words. Learners also needed to be trained in seeking vocabulary

based on cultural and personal interests. The study also showed that students were not

given enough vocabulary to increase word knowledge and meaning. However, students

achieved word gain by explicit vocabulary skills.

The second study also encouraged teachers to look for numerous activities that

reassured learners’ vocabulary recognition. The importance of vocabulary supported

reading comprehension and communication skills in the adolescent (Nation, 2001). The

results moreover provided a view of students’ interest in learning vocabulary through

reading with a 100% initiative and teachers’ initiative on teaching vocabulary through

reading with 0% interest. The focus had students learn new words, where learners were

limited (not writing one new word) than from students’ engagement with learning

76

vocabulary. The study demonstrated explicit learning, and offered students measurable

opportunities to learn new words, but teachers believed learning was not taking place;

hence, responsibility was only viewed by one part of the study, examined in 2006 by the

new Core Reading Model in middle and secondary high school for reading interventions

focused on word recognition, spelling, decoding skills, fluency and self- esteem for

struggling oral readers and English language learners. The study discussed the design,

which organized English levels of difficulty in reading and morphological patterns. The

investigation was one of the most recent too had identified words taken from the text in

middle and high school students.

The New Core Reading Program discussed its effectiveness in word recognition,

word endings, rhyming patterns, and reading gains for ESL classes.

The author stated the importance of oral reading in middle and secondary grade

levels as important for communicative competence to continue its development using the

teaching methodology for the Core Reading Model. The model consisted of the

following challenges for students:

1. Learn new vocabulary.

2. Organize vocabulary

3. Summarize vocabulary

4. Interpret information

5. Decode and understand difficult words

6. Read fluently

7. Implement strategies for understanding text

77

The results of the study indicated students’ frustration and grief in reading and the

tendency to be unskilled in vocabulary meaning, sentence structure, and text organization

(Akerman & Dykman, 1996; Cunningham & Stanovich, 1997). The study began with 15

students in the lab with one teacher, for five hours a week, one hour blocks and two hour

blocks. The reading was delivered by a computer software program at individual

learning. The reading design model included word recognition, fluency and

comprehension. The words here divided into patterns according to ELL’s needs. Five

important instructional reading components were included in the design: spelling,

vocabulary, word study, reading fluency and comprehension. All students worked on the

lessons for reading fluency and comprehension of word recognition.

Glavich (2006) concludes the learning of word recognition for vocabulary

building and reading comprehension in middle and high school students were successful

in labs. It also established students integrating reading skills in vocabulary knowledge

responsible for core class improvement. The achievement in core classes according to

the author represents a gain in vocabulary words and meanings to succeed in inadequate

vocabulary gaps created in language learning. The author identified the Core Reading

Model as successful in students’ word recognition and reading skills, in addition to

closing the gap on vocabulary knowledge (Glavich, 2006). He also stated the challenges

to set in students’ learning and word knowledge required to develop skills.

The information also acknowledged interest in adolescents identifying meanings

of words, for it was time consuming; the process is complicated and continuous. The

process of picking up words for middle and high school learners can grow significantly

more using the reading model, especially in word recognition and reading fluency, than

78

in younger students. A 90% of second language learners achieved high success in word

gains, sustaining relevance of study for ELL’s word recognition.

Rasinski, Padak, McKeown, Wilfong, Friedauer, and Heim (2005) also examined

strategies that sustained the development of vocabulary knowledge in high school

students with limited English vocabulary. The investigation of teaching methods detailed

decoding of words for meaning and the fluency accompanied in students’ comprehension.

The study divided high school students into individual “houses” (specific school areas

designed for reading) to complete one minute reading passages from Secondary and

College Reading Inventory (Johns, 1990). Students were asked to read orally and retell

what they had read. Errors were identified in reading. The retelling of the passage was to

make sure students read in a normal pattern- to read for understanding not speed.

The study revealed each students’ word recognition level, and reading fluency, as

determined by words read correctly in time period establish. The reading was compared

to students’ silent reading scores from the high school graduation test. The findings

established 9th

graders read with average word recognition and an accurate fluency rate,

establishing higher fluency rates. In overall the investigation indicated strong proficiency

in word as well, as identifying word recognition and fluency, reading comprehension was

also viewed as important for vocabulary knowledge. Students’ differences in

comprehension established variations in reading fluency. Although Rasinski (2005),

presented a correlation between fluency and comprehension, the results demonstrated

improvements in fluency could account for significant gains in students’ comprehension.

The hypothesis was not tested during the study, yet, made relevant for comprehension of

reading. The data also establish an awareness of fluency in high school learners’ was

79

called for. There were also percentages stating high school graduates read at a 28%

eighth grade level, meaning more time was to be spent on reading skills and word

recognition.

Rasinski, Padek, McKeeown, Wilfong, Friedauer, and Helm (2005) also stated

reading rates as non representative to the full meaning of fluency, rather than suggestions

by personal studies completed in the field high lighting repeated and assisted reading for

meaning, which resulted in faster and consciousness of word understanding.

The study developed controlled variables that interfered with the results to

guarantee reliable procedures. The one minute reading passages from one college and

secondary text presented students with limitations in work knowledge. Another

controlled variable was the interference in the time period established in the study for

students in reading passage assigned. The time was only one minute and students with

limitations could confront problems in reading comprehensions. In addition the fluency

of each learner was dependable upon previous background knowledge therefore losing

perspectives on a student’s word recognition, comprehension, and gradual knowledge of

reading. The investigators demonstrated the importance of word gain and fluency in

reading comprehension to be an important element in reading comprehension, as students

with additional support in word recognition were able to increase knowledge and fluency

in reading comprehension and related courses.

Carlo, August, McLaughlin, Snow, and Dressler (2004), in recent studies of word

recognition, presented the disadvantages students had in their English word bank than

most students whose first language was English. The revision also stressed the lag

behind even further. The lack of vocabulary indicated difficulty in reading

80

comprehension because of grade level material. Students in elementary grades were

known as “emerging readers,” when in middle and high school expectations of academic

achievement were anticipated. The No Child Left Behind (2001) however expected all

students to be on grade level by the year 2014. Schools that did not meet with these

requirements were sanctioned. Presented with this requirement, teachers came to see

adolescents not meeting with expectations as potential liabilities in the classroom, rather

than students experimenting with natural experiences in the learning of a second

language. Suggestions in the use of dynamic strategies according to students’

background and appropriate for English language development were: (a) use of

dictionary (Hart & Risely, 1995) and (b) rich and intensive vocabulary instruction that

implemented various activities that went beyond short definitions (Beck et al. 2002).

Biemiller (2005) discussed direct vocabulary development and implications for

academic success in word recognition when used as a tool in oral reading. Studies

presented early vocabulary learning and literacy, influence of vocabulary acquisition, and

mechanisms for word meaning acquisition. The data observed the absence of word

recognition and adequate vocabulary in students’ reading comprehension. Other

investigations in the field stated predictions of learning vocabulary for reading skills were

a pre requisite for success (Becker, 1978; Scarborough, 2002; Storch & Whitehurst ,

2002) and that concurrent vocabulary was an even stronger predictor of reading

comprehension by fourth grade and thereafter. Cunningham and Stanovich (1997) also

showed a relationship between oral vocabulary and reading comprehension in first and

eleventh grade.

81

Baumann, Kame’ ennui, and Ash (2003) questioned in previous research the

double deficit of weak vocabularies and poor reading comprehension as additional

difficulties in learning new words. The authors agreed on direct teaching methods to

support vocabulary building and word meaning. Specifically, two studies of vocabulary

instruction provided evidence of vocabulary instruction in students, but not necessarily in

reading comprehension (Baumann 2002; Baumann, Edwards, Boland, Olejnik, & Kame’

ennui, 2003). Recent research had also provided data in support of incidental learning of

vocabulary through units and reading (Carlisle, Fleming, & Gudbrandson, 2000).

The teaching of explicit vocabulary in oral readings presented learners with the

opportunity to become more proficient in learning strategies and content. The integration

of factors associated with vocabulary gain and comprehension were motivation in oral

readings and graphic organizers. Thus, effective instruction for older readers (secondary

level) was likely to occur when additional educational development for teachers was

required (RAND Reading study group, 2002, PRDE, 2007).

Pearson, Hiebert, and Kamil (2007) stated the ties between vocabulary instruction

and reading comprehension in the enrichment of word recognition and meaning

comprehension (NICHD, 2000). According to researchers, the formation of vocabulary

instruction organized the use and reuse of words during reading. The richness of words

semantic associations built on were an extension of the work of Beck et al (2002). It was

the association of semantics in the development of what the word was part of (Marzano,

1988). The teachers were used to developing word recognition with definitions and

general concepts in the exposition of the word, and presented various examples.

Teachers were careful in types of vocabulary words to be used and tested for

82

comprehension. Pearson Hiebert and Kamil (2007) pretended to encourage vocabulary

assessment in the distinction of word recognition and reading comprehension by

identifying interests in students’ vocabulary learning with the following priorities for the

next decade: (a) research attention to students conceptual and operational distinctions

within the reading, writing, listening, and speaking processes, (b) identified the

components and formats of vocabulary assessment, in regard to selection of words,

sampling procedures for individual and targeted assessment for each type of vocabulary;

without information progress was to be limited, (c) research in text genre and vocabulary

variables to identify word meaning, (d) transfer and vocabulary knowledge the student

had to relate, (e) the identity of measures of word recognition through reading

comprehension,(f) verification of knowledge in students’ comprehension and its

relationship to literacy and, (g) integration of computer assessment of vocabulary

domain, not limiting assessments to classroom, but other settings out of the classroom.

The use of vocabulary for word recognition, and comprehension, hence, promoted the use

of oral communication and writing scenarios.

The studies done with vocabulary instruction and communicative competence

brought attention to vocabulary building and oral proficiency in high school learners’

word gain. There were two studies that investigated adolescents’ word knowledge. The

first by Hiebert (2005) established vocabulary development and word meaning as

significant in secondary level students reading comprehension. The second was based on

Beck, McKeown and Kukan’s word recognition in oral reading skills (2002). The two

similarly developed studies investigated the importance of word recognition in reading

comprehension and interests in language improvement.

83

The first study identified the improvement of students’ vocabulary building and

word meaning in class assessment. Hiebert (2005) used a framework called Text (Text

Elements by Task) to describe the different tasks that posed in reading acquisition. A

technique developed to increase vocabulary was mentioned as Word Zone. The

technique was the division of seven word zones found in school texts for frequency in

writing; the zones differed in size and the number of times the word were found in the

text. The quantities of words that were found in each zone were divided by high

frequency and rare words to establish relation and extension of vocabulary in a learner.

The second study by Beck, McKeown, and Kukan (2002) investigated the use of

vocabulary in oral readings. Beck et al. (2002) used games to identify students’ interest in

word recognition and meaning. The development of the Word Wizard technique offered

points when students heard words, in the identity and use of words recently. The teacher

prepared charts to relate to words being identified. The students were to identify the

word each time it was used and heard in class. The study emphasized students’ attention,

motivation, and use of vocabulary daily. The students’ also had the opportunity to learn

in a positive and natural environment, yet at the same time gain points in the learning

process.

The two studies also proposed the use of multifaceted and long term vocabulary

teaching by Graves (2006) with the teaching of vocabulary and word consciousness. The

study focused on word meaning and purpose in reading. The aim of the program was to

review cognitive aspects, and students’ motivations through words and word meanings.

The program had four basic components to develop vocabulary: (a) rich language

experiences, (b) teaching individual words, (c) teaching word learning strategies and, (d)

84

fostering word consciousness to develop power in the words. The basic components,

according to Graves (2006), had complex teaching methods for elementary level students

and further.

Vocabulary Word Choice and Oral Communication

The previous investigations cited in this study presented word recognition and

oral reading of stories with varied language experiences in the integration of vocabulary

terms and word choice. The pre selected words determined the effectiveness, richness,

and variety used in this study. The language terms were also appropriate for research,

unfamiliar to high school students, and important for reading comprehension.

The selection of vocabulary words taught in class had initiated debates related to

the amounts of words used by students’ and suitable schedule time in schools. Hiebert

(2005) identified teachers focus on varied language experiences in the classroom to

continue language learning and word knowledge, the selection of words according to

readings and daily language used orally and written. Hiebert (2012) gave emphasis to the

integration of different words, different goals, contexts and, procedures used by the

teacher to develop techniques. The opportunity provided students with activities that

encouraged instructional purposes and vocabulary achievement learning through multiple

exposures incremented overtime (Stahl, 2005).

The use of words was determined by the vocabulary needed of high school

learners. The focus of word learning developed with Beck, McKeown, and Kukan’s

(2002) division of practical words, general knowledge, refined expressions, prior

knowledge in the learner, and words unknown in curriculum. Biemiller (2005) suggested

teachers focus on words previously known by the learners that had a 40% or more

85

notions on oral communication skills to be developed with word choice. According to

Biemiller, these were the words students will be able to relate to. Hiebert (2005, 2012)

suggested three basic approaches in vocabulary instruction like: language experiences in

classroom environments, individual word teaching, and word awareness to develop word

recognition. Stahl (2005) also contributed to vocabulary learning through multiple word

exposure activities.

The study presented words with multiple encounters in a variety of contexts that

let teachers and students be engaged in vocabulary learning through reading (Beck,

McKeown, & Kucan, 2002). Teachers used specific activities to support students in

developing rich representations of word meanings that exceeded just associating a word

with its definition. Kucan, and Mckeown (2007) suggested that inviting students to

develop multiple representations as well as multiple connections were important ways to

mediate students’ developing representations of word meanings. Kucan et al. (2007) also

suggested students learn about how words work and were integrated into word

knowledge for effective language skills to progress. Teachers were encouraged to focus

their instruction on word features such as prefixes, roots, and word histories. Kucan’s

(2007) study showed strong relationships between vocabulary improvement, oral reading

and language skills. Studies were based on work with Beck et al. (2002), Stahl’s (2005)

multifaceted language knowledge, and Graves (2006) views on vocabulary expansion and

oral reading.

The investigation focused therefore on words that developed students’ levels of

integration in reading contexts and multiple encounters. Some inclusions were root,

prefixes, basic vocabulary, and word histories. The words were extensive according to

86

twelfth grade English language learners’ knowledge. The selection of 10 words was

necessary for word recognition and reading comprehension. Some of the words were

concrete referred to and other abstracts. The choice of these vocabulary words in Chapter

III of this dissertation proved a detailed explanation of the criteria taken into

consideration for the selection of key vocabulary words.

Evaluation and Significance of Word Choice

Biancarosa and Snow (2004) sustained that the principal difficulty in teaching

vocabulary was its process of evaluation. The importance in identifying professional

development for teachers in searching for key words to measure students’ knowledge,

word recognition and how it was to be evaluated was relevant. Another piece of the

puzzle was the development of direct and explicit instruction in English language

learning environments to increase language comprehension.

The previous studies reviewed in the literature for this dissertation indicated

evaluation of word knowledge, language proficiency and oral reading in different phases

in the development of oral communication skills. Some evaluated the receptive and

expressive form. Others limited studies to previous and associative comprehension.

Various evaluations used illustrations (auditory and visual), others used verbal argument.

In addition, some were limited to adolescents completing cloze examples in identifying

word concepts and using specific examples. Some evaluation techniques provided for

students’ to express a verbal definition or a synonym or antonym. While other strict

requirements suggested students’ identify context use, and application of concepts in

other contexts (Beck & McKeown, 2006). The activities were difficult in language

context and function in specific applications for the study. Another significant finding

87

was the formative and summative assessment techniques developed in the evaluation

process. The last activity was the most difficult because of the requirement of language

in different contexts to ensure alignment with curriculum and language expectations of

high school learners (Torgeson, Houston, Rissman and Dressler, 2007).

The importance in which word recognition was evaluated, the age level of

learners, and the interpretation of conclusions in the investigation, concurred with the

results of the studies by Biancarosa and Snow (2004) and Graves (2006). On the other

hand, apparent or partial knowledge of words misjudged the amount of words the learner

recognized and how its meanings were used accordingly (RAND, 2002; Torgeson,

Housten, 2007). The studies presented various examples of word recognition as an

assessment activity to encourage vocabulary knowledge.

In investigations reviewed with middle and secondary level ELL’s, these listened

to vocabulary word recognition and oral readings through computer software programs

various times (Graves, 2006). In other examples by Beck, McKeown and Kukan (2002),

students were able to identify vocabulary meaning through reading contexts. After

students listened to reading of stories, investigators believed data of students’ acquisition

of vocabulary and learning style technique used for knowledge gain increased word

expansion (Gardner, 1983). In another report the NRP (2000) also identified differences

in word recognition in secondary levels and students’ knowledge of word meaning.

Biemiller (2003), an advocate of word recognition in elementary grades, identified

students’ loss of word recognition as students advance in further grades, limiting word

knowledge and use in particular contexts. The importance of vocabulary instruction,

reading comprehension, and oral communication was more complex than simply teaching

88

students more words as observed by the casual associations and comprehension of words

as tricky and elusive (Nagy, and Anderson, 1984; Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986; Graves,

2006). The different forms of vocabulary recommended by the NRP (2000) were in

accordance with the contextual construction and types of vocabulary and or categories to

evaluate and measure which were: observation of vocabulary, oral vocabulary, written

vocabulary, receptive and expressive vocabulary, and others. There were specific

vocabulary aspects to be evaluated and that were to be defined; these were the amount,

the use, the meaning, the acquisition, and retention of ELL’s (NRP, 2000; NICHD, 2000;

NCLB, 2001).

Vocabulary was generally measured by standardized tests. Even though, there

were no specific vocabulary results that presented students’ knowledge of vocabulary,

amount of words known and learning techniques that achieved word recognition and oral

competence (NICHD, 2000), there were educational instruments used by teachers and

investigators to identify several informal means. Teachers measured vocabulary in

lessons, particular context, or units by various assessment activities.

The activities used to measure students’ assessment was developed in part by

investigators’ work in previous literature like the NRP (2000), the NCLB (2001) with

yearly evaluation tests and tests prepared by teachers and studies in relation to word

recognition. In different reviews presented in the NRP, suggestions of standardized tests

did not present clear evidence to sustain changes in vocabulary gain and recognition. In

yearly tests presented in compliance with the NCLB Act, there was no apparent change in

students’ word recognition through oral and silent reading measurement (NICHD, 2000,

89

p.4; Puerto Rico Department of Education, 2010, 2011, 2012; Puerto Rico Academic

Achievement Tests, 2010, 2011,2012).

The measurement in the development of methodologies used in word recognition

was not significant for gradual learning of adolescents’ vocabulary through oral skills.

The measures did not consider the increase and acquisition of vocabulary and word

knowledge which were extensive, had profound reach, were time consuming, required

multiple expositions in class, and applied to a diversity of contexts in the secondary level

(Beck & McKeown, 2002; Biancarosa & Snow, 2004; Biemiller, 2003; Graves, 2006;

Nagy & Anderson, 1984; NRP, 2000; NCLB, 2001; NICHD, 2000; PRDE,

2010,2011,2012; PRAAT, 2010,2011,2012; Stahl, 2005; Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986).

Variables in the results of the investigation were the amount of time during the

presentation of words and the administration of the post test. Some investigators repeated

the post test after completing the exploration of word knowledge with positive results, or

on the contrary, of development. The study did not explore this variable.

The criteria used to determine the evaluation of vocabulary instruction and word

recognition according to the National Reading Panel (2000), indicated there were no

particular standards in the measurement of the instructional assessment under

investigation. The evaluation should be similar to teaching methods used in class. The

data will be liable and learning real for students (Carlo et al. 2004; NICHD, 2000;

Graves, 2006).

90

Summary

The revision of literature for this study indicated the behavioral attitudes found in

Character Counts Program, the various vocabulary methods in teaching submitted in

fulfillment of secondary students’ (ninth to twelfth grade students), and oral

communication skills developed for English language learners. A number of studies

promoted direct teaching, explicit teaching, and intentional, while others promoted

indirect, explicit and incidental teaching in secondary levels of vocabulary instruction and

communicative competence.

The Carnegie Report: Reading Next (2004) identified the intervention of

vocabulary in readings through direct and explicit interventions focusing on language

growth. The NRP (2000) also reviewed more than 45 studies based on behavioral

attitudes towards the learning of a language and vocabulary teachings in enhancement of

oral communication. The effectiveness of the Carnegie Report (2004, p.11) in

accordance with the NRP (2000, p. 4) acknowledged the strategies of explicit and direct

teachings of vocabulary to conclude: “teaching of vocabulary was to be taught directly

and explicitly in language settings.”

The instructional methodologies approved and revised in the investigations for

this work, as the Research Measurement Corporation and the Josephson Institute Center

for Youths related the effectiveness of the use of character education with specific

character features for high school English language learners. The multiple exposures of

vocabulary in diverse contexts, enriched measures of teaching, use of repeated and

extended new vocabulary, reviews of language gain and other important approaches in

the development of oral communication skills indicating growth in language skills,

91

behavioral attitude, and vocabulary expansion in high school learners. The exposure to

English language, enriched teaching, listening and speaking environments in the English

language, and word expansion growth were also essential for language learning. Both

vocabulary instruction and communication proficiency corresponded to the development

of character education seen through motivational attitudes English language learners face

in the process of acquiring word gain, verbal skills, and behavioral approaches for

language enhancement.

The Carnegie Report recommended that practitioners use extended and effective

texts and literature for enriched vocabulary gain and language proficiency. The NRP

(2000), the NCLB (2001), and the Josephson Institute Center for Youths (JICY;

2004,2005,2010) along with the Character Count Program (2005,2010) also highlighted

the implementation of varied teaching methods that included direct and explicit

instruction of language, effective instructional principles, motivation and self-directed

learning, text based- interactions, communication skills through the use of diverse texts,

and ongoing assessment that enhanced language proficiency through behavior attitudes

based on English language. The Research Measurement Corporation (RMC,2005) with

the JICY Center (2005, 2010) also mentioned that extended time of literacy, language

proficiency, and summative assessment of students’ progress were important elements in

developing character education and motivational attitude of language building. The

teaching of vocabulary and language skills in high school students caused significant

improvements without these elements, because of the instructional effectiveness and

measuring effects, “they act as a foundation for instructional innovations.” In the

upcoming learning methods, the teaching of vocabulary produced flexible and ample

92

knowledge in learners’ competence to establish language learning and application of new

words in different contexts integrating communicative skills and behavioral attitude in

the ability to enhance language (Stahl, 2005; Stahl & Fairbanks, 1986; Nagy & Scott,

2000).

93

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methodology used in the study. It also specified the

design of the investigation, the participants, the experimental group, teacher participation,

the ethical elements (consents, risks, potential benefits, and confidential aspects), the

measurable instruments used ( pre-post tests and Character Counts Survey), measurable

instruments administered, characteristics identified in the book (Borincuan Times), the

pre selection of key vocabulary words, the use of oral communication instruction,

materials to be used, the instructional methodology and intervention (techniques to

enhance vocabulary development, enriched instruction, and protocol of experimental

group), the procedure, data collection, statistical tests and data analysis and limitations of

the study.

The current literature recommended the exposition of new words in adolescents

through the Character Counts Program (CCP) implementation of strategies in oral

readings of short stories that influenced vocabulary learning, and oral communication.

(Biancarosa & Snow, 2003; Beck & McKeown, 2006; Biemiller, 2004; Josephson

Institute of Youths, 2010; Graves, 2006; Hiebert, 2005; NCLB, 2001; McKeown &

Kukan, 2002; NRP, 2000; NICHD, 2000). The information also identified the

explanation and development of vocabulary in specific context that facilitated not only

oral communication but learning as well (Beck & McKeown, 2006; Biemiller & Boote,

2006).

The study examined the effect in the development of character education through

vocabulary instruction, in the enhancement of oral proficiency. The implementation of a

94

combined methodology of character pillars (responsibility, trustworthiness, respect,

caring, citizenship and fairness), vocabulary instruction in short story readings and oral

production skills through repetition of words was examined in high school English

language learners. The investigation explored and analyzed high school students’

vocabulary aptitude, learning of specific key vocabulary words in relation to character

pillars of the Character Counts Program, and oral proficiency (CCP, 2010).

The reviewed studies for this research presented a mixed methodology.

Although, evidence in previous investigations presented vocabulary gain through oral

reading and character pillars of the character counts program, with and without emphasis

on selected vocabulary words, it was not sufficient to gain vocabulary and oral

communication (Beck & McKeown, 2001; Frances & Simpson, 2003; JICY, 2005;

Penno, 2002; Nagy & Scott, 2000; Stahl, 2005). The results of these studies mentioned

the outcomes of vocabulary instruction, character pillars and oral communication at

minimum. Even though the conclusions of the pedagogical implications with the

research suggested, regularly, the value of oral reading, the use of oral repetition of key

words, and the opportunity of oral communication through the interaction of behavioral

attitude, it was a point of discussion. The previous studies by the RMC (2005), NRP,

(2000), and Francis and Simpson (2003) also recommended providing instructional

practices such as: the development of key words through oral readings, selected

vocabulary words taught explicitly, vocabulary gains in a L2 to support oral

communication skills and the teaching of behavioral attitude through key character

pillars.

95

The development of word use in the L2 was complex and progressive

(Blachowicz, Fisher, Ogle, & Watts-Taffe, 2006). The use of vocabulary words implied

knowledge of meanings or language gain in vocabulary (Beck & McKeown, 2007; Nagy

&Scott, 2000; Stahl, 2005). The use of vocabulary words in language skills was not a

limitation or struggle in knowledge and meaning of words that characterized action,

concept and profound knowledge (Butler & Hakuta, 2006). The development and

comprehension of vocabulary and oral communication at the secondary level was not

reduced to association and use of words, but to provide opportunities for students to

practice using words in reading, speaking and conversations led by teachers and

developed by adolescents in English language environments (Carlo, August, McLaughlin,

Snow, Dressler, Lippman, Lively & White, 2004).

The research provided a mixed method with dimensions of word knowledge and

adolescent displays (process of words, recall information, monitor learning, precision of

words, amplitude, accessibility to words and meanings, flexibility in use of words and

application in deliberate and spontaneous tasks of language growth) presented mixed

scopes multifaceted tasks in the adolescents learning process (Beck, McKeown & Kukan,

2002; Blachowicz, Fisher, & Ogle, 2006; Butler & Hakuta, 2006; Carlo, 2004; Francis &

Simpson, 2003; Luciana et al, 2005; Kelemen, 2005; NMSA Research, 2008; RMC,

2007; Thiede & Dunlosky, 1999). Oral communication and vocabulary word knowledge

developed through various levels of instruction; increasing with age, experiences and

significance.

The analysis of results achieved in a quasi- experimental, pre post design, were to

compare the growth in reading and language skills developed in the study by the RAND

96

reading study group (2002). The reading study group suggested striving readers and low

language achievers explore the use of reading (Reading/ Language Arts Program for high

school students who had difficulty with reading, language and vocabulary skills) to

obtain gains in reading comprehension, vocabulary growth, and oral communication. To

gain vocabulary growth the RAND group proposed the use of effective vocabulary

techniques to increase word meaning (Slavin, 2008). The exposure of words in different

contexts and students’ association through various classroom experiences and

opportunities reinforced vocabulary gain and increased participation in language skills

that encouraged adolescents reading skills.

The Reading and Language Arts Program study (RAND, 2002) suggested the use

of intervention programs to explore word growth through reading and comprehension

through the arts as encouraging and considerable. The investigation recommended

specific circumstances to encourage effective learning such as expressive and receptive

vocabulary, communicative skills, motivation, and reading in high school learners

(RAND, 2002).

Research and studies stated the need to provide varied techniques and

opportunities in students’ word growth in everyday classroom instruction. The teaching

of vocabulary in secondary level classrooms was also effective with the implementation

of techniques, learning content and independent strategies that increased vocabulary

instruction, communication skills, growth in word consciousness and behavioral attitude

of the English language (Baumann, Kame’ enui, & Ash, 2003; Blachowicz, &Fisher,

2000; NRP, 2000; NICHHD, 2000). The development of such techniques encouraged

researchers to implement a methodology and complement vocabulary growth through

97

Character Education and Oral Communication development with Enriched Vocabulary

Instruction. The literature and the reviews restated the need to provide a variety of

opportunities that promoted character education in high school classrooms. It also

promoted vocabulary instruction with high school English language learners through

word recognition and diverse oral exposures (Francis & Simpson, 2003). With this in

mind, the present researcher determined to implement a reliable and complimentary

methodology of Character Education through Vocabulary Instruction with enrichment of

Oral Communication, corresponding with a mixed method of investigation.

Design of the Study

This study followed a quasi-experimental design with a pre-test and post-test.

The experimental design was mostly used in Education to explore possible fundamental

causal effects in independent variables and dependent variables (Creswell, 2005, 2010).

The selection of experimental and control groups existed in classroom settings. The

participation of students in a study occurred according to teachers’ contributions and

school choice. According to Creswell (2010), the random selection of students was a

procedure that influenced the education process that was normally observed at schools.

Even though, the selection presented risks to the external validation of the process, a

reduction of the possibility to generalize conclusions was to be derived from the study

(Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002).

Independent Variable

The independent variable in the study was the implementation of a combined and

complimentary methodology of Character Education techniques, Vocabulary Instruction

from pre-selected short stories, and Oral Communication (CEVIOC) growth.

98

Dependent Variable

The dependent variable in the study was the gain of receptive vocabulary pre

selected from the short stories. The variable was tested through the administration of a

pre test and post test of vocabulary assessment designed by the researcher. The test

control was prearranged for two occasions, before the intervention (pre-test) and after the

intervention (post-test). After calculation of scores obtained from students’ results from

the pre-test and post-test, it was expected that behavioral attitude, vocabulary gain and

oral proficiency were reached.

Sample

The study was developed in four twelfth grade classrooms of fifty minute periods

in a secondary school of the public system of the Puerto Rico Department of Education.

Two groups were assigned as the control groups and the other two groups as

experimental groups. The groups were from the same school to verify vocabulary

instruction and oral communication proficiency.

The school which was served in the implementation and intervention of the

CEVIOC was located in the Caguas Region. The experimental group presented a highly

qualified teacher (HQT) which developed techniques with the two groups.

Both control and experimental groups were from the same school. The high

school was located in the municipality of Barranquitas. The classroom presented a highly

qualified teacher (HQT) with certification in Advanced English Seminars.

The school offered services to low family income and middle class income

students. According to information provided by the school, the levels of poverty for the

academic year 2012-2013 were 73% for the experimental group and 75% for the control

99

group. The levels of poverty for the 2012-2013 school year were 73% for the small town

high school (School District Statistics Office, 2012).

The short story readings were verified as a common practice in the curriculum

program of both teachers involved in the activity. The teachers, who incorporated the

activity into classroom curriculum, frequently used adolescent literature and developed

interactive discussions. The students were acquainted with short story interventions

regularly. The assumption of being familiar with short story activities in the classroom

encouraged development, so the study would not be of unknown knowledge to the

learner. The study was developed in a natural context surrounding and closely related to

daily classroom readings and communicative events for learners’ to perform in the

English language at a twelfth grade level.

The teachers represented an important element in the study, for they were in

charge of interventions, and administration of the pre-test and post-test. Given the

significance of the study, the researcher provided workshops and previous guidance in

the development of the activities, during after school hours.

The experimental group teacher was familiar with the methodology of CEVIOC

and the protocol before the implementation of the study. The researcher provided an

orientation of the importance and awareness of the acquisition of vocabulary for effective

communication, improved academic achievement, character education beliefs and

development of reading comprehension. Several outcomes emerged from studies

developed with oral short story reading and enriched vocabulary instruction with

emphasis of character education. Also, teachers were trained with procedures and

protocols for daily intervention with the CEVIOC (Character Education with Vocabulary

100

Instruction and Enrichment of Oral Communication) methodology. Appendix C presents

the five protocols used with the experimental group.

The teacher with the experimental group was given the materials and explanation

of each short story with character counts activities. Finally, instructions for the pre-test

and post-test were also given. Appendix B presents a guide for the administration of the

tests.

The teacher of the control group received orientation for the administration of the

pre-test and post-test evaluation after school hours. The teacher worked with the regular

curriculum for twelfth grade students provided by the Puerto Rico Department of

Education with the Standards and Expectations of the English program.

The researcher observed the teachers of the experimental group while completing

activity sessions. These were according to established procedures and research. Each

time the researcher observed a lesson, a list of checkmark observations was completed

(see Appendix D). The intervention was implemented with accuracy and reliability,

according to procedures discussed and developed in the intervention. Reliability also

reduced pressure of internal validity of the quasi-experiment. The researcher shared and

discussed observations with the teacher, each week to listen to experiences and doubts,

discuss observations from course group, and continue activities, review procedures and

offer retro communication.

After the orientation, the control teacher was given pamphlets with short stories,

character count activities, and protocols used by the experimental groups. The students

of the control group also benefited from the interventions with the experimental groups.

101

There was a selection of four groups of twelfth grade students of a high school of

the Puerto Rico Department of Education. Each group size was from 21 to 25 students

ranging from low to middle socioeconomic status and diverse backgrounds. The initial

sample for the study consisted of 91 students with parents’ consent.

Validity

The meeting held with students at the school included a discussion of the minimal

risks associated with the study. The risks were: lack of motivation and feeling

uncomfortable during the administration of the pre-test and post-test. The possibilities

were minimum for pre-test and post-test were short and according to grade level.

Students were also informed about lack of motivation and doubts, which were informed

to the teachers during the administration of tests. As a result of risks being at minimum,

the benefits led participants to increase knowledge. Appendixes G and H illustrate

consent forms given to students for parent’s consent and confidentiality dispositions

according to study.

Measurement Instruments

Two weeks prior to the intervention, a teacher was selected to present the

Character Count Survey, validated by the Puerto Rico Department of Education, to high

school students based on behavioral attitudes from the Character Counts Program (CCP).

The administration of the Character Counts Survey Adapted by the PRDE (2010)

presented a reference in general knowledge of high school learners’ knowledge of

character pillars and values. The Josephson Institute Center for Youths (JICY) and the

Character Counts Program Survey (Josephson Institute Center for Youths, 2010) was

administered after students’ interventions were completed. A post-test to measure

102

students’ vocabulary gain and behavioral attitudes was administered by the teachers to

participating students.

Procedure

One week previous to project investigation, a Highly Qualified English Teacher

was administrated a pre-test (experimental and control group) with the researcher’s

participation as an observer with the vocabulary words preselected and character count

pillars. The pre and post-test were designed by the researcher and validated by HQT to

be administered by the teachers of the study.

The experimental group was exposed to the methodology combined with

Character Education in Vocabulary Instruction and Oral Communication (CEVIOC) with

preselected short stories for a five week period study. The oral communication

developed in the readings and vocabulary instruction provided oral communication to

develop conversations. The methodology included guide questions, before, during and

after reading. The discussion of key vocabulary words with meanings in context and

character count pillars reviewed key words studied. The enriched vocabulary instruction

represented an explicit use of the words developed by Beck and McKeown (2007). Each

week a short story was introduced to the students in each session.

The control group worked with activities of the English Curriculum Program for

Twelfth grade by the Puerto Rico Department of Education (Standards and Expectations,

2007; PRDE, 2007). The Character Counts Program Survey was not administered to the

control group and only the pre and post tests were given.

Once the intervention was completed, the administration of the post-test (which

included receptive vocabulary and character count pillars) was provided to the students

103

by the participating teachers of the study. A comparison of the results of the test was

prepared (pre-test and post-test) with each group to determine if there were differences

between the groups and a gain in key vocabulary words. The data were analyzed to

explore a possible relation between the scores obtained and the gain in vocabulary and


The researcher prepared the guides and protocol for readings of short stories, pre-

selected vocabulary words, character count pillar words and oral communication skills to

be used as vocabulary enrichment. The intervention was developed with accuracy and

according to protocol established, to avoid unsubstantial validity of the investigation.

The teachers received an orientation about the use of procedures and the data the

researcher presented during the intervention. The research intervention was as follows:

Day 1: Before preamble of short story readings

The teacher introduced a character counts conversation and character education

words to be discussed and used as key vocabulary words: (trustworthy, respect,

responsibility, caring, fairness, and citizenship). Each of the character pillars was

discussed according to the Josephson Institute Center for Youths (JICY) and the

curriculum programs of the Puerto Rico Department of Education’s (PRDE) standards

and expectations for students’ improvement in character (JICY,2004,2010; PRDE, 2007,

2010).

Day 2: After preamble of Character Counts

The teacher began development with a character count pillars handout describing

each character count and providing an example for discussion. The teachers were

oriented to develop oral conversation with students of character counts and examples.

104

Another handout with the six character pillars was given for students to complete with the

names of the six character pillars, a review of meaning of each one and an example. The

students shared experiences with the group of the meanings and examples.

Conversation and explanation of vocabulary words and character count pillar to

be used in readings.

A. Before the reading:

1. The teacher showed the book. The students observed the book and began

conversation of title and images. The students made inferences of possible readings to be

found in the book.

2. The title of the short story was given on a handout accessible for all students. The

title was arranged in the middle of the paper for all students to observe. The students

developed a discussion of the title of the story and vocabulary words to be developed in

context. The character pillar also discussed and reviewed for comprehension with a

question: What is responsibility? Who is responsible for a person’s actions?

and What responsibilities does a teenager have with friends and family members?

3. The students’ shared their experiences according to title of the short story and the

character pillar word.

4. Before the short story reading, the teacher introduced the importance of listening

comprehension and speaking to the students.

B. During the reading

The teacher read the short story for the first time. The teacher in previous

orientations suggested to use expressive gestures, decoding of words, changes in tone of

voice, pauses, rhythm in reading style, fluency, and visual contact with the learners

105

(Rasinski, Padak, McKeon, Wilfong, Friedauer and Heim, 2005). The discussion

initiated from short story reading consisted of key vocabulary words and the motivation

of the students to use vocabulary in oral conversations and reading comprehension.

A preview of events was developed for student motivation.

1. The teacher in the first reading presented key vocabulary words according to the

short story and used the words throughout the reading. The teacher discussed vocabulary

definition according to context for development of language. To ensure consistency,

each key word was reviewed with context meaning.

2. After each key vocabulary word was discussed, clarified, defined, explained,

demonstrated, and provided with examples, the teacher read the short story with students’

participation and reviewed key word included in each sentence.

3. During the reading, the teacher made comments and asked questions to encourage

participants’ oral skills and comprehension. The questions and comments made were in

regard to the short story. The questions also encouraged students’ to provide answers in

response to reading comprehension.

C. After reading

After reading the short story, a discussion of the reading developed. Questions were

asked for comprehension and the teacher used key vocabulary words to stimulate

students’ comments.

1. In the first reading, students were to develop conversation about the interest and

motivation of the story.

2. A guide question about interest and character pillar developed in the story was

presented. What role does responsibility have in the short story “Just a lipstick?”

106

3. After class discussion, the teacher presented the story elements like: theme,

setting, character, problem, rising action, plot, falling action, resolution, conflict,

conclusion and figurative language (simile, metaphor, personification and

hyperbole).

4. The teacher discussed vocabulary words reviewed and learned. An oral review of

the key words and definitions was developed. The title of the story was posted on

a wall in the classroom throughout the research.

B. The second day (A second reading of the short story with explanations was completed)

The second reading provided comprehension of the short story and provided

opportunities for students to develop reading comprehension, vocabulary growth, and

oral communication skills.

The story also provided high school students with the opportunity to make inferences and

reinforce reading comprehension.

A. Before the reading

1. The teacher encouraged students to remember the title of the short story read and

express ideas in class conversation. The students observed title of second short

story and discussed inferences orally. The teacher had students review character

count pillars and select pillar relevant to short story.

2. During reading

The teacher reread the story with students’ participation. The teacher and students used

oral expression, gestures, pauses, dramatic expressions, various tones of voice without

exaggeration, rhythm and visual contact ((Rasinski, Padak, McKeon, Wilfong, Friedauer

& Heim, 2005). The discussion completed throughout reading provided key word

107

vocabulary and enthusiasm in word use for support and comments relative to vocabulary

enrichment.

1. During the reading, the teacher asked students if they remembered the meaning of

the key word. The teacher provided the meaning to verify word in context and use, the

explanation and a brief definition. The teacher reviewed vocabulary growth and

techniques provided in orientation and chapter three guide discussion.

2. After each review, explanation, definition, example and discussion the teacher

was to repeat the short story and review the vocabulary key words.

3. The teacher provided the example used in procedures where the key word was

used out of context, but with similar connotation. Therefore, the word was applied

according to techniques and orientation reviews.

4. During the reading, the teacher made comments and asked questions for students

comprehension relative to vocabulary key words and character count pillars used in

the second story.

3. After reading

After rereading the short story a discussion guide continued. Guide questions

developed for oral discussion by the students. The guide questions were open and

relative to Depth of Knowledge (DOK) web for reading. The vocabulary was also

used as a stimulus to provide support in language learning.

1. Questions relative to the short story and the inferences and analysis of given

reading were discussed. The students provided explanations relative to inferences

made in oral reading of short story and analysis for reading comprehension skills

108

developed in twelfth grade. The motivation and participation of learners’ was given

opportunity to enhance reading and vocabulary growth.

2. The teacher also encouraged students’ language growth through guide questions

significant to character count pillars for short story (responsibility and respect). How

does the story develop responsibility in the character? Other guide questions for

character count pillars were: How does the main character respect herself? What

opinion do you have of “X” character? and What was the little voice calling “X”

according to the story?

3. After discussing the story and the guide questions, the teacher asked the following

questions: What words were reviewed in class today? Review the meaning of the words

orally for class discussion. The teacher presented the words on a handout and had

students write about personal experiences relevant to short story and character count

pillars. The vocabulary words were also integrated for class review.

(Reading and reconstruction of short story where teacher asked guide questions and

promoted key words for vocabulary enrichment was discussed).

The third reading given to participants (from the five selected short stories)

integrated the story read by the teacher and the students orally. Each day the teacher

encouraged students to read the story, parts of the story and paragraphs orally. The

teachers asked guide questions based on the short story. The vocabulary key words were

reviewed and discussed for meaning in context.

The story provided oral reading of paragraphs, discussion of parts of the story and

analysis to continue with the subsequent reading.

109

A. Before reading

1. The teacher encouraged students’ recollection by presenting the title on a handout

with a picture (relevant to short story). The teacher provided guidance in the

review of the short story.

B. During reading

2. During the reading the teacher continued to provide explanations, give definitions

of key words and follow procedures discussed in orientation. The teacher

reconstructed the short story to integrate students in sequence and review. The

students were to review the vocabulary words and provide a family experience

appropriate for the short story. The vocabulary techniques mentioned previously

were used to encourage key word growth.

C. After the reading

After the review of vocabulary words, definitions, explanation, demonstration and

examples, the teacher repeated the short story by oral reading and students’ participation

where key words were discussed. The students reviewed the reading and methodology of

the Core Reading Model used by Glavich (2006). The methodology of enriched reading

and vocabulary adapted for the investigation consisted of seven steps.

The procedures implemented with the experimental group encouraged teachers to

review the book and familiarize with the character count pillars for high school learners.

The vocabulary words were implemented and developed each day with the character

count pillars according to short story. The methodology was reinforced with enriched

reading and vocabulary instruction and oral communication skills in the development of

110

vocabulary instruction (Glavich, 2006; Standards and Expectations (PRDE), 2007; CCP,

2010).

The collection of data of the study was to be completed in two interludes; first, the

administration of the pre and post-test; second, the survey of Character Counts Program

was to be administered to the experimental groups. The experimental groups completed a

pre-test and post-test and finally, the control groups were administered a pre and post-

test. The results of the instruments of the pre and post tests were submitted for the study

and the analysis of the corresponding gain in vocabulary and statistical data.

Pre and Post Vocabulary Tests

The meta- analysis study by the NRP (2000), the RMC studies (2007), and the

RAND project (2002) established differences in researchers’ results in vocabulary

instruction, character education, and oral communication. The RMC (2007, 2009) study

established effective instruction and vocabulary gain in learners when evaluation

measures were designed according to age, language group, social settings and proficiency

levels. The regarding test evaluations and the National Reading Panel (2000) indicated

that standardized tests did not seem to be adequate in vocabulary changes found in

independent measures. It was believed that vocabulary was better evaluated by teacher

generated instruments in an attempt to be useful for monitoring pre-tests and post-tests in

accordance to reading comprehension and motivation in the development of vocabulary

building (NICHHD, 2000, NRP, 2000; National Reading Technical Assistance Center,

2010).

111

The reports specified that: “the more relevant the assessment in instructional

framework for students, the more suitable the results about instruction were” (NRP,

2000).

For this study, the researcher prepared a test of vocabulary assessment used as a

pre-test and post-test. The test corresponded to key words of the selected short stories

and the character count pillars (CCP, 2010), for the instructional methodology

implemented in research and adolescents age.

The measurement of vocabulary knowledge in adolescent high school students by

researchers was diverse. Some measured receptive vocabulary and others researchers’

expressive vocabulary. In some studies they used pictures as images or pictorial

representations; in others, key synonym words (Biemiller, 2000; Chall, 2000).

Additional measures in the complexity of vocabulary growth and oral communication

skills required the adolescent produce definitions and explanations of the key words

(RAND, 2002; Biemiller, 2004, 2000). The use of expressive vocabulary and receptive

vocabulary in adolescents influenced reading skills in different ways. The use of

listening comprehension skills in word identification strengthened expressive vocabulary

and oral communication; also the use of receptive vocabulary expanded pre reading skills

and word meaning in provided options for the learner of a L2 (Wise, Sevick, Morris,

Lovett, & Wolf, 2007).

The researcher generated an instrument of evaluation to measure receptive

vocabulary. A design of a multiple choice test was also prepared on definitions and

synonyms, representing the key words and definitions. Each item presented a sentence

with the key word in context and five alternatives (the correct answer and four

112

alternatives). The sentences used in the items of the test were different from the readings;

even though, the words had the same meaning as presented in the short stories

Once the short stories were selected from the book: “Boricuan Times”;

vocabulary words were selected according to students’ grade level. The words were

consistent with twelfth grade L2 students’ reading texts and grade level expectations of

the Department of Education. The pre-test and post-test were reviewed by three experts

in education for high school students (College professor and two English high school

teachers). The experts responded with recommendations and reviews for the short story

selections from the book.

To evidence the reliability of the instrument an IBM 19.0 Statistical Package of

Social Sciences for Windows was used for consistency of measurements.

Administration of Measurement Instruments

At the beginning of the intervention, a teacher administered a Character Education

Survey for experimental groups one (1) and two (2) participants to recall ethic and

character education values (CCP, 2010; PRDE, 2010).

The test was administered individually with an approximate duration of 15 to 20

minutes. The administration of the survey was provided at the school classroom where

no noise was made; distractions were at a minimum, with adequate temperature and

required lighting.

The researcher coordinated with the director of the school and with the

participating examiners, the date of the administration of the character education survey,

the location and procedures to be followed. The researcher observed the process, verified

113

consent forms and students’ number code for protocol purposes of the test and

confidentiality.

The observation of the survey allowed the examiner to exchange impressions with

the students in an adequate conversation to provide assurance of conditions. The

conversation with the students’ provided a five minute discussion of an explanation of the

survey and the purpose of the pre- test and post-test. The examiners read the instructions

according to protocol and manual guide provided, and began practice examples with the

students.

During the administration of the survey the examiner mentioned the discussion

question and waited for the participant to select the corresponding letter, from a group of

words or phrases. After each item was mentioned, the examiner was not given discussion

or key words of the item to give explanations. The students selected a response (a, b, c, d

or e), depending on the item and the appropriate response. The examiner verified the

students’ responses to the answer key and the selection of incorrect items.

Even though, the examiner offered positive comments during the administration

of the Character Education Survey to maintain the motivation of the participants, the

comments were not biased towards given responses. The examiner presented oral cues

related to the survey with no influential remarks, facial expressions, or accessible

response keys.

The survey was administrated by the examiner, and preceded with the calculation

of the complete amount of criteria and the standard score, the percentile rank and age

according to standards and expectations of the English Program of the Puerto Rico

Department of Education of Puerto Rico (PRDE). The protocol was completed in ink.

114

The participants’ responses were saved by the researcher, according to procedures and

regulations of students’ regulations of the Puerto Rico Department of Education and the

HIPPA Law of confidentiality and disposition of privacy.

The survey was not repeated to participants after a six month period of the

administration of the test. The information was notified to parents in the consent form.

The research presented the Character Education Survey and also another pre and post-

test. The researcher completed a test of vocabulary assessment used as a pre-test and

post-test. The test corresponds to five short stories used in the intervention and the

instructional methodology.

The twelfth grade high school teachers administrated the tests to the experimental

and control groups as a whole. The pre-test was administered a week prior to

intervention and the post-test a week after the intervention. The classroom was identified

as an adequate location for the administration of the pre-test and post-test. The location

was comfortable with ventilation, lighting, and chairs for the examiner and the

participants.

The test was administered in the morning from (8:00 to 11:30 a.m.). The process

took 15 to 20 minutes, approximately. While the teachers administered the tests to the

students, the researcher collaborated in the process by verifying the number codes,

facilitation of pencils and organization of location and needs for being comfortable.

Appendix B presents the instructions and administration of the test or vocabulary

assessment designed by the researcher and the instructions for the examiner.

115

Selection of Short Stories

There was a selection of five short stories with specific required characteristics,

particularly focused on vocabulary. The selection of the short stories began by the

researcher verifying books relevant to high school students’ experiences, vocabulary

knowledge and the English Program from the Puerto Rico Department of Education’s

standards and expectations for grade level. The revision and list of books and short

stories pertinent to twelfth grade students’ was viewed. The visit to bookstores and

conversations with fellow English teachers and facilitators provided extensive research in

search of an adequate book and selection of stories. A conversation with examiner and

teachers provided a selection of stories used in the investigation significant for grade

level and students’ competence.

The following criteria was implemented in the selection of the book (Biemiller,

2007; English Program Circular Letter, 2012; PRDE Content Standards and Expectations,

2007; Research in Middle Level Education (RMLE), 2004)

1. Vocabulary in context.

2. Vocabulary extension strategies to assess word meaning.

3. Analysis of word meaning and application of new meaning to context according

to academic, cultural or contemporary based on current trends.

4. Inference and support of meanings of vocabulary words.

5. Conveyance of meaning of vocabulary words and makes connections to words.

6. Acquisition of independent word learning strategies

7. Books containing short story elements (setting, characters, rising action, conflict,

plot, resolution and conclusion)

116

8. Short stories appropriate for high school students.

9. Short stories with profound analysis of critical thinking, and inferences in high

school learners. The short stories were relevant to students’ personal and cultural

experiences.

The researcher of the study selected five short stories: Just a Lipstick by Anibal

Muñoz (2009), Emily’s Voices by Anibal Muñoz (2003), Get Out of Here! by Anibal

Muñoz (2001), The Paperboy’s Wish by Anibal Muñoz (2001), and Marbete by Anibal

Muñoz (2006).

At the beginning of the study the teachers informed not to engage in reading the short

stories previously selected for the intervention from the book.

The second chapter emphasized the criteria and conditions to be considered in the

selection of key vocabulary words. The investigation selected three to five words for

each short story of the book: “Boricuan Times” for a total of 25 words. There are various

grammatical categories included in the selection of the key words like: nouns, adjectives,

and verbs. Table I presents the key words for each short story.

Selection of Vocabulary Words

Table 1. Key Words of Short Stories

Title Short Stories Quantity Key Words Key Words

Just A Lipstick 3 blossom

by Anibal Muñoz spoil

gloomy

Emily’s Voices 3 fervantly

by Anibal Muñoz profile

sorrow

Get Out of Here! 3 dismiss

by Anibal Muñoz anguish

outburst

117

The Paperboy’s Wish 3 slippery

by Anibal Muñoz vulture

swivel

Marbete 3 uneasy

properly

comply

Character Pillars 6

by: Character Counts Program respect

responsibility

fairness

citizenship

caring

trustworthiness

The study provided materials for each short story and the character count pillars.

The materials were presented previous to study by twelfth grade English teacher of the

experimental group. The materials prepared were the short stories, key words and

character count pillars developed and defined briefly, photocopies, protocol and guide for

research investigation for each intervention day with suggested guide questions.

The intervention of the investigation developed in a five week period. There were

five short story components, one per week with the five short stories selected. Each story

component developed in three days (Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays) during 50

minute periods, approximately. The experimental group read the stories and developed

the vocabulary words.

The implementation procedures with the experimental group learning word gain,

reading comprehension and character pillars developed the methodology by Anibal

Muñoz (2009) in his publication of cultural short stories for ESL readers of secondary

level public schools and explicit instruction in how to develop assessment techniques.

118

The methodology of the investigation had three components:

1. Readings and oral readings of short stories that integrated vocabulary enrichment

(PRDE, Standards and Expectations, 2007).

2. Discussion and analysis of short story comprehension and vocabulary in context

review (PRDE, Standards and Expectations, 2007).

3. Enriched vocabulary instruction and inferred vocabulary meaning (Biemiller,

2007)

Vocabulary Development Techniques

The intervention of vocabulary development offered during the study integrated

technical support in development of character education (Character Pillars), short story

vocabulary words and oral practice of new words (CCP, 2010; McGee & Schickedanz,

2007). The techniques were:

1. Key vocabulary words were to be preselected before presentation of short

story.

2. The vocabulary words were to be defined, explained, given in context,

provided in examples, and discussed by the teacher and by the student before,

during and after the short story.

The teacher used cloze and in context exercises to clarify definition of words. An

example was to be given to explain the pre-selected vocabulary in the presentation of

synonyms of a key word read from the short story. In addition, an explanation and or

sentence of a key word like: courage, the ability to face danger, difficulty, or pain without

fear were discussed.

119

3. The teacher used linguistic elements such as: gestures, facial expressions,

intonation, stress, and tone. The pronunciation of the word “courage” in a

projected firm tone or low nervous tone.

4. The teacher used pauses, rhythm, velocity, intensity, time and durability

during reading of short story. The student had the opportunity to read

according to own speed and tempo.

Vocabulary Enrichment

Glavich (2006) developed the Core Reading Model which presented seven

specific steps in the acquisition of vocabulary. The steps were discussed in chapter two

in the Enriched and explicit vocabulary of the dissertation. According to the

investigation an adaptation of the information was completed. Additional steps were

included to present key vocabulary words with a list of synonyms under each one

according to pre-selected short story vocabulary and character count pillars. A reference

to the list of words for the pre-test and post-test were mentioned below the title. A guide

question was asked in reference to key words: What vocabulary words and character

pillar was discussed during the week? The additional steps were to be added to make

students aware, provide exposition, develop communicative competence and increase

vocabulary in context, pertinence and meaning to the methodology.

The expansion of enriched and explicit vocabulary in the dissertation was given

once a week after intervention of short story and vocabulary enhancement. The key

vocabulary words were introduced before, during and after the reading, through the use

of vocabulary reinforcement techniques and interactive discussions. The vocabulary key

words and character count pillars (CCP) were to be reviewed each day for enrichment

120

and gain in meaning. The teachers were given reinforcement techniques in orientations

provided previous the intervention of investigation that had students use the word in

school, pronounce the word and use the word in context.

Analysis of Statistical Data

The descriptive statistical data were used to calculate the measures and mid

tendencies (medium) and the variability (deviation standard) of the scores of the

standardized tests (Dunn, 1986, 2007) administered previously. The results of the data

were collected through the administration of the tests (pre-test and post-test).

To compare the control group and the experimental group in the dependable

variable of word gain, the use of the Windows IBM, SPSS, 19.0 was selected. The

procedure allowed control in the influence of unknown variables and independent

variables that affected the dependent variable. These unknown variables were known as

covariance (Creswell, 2009). Statistically, the variables created differences and withheld

data from the experimental group and control group before the intervention.

The literature suggested verbal ability (and word sounds) was able to affect the

acquisition of vocabulary and word recognition (Coyne, Simmons & Kame’enui, 2004;

Gathercole, 2007; Folse, 2004; Lonigan, 2007).

Ethical Characteristics

Once the school was identified, the teachers selected the twelfth grade classroom.

Consent forms were given before the studies initiated. Students were given an orientation

about the study to be completed and informed about the participation (experimental and

control group), for each school separately. The orientation provided information about

the investigation groups to be identified, two as the experimental group and two as the

121

control group, the purpose of the study, the procedures, the risks and benefits,

confidentiality towards the participants, teachers, and schools, the data, voluntary

participation and requirements for consent forms informed to parents and or legal

guardians. The meetings were programmed in coordination with the twelfth grade

English teachers, and developed three weeks prior to the research study.

Confidentiality Dispositions

The identity of each participant was protected. The information and data

identifying the student was confidential, according to the Puerto Rico Department of

Education Student Law passed in 2004, stipulating the right to protect students’ personal

information and the HIPPA Law regulations of confidentiality. The following measures

of security were disclosed: (a) tests were given a numerical number and no names were

used by students’; (b) the consent forms and tests were organized in folders by colors; (c)

the results of the tests are protected in folders and boxes in the researchers private

residence; (d) the names of students, teachers and school are not found on any of the

documents generated as part of the investigation; (e) the names of students were only

identified on the consent forms, stored at the researchers home, separated from the tests.

The researcher had access to the data. The documents were stored for a minimum of five

years after the study. After this time the documents will be destroyed.

Limitations

The investigation like similar studies presented limitations in the performance

intervention. First, a selected sample was used and not plausible to primary groups. The

use of formed groups facilitated the intervention of the study, incorporated external

validity for it limits in the validation of the findings and other contexts and assessment

122

settings (Kazdin, 2002). The investigation design selected for the research (quasi-

experimental) accepted the samples of non plausible statistics with the limitation of

results being found inadequate in the sample. The general results towards the population,

stimulus, and assessment were not possible (Kazdin, 2002).

The selection of the participating schools presented various limitations. The study

required twelfth grade high school students for the study. The study includes the

Character Counts Pillars (CCP) by the Josephson Institute Center for Youths (JICY) in a

64 question survey given by the teachers in a thirty minute duration presenting control in

responses only relevant to character pillars discussed during intervention (JICY, 2004,

2010). The English class itinerary was of fifty minutes at the participating school,

presenting limitations in time of measurement and study review (Kazdin, 2002). The

teachers’ and students’ participation in the investigation was a necessary component that

was not often found with acceptance.

The use of a pre and post-tests was also used in the internal validity of the study.

The menace of the internal validity affected the inferences related to the derivational

causes and effects of the study (Creswell, 2005). The pre and post tests were used as

possible instruments in students’ proficiency of vocabulary words and character count

pillars.

Another threat towards the internal validity of the research was the restriction in

the intervention of the study and the control of variables. The frequency and exposure to

key vocabulary words did not control the amount of times the key word (s) appeared in

the text. Also, the validity of the intervention of the character pillars discussed and used

in the study was not all effective in the short story readings. The study was completed in

123

a natural English classroom setting. A commercial English Book was selected and not

modified to control the variables. Also, the Character Education through Vocabulary

Instruction in enhancement of Oral Communication (CEVIOC), particularly, the enriched

vocabulary instruction promoted various key words exposed of character count pillars in

readings. The vocabulary words were critical characteristic essential in extended

instruction and a distinction between incidental exposure and extended instruction of the

key words from the oral readings and character count pillars. The key words addressed

the extended vocabulary challenges that high school students faced (Graves, 2006).

Students’ required vocabulary instruction programs that developed comprehension of

meanings, repeated exposure to words and opportunities for wide reading (Graves, 2006).

Knowing many key vocabulary words provided youths’ access to countless

worlds of ideas and information (Graves, 2006). The development of oral

communication in high school students was an additional observation in the development

of fluency in oral reading and word knowledge gain (Rasinski, 2005). The effectiveness

of oral communication in students’ reading was a difference based on individual

acquisition of key words and oral skills in high school classrooms. The study presented

limitations of students’ word gain and oral fluency abilities. Another matter not taken

into consideration was students’ attendance to class during the intervention of study.

The assessment techniques used were also limited conclusions of the researcher in

the identity of key vocabulary words learned by the students’. The evaluation

instruments developed by the researcher reviewed receptive vocabulary in selected items

through multiple choices. The evaluation measured the gain or insight of knowledge

acquired by the learners’ in pre selected vocabulary words and character count pillars

124

presented in the pre test and post test. Beck, McKeown and Kukan (2002) indicated

learning of vocabulary words in students’ is one influential component in language

growth; gain and general knowledge could misjudge the quantity of words learned in real

and functional circumstances. The communicative views that established language

proficiency were also significant in high school students learning (Francis & Simpson,

2003).

The vocabulary words used in the pre-test and post-test provided the same

vocabulary meanings specified in short story readings, but the sentences used in the items

of the pre-test and post-test were different from the sentences specified in short stories.

The key vocabulary words were not in context. Although the items were simple, the

learner had no requirements in the interpretation and evaluation of application in meaning

of correct words. The items presented synonyms or short meanings that required an

association by the learner in the words meaning and the retention during the interventions

with the key vocabulary words and communicative proficiency.

The investigation did not indicate students’ gain in word meaning and

communicative skills, but presented benefits in the opportunity for vocabulary growth

rate. The CEVIOC (Character Education with Vocabulary Instruction for the

enhancement of Oral Communication) did not support this type of learning. The

assessment technique indicated that the investigation did not provide specific data of the

knowledge of vocabulary enrichment and oral communication in high school learners.

125

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS

This chapter presents an analysis of the investigation findings. The statistics were

obtained to examine the Development of Character Education through the use of

Vocabulary Instruction for the enhancement of Oral Communication of High School

Seniors of a public school in Puerto Rico. The data were based on the administration of

two instruments: “Vocabulary Test, 2012 (Rivera)” and the Character Education Survey

(Josephson Institute Center for Youths, 2010).

The analysis of data was completed using the Statistical Package of Social

Sciences19.0 (IBM, SPSS, Statistics by Windows). The analysis of the study complied

with two main purposes. The first purpose was to present the demographic characteristics

of the participants’ profile of the study. The second purpose was to present the statistical

analysis related to each of the questions of the investigation. The third purpose was to

present the findings and statistical analysis related to each of the questions of the

investigation. The data were obtained through the administration of a standardized test

and a test prepared by the researcher in two stages: before the treatment (pre) and after

the treatment (post). The instruments were provided to four groups of a high school of

Puerto Rico in two control and two experimental groups. The instruments of group

distribution are presented in Table 2.

126

Table 2. Group Participant’s Distribution (n-91)

Group Frequency Control

(f) (%)

_______________________________________________________________________

Control 1 21 23.5

Experimental 1 24 26.4

Control 2 23 25.3

Experimental 2 23 25.3

Total 91 100.0

Figure 1. Group Participant’s Distribution (n=91)

The subject distributions by group participants were high school seniors of one

public high school of the Caguas School Region. The group of participating students was

constituted by 91 participants from which 21 were in control group 1, representing a

23.1%, 24 students in experimental group 1, which represented 26.4 %, 23 from group

control 2, which represented a 25.3 % and 23 participants of experimental group 2 ,

which represented a 25.3 %. The data were observed on Table 2 and Figure 1.

127

The third section identified participants’ demographic data by gender and age.

The 91 participants were divided in 46 females which represented 50.5 %and 45 male

students which represented a 49.5 observed in Table 3 and Figure 2.

Table 3. Participant Gender Distribution (n=91)

Gender Frequency Percent

(f) %

Feminine 46 50.5

Masculine 45 49.5

Total 91 100.0

Figure 2. Participant’s Distribution

MALE FEMALE

The demographic data in Table 3 figure 2 described the participant’s profile in the

study through the analysis of data provided in demographic documents. The study

accounted with the participation of 91 high school seniors of a public school of Puerto

Rico with a 50.5% being female participants and 49.5% being male participants of the 4

groups which participated in the study. The distribution of participants is observed by

gender.

128

The third section also presented the participants’ age distribution. The 91

participants were twelfth grade students between the ages of 16, 17 and 18 years of age as

presented in Table 4 and Figure 3.

Table 4. Participants’ Age Distribution (n=91)

Figure 3. Participants’ Age Distribution (n=91)

16 years 17 years 18 years

Age Frequency

(f)

Percent

(%)

16 years 7 7.7

17 years 78 85.7

18 years 6 6.6

Total 91 100.0

129

Table 4 and Figure 3 presented participants’ age distribution. Of the 91 participants, 7

were sixteen years of age, representing a 7.7%, 78 were seventeen years of age,

representing an 85.7% and 6 were eighteen 18 representing a 6.6 % . The age

representing high school seniors in the study was of 17 years.

The fourth section presented the statistical inferential and correlated procedures to each

of the four study questions and hypothesis formulated. Each of these sections included

tables and figures to facilitate comprehension of study findings. The section presented a

summary of the findings of the study.

Profile of Student Sample

An analysis of the demographic data obtained and outlined previously allowed

establishing a sample profile of participants. The profile of the sample of study was:

twelfth grade high school students of feminine gender of a high school of the Caguas

Region. The average age was seventeen (17) years old.

Findings

The section presented quantitative findings of research according to each of the

variables and groups to answer study questions.

Descriptive Analysis of Data

The following presented a descriptive analysis of the data obtained from the

administration of instruments: “Vocabulary Test, Rivera (2012)” and “Character

Education Survey (Josephson Institute Center for Youths, 2010)”. As part of the analysis,

the study presented the average, deviation, standard and variance of the pre test and the

post test administered to each of the participating groups. The results of the Character

Education Survey were presented according to administration for experimental groups

130

one (1) and two (2). The following results were from the average, deviation, standard

and variable of the pre test given to participants and provided in Table 5 and Figure 4.

Table 5. Average, Deviation, Standard, and Variable of the pre test administered to

participants (n=91)

Group N Average

Deviation

Standard

S

Variable

s2

Control 1 21 9.38 2.71 7.35

Control 2 23 12.78 2.21 4.91

Experimental 1 24 8.92 2.21 4.86

Experimental 2 23 9.00 1.91 3.64

Figure 4. Average of Pre Tests administered to Participants by Group (n=91).

In the pre test Control 1 group (Traditional teaching) obtained a percent of 9.38

with a deviation standard of 2.71 and a variable of 7.35, the Control group 2 (Traditional

131

teaching) obtained a percent of 12.78 with a deviation standard of 2.21 and a variable of

4.91, the Experimental 1 group (TVC) obtained a percent of 8.92 with a deviation

standard of 2.21 and a variable of 4.86 and Experimental 2 group (TVC) obtained an

average of 9.00 with a deviation standard of 1.91 and a variable of 3.64. The data were

observed on Table 5 and Figure 4. Table 6 and Figure 5 present the post test data of

deviation, standards and variables are also provided in Table 6 and Figure 5. The post

tests average, deviation, standard and variables were also provided in Table 6 and Figure

5.

Table 6. Average, Deviation, Standard, and Variables of the Post Tests

Administered to Participating Groups (n=91).

Group N Average

Deviation

Standard

S

Variable

s2

Control 1 21 15.38 2.44 5.85

Control 2 23 15.74 3.19 10.20

Experimental 1 24 15.79 2.72 7.39

Experimental 2 23 16.04 2.72 7.41

132

Figure 5. Average, Deviation, Standard, and Variables of Post tests Administered to

Participating Groups (n=91).

The post test of Control 1 group (Traditional teaching) obtained an average of

15.38 with a deviation standard of 2.44 and a variable of 5.95, Control 2 group

(Traditional teaching) obtained an average of 3.19 and a variable of 10.20, while the

Experimental 1 group (TVC) obtained an average of 15.79 with a deviation standard of

2.72 and a variable of 7.39 and the Experimental 2 group obtained an average of 16.04

with a deviation standard of 2.72 and a variable of 7.41. The Character Education Survey

was also administered to four groups related with Character Count Pillar Words (CCP).

Tables 7 and 8 below present variables with data from the study instruments given to

participants.

133

Table7. Average, Deviation, Standard and Variables of Study Instrument “Tus

Valores Cuentan” – Character Education Survey” for the Experimental

group 1 (n=24)

Variable or dimensión n Average

Deviation

Standard

s

Variable

s2

Trustworthy 24 3.51 .46 .21

Respect 24 3.40 .32 .10

Citizenship 24 3.43 .28 .08

Responsibility 24 3.77 .56 .31

Fairness 24 3.21 .40 .16

Caring 24 3.36 .40 .16

General Average 24 3.40 .27 .07

Table 8. Average, Deviation, Standard, and Variable of Study Instrument “Tus

Valores Cuentan – Character Education Survey” for Experimental group 2

(n=23)

Variable or dimension n Average

Deviation

Standard

s

Variable

s2

Trustworthy 23 3.51 .23 .05

Respect 23 3.32 .33 .11

Citizenship 23 3.53 .24 .06

Responsibility 23 4.03 .29 .09

Fairness 23 3.13 .39 .14

Caring 23 3.44 .30 .09

General Average 23 3.40 .18 .03

134

The “Character Education Survey” administered to Experimental groups 1 and2

provided the following results for: Character trait trustworthy the obtained average was of

3.51 with a deviation standard of 0.23 and a variable of 0.05. The trait of respect

obtained an average of 3.32 with a deviation standard of 0.33 and a variable of 0.11. The

character The Character Education Survey instrument was administered to the two

experimental groups for these two groups received treatment of “Tus Valores Cuentan”

six character traits. The Experimental group 1 results were the following for: trait 1 –

trustworthy the obtained average was 3.51 with a deviation standard of 0.46 and a

variable of 0.21. The trait of respect obtained an average of 3.40 with a deviation

standard of 0.32 and a variable of 0.10. The citizenship trait obtained an average of 3.43

with a deviation standard of 0.28 and a variable of 0.08. The character trait of

responsibility obtained an average of 3.77 with a deviation standard of 0.56 and a

variable of 0.31. The variable of fairness obtained an average of 3.21 with a deviation

standard of 0.40 and a variable of 0.16. The character trait of caring obtained an average

of 3.36 with a deviation standard of 0.27 and a variable of 0.07. The data were observed.

The citizenship trait obtained an average of 3.53 with a deviation standard of 0.24 and a

variable of 0.06. The trait of responsibility obtained an average of 4.03 with a deviation

standard of 0.29 with a variable of 0.09. The character trait of fairness obtained an

average of 3.13 with a deviation standard of 0.38 with a variable of 0.14. The trait of

caring obtained an average of 3.44 with a deviation standard of 0.30 with a variable of

0.09. When considering the variables or dimensions combined the general average

obtained was 3.40 with a deviation standard of 0.18 and a variable of 0.03. The data

were observed in Tables 7 and Table 8. The data were obtained from Control groups 1

135

and 2. The data distributed in tables 9 and 10 were obtained through each instrument

items of the Vocabulary Pre and Post Tests- Rivera (2012) administered. As part of the

analysis the frequency and percent of each item were presented from the pre-test and

post-test answered correctly.


on the Pre and Post Tests (n= 21)

Item

Pre Test Post Test

Freq.

f

%

Freq.

f

%

1

I guess blossoming abandoned us

when we changed our groovy

attitude.

3 14.3 19 90.5

2 The manager was spoiling our good

time by ruining the moment. 2 9.5 0 0.0

3

I was in my room looking at the

gloomy afternoon through the

window.

9 42.9 0 0.0

4 The incident changed my whole

character realizing how my life was 3 14.3 16 76.2

5 Beliefs help change my character. 1 4.8 1 4.8

6 She shares her sorrow with others. 8 38.1 17 81.0

7 The young girl showed fervently her

enthusiasm. 6 28.6 2 9.5

8 The doctor revised the patient’s

profile. 15 71.4 18 85.7

9 The students’ are trustworthy with

their school work. 11 52.4 0 0.0

10 The teenage boy respects his

teachers and friends at school. 4 19.0 18 85.7

136

Item

Pre Test Post Test

Freq.

f

%

Freq.

f

%

11 Glenda cried out in an anguish that

filled the room. 8 38.1 1 4.8

12 José made a decision about his

studies. 13 61.9 18 85.7

13 The rain was keeping the road

slippery and wet. 8 38.1 17 81.0

14 Like the vulture of his kingdom, he

was there for his prey. 3 14.3 19 90.5

15 The driver swiveled to the left of the

road. 14 66.7 19 90.5

16 Mrs. Vázquez has a responsibility

with her twelfth grade students. 13 61.9 19 90.5

17 The two male police officers were

signaling something to her. 8 38.1 0 0.0

18 He was one of those kids who liked

to do things properly. 7 33.3 2 9.5

19 Mathew had to comply with the law. 3 14.3 21 100.0

20

Marta was in fairness with the two

students’ participation in the Science

Fair.

10 47.6 21 100.0

21 Equality of citizenship and law are

important for human beings. 2 9.5 17 81.0

22 Glesmary will dismiss her friends

from the hospital. 12 57.1 21 100.0

23 High school students’ need caring

from teachers and parents. 9 42.9 19 90.5

24 Elisa respects her friends in class. 14 66.7 18 85.7

25 The teenage girl’s outburst led to

crying in her room. 11 52.7 20 95.2

General Average 9.38 44.7 15.38 61.4

137

A descriptive analysis of data obtained from each of the instrument items of the

“Vocabulary Pre Post Tests– Rivera (2012) was done. As part of the analysis, the

frequency and percent of each item from the pre and post-tests answered correctly are

presented in table 9 with item, frequency and general average. A descriptive analysis of

Control Group 2 was presented from the results of the pre and post tests given in table 10.


on the Pre and Post-tests (n= 23)

Item

Pre Test Post Test

Freq.

f

%

Freq.

f

%

1



attitude.

3 13.0 22 95.7



3



window.

2 8.7 1 4.3






enthusiasm. 19 82.6 12 52.2


profile. 22 95.7 17 73.9





138

Item

Pre Test Post Test

Freq.

f

%

Freq.

f

%




studies. 22 95.7 22 95.7






road. 14 60.9 21 91.3








20



Fair.

23 100.0 20 87.0










General Average 12.78 55.6 15.74 68.4

139

Table 10 presented a descriptive analysis of data obtained from each of the instrument

items of the Vocabulary Pre and Post Tests– Rivera (2012) administered to Control

Group 2. As part of the analysis, the frequency and percent of each item answered

correctly were presented. A descriptive analysis of pre and post-tests results from

Experimental Group 1 is observed in Table 11 below.


Group 1 on the Pre Test and Post Test (n=24).

Item

Pre Test Post Test

Freq.

f

%

Freq.

f

%

1



attitude.

8 33.3 21 87.5



3



window.

13 54.2 3 12.5






enthusiasm. 11 45.8 15 62.5


profile. 17 70.8 19 79.2





140

Item

Pre Test Post Test

Freq.

f

%

Freq.

f

%




studies. 14 58.3 21 87.5






road. 13 54.2 21 87.5

16 Mrs. Vázquez had a responsibility







20



Fair.

3 12.5 19 79.2










General Average 8.92 37.2 15.79 65.8

141

Table 11 presented a descriptive analysis of data obtained from each of the instrumental

items of the “Vocabulary Pre-Test and Post-Test –Rivera (2012)” administered to

Experimental 1 Group. As part of the analysis the frequency and percent were presented

in the pre-test and post-test answered correctly. The statistical analysis of data from

Experimental Group 2 is also presented as follows in Table 12.


Group 2 on the Pre and Post Tests (n=23)

Item

Pre Test Post Test

Freq.

f

%

Freq.

f

%

1



attitude.

7 30.4 20 87.0



3



window.

4 17.4 18 78.3






enthusiasm. 11 47.8 0 0.0


profile. 19 82.6 21 91.3





142

Item

Pre Test Post Test

Freq.

f

%

Freq.

f

%




studies. 13 56.5 21 91.3






road. 12 52.2 21 91.3








20



Fair.

3 13.0 22 95.7










General Average 9.00 39.1 16.04 69.8

143

Table 12 presented a descriptive analysis of data obtained from each of the instrumental

items of the “Vocabulary Pre Test and Post Test –Rivera (2012)” administered to

Experimental 2 Group. As part of the analysis the frequency and percent were presented

in the pre-test and post-test answered correctly. The descriptive analysis of the

Characters Counts Survey was included as part of the study questions and results seen in

Table 13 below.


“Character Education Survey” (Components1-25) for Experimental

Group 1 (n=24).

Component

High

Description Average

DS

S

Interpretation

20

If a man impregnates a woman

and she decides to have the

baby, he has the moral

obligation of providing

monetary assistance to the

child, even if the relationship

has terminated.

3.96 .20

Entirely in

agreement

3 It is important for me to do

well in school. 3.92 .28 In agreement

16

Being a good person is more

important than being a rich

person.

3.92 .28 Entirely in

agreement

18

There is no justification for a

man to hit his wife or

girlfriend.


agreement

5 I have planned to go to College

or a Technical Institute. 3.88 .34

Entirely in

agreement

Low 14 It is fine to break a promise if it

is difficult to fulfill. 1.67 .70

In

disagreement

144

Component

High

Description Average

DS

S

Interpretation

17 It is acceptable to hurt a person

who insults me. 2.13 .68

In

disagreement

7 Failure, sometimes is necessary

to improve. 2.17 .96

In

disagreement

4 I cease to strive when class is

too difficult. 2.25 .90

In

disagreement

11

It is difficult for me to defend

my beliefs when I know my

friends laugh at me.

2.50 1.25 In agreement

Table 13 presented a descriptive analysis of data obtained by instrument

components of “Character Education Survey.” As part of the analysis, the average

deviation standard of the components with high averages and low averages were

identified on the survey. The survey was administered to two experimental groups. The

survey was designed with six different scales to measure participating students’

perceptions.

First, data obtained by Experimental Group 1 is presented. The first scale

indicated if students agreed or disagreed with the statements specified. The first

statement presented elements 1-25 which possible values were 1, 2, 3, and 4. Number

one represented the level of perception over the different slightest statements and number

four represented the level of perception over the different highest statements. If the

participant averaged a value score equal to or greater than 3.50, the participant entered in

the category of total agreement, if the participant averaged a value score between 2.50

and 3.49 the student entered in the category of agreement, if the participant averaged a

value score of 1.50 and 2.49 the student entered in the category of disagreement, and if

145

the students averaged a value score between less than or equal to 1.49 the student entered

the category of total disagreement.

Table 13 presented the components of high and low averages obtained by results

of participating students’ answers. In this case the results indicated number 20 as the

component with a better average of 3.96 and a deviation of 0.20. The component was

described as: If a man impregnated a woman and she decided to have the baby, he had the

moral obligation of providing monetary assistance to the child, even if the relationship

had terminated. The components to continue in high level averages were: 3.16, 18, and 5.

Number 3 obtained an average of 3.93 with a deviation standard of 0.28. The component

was described as: “for me the best thing was to do well in school.” Component number

16 obtained an average of 3.92 with a deviation standard of 0.28. The component was

described as: “Being a good person was more important than being rich”. Component

number 18 obtained an average of 3.88 with a deviation standard of 0.61. The

component was described as: There was no justification for a man to hit a woman or his

girlfriend. Component number 5 obtained an average of 3.88 with a deviation standard of

0.34. The component was described as: “I had planned to go to College or a Technical

Institute.”

According to the components with a low average, these were numbers 14, 17, 7,

4, and 11. Component number 14 obtained an average of 1.67 with a deviation standard

of 0.70. The component was described as: “It was fine to break a promise if it was

difficult to fulfill.” Component number 17 obtained an average of 2.13 with a deviation

standard of 0.68. The component was described as: “It was acceptable to hit a person that

insulted me.” Component number 7 obtained an average of 2.17 with a deviation

146

standard of 0.96. The component was described as: “Failure, sometimes was necessary to

improve”. Component number 4 obtained an average of 2.25 with a deviation standard of

0.90. The component was described as: “I ceased to strive when class was too difficult.”

Component number 11 obtained an average of 2.50 with a deviation standard of 1.25.

The component was described as: “It was difficult for me to defend my beliefs when I

knew my friends were to laugh at me.”

The second scale presented the frequency participants had selected from the

different alternatives presented in the statements. The components of the second scale

from 26 to 39 identified with values 1,2,3,4, and 5. Number 1 represented the lowest

level of frequency and 5 represented the highest level of frequency. If the participant

averaged an equal or greater value of 4.50, that entered the category of never, if the

average equaled or valued between 3.50 and 4.49, the category was seldom, if the

average equaled or valued between 2.50 and 3.49, the category was sometimes, if the

average equaled or valued between 1.50 and 2.49, the category was often, and if the

average was less than 1.49, the category was always. Table 14 provided data analysis

based on components 26-31 the instrument scale from “Character Education Survey”.

147

Table 14. Components of High and Low Averages of Instrumental Scale.


Group 1.

Component Description Average DS Interpretation

High 31 I have suicidal thoughts after

having problems at school 4.54 .83 Never

39

A teacher does not enforce the

rules because he is afraid of

the students

4.33 1.01 Seldom

36 A student brings a weapon to

school. 4.21 .72 Seldom

29 A student insults a teacher

with words or gestures. 4.04 .95 Seldom

30 A student destroys school

property. 4.04 .95 Seldom

Low 32 A student verbally abuses of

another person. 1.88 1.12 Sometimes

26

Socializing with a different

type of student (for example, a

student from a different entity,

religion or sexual orientation)

2.00 .88 Sometimes

35 A student physically attacks

another person. 2.63 .77 Sometimes

37 A studente gets into fights. 2.83 .96 Sometimes

33 A student steals from another

person. 2.96 1.08 Sometimes

Table 14 presented the components of high and low averages obtained according

to participants’ answers. Component 31 was the most selected with an average of 4.54

and a deviation standard of 0.83. The component was described as: “I had suicidal

thoughts after having problems at school.” The components following the highest

148

answers are 39, 36, 29, and 30. Component 39 obtained an average of 4.33 with a

deviation standard of 1.01. The component was described as: “A teacher did not enforce

the rules because he was afraid of the students”. Component 36 obtained an average of

4.21 with a deviation standard of 0.72. The component was described as: “A student

brought a weapon to school”. Component 29 obtained an average of 4.04 with a deviation

standard of 0.95. The component was described as: “Insulted a teacher with words or

gestures.”

Component 30 obtained an average of 4.04 with a deviation standard of 0.95. The

component was described as: “Student destroyed school property.” The components for

low averages were: 32, 26, 35, 37, and 33. Component 32 obtained an average of 1.88

with a deviation standard of 1.12. The component was described as: “A student verbally

abused another person.” Component 26 obtained an average of 2.00 with a deviation

standard of 0.88. The component was described as: “Socializing with a different type of

student (for example, a student from a different entity, religion or sexual orientation).


component was described as: “A student physically attacked another person.” Component


described as: “A student who got into fights.” Component 33 obtained an average of

2.96 with a deviation standard of 1.08. The component was described as: “A student who

stole from another person.”

The third scale presented the frequency with which participants have selected

different alternatives present in statements, but with different categories. The third scale

identifies components 40 to 56 with values of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Component number 1

149

represents the lowest level of frequency and 5 represents the highest level. If the

participant averages a value equal or greater than 4.50, that enters the category of never,

if the average is of 3.50 and 4.49, enters the category of only once, if the average is

between 2.50 and 3.49, it enters the category of two or three times, if the average is

between of 1.50 and 2.49, it enters the category of four or five times, if the average is of

less or equal to 1.49, it enters the category of six or more times. The statistical analysis

in Table 15 presented components (40-56) for the “Character Education Survey.”



Group 1 (n=24).


High 52

Student takes a weapon (gun

or knife) to school for

protection.

4.83 .82 Never

53 Student threatens another

person with a weapon. 4.83 .82 Never

47

Student drives under the

influence of drugs and

alcohol.

4.79 .83 Never

42 Student steals something from

a store. 4.71 .86 Never

49

Student attends school under

the influence of drugs or

alcohol.

4.71 .91 Never

Low 55 Student helps another student

when he is in problems. 1.96 1.23

Four or five

times

43

Student does the right thing,

even if it reduces popularity

with friends.

2.29 1.33 Four or five

times

150


40 Student cheated on a test. 2.54 1.18 Two or three

times

45

Student defends another

student when being

intimidated.

2.75 1.19 Two or three

times

48 Student is drinking alcohol. 3.13 1.48 Two or three

times

Table 15 presents components of low and high averages obtained according to

participants’ answers. Component 52 obtained the highest average of 4.83 with a

deviation standard of 0.82. The component is described as: “Student takes a weapon (gun

or knife) to school for protection.” The components that followed in high average were

53, 47, 42, and 49. Component 53 obtained an average of 4.83 with a deviation of 0.82.

The component is described as: “Threatening another person with a weapon.” Component


described as: “Driving under the influence of alcohol.” Component 42 obtained an

average of 4.71 with a deviation standard of 0.86. The component is described as:

“Stealing something from a store.” Component 49 obtained an average of 4.71 with a

deviation standard of 0.91. The component is described as: “Student attended school

under the influence of drugs or alcohol.”

The components of low average were 55, 43, 40, 45, and 48. Component 55

obtained an average of 1.96 with a deviation standard of 1.23. The component was

described as: “Student assisted other students when they needed help.” Component 43


151

described as: “Student does the right thing even if it reduces popularity with friends.”

Component 40 averages a 2.54 deviation standard of 1.18. The component was described

as: “Student cheated on a test.” Component 45 obtained an average of 2.75 with a

deviation standard of 1.19. The component was described as: “Student defended another

student who was being intimidated.” Component 48 obtained an average of 3.13 with a

deviation standard of 1.48. The component was described as: “Student is drinking

alcoholic beverages.”

The fourth scale presents a perception of students’ responsibilities at school. The

fourth scale identified components 57 to 63 with possible values of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

Number one represents the lowest level of frequency and five represents the highest level

of frequency. If the participants’ average was equal or greater than 4.50, the category

was “Very Good,” if the students’ average was 3.50 and 4.49, the category is “Good,” if

the students’ average was 2.50 and 3.49, the category is “Regular,” if the students

average was 1.50 and 2.49, the category is “Poor,” if the student obtained an average of

less or equal the category was “Very Poor”. These are presented in Table 16 below.

152

Table 16. Relation of High and Low Components of the Fourth Instrument Scale


Group 1 (n=24).

Component Students perception of

Responsibilities at School Average DS Interpretation

High 61

Maneja adecuadamente

asuntos de disciplina y

problemas de conducta de los

estudiantes.

3.88 1.12 Good

60

Provides a positive

environment to achieve

learning.

3.75 .94 Good

62 Teaches the six character

pillars to students. 3.71 1.30 Good

Low 59 Provides an environment free

from verbal abuse 2.58 1.25 Regular

57 Provides a pleasant

environment for students. 3.17 1.61 Regular

63 Models the six carácter pillars

to students. 3.29 1.08 Regular

Table 16 presented components of low and high averages obtained from

participants’ answers. The scale provides only seven components from which the three

highest and the three lowest were selected. Component number 61 obtained the highest

average with a 3.88 and a deviation standard of 1.12. The component described as:

“Handles discipline problems and behavioral problems of students” was observed as a

High component. Components 60 and 62 were the highest average after component 61.


component was described as: “Provided an environment of learning.” Component 62

153


described as: “Taught the six character pillars to students.”

The components of lower averages were 59, 57, and 63. Component 59 obtained

an average of 2.58 with a deviation standard of 1.25. The component was described as:

“Provided an environment free from verbal abuse.” Component 57 obtained an average

of 3.17 with a deviation standard of 1.61. The component was described as: “Provided a

pleasant environment for the students.” Component 63 obtained an average of 3.29 with

a deviation standard of 1.08. The component was described as: “Modeled the six

character pillars to students.”

The fifth scale referred to the following question: How many questions were

answered honestly? Component 64 values at 1, 2, and 3. For this question three

represented the category with “All,” the value of two represented the category with

“Some,” and value one represented the category with “None.” The component for this

question was 2.54 with a deviation standard of 58.3 % of the participants, 9 answered

“Some” with total honesty representing 37.5 % and only 1 answered “None” with total

honesty and representing 4.2 %. The scale provided the following data analysis:

154



Experimental Group1 (n=24).

Tabulation Frequency

f

Percent

% Average

Deviation

Standard

S

All 14 58.3

2.54 .59 Some 9 37.5

None 1 4.2

The data reflected that the percent of participants frequency and deviation standard

ranged from 58.3 to 37.5 and 4.2.

The sixth scale provided two statements: “Answering the survey questions made

me think about what was right and wrong” and “Answering the survey questions helped

change my conduct.” The sixth scale identified questions 65 and 66 which provided a

value of 1 and 2. For the question, value two represented “In agreement” and value one

represented “In disagreement.” Component 65 obtained an average of 1.63 with a

deviation standard of 0.49. The frequency in answers for component 65 was the

following: 22 answered “In agreement,” representing 91.7 % and 2 answered “In

disagreement” representing 8.3 %. The frequency in answers for component 6 was the

following: 15 participants answered “In agreement” representing 62.5 % and 9 answered

“In disagreement,” representing 37.5 %. The following table presents a frequency

response to components 65 and 66 from the Character Education Survey Instrument.

155


“Character Education Survey” for Experimental Group1 (n=24).

Question Response Freq.

F

Percent

% Average

DS

S

65. Answer the following

Survey question: The survey

made me think about what is

right or wrong?

In agreement 22 91.7

1.92 .28 In

disagreement 2 8.3



will help me change conduct?


1.63 .49 In

disagreement 9 37.5

The following data provided results obtained from the “Character Education

Survey” for Experimental Group2. The first scale presented participants responses to

statement “In agreement” or “In disagreement.”

Table 18 presents components with high and low averages obtained according to

participants’ responses of Experimental Group 2. The component of high rank was 20

with an average of 4.00 and deviation standard of 0.00. The component was described

as: “The component is described as: If a man impregnated a woman and she decided to

have the baby, he had the moral obligation of providing monetary assistance to the child,

even if the relationship had terminated. The components to continue in high level

averages are: 5, 2, 3, and 1. Number 5 obtained an average of 3.96 with a deviation

standard of 0.21. The component was described as: “I had planned to go to College or a

Technical Institute.” Component number 2 obtained an average of 3.91 with a deviation

standard of 0.29. The component was described as: “I learned anything if I had tried

hard.” Component number 3 obtained an average of 3.87 with a deviation standard of

156

0.34. The component was described as: “It was important for me to have done well in

school.” Component number 1 obtained an average of 3.78 with a deviation standard of

0.52. The component was described as: “The more study tools I had, more opportunities

were provided.”

According to the components with a low average, these were numbers 11, 4, 14,

13, and 17. Component number 14 obtained an average of 1.35 with a deviation standard

of 0.71. The component was described as: “It was difficult for me to defend my beliefs

when my friends laughed at me” Component number 17 obtained an average of 1.78 with

a deviation standard of 0.80. The component was described as: “I did not strive when the

class was difficult.” Component number 14 obtained an average of 1.87 with a deviation

standard of 0.76. The component was described as: “It was difficult to break a promise

when it was difficult to comply with.” Component number 4 obtained an average of 2.25

with a deviation standard of 0.90. The component was described as: “I ceased to strive

when class was too difficult.” Component number 13 obtained an average of 2.39 with a

deviation standard of 0.89. The component was described as: “In today’s society a

person had to lie or cheat to be successful.” Component number 17 obtained an average

of 2.48 with a deviation standard of 0.90. The component was described as: “It was

acceptable to hurt someone who insulted you.” The data analyses of high and low

components are presented in Table 19.

157



Group 2 (n=23)

Component Description Average DS

S Interpretation

High 20

If a man impregnates a woman

and she decides to have the

baby, he has the moral

obligation of providing

monetary assistance to the

child, even if the relationship

has terminated.

4.00 .00

Entirely in

agreement

5 It is important for me to do

well in school. 3.96 .21 In agreement

2

Being a good person is more

important than being a rich

person.


agreement

3

There is no justification for a

man to hit his wife or

girlfriend.


agreement

1 I have planned to go to College

or a Technical Institute. 3.78 .52

Entirely in

agreement

Low 11 It is fine to break a promise if it

is difficult to fulfill. 1.35 .71

In

disagreement

4 It is acceptable to hurt a person

who insults me. 1.78 .80

In

disagreement

14 Failure sometimes is necessary

to improve. 1.87 .76

In

disagreement

13 I cease to strive when class is

too difficult. 2.39 .89

In

disagreement

17 It is necessary to hurt someone

who insults me. 2.48 0.90 In agreement

158

The second scale presented the frequency participants had selected from the

different alternatives presented in the statements. The components of the second scale

from 26 to 39 identified with values 1,2,3,4, and 5. Number one represents the lowest

level of frequency and five represents the highest level of frequency. If the participants

average was of equal or greater value than 4.50, that entered the category of never, if the

average was equaled or valued between 3.50 and 4.49, the category was seldom, if the

average equaled or valued between 2.50 and 3.49, the category was sometimes, if the

average equaled or valued between 1.50 and 2.49, the category was often, and if the

average was less than 1.49, the category was always. The following scales provided

detailed analysis of components 26-39 in Table 20.

Table 20. Relation of High and Low Components of Second Instrument Scale


Group 2 (n=23).


High 31 I have suicidal thoughts after

having problems at school 1.88 1.12 Never

27

A teacher does not enforce the

rules because he is afraid of

the students

2.00 0.88 Seldom

30 A student brings a weapon to

school. 2.63 0.77 Seldom

28 A student insults a teacher

with words or gestures. 2.83 0.96 Seldom

39

A teacher does not comply

with rules for being

intimidated by students.

2.96 1.08 Seldom

159


Low 32 A student verbally abuses of


26

Socializing with a different

type of student (for example, a

student from a different entity,

religion or sexual orientation)

2.22 .80 Sometimes

37 A studente gets into fights. 2.48 0.90 Sometimes

35 A student physically attacks


34

A student goes to school

under the influence of drugs

or alcohol.

3.26 0.96 Sometimes

Table 20 presented the components of high and low averages obtained according

to participants answers. Component 31 was the most selected with an average of 5.00

and a deviation standard of 0.00. The component was described as: “I had suicidal

thoughts after having problems at school.” The components following the highest

answers are 27, 28, 30, and 32. Component 27 obtained an average of 4.35 with a

deviation standard of 0.88. The component was described as: “Student had been

intimidated by other student (for example, for entity, religion, and sexual orientation).”


component was described as: “A student brought a weapon to school.” Component 29


described as: “Destroyed school property.” Component 28 obtained an average of 4.17

with a deviation standard of 1.03. The component was described as: “Student destroyed

school property.” Student sought for help from an adult when having problems at

160

school.” The last component of high average is 39 where the obtained score is 4.17 with

a deviation standard of 0.83. The component was described as: “A teacher did not comply

with rules for being afraid of students”. The components for low averages were: 26, 32,

34, 35, and 37. Component 32 obtained an average of 2.17 with a deviation standard of

1.15. The component was described as: “A student verbally abuses of another person.”


component was described as: “Socializing with a different type of student (for example, a

student from a different entity, religion, or sexual orientation). Component 37 obtained


“A student who got into fights.” Component 33 obtained an average of 2.96 with a

deviation standard of 1.08. The component was described as: “A student who stole from

another person.” Component 35 obtained an average of 2.74 with a deviation standard of

1.05. The component was described as: “A student physically attacked another person.”


component was described as: “A student came to school under the effects of drugs or

alcohol.” The following table provides data from components 40-56:

161



Group 2 (n=23).


High 52

Student takes a weapon (gun

or knife) to school for

protection.

5.00 0.00 Never

53 Student threatens another

person with a weapon. 5.00 0.00 Never

42 Student steals something

from a store. 4.91 0.42 Never

49

Student attends school under

the influence of drugs or

alcohol.

4.91 0.42 Never

50

Student has intimidated a

person (for example, entity,

religion, or sexual orientation)

4.87 0.46 Never

Low 40 Student cheated on a test. 2.26 0.92 Four or five

times

48 Student is drinking alcohol. 2.87 1.55 Four or five

times

43

Student does the right thing,

even if it reduces popularity

with friends.


times

55 Student helps another student

when he is in problems. 2.91 1.20

Two or three

times

45

Student defends another

student when being

intimidated.


times

The third scale presented the frequency with which participants had selected

different alternatives presented in statements, but with different categories. The third

scale identified components 40 to 56 with values of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Component number

162

one represented the lowest level of frequency and five represented the highest level. If

the participant averaged a value equal or greater than 4.50, that entered the category of

never, if the average was of 3.50 and 4.49, it entered the category of only once. If the

average is of 2.50 and 3.49, it entered the category of two or three times. If the average

was of 1.50 and 2.49, it entered the category of four or five times. If the average was of

less or equal to 1.49, it entered the category of six or more times. Table 21 presented the

following data of components:

Table 21 presented components of low and high averages obtained according to

participants’ answers. Component 52 obtained the highest average of 5.00 with a

deviation standard of 0.00. The component was described as: “Student took a weapon

(gun or knife) to school for protection.” The components that followed in high average

were, 42, 49, 50, and 53. Component 53 obtained an average of 4.83 with a deviation of

0.82. The component was described as: “Threatening another person with a weapon.”


component is described as: “Driving under the influence of alcohol.” Component 42


described as: “Stealing something from a store.” Component 49 obtained an average of

4.91 with a deviation standard of 0.42. The component was described as: “Student

attended school under the influence of drugs or alcohol.” Component 50 obtained an

average of 4.87 with a deviation standard of 0.46. The component was described as:

“Student had intimidated a person (for example, entity, religion, or sexual orientation).

The components of low average were 40, 43, 45, 48, and 55. Component 40 averaged a

2.26 deviation standard of 0.92. The component was described as: “Student cheated on a

163

test.” Component 48 obtained an average of 2.87 with a deviation standard of 1.55. The

component was described as: “Student drank alcoholic beverages.” Component 43


described as: “Student did the right thing even if it reduced popularity with friends.”


component was described as: “Student assisted other students when they needed help”


component was described as: “Student defended another student who was being

intimidated.” The following table identified data analysis components 57 to 63:

Table 22. Relation of High and Low Components of the Fourth Instrument Scale


Group 2 (n=23).

Component Students perception of

Responsibilities at School Average DS Interpretation

High 62 Teaches the six character

pillars to students. 3.39 1.12 Good

60

Provides a positive

environment to achieve

learning.

3.13 0.92 Good

63 Models the six character

pillars to students 3.09 1.16 Good

Low 59 Provides an environment free

of verbal abuse 2.17 1.07 Regular

58

Provides an environment free

of physical abuse for

students.

2.57 1.04 Regular

57 Provides a pleasant

environment for students 2.78 1.08 Regular

164

The fourth scale presented a perception of students’ responsibilities at school.

The fourth scale identified components 57 to 63 with possible values of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

Number one represented the lowest level of frequency and five represented the highest

level of frequency. If the participants average was equal or greater than 4.50, the

category was “Very Good,” if the students average was 3.50 and 4.49, the category was

“Good,” if the students average was 2.50 and 3.49, the category was “Regular,” if the

students average was 1.50 and 2.49, the category was “Poor,” if the student obtained an

average of less or equal, the category was “Very Poor.”

Table 22 presented components of low and high averages obtained from

participants’ answers. The scale provides only seven components from which the three

highest and the three lowest were selected. Component number 62 obtained the highest

average with a 3.39 and deviation standard of 1.12. The component described as:

“Taught the six character pillar traits to students” presented a high average. Components

60 and 63 were the highest average after component 61. Component 60 obtained an

average of 3.13 with a deviation standard of 0.92. The component was described as:

“Provided an environment of learning.” Component 63 obtained an average of 3.09 with

a deviation standard of 1.16. The component was described as: “Modeled the six

character pillars to students.”

The components of lower averages were 59, 58, and 57. Component 59 obtained


“Provided an environment free from verbal abuse.” Component 58 obtained an average

of 2.57 with a deviation standard of 1.04. The component was described as: “Provided an

environment of free verbal abuse”. Component 57 obtained an average of 2.78 with a

165

deviation standard of 1.04. The component is described as: “Modeled the six character

pillars to students.” The next scale on Table 23 provides data analysis of component 64:



Experimental Group 2 (n=23).

_______________________________________________________________________

Tabulation Frequency Percent Average Deviation

F % Standard

S

________________________________________________________________________

All 15 65.2

Some 8 34.8 2.65 .49

None 0 0.00

________________________________________________________________________

The fifth scale referred to the following question: How many questions were

answered honestly? This was Component 64 which was valued as 1, 2, and 3. For this

question three represented the category with “All,” the value of two represented the

category with “Some,” and value one represented the category with “None.” The

component for this question was 2.65 with a deviation standard of 0.49. For the

component 15 participants answered “All” with total honesty representing a 65.2%, eight

(8) answered “Some” with total honesty and representing 34.8 % and no participant

answered “None” representing 0.00 %. Table 24 presents frequency responses to

components 65 and 66:

166


“Character Education Survey” for Experimental Group1 (n=23).

Question Response Freq.

F

Percent

% Average

DS

S



made me think about what is

right or wrong?


1.43 .51 In

disagreement 10 43.5



will help me change conduct?


1.43 .51 In

disagreement 10 43.5

The sixth scale provided two statements: “Answering the survey questions made

me think about what was right and wrong” and “Answering the survey questions helped

change my conduct.” The sixth scale identified questions 65 and 66 provided a value of

one and two. For the question, value two represented “In agreement” and value one

represented “In disagreement.” Component 65 obtained an average of 1.43 with a

deviation standard of 0.51. The frequency in answers for component 65 was the

following: 13 answered “In agreement” representing 56.5 % and 10 answered “In

disagreement” representing 43.5%. The frequency in answers for component 66 was the

following: 13 participants answered “In agreement” representing a 56.5% and 10

answered “In disagreement” representing a 43.5%.

The chapter presented an analysis of the Tables and Figures with the analysis of

the statistics obtained from the “Character Education Survey.” The data analysis was

completed using the Statistical Package of Social Sciences 19.0 (IBM, SPSS, Statistics by

Windows). The Tables and Figures represented demographic characteristics of

167

participants, key vocabulary words of short stories from the book “Borincuan Times” and

statistics from the questions of investigation. The instruments provided data of two

experimental groups and two control group to validate research questions and, the

“Character Education Survey.”

The data presented from the “Character Education Survey” represents students’

treatment after the study and results in findings that benefit the CEVIOC methodology in

high school seniors.

168

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Chapter five presented the discussion of the findings, the conclusions, and

recommendations derived from the study. The chapter began with a general view of the

study. Then, a descriptive analysis discussion was presented of the scores obtained on

the Pre-test and Post-test and the Character Education Survey. The following segment

elaborated a discussion of the findings in the context of the study questions. It was

followed by conclusions of the study, recommendations applying to educational

scenarios, and suggestions for future investigations.

General View of Research

The study provided a cumulus of knowledge available about character education

through vocabulary instruction for oral communication of high school seniors through

readings and character education traits. Even though, the design of the investigation used

limited generalization of the population results for the limitations of the research, the

study presented data of high school seniors of a school of the Department of Education.

It was considered a contribution for there were no studies identified as such, in the

educational field, completed in Puerto Rico.

The purpose of the study was to examine the development of the implementation

of a combined methodology and supplementary readings with vocabulary instruction and

character count traits enhancing oral communication of high school seniors in the English

language classroom of the public school in Puerto Rico.

The study explored if there was a significant difference between vocabulary gain

between the experimental groups exposed to the readings and character pillar traits, and

169

the control groups, exposed to the traditional teaching methods (regular curriculum). The

study also pretended to explore if there existed a relative significance between the results

of the pre-test and post-test with the students exposed to values (character pillar traits),

vocabulary instruction, oral communication and key vocabulary gain. The study also

identified a relative significance between students exposure to oral communication

through readings and character pillar traits.

The sample of the study was of 91 participants of twelfth grade distributed in four

groups. A pre-test and post-test were provided to participants by teachers selected for

study and a 64 Character Education Survey (Josephson Institute Center for Youths,

2010). The survey served as a reference point of the general knowledge of receptive

vocabulary and verbal ability of the high school students. Before the intervention with

the experimental groups, the teachers administered a pre-test to all participants to explore

previous knowledge of key vocabulary pre-selected from short stories.

The experimental groups were exposed, during a period of five weeks to the short

stories, vocabulary instruction, oral communication and character trait pillars (CEVIOC).

The teachers were provided with protocol for each of the stories (five total) with guide

questions and activities for each short story. The control groups followed the traditional

methodology established by the regular curriculum for the English program of the

Department of Education.

Once the intervention was completed, the post test was administered with key

vocabulary and oral communication to the experimental and control groups. The

averages were compared and the scores of the tests (pre and post) of each group

separately to answer the first two questions of the investigation. The averages of

170

vocabulary gain were compared (differences between pre and post) of each group to

determine statistical significant difference between groups, and answer question number

three of the investigation. To conclude, data analysis was completed to explore a gain

obtained in scores from the pre and post tests and possible relation with key vocabulary

gain (fourth question).

The study was completed during the months of March and April of the year 2013.

The teachers followed the protocols, according to conversations and guide. The high

school seniors were enthusiastic with the short stories and the follow up activities

completed in class. The researcher at any given moment did not observe signs of

boredom during the session of each short story read, contrary to concern alluded by

(Biemiller, 2004) y Penno et,al. (2002) in their investigations.

The analysis of data obtained was completed using the Statistical Package for

Social Sciences, 19.0 (IBM, SPSS program). The calculation of the two tests t of the

experimental groups with a comparison of averages and scores was provided and of the

control group during the pre-test and post-test (first and second question of investigation).

A test t was completed by the groups to compare differences in vocabulary gain

with the experimental and control groups. The test allowed responses for the third

question of investigation. The fourth question of investigation, examined the significance

of results of the pre and post tests and vocabulary gain, and calculations of Pearson

correlation. The fifth question of the investigation, observed the relation between

communicative competence and vocabulary gain with character pillars with the

experimental and control groups.

171

Discussion of Descriptive Analysis of Scores

The analysis of the statistical description of scores obtained from the TVC

(Vocabulary Pre Test, Rivera; 2012) revealed differences between experimental groups

and control groups actions. The experimental groups obtained an average of 8.92 the

Experimental 1 group and 9.00 average for Experimental 2 group. The average for

Control 1 group was 9.38 and Control 2 group averaged a 12.78.

The statistical description of the results obtained from the pre test TVC identify a

high average for the Control 2 group of 12.78 in comparison with the Experimental group

1 (8.92). In this case, the difference between the groups was minor compared to

Character Education Survey and Post Test. The significant differences between scores of

the TVC for Experimental 1 group and significant gain were (r = .304 with a level of

significance less than 0.05, (p=.038).

The statistical description of the scores from both groups of the post test revealed

differences between experimental and control groups. The Control 1 group obtained a

15.38 average, Control Group 2 averaged 15.74 and Experimental 2 group obtained an

average of 16.04 while Experimental Group 1 obtained an average of 15.79. After

comparison of statistical data in the pre-test and post-test distributions, there was an

increase observed in average scores obtained by each group. However, an increase in the

experimental Group 1 was observed by an increase of 6.88 points between the average

pre-test (8.92) and the post-test(15.79). Experimental Group 2 also observed an increase

of 7.04 points between the average pre-test (9.00) and post-test (16.04). On the other

hand, the Control 1 group 1 observed an increase of 6.00 point between the average pre-

test (9.38) and post-test (15.38). The Control Group 2 also observed an increase of 2.96

172

points between average pre-test (12.78) and post-test (15.74). The differences suggested

the effectiveness of the intervention in increasing the gain of vocabulary words.

Discussion of Findings

The section elaborated the discussion of the findings of the study. The study was

organized in accordance to questions of investigation.

Question1. The first question of the investigation was: Are there significant

differences between the results of the pre and post-tests of students

who are being exposed to character education through vocabulary

instruction and oral communication methodology (CEVIOC)? To

answer the question a pre and post-test t was given to the

experimental and control groups. The analysis of the pre and post-

test of Experimental 1 group obtained as a result a value t of t =

11.578 with a level of significance of less than 00.5, (p=000).

Therefore, there was an increase between the students exposed to

character education through vocabulary instruction and oral

communication (Experimental Group 1). Experimental Group 2 pre

and post-test exposed a value of t of t =11.910 with a level of

significance less than 0.05, (p=.000). The increase in Experimental

Group 2 indicated increase in average, therefore discarding the null

hypothesis, for there was a significant difference between averages

and scores of the pre and post-test of the experimental groups. The

effect of vocabulary instruction was of 6.88. The finding suggested

there was a gain of vocabulary of students exposed to CEVIOC.

173

The average of vocabulary gain of the experimental groups was of 14 words

during the pre and post-test, what represents a 56% of words taught. The finding

increased vocabulary gain reported in studies. For example, in a study about the

effectiveness of teaching vocabulary directly through short stories to high school

students, Beck and McKeown (2007) reported a gain of 12% in a group of enriched

instruction. Other researchers also used oral reading of short stories, with or without

explanation of vocabulary words reporting different gains, according to teaching.

Biemiller and Boote(2006) reported a gain of vocabulary words of 22% for words given

an explanation versus a gain of 12% for those that were not explained. In a second study,

Biemiller and Boote (2006) reported a gain of 41% when instruction of key words was

intensive and the transfer of teaching or application was significant in new context.

These findings related to the gain of vocabulary of the experimental 1 and 2

groups according to the findings informed by Coyne, Simmons, Kame’enui, and

Stoolmiller (2004). Beck and McKeown (2007), and Wasik and Bond (2001) who

concluded the interaction of key words and use in varied contexts promoted significant

learning. The study, the planned activities and completion of the methodology CEVIOC

provided high school seniors the opportunity and the use of varied key words,

contextualized and decontextualized. The interaction with key words explained the

registered difference between the average scores of the pre-test and the post test of the

experimental groups, which resulted in vocabulary gain.

The findings also identified significant exposure through oral communication

class readings of short stories. The interaction of students exposed to vocabulary words

in Experimental 1 and 2 groups through oral readings provided significant gain in

174

vocabulary learning. The oral exposure of readings and vocabulary activities provided a

14% of vocabulary gain in learner’s instruction.

Question 2. The second question of the investigation was: Are there significant

differences between the results of the pre and post-tests of students

who are being exposed to the control groups of the traditional

methodology? To respond to this question a test t was applied to

independent groups to allow a comparison of averages and scores

obtained by students of the control groups on the pre-test and post-

test. The calculation obtained by Control 1 group was of an average

on the pre-test of 9.38 and on the post-test a 15.38 with a median of

6.00. Control 2 group obtained an average on the pre-test of 12.78

and on the post-test of 15.74 with a median gain score of 2.96.

Control 1 group obtained a t of t of 8.073 with a significance of less

than 005. Control 2 group obtained a t of 4.434 with a significance of

less than 0.05. For this reason, the null hypothesis was rejected, for

the significant difference in the average scores of the pre and post-test

of the control groups. There was evidence of the acquisition of key

vocabulary words for the control groups. In this case, there was a

median of 9.38.

The acquisition of key vocabulary words was also evidenced in the analysis of

vocabulary gain of the control groups. The average gain of the control group was of

3.96, which represented a 16% of key words. These findings suggest there was a

175

vocabulary gain of students exposed to traditional teachings. However, the gain was less

than the experimental groups registered (52%).

Even though the control groups were not exposed to the CEVIOC methodology or

listened to the selections of short stories used with the experimental groups, these

students participated frequently of readings of short stories as part of the habitual twelfth

grade English curriculum. The readings of the stories were not in repeated form,

assuming stories were not discussed profusely using the CEVIOC methodology. Even

when teachers used brief explanations of significant vocabulary words found in stories,

the teachers did not follow a systematic methodology of teaching vocabulary. The oral

communication exposed with control groups was not progressive in oral readings of short

stories for methodical teachings were used with controlled groups. The teachers provided

grade level curriculum with limited exposure to oral settings for vocabulary growth.

The present study did not explore, as part of the recollection of data, an analysis

of content vocabulary of the books read by the control group teachers. It was likely these

students were exposed to incidental learning of some key words, which could explain,

partially, a significant statistical difference of average scores of the pre and post-tests of

the control groups.

The research literature revealed, consistently, that reading stories was an effective

practice for students to learn vocabulary. Oral reading of short stories was a powerful

acquisition of new vocabulary (Beck & Mckeown, 2007); Biemiller, 2004; Stahl &

Dougherty, 2004) and promisory characters for the development of language (Van

Kleeck & Stahl, 2003). By the activities students learned key words, possibly by words

not heard daily (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1998; Wasik & Bond, 2001). A final report

176

by the NRP recognized the teaching strategies of vocabulary and implicit teachings to

conclude: “Vocabulary should both be taught directly and indirectly” NICHD, 2000 p.4-

24), for which there was a gain in vocabulary words by control groups.

The study also demonstrated a minimum or insufficient vocabulary gain. The

reading of short stories was an effective activity for student vocabulary gain, but not

significant as various researchers confirm (Beck & Mckeown, 2007; Biemiller & Boote,

2004).

Various studies indicated students learned vocabulary when given a word in

context (Beck & Mckeown, 2007; Biemiller & Boote, 2004; Sénéchal, 1997). These

studies suggested that oral readings, where some explanation of unknown words, was not

enough to enrich vocabulary. Some studies transcended this argument and indicated a

brief explanation of the vocabulary word within context of the story, were encouraging,

not enough to obtain a substantial gain (Beck & Mckeown, 2007; Biemiller & Boote,

2004; Coyne, Simmons, Kame'enui, & Stoolmiller, 2007). These researchers indicated

the importance of the teaching methods and key vocabulary words, but at the same time,

indicated the use to be insufficient and the gain to be insignificant (Beck & Mckeown,

2007).

The analysis of the effect of the test results t, completed during comparison of

different pre and post-tests, indicated the difference between the experimental groups and

the control groups. The difference of the control groups was of 6.00 by Control Group 1

and 2.96 by Control Group 2. The effect of the experimental group was higher than the

control group, the difference in medians was higher in experimental groups. The

evidence of the acquisition of key words was effective with the CEVIOC method. The

177

completion of the studies that explored incidental learning of words by reading of short

stories was recommended.

Question 3. Are there significant differences in vocabulary gain between the

experimental and control group? The post tests administered to students

exposed to traditional teachings (Control 1 and 2 groups) and those exposed

to character education through vocabulary instruction and oral

communication (Experimental 1 and 2 groups) indicated differences in

vocabulary gain. Evidence obtained from results of the post tests of

Control Group 1 and Experimental Group 1 indicates a median of 0.41.

Control Group 2 and Experimental Group 2 median indicate a 0.30. Both

groups presented a value t =0.534, (Control 1 and Experimental 1) with a

significant level of less than 0.05p. and (Control 2 and Experimental 2)

value t= 0.348 with a significant level of less than 0.05p. In this case, the

null hypothesis was excluded for there was a significant difference between

the gain of vocabulary of control and experimental groups. The average

gain of the experimental groups was of 15.79 and for the Control Groups of

15.38. The experimental groups had an increase in average of 2.72

(experimental groups) and 2.44 (control groups). This suggested the

intervention used was more effective than the traditional methodology of

vocabulary word gain.

The results were in agreement with obtained results by other researchers. In those

studies, groups given readings and explicit instruction with key vocabulary revealed a

higher vocabulary gain in comparison with groups who did not receive treatment (Beck

178

& Mckeown, 2007; Biemiller & Boote, 2004). Beck and Mckeown (2007), indicated

enriched instruction within reading context of short stories and discussion of readings

generated verbal repertoire for students to use effectively.

The CEVIOC methodology represented strategies and techniques (character

education (character pillar traits) vocabulary instruction, oral communication and reading

of short stories to identify words in context) had proven effective in the development of

vocabulary and reading comprehension (Beck and Mckeown, 2007). The methodology

harmonized with the techniques developed and complemented. The fusion of practices

and the implementation of activities encouraged CEVIOC teaching experiences for the

study. The researcher identified practices according to high school senior levels of

learning from NAEYC (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). The elaboration and use of

protocol was essential to facilitate implementation of CEVIOC. Reading of short stories

and classroom discussion (before, during and after reading stories) provided frequent key

word exposition in different contexts, to influence vocabulary word gain, according to

(Beck and Mckeown, 2001, 2007; Senechal, and Cornell, 1995; Whitehurst and Epstein,

1994).

Penno (2002) determined the combination of various vocabulary instruction

techniques were of benefit for the learner. The NRP (2000) highlighted the use of

various instructional methods appropriate for English learners and age appropriate when

acquiring vocabulary (NICHD, 2000). The NRP also identified the need to expose

multiple vocabulary activities to extend vocabulary growth. This study considered the

recommendations of the NRP for follow up.

179

Question 4. Is there a significant relation between the scores of the pre and post-tests

and the students gain in key vocabulary? To respond to the question the

calculation of the Pearson correlation was developed. There was no

significant relation between the TVC and vocabulary gain with the

Character Education Survey in Experimental groups 1 and 2 only. These

results were because of obtained scores from the Character Education

Survey and SPSS 19.0 coefficient correlation (r = .304 significant less than

0.05, (p=.038). There was a significant correlation between the results of

the pre and post tests and the Character Education Survey administered and

students exposed to character education, vocabulary instruction and oral

communication. Due to the coefficient of the correlation and the significant

difference, a procedure of calculations was determined. From the

calculations a variable to determine coefficient resulted from common

factors: r2 = (.304)

2 = 0.092. The SPSS 19. 0 IBM correlation with the

Character Education Survey established a r = .126 with a significant less

than 0.05. p=3.99 which indicates there was no significant difference

between the results of the pre and post tests and the Character Education

Survey administered only to Experimental 1 and 2 groups.

The findings related to vocabulary instruction gain difference suggested a possible

effect on vocabulary acquisition (Biemiller, 2005,2003, 2001; Mckeown, 1985’ Penno,

2002; Senechal and Cornell, 1995). According to Justice and collaborators (2005)

students responded to different vocabulary learning with previous vocabulary knowledge.

180

Some researchers indicated students with abilities reached vocabulary gain with

higher vocabulary words (Coyne et al, 2007; Penno et al, 2002, Senechal and Cornell,

1995). Fundamental findings like these were considered for the TVC study as a

covariant. However, a significant correlation of TVC and Character Education Survey

extended significant gain. The possibility of using the covariant was discarded.

On the other hand, various studies indicated high school students with minor

verbal ability were capable to acquire vocabulary. Elley (1989) found students

demonstrated low vocabulary abilities on the pre-test obtained gain by post-test. Coyne,

et al (2004) researched explicit instruction of vocabulary words with reading to students

learning English and found students with vocabulary skills demonstrated a gain in

vocabulary with those receptive learners. The researcher concluded explicit teaching of

words within context and short story readings contributed or detoured, vocabulary

learning.

Biemiller (2005, 2003, 2001) demonstrated effective teaching to high school

students learning to achieve vocabulary gain. Biemiller (2005, 2003) indicated that to

minimize the risk, direct teaching of vocabulary was to be revised and established with

language learning environments.

The findings of no significant relation between the TVC and vocabulary gain

presented in the study were consistent with Coyne and collaborators (2004) research

where students with lower receptive vocabularies benefitted more from the intervention

of students who were not exposed to the study. The experimental groups provided key

vocabulary gain similar to control groups (Coyne, 2004).

181

Question 5. Is there a significant relation between oral communication and vocabulary

instruction with character education pillars in experimental groups? To

respond to the question the relation between communicative competence

and vocabulary instruction with character education was observed

according to Wasik and Bond (2001) in the interaction of key words and

use in varied contexts to promote language growth. During oral reading

and vocabulary enrichment there is an increase in fluency and

comprehension that encourages language use in students exposed to

readings. The results of the post test for the experimental groups indicated

an increase in word growth of 9.2%. The enrichment of communicative

competence for ESL learners gave emphasis to oral reading activities

applied to experimental groups 1 and 2. The structure and process

developed during oral readings completed with Experimental groups

recognized students learning needs to support word recognition for reading

comprehension and oral input (Jordan, 2005, & Rasinski & Hoffman,

2003). Dudley (2004) and Castellanos (2006) also promoted the use of

language structures, emotional experiences and learning process that

encouraged communication. The effectiveness of language growth with

vocabulary instruction confirmed the importance of oral reading in English

language classrooms and the use of character education pillar words to

strengthen communicative skills in high school seniors. The pre and post

test results emphasize the challenge of language content (Echevarria &

Short, 2008) and the significance of the English language in a social

182

educational environment to encourage communication (Nakanishi, 2000).

A positive attitude in the classroom reinforced students language growth

through vocabulary development observed in post test results of the two

experimental groups (Pizarro, 2006).

There was a limited significant relation in the present study between the scores of

the TVC and vocabulary gain. In other words, the ability for students to gain word

knowledge from context was not a major factor related to word acquisition. Students

learned new words. The findings suggested additional researchers to explore vocabulary

gain with character education traits.

The study also integrated the Character Counts Survey with vocabulary words

from short stories emphasizing character trait pillars where students benefitted from

similar word use and education values presented in the survey. The results identified

awareness of character traits in students’ actions identifying “responsibility” as the

significant character trait of the six pillars of the survey. The Josephson Institute Center

for Youths (JICY, 2010,) also stated the importance of character traits in learners

environment providing the survey to evaluate students’ character.

Conclusions of the Study

In light of the analysis of the data, the following conclusions were reached:

1. The investigation obtained significant difference between vocabulary gain of the

experimental groups exposed to the CEVIOC methodology and the control groups.

The data indicated the CEVIOC methodology was effective according to vocabulary

instruction and oral communication. The reading of short stories with inserted

vocabulary word explanations was an effective acquisition of vocabulary for high

183

school seniors. However, the results were not to be attributed to the CEVIOC

methodology only. The limitations inherent to the study did not allow it. Cunningham

(2005) indicated vocabulary gain was not to be accredited to school years and with

explicit class instruction.

2. The study provided evidence of vocabulary gain with the control groups, but gain with

the experimental groups was higher and strong. The vocabulary gain of the control

groups was provided by teachers reading short stories from the regular English

curriculum program for high school students. Research literature reveals consistently,

short story readings are an effective practice for students to acquire vocabulary. The

NRP (2000) acknowledges vocabulary strategies for students learning, and implicit

teaching (NICHD, 2000). The research identified implicit teaching methods for

vocabulary gain was insufficient for language gain. The reading of short stories was

an effective activity for receptive vocabulary gain, but not substantially for some

researchers (Beck & Mckeown, 2007; Biemiller & Boote, 2006).

3. The study exposed oral communication and short story readings for vocabulary gain.

The findings related to oral communication and oral readings was insufficient to

identify effective vocabulary gain for Control 1 and 2 group participants, but some

researchers (Rasinski, 2003;Biemiller & Boote, 2006; NRP,2000) stated the

importance of oral reading for language fluency and reading comprehension as a

component for effective instruction. The recognition of words in readings was

observed in vocabulary gain in pre and post test results of Experimental Groups 1 and

2 and for reading comprehension was recognized in texts when students were provided

184

oral readings in the two experimental groups only. The control groups were not given

direct methodical teachings based on oral readings as the experimental groups.

4. There was no significant relation between pre and post test scores with the Character

Education Survey and vocabulary gain. The findings related to vocabulary word gain

and character pillar traits were diverse and contradictory in research revised for the

study. While various researchers specified students with high vocabulary rates

achieved word gain in vocabulary learning; others demonstrated students with a

reduced vocabulary rate were capable of acquiring vocabulary in equal proportion to

students with improved language skills. The findings of the study indicated a not

significant correlation between students pre and post-test scores with the character trait

values. The students who had acquired vocabulary gain, achieved word gain

interchangeably of pre and post tests or character survey.

5. The development of oral reading in the classroom according to post test results and

vocabulary instruction state the importance of integrating oral communication with

vocabulary instruction in language learning environments (Rasinski & Hoffman,

2003). Oral communication and learning of a L2 enriches vocabulary instruction

when oral input is developed within an effective structure. The integration of oral

readings in high school seniors L2 classrooms encourages learners to improve word

recognition and gain word expansion (Gardner, 1983). The increase in oral

communication develops through age, experience with various oral techniques and

significance student presents in acquiring vocabulary in a second language. The

CEVIOC methodology encourages oral skills with the integration of vocabulary

instruction through character pillars, and the implementation of oral skills

185

complements the study in results from post-test for Experimental Group 1 with an

increase of 7.2% of vocabulary.

Recommendations

The study presents a contribution to existing literature research towards the

teaching of character education pillars, vocabulary words, and oral communication to

high school seniors. The recommendations applicable to educational scenarios are

directed to explicit teachings and systematic vocabulary, but not decontextualized or

isolated. They should be within reading context of short stories, challenging and

appropriate for high school seniors’ practices (Allen, 1999; Baumann & Kame’enui,

2004).

The following were some recommendations to promote vocabulary gain

instruction:

1. Read short stories in class. Select stories of interest and challenge to high school

learners who enjoy reading and developing values. The NRP (2000) states the

importance of selecting short stories to be read in class with key vocabulary

words. Some stories have sophisticated and abundant words to ensure multiple

exposure to vocabulary (Baumann & Kame’enui, 2004; Beck & Mckeown, 2007,

Biemiller, 2004; NRP, 2000).

2. Identify books to be used and short stories to be read, vocabulary words, and use

of words in various contexts to enrich meaning (Baumann & Kame’ enui, 2004).

A minimum amount of words to be taught is to be established during course year.

It is important for teachers to plan and select words for explicit vocabulary gain

186

from textbooks provided from the Puerto Rico Department of Education English

Program and available resources (Biemiller, 2004, 2005).

3. Support reading activities of short stories in the classroom according to the high

school English curriculum. A daily reading period or time slot is recommended to

reinforce reading and vocabulary learning with key words CEVIOC. Enriched

instruction was recommended to increase vocabulary knowledge with use of the

CEVIOC methodology in English language classrooms of Puerto Rico.

4. Promote vocabulary use by applying words to new and significant situations in

high school students was imperative to language learning and multiple exposures

to new vocabulary words (Beers, 2003). Some studies about the topic suggested

teachers elaborate and develop different techniques using Puerto Rican short

stories to encourage language growth, culture, tradition, and word knowledge

(Heinemann, 2003; Manzo & Manzo, 2008).

5. Promote the CEVIOC methodology in high school grades is to increase

vocabulary. Teaching is to be sequential and progressive in language learners and

raise students’ fluency as a bridge between decoding and comprehension (Beck &

Mckeown, 2007; Biemiller, 2004; Heinemann, 2003). If follow up in oral

readings is provided using the CEVIOC methodology, the benefits transcend high

school level.

6. Incorporate the CEVIOC methodology within Puerto Rico’s Department of

Education English program curriculum to promote acceptance and use of the

English language for vocabulary gain and character values of high school seniors.

The use of interesting, cultural and traditional Puerto Rican short stories provided

187

by resources available in the public school system offer a range of opportunities

for high school students vocabulary word gain, character values and


7. Integrate specific CEVIOC techniques within high school seniors language

learning through English curriculum and monitoring of students vocabulary

growth.

Suggestions for Future Research

The following recommendations propose to continue future revisions:

1. Study the effectiveness of the CEVIOC methodology with high school seniors

and other high school grades of Puerto Rico’s Department of Education English

program to gather more evidence of character education, vocabulary gain and oral

communication skills.

2. Study the effectiveness of the CEVIOC methodology in different socio-

demographic contexts such as: schools with low economic status, urban schools,

and private schools of Puerto Rico.

3. Complete a mixed study design to explore the strengths and particularities and

patterns of acquiring vocabulary through the CEVIOC methodology of public

schools of Puerto Rico.

4. Repeat the study with the following modifications: offer the intervention for a

longer period of time, for example, a three month period or a semester. The

intervention would be consistent with vocabulary development and learning.

Measure vocabulary through key words and post-tests a month and a half later.

188

5. Repeat study using an assessment scale different for vocabulary evaluation. It is a

necessary tool for student learning and word knowledge.

6. Design additional investigations to explore the relation between vocabulary

growth and oral communication to provide explicit vocabulary gain of high

school students of the public school system of Puerto Rico with short stories by

Puerto Rican authors.

7. Study the characteristics of short stories from Puerto Rican authors that are

interesting and significant for social and cultural backgrounds of high school

seniors and explore if there is influence inferred in vocabulary growth.

8. Study the effectiveness of oral readings and reading comprehension for

vocabulary growth in high school students of Puerto Rico’s Department of

Education.

9. Research the acceptance and use of the English language by Puerto Rican students

and the use of Puerto Rican short stories that promote culture and tradition by the

integration of the CEVIOC methodology.

189

REFERENCES

Ackerman, P.T., & Dykman, R.A. (1993). Phonological processes, confrontation

naming, and immediate memory in dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities,

26, 597-609.

Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological

processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94,

545–561.

Alexander, P. (2003). Profiling the adolescent reader: The interplay of knowledge,

interest, and strategic processing (pp.47-65). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading

Conference.

Allen, J. (1999). How do we know its working? In Words, words, words: Teaching

vocabulary in grades 4-12 (pp.95-107). Portland; WA: Stenhouse Publishers.

Allen, J. (1999). Words, words, words. Portland; WA: Stenhouse Publishers.

Alvidrez, J., & Weinstein, R. S. (1993). The nature of “schooling” in school transitions:

A critical re-examination. Prevention in Human Services, (10), 7-26.

Anderson, N.J. (2003, July). Metacognitive reading strategies increase L2 performance.

The Language Teachers, (27), 20-22.

Anderson, R. C., & Nagy, W. E. (1991). The vocabulary conundrum. American

Educator, 16(4), 14–19, 14–47.

Armbruster, B.B., & Osborn, J. (2001). Put reading first: The research building

blocks for teaching children to read. Center for the Improvement of Early Reading

Achievement. Retrieved from:

http://www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/publications/PFRbooklet.pdf

http://www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/publications/PFRbooklet.pdf

190

Arnett, J. J. (2004). Adolescence and emerging adulthood: A cultural approach (2nd

Ed.).

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

August, D., Carlo, M., Dressler, C., & Snow, C. (2005). The critical role of vocabulary

development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research and

Practice, 20(1), 50-57.

August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language

learners: Report of the national literacy panel on language-minority children and

youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ballard, W. S., Tighe, P. L., & Dalton, E. F. (1980). IDEA- Oral language proficiency

Test I. Brea, CA: Ballard & Tighe.

Bamford, J., & Day, R. (2004). Extensive reading activities for teaching language.

Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Barley, Z., & Arens, S. (2008, January). Helping At-Risk Students Meet Standards: A

Synthesis of Evidence-Based Classroom Practices. McRel Mid Continent

Research for Education and Learning , Aurora, CO. Retrieved from:

http://www.mcrel.org

Baumann, J. F., & Kame’enui, E.J. (2004). Vocabulary instruction: Research to

practice. New York: The Guildford Press.

Baumann, J. F., Ware, D., & Edwards, E. C. (2007). Bumping into spicy, tasty words

that catch your tongue: A formative experiment on vocabulary instruction. The

Reading Teacher, 62, 108-122. Reprinted in M. F. Graves (Ed.) (2009). Essential

readings on vocabulary instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Bauman, K. J, & Graf, N.L. (2003). Educational attainment: 2000.Census 2000 brief.

http://www.mcrel.org/

191

Washington, DC. U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from: ERIC database on October

27, 2010.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M.G. (2006). Improving comprehension with questioning the

author: A fresh and enhanced view of a proven approach. New York: Scholastic.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M.G.(2007). Increasing low-income children's oral

vocabulary repertoires through rich and focused instruction. The Elementary School

Journal, 107(3), 251-271.

Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kukan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust

vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford Press.

Beck,I. L., McKeown, M.G., & Kukan, L. (2003, spring). Taking delight in words.

American Educator, 36-42.

Becker, W.C. (1977). Teaching and reading language to the disadvantaged: What we

have learned from field research. Harvard Educational Review, 47, 518-543.

Beers, K. (2003). When kids can’t read: What teachers can do. Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann.

Berk, L., & Rogoff, B. (1998). Cognition as a collaborative process: In D. Kuhn & R.

Siegler (Eds.) Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 2 Cognition, perception and

language (pp. 679-744), NY: John Wiley.

Berkowitz, M., & Bier, M.(2006). What works in character education: A research-driven

guide for educators. Washington, DC.: Character Education Partnership.

Berliner, D. C., & Nichols, S. L. (2007). High-stakes testing is putting the nation at risk.

Education Week, 26, 36-48.

192

Bernaus, M., Masgoret, A., Gardner, R., & Reyes, E. (2004). Motivation and attitudes

towards learning language in multicultural classrooms. International Journal

of Multilingualism, 1(2),75-89. Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14790710408668180

Biancarosa, C., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next-A vision for action and research

in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New

York (2nd

Ed). Washington, DC.: Alliance for Excellent Education.

Biemiller, A. (1999). Language and reading success: Vol. 5.Cambridge: MA:

Brookline.

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.

Biemiller, A. (2006). Vocabulary development and instruction: A prerequisite for school

learning. In D. Dickinson & S. B. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy

research, 2, 41-51. New York: Guilford.

Biemiller, A., & Boote, C. (2006). An effective method for building meaning vocabulary

in primary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 44-62.

Biemiller, A., & Slonim, N. (2001). Estimating root word vocabulary growth in

normative and advantaged populations: Evidence for a common sequence of

vocabulary acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 498-520.

Billig, S. H. (2000). Research on K–12 school-based service-learning: The

evidence builds. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(9), 658–664.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14790710408668180

193

Billig, S. H. (2002a). Philadelphia freedom schools junior leader evaluation. Denver,

CO: RMC Research Corporation.

Billig, S.H. (2010). Five rules separate high-quality service learning from

community service. Principal Leadership, 10(6), 26-31.

Billig, S. H., Jesse, D., & Grimley, M. (2008). Using service learning to promote

character development in a large urban district. Journal of Research in Character

Education, 6(1), 21-34.

Billig, S. H., & Root, S. (2006). Maximizing civic commitment through service learning:

Case studies of effective high school classrooms. In K. McKnight Casey, G.

Davidson, S. H. Billig, & N. C. Springer (Eds.), Advances in service learning

research: Vol. 6.

Billig, S. H., & Weah, W. (2008). K-12 service learning standards for quality practice.

In J. C. Kielsmeier, M. Neal, N. Schultz, & T. J. Leeper (Eds.), Growing to greatness,

2008: The state of service learning project (pp. 8-15). St. Paul, MN: National Youth

Leadership Council.

Blachowicz, C., & Fisher, P. (1996). Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms.

(1tst

ed.). Columbus, OH: Allyn & Bacon.

Blachowicz, C., & Fisher, P. (2009). Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms (4th

ed.).

Columbus, OH: Allyn & Bacon.

Blachowicz, C. L. Z., & Fisher, P. J. L.(2000).Vocabulary instruction. In M. J. Kamil, P.

B.Mosenthal,P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research,

3 (pp. 503–523). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

194

Blachowicz, C.L.Z., Fisher, P. J., Ogle, D., Watts-Taffe, S. (2006). Vocabulary:

Questions from the classroom. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(4), 524-530. Boston:

Allyn and Bacon.

Blum, R., & Libbey, H. (2004). School connectedness: Strengthening health and

educational outcomes for teenagers. School Health, (74), 231-232.

Brabham, E. G., & Linch-Brown, C. (2002). Effects of teachers' reading-aloud styles on

vocabulary acquisition and comprehension of students in the early elementary

grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 465-473.

Bromley, K. (2007). Nine things every teacher should know about words and

vocabulary instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(7), 528-537.

Retrieved from: doi:10.1598/JAAL.50.7.2

Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating students to learn (2nd

ed.). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Brown, R., Waring, R., & Donkaewbua, S. (2008). Incidental vocabulary acquisition

from reading, reading-while-listening, and listening to stories. Reading in a

Foreign Language, 20(2), 136-163. Retrieved from:

http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/October2008/brown/brown.html

Burt, M., Peyton, J. K., & Adams, R. (2003). Reading and adult English language

learners: A review of the research. Washington, DC: Center for Applied

Linguistics. Retrieved from: www.cal.org/caela/research/raell

Burstall, C. (1975). Language teaching: Factors affecting foreign-language learning:

A consideration of some recent research findings, 8, 5-25 Cambridge University

Press: Retrieved from: doi: 10.1017/S0261444800002585. Published online by

http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/October2008/brown/brown.html

http://www.cal.org/caela/research/raell

195

Cambridge University Press 23 Dec 2008.

Burstall, C., (1975). Primary French in the balance. Educational Research, 17(3), 193-

198. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0013188750170304

Butler, Y. G., & Hakuta, K. (2006). Cognitive factors in children's L1 and L2 reading.

Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10(1), 23–27. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Calderon, M. A., August, D., Slavin, R., Duran, D., Madden, N., & Cheung, A. (2005).

Bringing words to life in classrooms with English language learners. In E. H.

Hiebert & M. L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing

research to practice (pp. 115–137). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Camara, B. (2006). Voices Interacting within language education processes and the

importance of their connection with the socio-cultural English classroom context.

(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras,

Puerto Rico.

Canning, J. (2004). Disability and residence abroad. Subject Centre for Languages,

Linguistics,and Area Studies for Good Practice Guide. Southampton, UK.

Retrieved from: http://www.llas.ac.uk/resources/gpg/2530

Carlisle, J. F., Fleming, J.E., & Gudbrandsen, B. (2000). Incidental word learning in

Sciency classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25,184-211.

Carlo, M., August, D., McLaughlin, B., Snow, C., Dressler, C., Lippman, D.,

Lively, T., & White, C. (2004). Closing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary

needs of English language learners in bilingual and mainstream

classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 188–215.

Carnegie Report. (2004). Annual report and findings. Stanford, CA: Carnegie Council.

http://www.llas.ac.uk/resources/gpg/2530

196

Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kame'enui, E. J., & Tarver, S. G. (2010). Direct instruction

reading. Center on Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Retrieved

from: doi.pdf 10.1111j.1540-5826.2005.00120.

Castellanos, O. (2006, 2013). The cost of providing an adequate education for English

language learners: A review of literature. Review of Educational Research,82 (2),

179-232.

Celce-Murcia, M. (1995, 2007). Rethinking the role of communicative competence in

language teaching. In Alcón, S., & Safont, J. (Eds). Intercultural language

use and language learning (pp.41-47). Oxford/Cambridge: Oxford University

Press. Retrieved from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/t425718803025042/ .

Chall, J. S. (2000). The academic achievement challenge: What really works in the

classroom? New York, NY: Guilford.

Chall, J. S., & Jacobs, V.A. (2003, spring). The classic study on poor children’s

fourth‐grade slump. American Educator (pp. 41-51). Cresskill, N.J., Retrieved

from: http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/spring2003/hirschsbclassic.cfm.

Character Education Partnership. (2010). Developing and assessing school culture: A

new level of accountability for schools. Character Education Principles

Review, Washington, D.C., Retrieved from: www.character.org.

Chen, X., & Carroll, C.D. (2005). FGS in postsecondary education: A look at their

college transcripts (NCES 2005-171). U.S. Department of Education, National

Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC.: U.S. Government Printing

Office.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/t425718803025042/

http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/spring2003/hirschsbclassic.cfm

http://www.character.org/

197

Clark, M.K., & Ishida, S. (2005). Vocabulary knowledge differences between placed and

promoted EAP students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(3), 225–238.

Coady, J., & Huckin, T. (1999). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language:

A Review. Studies in second language acquisition. Cambridge Journal, 21(2),

188-193.

Cohen, J. (2006). Social, emotional, ethical and academic education: Creating a climate

for learning, participation in democracy, and well-being. Harvard Educational

Review, 76 (2), 201-237.

Comer, J. P. (2005, June). Child and adolescent development: The critical missing focus

in school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 757-763.

Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in

early childhood programs (3rd

ed.). Washington, DC. National Association for

the Education of Young.

Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. IRAL 4, 161-170. ERIC

Document Reproduction Service, ED 019903.

Coyne, M., Simmons, D., Kame'enui, E., & Stoolmiller, M. (2004, September 1).

Teaching vocabulary during shared storybook readings: An examination of

differential effects. Exceptionality, 12(3), 145–162. Hillsale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Creswell, J. W. (2010). Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches:

Research design (3rd

ed.). UpperSaddle, NJ: Sage Publications.

Cummings, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and

pedagogy. Avon, England: Multilingual Matters, Ltd.

198

Cummins, J. (1994). The acquisition of English as a second language. In K.

Spangenberg- Urbschat & R. Pritchard (Eds.), Kids come in all languages:

Reading instruction for ESL students (pp. 36–62). Newark, DE: IRD.

Cunningham, A. E. (2005). Vocabulary growth through independent reading and reading

aloud to children. In E. H. Hiebert and M. L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning

vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp.45-68 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1991). Tracking the unique effects of print

exposure in children: Associations with vocabulary, general knowledge, and

spelling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 264–274.

Cunningham, A.E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1998). Early reading acquisition and its

relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental

Psychology, 33(6), 934–945.

Curtis, M. E. (2005). Adolescents who struggle with word identification: Research and

practice. In T. L. Jetton and J.A. Dole, (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and

practice. (pp. 119-134). New York: The Guilford Press.

Curtis, M.E., & Longo, A. A.(1999). When adolescents can’t read: Methods and

materials that work. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.

Dale, E. (1965). Vocabulary measurement: Techniques and major findings. Elementary

English, 42, 895-901, 948.

Damon, W. (2005). Good, bad, or none of the above? The time-honored, unavoidable

mandate to teach character. Education Next, 5(2), 20-27.

Davidson, Lickona, & Khmelkov. (2007) Smart and good schools: A paradigm shift

for character education. Education Week, 27 (12) 31, 40.

199

Davis, M. (2002). Vocabulary instruction: A new approach to learning. Retrieved

from: http://www. learnweb.harvard.edu/2821/v6.cfmD.

Deshler,D.D., Schumaker, J. B., & Woodruff, S. K. (2004).Improving literacy skills of

at-risk adolescents: A schoolwide response. In D. S. Strickland & D. E.

Alvermann (Eds.), Bridging the literacy achievement gap, grades 4–12. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Diamond, L. (2006). Implementing and sustaining an effective reading program. Core

Reading Model (pp.1-14). The Consortium on Reading Excellence, Inc.

DiMaggio PJ, & Powell, W.W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional

isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociology

Review,35, 147-60.

Dornyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing motivation in foreign-language learning: Language

Learning, (40) 45–78.

Downhower, S., Melvin, M.P., & Sizemore, P. (1990). Improving writing instruction

through teacher action research. Journal of Staff Development, 11(3), 22-27.

EJ430614.

Dudley, E.T., & St. John, M. J. (2004). Development in English for specific purposes.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dunn, L.M., & Dunn, L.M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test: Examiner’s

manual and norms booklet (3rd

ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance

Service.

http://www/

200

Eccles, J.S., & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage environment fit: Developmentally appropriate

classrooms for adolescents. In R. Ames, & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on

Motivation in Education, 3. New York. Academic Press.

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D.J. (2008). Making content comprehensible for

English learners: The SIOP Model (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, Edwards, C. E.,

Elley, W. B. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories read aloud.

Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 174-187.

Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL

lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281-318.

Faggella-Luby, M. N., & Deshler, D. D. (2008). Reading comprehension in adolescents

with LD: What we know; what we need to learn. Learning Disabilities Research

and Practice, 23(2), 70-78.

Folse,K. (2002, 2004). Myths about teaching and learning second language vocabulary:

What recent research says? TESL Reporter, 37(2), 1-13.

Folse, K. (2004, 2010). Is explicit vocabulary focus the reading teacher’s job? Reading

in a Foreign Language, 22 (1), 139-160.

Font, G., Baumann, J. F., & Boland, E. (2004). Unlocking word meanings:

Strategies and guidelines for teaching morphemic and contextual analysis. In J. F.

Francis, M. A., & Simpson, M. L. (2003). Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,

47(1), 66-78. Retrieved from: http://nces.ed.gov/ Using theory, our intuitions, and a

research study to enhance students' vocabulary knowledge nations report card

http://nces.ed.gov/%20Using%20theory,%20our%20intuitions,%20and%20a%20%20%20%20%20research%20%20study%20to%20enhance%20students'%20vocabulary%20knowledge%20nations%20report%20card

http://nces.ed.gov/%20Using%20theory,%20our%20intuitions,%20and%20a%20%20%20%20%20research%20%20study%20to%20enhance%20students'%20vocabulary%20knowledge%20nations%20report%20card

201

Francis, M. A., & Simpson, M. L. (2003). Using theory, our intuitions, and a research

study to enhance students' vocabulary knowledge. Journal of Adolescent & Adult

Literacy, 47(1), 66-78.

Fraser, H. (2000). Coordinating improvements in pronunciation teaching for adult

learners of English as a second language. Australia National Training Authority

Adult Literacy Project. Canberra: Deyta. University New England.Retrieved from:

http://wwwpersonal.une.edu.au/~hfraser/docs/HF_ANTA_REPORT.pdf

Freeman, Y., Freeman, D., & Ramírez, R.(Eds.). (2008). English language learners: Who

are they? How can teachers support them. In Y. Freeman, D. Freeman & R.

Ramírez (Eds.), diverse learners in the mainstream classroom: Strategies for

supporting all students across content areas (pp. 31-58). Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann.

Fuchs, L.S. (2002). Three conceptualizations of treatment in a response to treatment

framework for LD Identification of learning disabilities. In R. Bradley, L.

Danielson, & D. Hallahan (Eds.), Identification of learning disabilities: Research

to practice (pp. 521-529). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Furco, A. (2002). Is service-learning really better than community service?

A study of High School Service Program Outcomes. In A. Furco, & S.H. Billig

(Eds.), Service-learning: The essence of the pedagogy (pp. 23-50). Greenwich,

CT: Information Age Publishers.

Garcés, M. (2004). The beliefs of a group of college students concerning the teaching

learning process of the English language. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).

University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico.

http://wwwpersonal.une.edu.au/~hfraser/docs/HF_ANTA_REPORT.pdf

202

Gardner, R. C. (1983, 1985). Social psychology and second language learning:

The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold Publishers.

Gardner, R. C., (1985). The Socio-Educational Model of Second-Language

Learning: Assumptions, findings, and issues. Language Learning, 38 (91),

Retrieved from: DOI: 10.1111/j.14671770.1988.tb00403.x

Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language

learning: Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.

Gathercole, V.C. (2007). Language transmission in bilingual families in Wales. Cardiff,

Wales: Welsh Language Board.

Gathercole, V. C., & Hoff, E. (2007). Input and the acquisition of language: Three

questions. In E. Hoff & M. Shatz (Eds.), The Handbook of

Language Development (pp. 107-127). Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishers.

Ginott, H. G. (2012). Teacher and child: A book for parents and teachers. New York,

NY: Word press. http://rategarden.wordpress.com

Goering, C. Z., & Baker, K. L. (2010). Like the whole class has reading problems: A

study of oral reading fluency activities in a high intervention setting. American

Secondary Education, 39, 61-70.

http://findarticles.com/7452/is_201010/ai_n56445020/

Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Reading in a foreign language. Teaching and

researching reading, 14 (2), 155-157. London, England: Pearson Education

Longman.

Graves, M. F. (2000). A vocabulary program to complement and bloster a middle-

grade comprehension program. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves, & P. Van Den

http://rategarden.wordpress.com/

http://findarticles.com/7452/is_201010/ai_n56445020/

203

Broek (Eds.), Reading for Meaning (pp. 116-135). Newark, DE: International

Reading Association & Teachers College Press.

Graves, M. F. (2006, 2008). The vocabulary book: Learning and instruction. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Greene, J. P., & Forster, G. (2003). Public high school graduation and college

readiness rates in the United States. Education Working Paper No. 3. New York:

Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.

Greenwood, S.C. (2002, May-June). Making words matter: Vocabulary study in the

content areas. The Clearing House, 75(5), 258-263. A Journal of Educational

Strategies. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30189755.

Guthrie, J. T.,& Taboada, A. (2004). Fostering the cognitive strategies of reading

comprehension. In J. T. Guthrie, A. Wigfield, & K. C. Perencevich (Eds.),

Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction (pp. 87 –

112). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Harmon, J. M., & Wood, K. D. (2008). Research summary: Vocabulary teaching and

learning across disciplines. Retrieved [date] from http://www.nmsa.org/research/

Hart, D., & Fegley, S. (1995). Prosocial behavior and caring in adolescence: Relations

to self-understanding and social judgment. Child Development, 66, 1346-1359

Hart, B., & Risley, T. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap.

American Educator, 27, 4, 6-9.

Hasbun, L. (2005). The effect of explicit vocabulary teaching on vocabulary acquisition

and attitude toward reading. Electronic Journal, 5, (2), 1-21.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30189755

http://www.nmsa.org/research/

204

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2003, March). The power of feedback. Review of

Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. Academic Research Library.

Heath, I. (1999; 2003). Problems of language. Modern Thinker. Art.1; Section, 6.

Heinemann. H. M. (1990). Examining the impact of L1 literacy on reading success

in a second writing system. In H. Burmeister, & P. L. Rounds (Eds.), Variability in

second language acquisition: Proceedings of the tenth meeting of the second

language research forum. Eugene, OR: Department of Linguistics, University of

Oregon.

Hiebert, E. H. (2012). Core vocabulary: The foundation for successful reading of

complex text (Text Matters 12. 2). Santa Cruz, CA: Text Project. Retrieved from

http://textproject. org/teachers/text-matters/core-vocabulary/

Hiebert, E. H., & Kamil, M. L. (2006). Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing

research to practice. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates. http://www.erlbaum.com/ pp. 288. ISBN 0-8058-5286-7.

Hirsh, D., & Nation, P. (1992). What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified

texts for pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language, 8, 2, 689-696.

Hoff, E. (2003, October). The specificity of environmental influence: Socioeconomic

status affects early vocabulary development via maternal speech. Child Development,

74(5), 1368–1378.

Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In Pride, J. B., & Holmes, J.

(Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Baltimore, MD: Penguin Education, Penguin

Books Ltd. Longman.

205

Intercultural Development Research Corporation. (2004). The LAFEC experience for

language skills acquisition: The intercultural aspects have a central role in the

language- Salmon’s Model. 500-510.

International Reading Association. (1986). IRA position statement on reading and

writing in early childhood. Reading Teacher, 39, 822-824.

Irvin, J. L. (1998). Reading and the middle school student: Strategies to enhance literacy

(2nd

Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Irvin, J. L., Buehl, D. R., & Klemp, R. M. (2003). Reading and the high school student:

Strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 498-520. Retrieved from doi:

I0.1037//0022- 0663.93.3.498

Johns, J. L. (1990). Secondary and college reading inventory. (2nd

Ed). Dubuque, IA:

Kendall/Hunt.

Jordan, R. (2005). The oral communication among the students. Book II. New Ed.

IBM Statistical Package, Social Sciences, 19.0.

Josephson Institute Center for Youths. (2004). Character count pillars. Josephson

Institute. www.josephsoninstitute.org.

Justice, L., Meier, J., & Walpole, S. (2005, January 1). Learning new words from

storybooks: An efficacy study with at-risk kindergartners. Language, Speech, and

Hearing Services in Schools, 36(1), 17–32. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service

No. EJ741266). Retrieved August 18, 2009, from ERIC database.

Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J.

(2008) .Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention

practices: A Practice Guide (NCEE #2008-4027). Washington, DC: National

http://www.josephsoninstitute.org/

206

Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education

Sciences, U. S. Department of Education. Retrieved from

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc.

Kamil, M. L., & Hiebert, E.H. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary: Perspectives

and persistent issues. In E. H. Hiebert, & M.L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and

learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp.1-23). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kazdin, A. (2002). External validity and single-case experimentation: Issues and

limitations (A response to J. S. Birnbrauer) Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic

University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, PA. Retrieved from:

doi:10.1016/0270-4684(81)90027-6

Kame’enui, E., Carnine, D., & Freschi, R. (1982). Effects of text construction and

instructional procedures for teaching word meanings on comprehension and

recall. Reading Research quarterly, 17(3), 367-388.

Kelemen, D. (2004). Are children’intuitive theists’? Reasoning about purpose and

design in nature. Psychological Science, 15, 295–301.

Kosanovich, M. L.,Reed, D. K., & Miller, D. H.(2010). Bringing literacy strategies into

content Instruction: Professional learning for secondary level teachers.

Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.

Krashen, S. (2004). The power of reading. (2nd

ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinneman.

Krashen, S., (1975). The critical period for language acquisition and its possible bases:

In D. Aaronson, & R. Reiber (Eds), Developmental psycholinguistics and

communicative disorders, (pp.220). New York,NY: New York Academy of

http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0270-4684(81)90027-6

207

Sciences

Lamb, M. (2004). Integrative motivation in a globalizing world. System, 32 (1),

3–19.

Lambert, W.E. (1955). Measurement of the linguistic dominance in bilinguals. Journal

of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 50, 197-200.

Langer, J. A. (2001, Winter). Beating the Odds: Teaching Middle and High School

Students to Read and Write Well. American Educational Research Journal, 38,

4.837-880.

Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second

language: Same or different? Applied Linguistics, 19(2), 255-271.

Lawrence, J. (2009). Summer reading: Predicting adolescent word learning from,

aptitude time spent reading, and text type. Reading Psychology, 30(5), 445–465.

Lee, V., & Burkam, D. (2002). Inequality at the starting gate. Washington DC.:

Economic Policy Institute.

Levin, J. R., Levin, M.E., Glasman, L.D., & Nordwall, M.B. (1992, April).

Mnemonicvocabulary instruction: Additional effectiveness evidence.)

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 17, 156-174.

Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for character: How our schools can teach respect and

responsibility. The Journal of Moral Education, (pp.10-12), New York, NY.

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned (2nd

Ed.). New York,

NY: Oxford University Press.

Lockwood, M. (2004). Reflections on metalinguistic and emotional awareness in the

composing processes of basic first year ESL students at the University of Puerto

208

Rico: A longitudinal action research study. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).

University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico.

Long, J. F., Monoi, S., Harper, B., Knoblauch, D., & Murphy, P. K. (2007). Academic

motivation and achievement among urban adolescents. Urban Education, 42(3),

196-222. Retrieved from: doi:10.1177/0042085907300447

Lonigan, C. J. (2007). Vocabulary development and the development of phonological

awareness skills in preschool children. In R. K. E. Wagner, A. E. E. Muse, & K. R.

E. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Vocabulary acquisition implications for reading

comprehension (pp. 15-31). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Love, J. M., Kisker, E. E., Ross, C., Raikes, H., Constantine, J., & Boller, K. (2005). The

effectiveness of Early Head Start for 3-year-old children and their parents: Lessons

for policy and programs. Developmental Psychology, 41(6), 885-901.

Lustig, M., & Koester, J. (2010). Intercultural competence: Interpersonal

communication across cultures. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Conrod, S. (2001). Willingness to

communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion

students. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 369-388.

MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2003, June). Talking in

order to learn: Willingness to communicate and intensive language programs. The

Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(4), 589-607.

Manyak, P.C. (2007). A framework for robust literacy instruction for English learners.

The Reading Teacher, 61, 2, 197-199.

Manzo, A. V., Manzo, U. C., & Thomas, M. M. (2006, 2008). Rationale for systematic

209

vocabulary development: Antidote for state mandates . Journal of Adolescent and

Adult Literacy, 49(7), 610-619.

Marzano, R. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development,

ASCD.

Marzano, R. J. (2004). Building background knowledge for academic achievement:

Research on what works in schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Retrieved from:

http://wwwascd.org.

Marzano, R. R., & Pickering, D. J. (2005). Building academic vocabulary: Teacher's

manual. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Retrieved from: http://wwwascd.org.

Maslow, A., & Lowery, R. (1998). Toward a psychology of being (3rd

Ed.). New York,

NY: Wileg & Sons.

McGee, L. M., & Shickedanz, J.A. (2007). Repeated interactive read alouds in pre

school and kindergarten. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

McGuinness, C., & McGuinness, G. (2000). How to increase your child’s

verbal intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 545–61.

McKenna, M. C., & Stahl, S.A., (2003). Assessment for reading instruction.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Mckeown, M. G., & Beck, I. L. (2003). Taking advantage of read alouds to help children

make sense of decontextualized language. In A. van Kleeck, S.A. Stahl, & E.B.

Bauer (Eds.), Storybook reading (pp. 159-176). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Middle Level Education Research. (2004,Janaury). The chronicle of middle level

education research. In S. B. Mertens, & N. Flowers, Research that

http://wwwascd.org/

http://wwwascd.org/

210

supports high performing middle-grade school,4 (1).

Milton, J., & Jones, G., (1988). Vocabulary size as a placement indicator. In P.

Grunwell (Ed). Applied Linguistics in Society. London, UK.

Milton, J., & Meara, P. (1995). How periods abroad affect vocabulary growth in a

foreign language?ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 107-108, 17-34.

Moats, L. C. (2001). Overcoming the language gap. American Educator, 25 (5), 8–9.

Moje, Birr, E. (2006). Motivating texts, motivating contexts, motivating adolescents:

An examination of the role of motivation in adolescent literacy practices and

development. Perspectives, 32(3), 10-14.

Moore, D. W., Bean, T. W., Birdyshaw, D., & Rycik, J. A. (1999). Adolescent literacy:

A position statement. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43, 97-112. Retrieved

from [EJ 592 830] ED469930.

Moore, D. W. (2010, June). Direct instruction: Targeted strategies for students success.

Best practices in secondary education. National Geographic.

Mosenthal, P. B., & Pearson, P. D. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of reading: Motivate

students, special considerations for struggling readers, the demands of text, and

strategies. Results of the 2005 NAEP (National Assessment of Educational

Progress).

Moss, B. (2000). The use of large-group role-play techniques in social work education.

Social Work Education, 19, 53, 471-83.

Muñoz, A. (2009). Borincuan times. San Juan, PR: Publicaciones Gaviota.

Nagy,W .E., Anderson, R. C., & Herman, P. A. (1986). Learning word meanings from

211

context during normal reading. American Educational Research Journal, 24 ,(2) 237-

270.

Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A. , Anderson, R.C. (1985, Winter). Learning words from

context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20 (2), 233-255, International Reading

Association. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/747758

Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. A. (1990). Word schemas: Expectations about the form and

meaning of new words. Cognition & Instruction

Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. A. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In M. L. Kamil, P. B.

Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research,

3, (pp.269–284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Nakanishi, T. (2002). Critical literature: Review on motivation. Journal of

Language and Linguistics, 1(3), 278-290. Retrieved from:

http://www.shakespeare.uk.net/journal/1_3/nakanishi1_3.html

Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston, MA: Heinle &

Heinle.

Nation, P., & Hu, M. (2000). Unknown vocabulary density and reading Comprehension,

Reading in a Foreign Language, 13(1), 403-427.

National Center for Education Assistance. (2002).The nation’s report card: An

introduction to the national assessment of educational progress (NAEP). United

States Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences NCES. Retrieved

from: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard

National Education Association (2007). Focus on Hispanics report: Special education

and English language learners. NEA Human and Civil Rights. Washington, DC:

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard

212

Alliance for Excellent Education.

National Institute for Literacy. (2007). What content-area teachers

should know about adolescent literacy. Retrieved from

http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/publications/adolescent_literacy07.pdf

National Literacy Project. (2006). Resource guide for adolescent literacy. Bill and

Melinda Gates Foundation. [email protected]

National Research Council (2003). Engaging schools: Fostering high school students’

motivation to learn. Committee on Increasing High School Students’ Engagement

and Motivation to Learn, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National

Academy Press.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based

assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for

reading instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health & Human

Development, National Institutes of Health. Retrieved March 1, 2003:

Retrieved from: www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/report.htm

National Reading Instruction Institute. (2003). A synthesis of the international

reading association’s research on teacher preparation for reading instruction.

International Reading Association, Newark, DE: Reading Instruction Institute.

Retrieved from: www.reading.org

National Reading Technical Assistance Center. (2010). Professional Development

Center, Washington, DC: United States Department of Education.

Nazari, A. (2007). EFL teachers’ perception of the concept of communicative

competence. ELT Journal, 61, 3, 202–210.

http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/publications/adolescent_literacy07.pdf

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/report.htm

http://www.reading.org/

213

Neuman, S. B. (1995). Literacy in the television age: The myth of the TV effect (2nd ed.).

Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Neuman, S. B. (2006). The knowledge gap: Implication for early literacy development.

In D. Dickinson, & S. B. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of Early Literacy Research (pp.

29-40). New York, NY: Guildford Press.

Neuman, S. B., & Celano, D. (2006). The knowledge gap: Implications of leveling the

playing field for low-income and middle-income children. Reading Research

Quarterly, 41, 176-201.Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

NICHD. (2007). What content areas teacher’s should know about adolescent literacy.

Washington, DC: National Reading Panel.

NICHD. (2000b). Report of the National Reading Panel: Reports of the subgroups.

National Association for the Education of Young Children. Newark, NJ: Erlbaum.

NCLB. (2001). No Child Left Behind Act. Washington, DC: United States Department

of Education.

Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1990). Possible selves and delinquency. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 112–125.

Penno, J. F., Wilkinson, I. A., & Moore, D. W. (2002). Vocabulary acquisition from

teacher explanation and repeated listening to stories: Do they overcome the

Matthew effect? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94 (1), 23-33.

Phythian-Sense, C., & Wagner,R. K. (2007). Vocabulary acquisition: A primer.

In R.K. Wagner, A.E. Muse, & K.R. Tannenbaun (Eds.), Vocabulary acquisition

(pp. 1-14). New York, NY: Guilford Publications.

Pikulski, J. J., & Templeton, S. (2004). Teaching and developing vocabulary: Key to

214

long- term reading success. Retrieved from:

http://www.eduplace.com/state/pdf/author/pik_temp.pdf

Pizarro, V. (2006). The ethnolinguistic identity of the University of Puerto Rico, Rio

Piedras Campus first year college students and their attitudes towards the learning

of English as a second language.(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of

Puerto Rico, Río Piedras, Puerto Rico.

Pressley, M. (2001). Effective beginning reading instruction. Executive

Summary and Paper Commissioned by the National Reading Conference. Chicago,

IL: National Reading Conference.

Proctor, I., Douglas, R. Garez-Izquierdo, A., & Wortman, S. (1994) Approach,

avoidance, and apprehension: Talking with high CA students about getting help.

Communication Education, 43, 312-321. In Bippus, A. & J. Daly. (1999). What do

people think causes stage fright: Naïve attributions about the reasons for public

speaking anxiety. Communication Education, 41 (October), 345-60.

Puerto Rico Department of Education of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (2010) Tus

valores cuentan :Character Counts Program. San Juan, Puerto Rico. Josephson

Institute Center for Youths.

Puerto Rico Department of Education of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

(2003). Conceptual Framework for the English Program. San Juan, PR: DEP.

Puerto Rico Department of Education of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (2007).

Content grade standards and expectations for the English Program, San Juan,

PR:DEP


http://www.eduplace.com/state/pdf/author/pik_temp.pdf

215

Informe del perfil escolar para Puerto Rico. Retrieved from:

http://de.gobierno.pr/que-es-el-perfil-escolar.








English Program Circular Letter 11-2011-2012. Retrieved from:

http://de.gobierno.pr/edu.


English Program Circular Letter. Retrieved from: http://de.gobierno.pr/edu.

Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge

and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language Learning,

52(3), 513–536.

Rand Reading Study Group. (2002). Special report: Rand report on reading

Comprehension. Educational Leadership, 60 (3), 92-92.

Rasinski, T.V. (2003). The fluent reader: Oral reading strategies for building word

recognition, fluency, and comprehension. New York, NY: Scholastic.

Rasinski, T.V. (2004). Assessing reading fluency. Honolulu, Reading Association.

Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Rasinski, T.V., & Hoffman, J.V. (2003). Oral reading in the school reading curriculum.

http://de.gobierno.pr/que-es-el-perfil-escolar



http://de.gobierno.pr/edu

http://de.gobierno.pr/edu

216

Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 510-522.

Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2000). Effective reading strategies: Teaching children who

find reading difficult (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Rasinski, T.V., Padak, N. D., McKeon, C.A., Wilfong, L.G., Friedauer, J.A., & Heim,

P. (2005). Is reading fluency a key for successful high school reading? Journal of

Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49 (1), 22-27.

Rasinski, T.V. (2006). A brief history of reading fluency: In S. Samuels, & A. Farstrup

(Eds.). What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 4-23). Newark,

DE: International Reading Association.

Reed, D. K. (2008). A synthesis of morphology interventions and effects on reading

outcomes for students in grades K–12. Learning Disability Research & Practice,

23(1), 36–49.

Renney, J. (2010). Contributing factors of communication competence. (Unfinished

master’s thesis). University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada.

Richards, J.C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking: From theory to practice.

New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Rivera, M. O., Francis, D. J., Fernandez, M., Moughamian, A.C., Lesaux, N. K., &

Jergensen, J. (2010). Effective practices for English language learners: Principals

from five states speak. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center

on Instruction.

RMC Research Corporation (2005, 2007). Instruction. The Reading Teacher, 61 (2),

108– 122. Portsmouth, NH.

RMC Research Corporation. (2005). The impact of project citizen on U.S. and middle

217

and high school students: A 2005-2006 study. Center for Civic Education.

Retrieved from: http://www/civiced.org

Robbins, C., & Ehri, L.C. (1994). Reading storybooks to kindergarteners helps them

learn new vocabulary words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 21, 491-511.

Roberts, G., Torgesen, J. K., Boardman, A., & Scammacca, N. (2008). Evidence-based

strategies for reading instruction of older students with learning disabilities.

Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23(2), 63–69.

Rodríguez, D. (2002). In search of new insights: A study of first year college students’

beliefs about the English language, their learning experience and the pragmatic

University of Puerto Rico, Río Piedras, Puerto Rico.

Rodríguez, M. (1999). The struggles and attitudes of high school ESL learners in

Puerto Rico: Resistance and challenge. TESOL-Gram, 26(2), 3-6.

Rogers, A. (2003). What is the difference? A new critique of adult learning and teaching.

Leicester, England: NIACE.

Rubin, R. (1990). Communication competence. In G. Phillips & J. Wood (Eds.), Speech

communication: Essays to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the Speech

Communication Association (pp. 94-129). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois

University Press.

Rupley,W. H., Logan, J. W.,& Nichols, W. D. (1999). Vocabulary instruction in a

balanced reading program. The Reading Teacher, 52 (4), 336-346.

Savignon, S. J. (1983). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice.

Reading,MA: Addison-Wesley.

Scarborough, H.S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)

http://www/civiced.org

218

abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. Neuman, & D. Dickinson (Eds.).

Handbook for research in early literacy (pp.97-110). New York, NY: Guildford

Press.

Scarborough, H. S., & Brady, S.A. (2002). Toward a common terminology for talking

about speech and reading: A glossary of the “phon” words and some related terms.

Journal of Literacy Research, SAGE Publications, Retrieved from

http://jlr.sagepub.com/content/34/3/299

Schiefele, U. (1992, 1999). Interest and learning from text. Scientific Studies of Reading,

3, 257–79.

Schirmer, B. R., Casbon, J., & Twiss, L. L. (1996). Innovative literacy practices for ESL

learners. The Reading Teacher, 49, 412–414.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy

(Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199-227).

Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

http://readperiodicals.com/201007/2100153311.html#ixzz1rMPzWI7F

Senechal, M., & Cornell, E. (1993, 1995). Vocabulary acquisition through shared

reading experiences. Reading Research Quarterly, 28(4), 361-374.

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-

experimental designs for generalized causal inference. New York: Houghton

Mifflin.

Shanahan, T. (2003). Research-based reading instruction: Myths about the National

Reading Panel Report. The Reading Teacher, 56, 646-655.

Shefelbine, J. (1990). Student factors related to variability in learning word meanings

http://jlr.sagepub.com/content/34/3/299

http://readperiodicals.com/201007/2100153311.html#ixzz1rMPzWI7F

219

from context. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22, 71–97. Social reproduction. ERIC

ED453 910.

Shostak, J. (2002). The value of direct and systematic vocabulary instruction. Sadlier-

Oxford Professional Development Series 7. Retrieved from: http://sadlier-

oxford.com

Slavin, R. E., Chamberlain, A., Daniels, C., & Madden, N. A. (2008, March). The

reading edge: A randomized evaluation of a middle school cooperative reading

program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational

Research Association, New York.

Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R & D Program in Reading

Comprehension (pp.61-69), Pittsburg, PA: United States Department of Education

Snow C. E., & Biancarosa, G. (2003). Adolescent literacy and the achievement gap:

What do we know and where do we go from here? New York: Carnegie Corporation

of New York.

Spycher, P. (2009). Learning academic language through science in two linguistically

diverse classes. Elementary School Journal, 109, 359-379.

Stahl, S., & Nagy, W. (2006). Teaching word meanings. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Associates.

Snow, C. E., Porche, M. V., Tabors, P. O., & Harris, S. R. (2007). Is literacy enough?

Pathways to academic success for adolescents. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Stahl, S. A., & Kapinus, B. (2001). Word power: What every educator needs to know

about teaching vocabulary. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

Stahl, S., & Fairbanks, M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model based

220

meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72-110. Retrieved from:

jstor.org

Stahl, S. A. (2005). Four problems with teaching word meanings (and what to do to

make vocabulary an integral part of instruction). In E. H. Hiebert and M. L. Kamil

(Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp.95-114).

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Most vocabulary is learned from context. In M. G. McKeown,

& M. E. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 89-105). Hillsdale,

NJ: Erlbaum.

Storch, S. A., & Whitehurst, G.J. (2002). Oral language and code-related precursors to

reading: Evidence from a longitudinal structural model. Developmental Psychology,

38, 934–947.

Swain, M., 2005. The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.),

Handbook on research in second language teaching and learning. (pp: 471-

484). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum;

Tackett A., K. K., & Schnakenberg, J. W. (2009). A synthesis abstract In A.V. Manzo,

U. C. Manzo, & M. M.,Thomas, (2006, April). Rationale for systematic

vocabulary development: Antidote for State Mandates. Journal of Adolescent &

Adult Literacy, 49(7), 610–619. Retrieved from doi: 10.1598/JAAL.49.7.6.

Thiede, K. W., & Dunlosky, J. (1999). Toward a general model of self -regulated

study: An analysis of selection of items for study and self-paced study time. Journal

of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1024–1037.

http://jstor.org/

221

Tremblay, P.F, Gardner, R.C., & Heipal, G., (2000). A model of the relationships among

measures of affection, aptitude and performance in introductory statistics.

Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 32(1), 40-48.

Torgesen, J. K., Houston, D. D., Rissman, L. M., Decker, S. M., Roberts, G.,Vaughn, S.,

Van Kleek, A., & Stahl, S.A. (2003). On reading to children: Parents and teachers.

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Wexler, J., Francis, D. J., Rivera, M. O., & Lesaux, N. (2007).

Academic literacy instruction for adolescents: A guidance document from the

Center on Instruction (p. 3). Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center

on Instruction. Retrieved from: www.centeroninstruction.org.

Wagner, R., Muse, A. E., & Tannenbaum, K. R. (2008). Vocabulary acquisition:

Implications for reading comprehension. New York: Guildford Press,

Walsh, C. (2010). System-based literacy practices: Digital games research, gameplay,

and design. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 33, 3, 211.

Washington, B. (2007, 2011). Character is power: Select writings of Booker T.

Washington. Philadelphia, PA: Ignacio Hills Press.

Wasik, B. A., & Bond, M. A. (2001). Beyond the pages of a book:Interactive book

Reading and language development in preschool classrooms. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 93 (2), 243-250.

Wesche, M. B., & Paribakht, T. S. (2000). Lexical inferencing in a first and second

language: Cross linguistic- dimension. Second Language Acquisition, 3: Washington,

DC. Library of Congress.

Whitehurst, G. J., Epstein, J. N., Angell, A.L., Payne, A. C., Crone, D. A., & Fischel, J.

http://www.centeroninstruction.org/

222

(1994). Outcomes of an emergent literacy intervention in Head Start. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 86, 542-555.

Windle, J., & Miller, J. (2010). Approaches to teaching low literacy to refugee-

background students, 35, (3), 317-333.

Wise, J. C., Sevick, R. A., Morris, R. D., Lovett M. W., & Wolf M. (2007). The

relationship among receptive and expressive vocabulary, listening comprehension,

pre-reading skills, word identification skills, and reading comprehension by children

with reading disabilities. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,

50:1093–1109.

Wong, J., & Olsher, D. (2000). Reflections on conversation analysis and nonnative

speaker talk: An interview with Emanuel A. Schegloff. Issues in Applied

Linguistics, 11, 1, 111–128.

223

Appendix A

Pre Test and Post Test

Listen to the following sentence(s) the teacher is going to read. In the sentence there is a

specific word the teacher is going to repeat and written in bold. Then, the teacher is

going to read five alternatives and you are going to identify the word that provides the

same meaning of the word in bold.

1. I guess blossoming abandoned us when we changed our groovy attitude.

a. clustering

b. development

c. flourishing

d. timing

e. engagement

2. The manager was spoiling our good time by ruining the moment.

a. wasting

b. damaging

c. harming

d. plundering

e. eliminating

3. I was in my room looking at the gloomy afternoon through the window.

a. depressing

b. dark

c. pessimistic

d. dreary

e. dark

4. The incident changed my whole character realizing how my life was.

a. feature

b. traits

c. reputation

d. capacity

224

e. ethic

5. Beliefs help change my character.

a. trust

b. actions

c. confidence

d. strength

e. words

6. The girl shares her sorrow with others.

a. grief

b. pain

c. misfortune

d. loss

e. anger

7. The young girl showed fervently her enthusiasm.

a. passionately

b. glow

c. hot

d. emotionally

e. carelessly

8. The doctor revised the patient’s profile.

a. vertical section

b. data

c. drawing

d. exposure

e. view

9. The students are trustworthy with their school work.

a. responsibility of conduct

b. trust

c. honest

d. sensible

e. fair

225

10. The teenage boy respects his teachers and friends at school.

a. esteems

b. attitude

c. appreciation

d. consideration

e. help

11. Glenda cried out in an anguish that filled the room.

a. distress

b. torture

c. anxiety

d. misery

e. tired

12. José made a decision about his studies.

a. issue

b. determination

c. judgment

d. opinion

e. verdict

13. The rain kept the road slippery and wet.

a. fall

b. tricky

c. not reliable

d. sliding

e. unstable

14. Like the vulture of his kingdom, he was there for his prey.

a. predatory

b. feeds from dead animals

c. birds

d. profit nature

e. scavenger bird

226

15. The driver swiveled to the left of the road.

a. link

b. turned

c. rotated

d. jumped

e. swung

16. Mrs. Vázquez has a responsibility with her twelfth grade students.

a. obligation

b. fact

c. course of action

d. concern

e. opportunity

17. The two male police officers were signaling something to the teenager.

a. an action

b. pointer

c. proceeding

d. negotiating

e. means of communication

18. He was one of those kids who liked to do things properly.

a. remove mistakes

b. make corrections

c. proper way

d. defects

e. appropriately

19. Mathew had to comply with the law.

a. in accordance with

b. obsolete

c. rule

d. wish

e. obedient

227

20. Marta was in fairness with the two students’ participation in the Science Fair.

a. absence

b. disadvantage

c. category

d. judgment

e. strong emotions

21. Equality of citizenship and law are important for human beings.

a. rules

b. rights

c. responsibility

d. ethic

e. respect of law

22. Glesmary will dismiss her friends from the hospital.

a. discharge

b. send away

c. move

d. to put out

e. to battle

23. High school students’ need caring from teachers and parents.

a. complication

b. empathy

c. worry

d. emotional care

e. sympathetic

24. Elisa respects her friends in class.

a. concerns

b. esteems

c. appreciation

d. interference

e. kindness

228

25. The teenage girl’s outburst led to crying in her room.

a. display of emotions

b. explosion

c. eruption

d. excitement

e. rush

229

Appendix B

Administration Guide for the Pre Test and Post Test

University of Turabo

School of Education

Doctoral Program

The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the

enhancement of oral communication of high school seniors


General instructions for the administration of the test or “Assessment” of

designed vocabulary by the investigator (TVC)

The administration of the measurement instruments (pre test and post test of vocabulary

or “assessment” of vocabulary designed by the investigator) is to be conducted in groups.

The pre test and post test are to be given in school classrooms, free of interruptions and

distractions. Each classroom is to be in a comfortable setting for twelfth grade high

school students, good lighting and ventilation. The classroom provides chairs for the boy

and or girl and for the examiner.

The pre test is to be administered one to two weeks before the beginning intervention and

the post test, a week after completing the intervention. The administration of the pre/post

tests are to be given during the morning (8:00 to 11:30 a.m.). The process develops in

approximately 15 to 20 minutes for each student. The test should not be administered

under pressure or in a hurry.

230

Appendix C

Protocol for Experimental Groups


School of Education

Doctoral Program


enhancement of oral communication of high school seniors.


Guide or procedure for each day of intervention: Character Counts Program

6 Character Pillars

Key words: trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, citizenship

Subject Matter:

The role of a student’s character supports values and resilience in education. Access to

character education expectations and values in the motivation of adolescents’ oral

communication, disciplinary actions, positive self esteem, beliefs about life, adaptation to

change, internal control of actions and social and cooperative skills in daily life settings;

provides development of character education and effective learning skills for senior

students.

The development of the 6 character pillars in high school seniors begins with the

introduction of Character Counts 6 pillars (trustworthiness, respect, responsibility,

fairness, caring, citizenship) and the integration of character education.

1. Day One (Introduction to Character Counts pillars and introduction to vocabulary

instruction):

A. Before Character Counts Activity

231

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón- Procedure of Character Count Pillars

The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral

communication of high school seniors. © ERC, 2013 Page 1

1.The teacher initiates conversation about character with the following question:

a. What is character?

b. What have you learned about character in a human being?

c. How do students interpret the significance of character?

The students respond on a strip of paper writing their interpretation of character.

An oral discussion to form an understanding and construction of definition of

character is to be completed and discussed for comprehension.

1. The teacher presents the title: Character Strengths to students on a

reproductive copy. The teacher reads the instructions: The students are

to fill in all possible character strengths known and used in life

experiences. The students will share character strengths and

experiences.

2. The teacher will identify the character strengths mentioned by the

students and write them on the board. The students will relate to each

one by oral communication of use of character strengths in daily

experiences (family, school, community).

3. The teacher will hand out a six pillars chart for students to mention

experiences of character strength.

4. The teacher will begin oral conversation of experiences by asking

students to participate in mentioning experiences of character pillars.

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Procedure of Character Count Pillars

232


communication of high school seniors © ERC, 2013 Page 2

2. Day two (Conversation about six character pillars of character education).

B. After Character Counts introduction

1. The teacher will review definition of character and mention character

count pillars. Students will mention orally six pillars.

2. The teacher will hand out a reprinted copy of the significance of the six

pillars of character education.

3. Students will read orally each one of the character pillars to reinforce

vocabulary instruction of character counts. Review of character pillars is to be

integrated in reading activities in following days of investigation.

4. Each time a character pillar is mentioned the teacher will reinforce

vocabulary key word for students to remember. After reading each pillar and oral

discussion of concepts, the teacher will ask students to select one character in

specific and give importance to life situations.

5. The teacher will give instructions and provide a chart for students to

recognize a character pillar in readings to be given and students are to make a

checkmark according to character pillar emphasized in each short story.

233

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Procedure of Character Count Pillars

The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement oral



School of Education

Doctoral Program


enhancement of oral communication of high school seniors.


Guide or protocol for each day of intervention

Just a Lipstick by Anibal Muñoz

Key Vocabulary Words: blossom, spoil, gloomy

Summary:

Laura, Juliana and the protagonist were enjoying life as it was blossoming for the

freshmen girls into a more daring senior attitude. The girls were of 16 and 17 years of age

in high school. One April afternoon the three girls decide to skip English class with Mr.

Borin and go to “El Amal” drugstore on Piñero Avenue to check out some lipsticks. The

girls knew they only had money for the bus and snacks, but they were still spoiled young

teenagers looking for adventure. Two employees asked the girls if they needed help, but

they laughed and said they were just checking things out. At another moment in the store

a manager approached the girls and told them to leave. They were suddenly offended by

the situation and decided in a few seconds to steal a lipstick in search of revenge. As the

girls walked out of the store the alarms suddenly went off and security stopped them.

Parents were called, the girls were punished and afterschool days became gloomy and

sad.

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Just A Lipstick

234



The protagonist’s life reveals change for the best as she was transferred to another school

and gets a new boyfriend. All just in time to improve grades and graduate from high

school.

1. First day (Prologue to book and first reading with explanations of

vocabulary)

A. Before reading

1. The teacher will show the reading to be used in investigation. The students

will observe and talk freely. Students’ will make predictions of what story is

about and possible outcomes and conflict.

Teacher--- What do you see in the picture?

What are the girls doing?

What do you think the story is about?

Who has a different prediction?

What do you think the problem or conflict is in the story?

2. Read the title of the short story. Use a strip of paper or blackboard to write the

title of the short story. Review the vocabulary words for the short story.

Teacher--- The vocabulary words to be developed in the short story are:

a. blossom

b. naïve

c. blame

d. rebellious

e. payback

f. spoil

g. courage

h. cynical

i. gloomy

j. grounded

Teacher--Guide questions are asked for comprehension and related experiences.

Do you have best friends at school?

Do you let your friends convince you into doing something you do not

want to?

If your friends ask you to do something illegal will you do it?

How much power do your friends have over your decision making? _____________________________________________________________________________________


235

The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for then enhancement of

oral communication of high school seniors. © ERC, 2013 Page 5

How do your previous decisions infer into making quick decisions with friends?

Do you give in to your friends requests easily?

Do you know what shoplifting is?

Have you ever been in a place where someone has committed shoplifting?

Day 2

Teacher--- The teacher introduces a brief description of story to be read orally in

class and purpose.

Laura, Juliana and the protagonist of the story go to “El Amal” drugstore

on Piñeiro Avenue. The three rebellious girls were skipping school one

April afternoon to go to the drugstore and try out lipsticks. The girls were

fooling around when the store manager tells them to leave if they weren’t

going to buy anything. The girls decide to seek payback from the

manager and the decision was made to take something from the store and

walk out. What events occurred when the girls were walking out of the

store?

B. During the reading

The teacher and students’ read the short story for the first time. The teacher

while reading is recommended to use gestures of expression, dramatic pauses,

voice change, variation in rhythm and tone and eye contact with students.

During class discussion the teacher is to use key vocabulary according to

vocabulary provided in reading to encourage comments and guidance.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Just A Lipstick The developmet of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


236

1. The teacher introduces key vocabulary words during the reading, questions and

responses. Protocol is established by teacher introducing vocabulary meaning, use

and technical support for vocabulary development. Each vocabulary word is to be

reviewed for comprehension of usage.

1. The teacher after each clarification of vocabulary word meaning will

repeat the word to clarify doubts.

Vocabulary Words: blossoming, naïve, blaming, rebellious, payback, spoiling,

courage, cynical, gloomy, and grounded.

2. During the reading, the teacher will make comments and ask questions to

stimulate students’ vocabulary instruction and oral communication skills

in the development of reading comprehension. The questions are in

development of short story events. The teacher provides vocabulary in

questions and stimulates adolescents use in responses.

Day 3

Teacher--- Guide Questions

The protagonist remembers her graceful youth at age 14. What does she

remember about her blossoming young age?

What naïve approach does the protagonist share with readers about her

freshman year?

_______________________________________________________________________

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Just A Lipstick The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


237

How did the girls change their attitude in school?

What plan did the girls’ have for that afternoon?

What did the girls do at the drugstore after walking in?

What did the girls decide to do after the manager wanted to throw them out?

How did Laura and Juliana convince the protagonist to steal the lipstick?

How does the protagonist react to the girls’ petition of stealing?

Why does the protagonist decide to do what she is told by her friends?

How does the protagonist feel after making her decision?

What happens to the girls while they are leaving the drugstore?

Who had a cynical look of triumph on his face after the gilrs were surrounded by

security guards?

How do the girls react towards the manager and police?

How did the events change the protagonist’s life?

What did the protagonist do at the end of the short story?

Day 4

c. After the reading

After the reading a class discussion is followed and questions about students’

comprehension are developed. In the class discussion after reading, the teacher provides

_____________________________________________________________________________________




238

vocabulary review and stimulates students’ to use vocabulary in comments and

guidance.

1. In the first reading, the discussion focuses on students’ interest in short story and

reasons.

Teacher--- Did you like the short story? Explain reasons.

2. The motive guide question is discussed.

Teacher--- What events occurred after stealing the lipstick at the drugstore?

3. The discussion will focus on the different elements of the short story. Setting,

time, place, atmosphere, characters, problem, conflict, outcomes, and theme.

4. Teacher---

In what environment is the setting of the short story developed?

How is the atmosphere important in the short story?

Who are the characters in the short story?

Who is the main character? Who are the secondary characters?

What is the problem or conflict in the short story?

How is the conflict solved in the short story?

How does the story end?

What theme is developed in the short story?

5. After the reading and discussion the teacher asks: What words were reviewed and

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Just A Lipstick The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral

communication of high school seniors . © ERC, 2013 Page 9

239

6. learned today? Students’ review orally definitions of vocabulary words and

provide examples of vocabulary words in sentences for comprehension.

7. The teacher will provide a post reading connection with revealing facts about

shoplifting in the United States for students to discuss and relate to Puerto Rico.

Claudio, A.M.(2009). Boricuan’ Times: Just a Lipstick. Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico: Publicaciones Gaviota.

________________________________________________________________________ Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Just A Lipstick The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


240

Univeristy of Turabo

School of Education

Gurabo, Puerto Rico


enhancement of oral communication for high school seniors


Guide or procedure for each day of intervention

Boricuan’ Times: Emily’s Voices by Anibal Muñoz

Key Vocabulary Words: disturbing, hysterical, sorrows, charming, regretted, ashamed,

fervently, apologized, profile, and bothered.

Summary:

It was a normal school day. Emily a tenth grade student at the Ramón Vila Mayo

High School in Rio Piedras was taking a social studies mid-term exam. All of a

sudden she began to scream and cry in the middle of the classroom. Emily would

say she heard voices. Mr. Rosario informs the school principal and she decided to

take care of it. Emily at home continued with her screaming and cries at 1:30 a.m. a

frequent hour for her to repeat the torment. Her mother would calm her down and

at 2:00 a.m. Emily would fall asleep.

Monday morning came and the director called Mrs. Morales (Emily’s mother) to

talk about the situation. She tells her that Emily needs medical assistance. What

does Mrs. Morales do to help Emily?

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Emily’s Voices The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement oral


241

I. First Day- Oral conversation about decision making. Introduction of

vocabulary words for reading.

A. Before Reading

1. Teacher introduces topic about making important decisions in

life and the consequences. The teacher presents discussion about

possible conflict or problem of story.

Guide Questions:

Have you made an important decision in your life?

Did the result change your life?

Many times teenage girls make decisions in their life

Why do you think teenage girls need to make careful decision

in their life?

What do you think the short story is about?

2. Title: Emily’s Voices. Students’ share any similar situations

about topic.

Do you trust your mother or father?

Do you trust your friends?

What does the title mean by “Emily’s Voices”?

What voices do you believe Emily hears?

3. Before reading the short story the teacher reads a brief

summary.

Emily is a tenth grade student who screams and cries at school

and at home. She has a personal problem. Her social studies

teacher, the school principal and her mother try to help her solve

that problem. Do they help? What event changes Emily’s silence

and allows her talk about her problem?

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Emily’s Voices The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


242

Day 2

B. During reading

The teacher and students read short story. The teacher is recommended to use

voice expressions, gestures, pauses, voice alterations, rhythm and visual contact

during reading. The teacher uses vocabulary during reading and stimulates

adolescents to use the vocabulary in class discussion.

1. Teacher introduces key vocabulary words and uses words in oral conversation,

reading and examples for comprehension.

2. Teacher provides definition of key vocabulary words for comprehension of

words and development. Each key vocabulary word will be discussed through

reading for comprehension and use.

3. After each definition, expression, example or illustration of key vocabulary word

the teacher will review key word provided in sentence.

During the reading, the teacher asks questions or makes comments to

stimulate students comprehension. The questions are according to

short story. The teacher uses key vocabulary in questions and

stimulates use in students’ responses. Where was Emily when she

began to scream and cry? How did her classmates react to the

situation?

_______________________________________________________________________



243

What did Mr. Rosario do to help Emily?

What does the school principal do to help Emily?

How does Emily’s mother react to the principal’s phone call?

Does Emily’s mother help solve the problem?

What does Emily’s mother do to help her daughter?

How does the psychologist help Emily solve her problem?

How does Emily feel talking about her problem to the psychologist?

What happens after Emily leaves the doctor’s office?

How does Emily’s character change in the short story?

What does Emily do at school that makes her value life?

How does Emily’s attitude help solve her problem?

How do mistakes change a person’s life?

Making decisions is important in life. Did Emily make the right

decision?



244

Day 3

C. After the Reading

After the reading the teacher and students continue with discussion and ask

questions according to student’s comprehension. The discussion after reading

provides the teacher to use key vocabulary words at all time and estimates

students use vocabulary in comments and guidance.

What did you think about the short story?

What events occurred in the short story that changed your idea about Emily? Does

Emily decide to leave her family? Explain.

What elements are developed in the short stories (environment, characters,

problem, conflict, solutions and main idea?

Where does the short story develop?

What is the problem or situation of the short story?

What is a possible solution for the problem?

What does Emily decide to do with her life?

How does the short story conclude?

After the reading and class discussion the following question is asked to the teacher?

What new words were learned today? (The teacher reviews the key vocabulary

words and definition.

________________________________________________________________________



245

After reviewing guide questions, the teaching of key vocabulary words by the

teacher through “rich vocabulary instruction” developed by Beck and Mckeown (2004).

The methodology of rich vocabulary instruction was adapted by the investigation with

the following steps:

1. Learning from context- Use of inference to come up with the meaning of a word.

The teacher asks what words were learned in reading and to use the key words in

sentences.

2. Choice of vocabulary words- teacher selects vocabulary words according to

students’ grade level and expectations.

3. Rich instruction- Active thinking of work knowledge. The teacher provides

guidance in students’ use of words in different situations and relationship among words.

Vocabulary words:

a. My parents are disturbing me.

b. He is upset.

c. Emily is hysterical.

d. My mother is impossible to control.

e. The girl feels regret.



246

f. She feels sorry about the accident.

g. Mr. Rosario is fervent about helping Emily.

h. Emily is extremely passionate.

The teacher read the following sentences and the students determined vocabulary word

comprehension by completing each blank with a vocabulary word.

disturbed, sorrow, ashamed, remorse, bothered

1. The light bulb bang ___________ me.

2. The girl had a feeling of deep __________.

3. Emily was ___________ of what she had done to herself.

4. She expressed _____________ for what she had done.

5. The students’ were _________ about the situation.

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Emily’s Voices The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for then enhancement of

oral communication of high school seniors. © ERC, 2013 Page 7

247

Character Counts

Character Evolution: Making decisions/ Responsibility

The teacher in the exercise will have students describe the characters as they appeared

in the short story (present) and present description. The students will provide possible

outcomes five years from then (future). Students should make predictions about where

they are, what do they do, and other details about their personal lives in chart.

CHARACTER DESCRIPTION

(PRESENT)

(5) YEARS AFTER

THE STORY

Emily

a.

b.

a.

b.

c.

Emily’s Mom

a.

b.

a.

b.

c.

Student What are you

doing now?

(5) Where do you

see yourself five

years from now?

Name:

a.

b.

c.

a.

b.

c.

Claudio, A.M.(2009). Boricuan’ Times:Emily’s Voices. Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico: Publicaciones Gaviota.



248


School of Education

Doctoral Program





Get Out of Here! by Anibal Muñoz

Key Vocabulary Words: lament, dismissed, sorrowful, anguish, vengefully, outrage,

prayed, outbursts, tormenting, distress.

Summary:

Glenda was a patient at the Auxilio Mutuo Hospital. Glenda had spent the last four

months in the hospital. She cried every night for the past two months between 2:00

and 2:30 a.m. The nurses got used to the crying and so did the doctors. Glenda’s

illness began to get worse and little by little, her visitors were reduced. In less than a

month, there was no one visiting except her parents. Glenda asked not to be seen by

anyone and every time she would cry out “Please go… please get out of here… go

away! It was a torment to see a young girl have flashes of her memories night after

night. The O.K. Motel, dating various friends, getting into cars, paying for motel

bills and dating older guys was Glenda’s lifestyle. She cried every night at the same

hour and in desperate moods would scream at her parents to not come back. It was

torment for everyone to see the girl act this way.

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol Get Out of Here! The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


249

I. Day 1

Vocabulary words introduction and review of meanings.

A. Before Reading

1. The teacher will present a picture of a teenage girl who is in the

hospital and ask students’ to observe and discuss questions.

2. The teacher presents the title of the short story “Get Out of Here!”

3. The students’ can discuss briefly what the story will be about:

a. Who has been in a place they do not like?

b. How do you feel when you are somewhere you feel

uncomfortable?

c. If you feel uncomfortable and other people you know come to see

you how would you feel?

d. Why would you feel that way?

e. If you were at the hospital and could not leave how would you

feel?

f. What would you do if you had an incurable illness and had to stay

at the hospital?

4. Before reading the short story, the teacher introduces the story for

students to feel motivated.



250

Glenda a teenage girl is at the Auxilio Mutuo Hospital with an incurable illness. Her

parents are always at her side helping in every way they can. Many events occur, but

Glenda cannot face her reality. At the end of the story answer the following question:

Why can’t Glenda face her reality?

Day 2

The teacher reads the story with the students’ orally for the first time. The teacher uses

expressions, gestures, dramatic pauses, voice change, rhythm variations and visual

contact. In oral discussion of reading, the teacher uses key vocabulary for comments

and guidance.

1. The teacher introduces the key vocabulary words according to short story at all

times. During the reading, the protocol introduced and vocabulary definitions are

simple and brief according to meanings provided. The vocabulary technique of word

knowledge develops rich vocabulary. Each word is mentioned in the short story and a

definition is presented for knowledge.



251

2. After each vocabulary clarification, definition, explanation and example, the

teacher reviews the word in reading and activity.

Vocabulary Definitions: Each short story provides vocabulary definitions for

comprehension. A cloze exercise of vocabulary words is given for

comments and guidance (Activities).

Day 3

B. During Reading

During reading, the teacher makes comments and asks questions to stimulate student’s

oral communication and comprehension. The questions are according to short story.

The teacher uses key vocabulary in questions for students’ to use in responses.

1. What kind of patient was Glenda when she was first admitted into the

hospital?

2. How did the nurses treat her at the beginning?

3. When did Glenda change her behavior at the hospital? Why was she crying?

4. How did she change physically and emotionally?

5. What were the events that prompted Glenda’s illness?

_______________________________________________________________________



6. What was Glenda’s illness?

7. How does Glenda feel at the end of the story?

252

C. After Reading

After reading the discussion continues and questions are asked for reading

comprehension. In discussion after reading the teacher uses vocabulary to stimulate

students comments and guidance.

What do you think about the story? Why?

Guide motive question is asked:

Why can’t Glenda face her reality?

3. The discussion is focused on the elements of the short story: environment,

characters, problem, conflict, plot, solution, ending.


Who are the characters of the short story?

Who is the main character of the short story?

What is the problem or conflict of the short story?

How is the problem solved? (if possible)

What happens at the end of the short story?

4. After the reading and discussion of the elements of the short story, the teacher

asks the following questions: What vocabulary words were learned?

______________________________________________________________________________________



(The teacher reviews meaning of vocabulary words and students’ provide examples

using vocabulary words).

5. The teacher after reading and discussing questions with students’ asks questions

about character pillar: “responsibility”.

253

What made Glenda sick?

How responsible was she with her own life?

Is being responsible important for a teenager?

Are you responsible for your actions?

What would you have done differently than Glenda?

Did Glenda make good decisions?

Would you help others by giving them advice about their life and decisions?

Imagine you had Glenda’s illness. What would you do?



254

6. The teacher will provide after discussion questions a reading about

“AIDS, What is it?” For oral discussion. Students will read orally and

discuss using key vocabulary words for comprehension.



255


School of Education

Doctoral Program





The Paperboy’s Wish: by Anibal Muñoz

Key Vocabulary Words: paperboy, remarkable, injured, slippery, allies, wandering,

vulture, joyfully, swiveled, floating.

Summary:

Angel a 16 year old paperboy had been on the streets selling newspapers for the last two

years. He had chosen the area of Las Cumbres Avenue and the Luis A. Ferre Highway to

sell newspapers. Angel sold his papers in two hours, which was a record for anyone.

There was usually an accident everyday at the stop and he had the opportunity to sell his

papers during the traffic jam. The ambulance siren assured Angel he would sell his

papers not worrying about his enemies. The accident, partners, and jams were his allies

in his pursuit of completing his job. On an August morning Angel began announcing “El

Vocero” and the local news of a new school year and tropical storm on the way. He

anticipated that day another accident. He announced again “ Primera Hora… El Díaaa…

Vocerooo…”

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol The Paperboy’s Wish The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


256

By now the cars were packing and suddenly he heard a squeaking sound of tires and

brakes. He began to sell his newspapers for a while when he notices the two men moving

their cars to the side to let others pass by. Angel began to wish for another accident that

would stop traffic until he sold all his newspapers. It began to rain and Angel put on his

raincoat. Once again he sees two sport cars accelerating and approaching the jammed

intersection. Once again a big accident just like Angel wanted. He saw a lot of people

getting out of their cars, newspapers everywhere and pages flying in the air. Angel was

not selling papers instead he saw from way above and he said goodbye to his mother and

sister and could not sell papers anymore.

I. Day 1

A. Before Reading

1. The teacher shows the students a picture of a boy selling newspapers for oral

discussion. Make predictions about what possible situation or conflict will occur in the

story.

What do you see in the picture?

What else do you observe?

What do you think will occur in the story?

Why do you think that will happen?

2. The teacher will present the title of the short story to the students. The title will be

visible for all students to observe and react.



The Paperboy’s Wish

3. The students’ will share experiences about the topic of the short story.

257

What is a paperboy?

How do paperboys sell newspapers in Puerto Rico?

What tricks do you think they have?

Have you ever sold newspapers or seen someone sell newspapers?

Have you bought a newspaper on the street? Explain experience.

4. Before reading the short story, the teacher introduces the story, purpose and guide

question.

Angel is a young teenager who sells newspapers between Las Cumbres and Luis A. Ferre

highway in Puerto Rico. He sold all his newspapers everyday within two hours. He

always wished for something to happen to be able to sell his papers. One day he wished

too much. That day something peculiar happened. Did Angel make the right decision in

wishing to sell his papers quickly?

Day 2

During Reading



The teacher begins reading the story and students continue to read orally. The

teacher uses expressions, gestures, dramatic pauses, voice changes, rhythm in reading and

258

eye contact. During oral discussion generated from reading the teacher uses key

vocabulary words to stimulate students’ use of vocabulary and comments.

1. The teacher introduces vocabulary according to reading and asks questions

and provides comments for discussion. The key vocabulary word will be

developed according to development of helpful vocabulary techniques like

definition, sentence and examples. Each word provided in the short story

highlights the definition to be learned by students.

2. After each clarification, definition, explanation, demonstration, and

example, the teacher repeats the vocabulary word and students will

participate in pronunciation.

3. During the reading, the teacher provides questions to stimulate oral

communication and comprehension. The questions are directly from short

story. The teacher uses key vocabulary words and stimulates students to

use in responses.



What was Angel’s main goal as a paperboy?

What was the key for Angel’s success at selling newspapers?

259

What was he doing before he started selling newspapers?

What kind of accident was Angel really wishing for?

How did his family feel about his job?

What happened at the end of the story?

Do you think Angel deserved what happened to him at the end?

Day 3

After Reading

After reading, teacher continues to discuss short story with students for comprehension.

After discussion the teacher uses vocabulary to stimulate comments.

1. In the reading, the discussion focuses on reading and enjoyment of short story.

What do you think about the short story? Did you like the story? Why?

2. The guide question is discussed.

Did Angel make the right decision in wishing to sell all his newspapers on time?

The discussion is focused on the story map elements: setting, characters, situation,

problem or conflict, solution to problem and theme.



260

Where does the story take place?

Who are the characters of the short story?

Who is the main character? Describe actions

What is the problem or conflict of the story?

How was the problem of the short story solved?

How does the short story end?

3. After the reading and discussion of elements of the short story, the teacher asks

students the following question: What vocabulary words were learned in the short

story? The teacher discusses the vocabulary words for comprehension of meaning and

examples.

Day 4

The teacher presents the article: “10 things you need to know about dropping out of

school”. Teacher will read with students orally and discuss importance of

responsibility. After oral discussion about article the teacher will discuss questions

focused on article and short story.


communication for high school seniors.. © ERC, 2013 Page 6

261

What do you think about school dropouts in Puerto Rico?

What would you do to help Puerto Rico with this situation?

Do you consider school dropouts is a serious problem in Puerto Rico?

Character Education:

One of the six pillars is responsibility. The teacher mentions the importance of being

responsible through the short story and discusses guide questions. The teacher will

provide students with a handout activity. The students will complete an acrostic with

the character pillar word “responsibility” with use of short story theme.



262


School of Education

Doctoral Program


enhancement of oral communication of high school seniors



“Marbete”: by Anibal Muñoz

Key Vocabulary Words: uneasiness, signaling, swiveled, garnishes, properly, sarcastic,

payday, realized, comply, task.

Summary:

Nelson a high school teenager is speeding in his Scion XB sport vehicle with his

girlfriend. A police patrol car was getting closer to his car. All of a sudden the police

officer asks him to stop. The officers approached the car and Nelson was remembering

his hectic day. The officers asked for the car registration and drivers license. Nelson had

remembered also that his “marbete” expired that evening April 30th

. The two officers

looked at the car trying to find something wrong. The two men talked and said his papers

were in order, but that they had stopped him and had to give him a ticket. Nelson kept

looking at his watch until it was midnight and then decided to tell the police the truth

about his “marbete”. Did Nelson do the right thing in telling the truth about the

“marbete”? Was Nelson a responsible person?

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol “Marbete” The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


263

Day 1

A. Before Reading

1. The teacher will present the title of the short story “Marbete” to the students for oral

conversation. The students will make predictions about the short story and possible

conflict or problem.

What do you think the short story will be about?

Have you ever bought a marbete?

What is the process of buying a marbete?

Have you ever had your marbete expired?

2. The students share experiences about buying or having their marbete expired.

3. Before reading, the teacher introduces the short story with an abstract and guide

question.

Nelson is a high school teenager driving rapidly his sport car with his girlfriend Sara.

This is when Nelson remembers his marbete. Suddenly two police officers pull him

over to check his papers. Do you think Nelson did the right thing in pulling over?

What makes Nelson talk to the police officers?

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol “Marbete” The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral

communication for high school seniors. © ERC, 2013 Page 2

264

Day 2

B. During Reading

The teacher reads the short story with the students orally. The teacher is

recommended to use expressions, gestures, pauses, voice change, rhythm variations and

visual contact. The discussion generated during reading uses key vocabulary words to

stimulate students’ use of vocabulary and comments.

1. The teacher introduces vocabulary words according to short story. During the

reading the teacher will provide the definition, explanation and simple examples to

develop vocabulary comprehension. Each word is discussed according to reading

definition.

2. After each vocabulary word is clarified, defined, explained, demonstrated and or

elaborated, the teacher repeats the word for comprehension.

3. During the reading, the teacher makes comments and asks questions to stimulate

comprehension of the short story. The teacher uses key vocabulary words in questions

and stimulates use in student’s responses.

What was Nelson doing that night before being stopped by the police?

What kind of car did Nelson have?

How was it described by the author?

What did the officers find about Nelson’s car?

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol ‘Marbete” The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


265

How did Nelson spend his day?

Why did the police officers keep looking at Sara?

What kind of people were Nelson and Sara?

Why did the police officers want to give Nelson a ticket?

Day 3

C. After reading

After reading the short story and completing a discussion of guide questions students

will have comprehension. In the discussion generated after reading the story, the

teacher uses vocabulary to stimulate students’ use of words and comments.

1. In the reading the discussion is focused on expressions of short story.

Did you like the short story “Marbete”?

2. The guide questions are discussed.

Do you think Nelson did the right thing in pulling over?

What Nelson a responsible person?

3. After the guide questions discussion the teacher focuses on the story

elements: setting, characters, situation, problem, conflict, solution and theme.


Who are the characters in the short story?

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol “ Marbete” The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral


266

Who is the main character in the short story?

What is the problem or conflict in the short story?

How is the problem or conflict solved in the short story?

How does the short story end?

What happens at the end of the short story?

What is a good theme for the short story?

4. After the reading and discussion the teacher asks the students: What vocabulary

words were learned from the short story? The teacher discusses the words and

students provide examples for comprehension of definitions.

Day 4

Character Education

The teacher will discuss the importance of the author leaving an open line for the reader

to complete an ending to the story in which they finish the conversation between the

officers and Nelson (or Sara or both). Think about all the possibilities according to your

perspective and complete the ending with a dialogue about what happened afterwards

and share it with your classmates orally. A handout will be provided for students to

complete individually.

Doctoral Dissertation Eneida Rivera Colón – Protocol “Marbete The development of character education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement of oral

communication of high school seniors.. © ERC, 2013 Page 5

267

Appendix D

Letter of Authorization of the Department of Education of Puerto Rico

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO DEPARTAMENTO DE EDUCACION

DISTRITO ESCOLAR DE BARRANQUITAS Escuela Superior Luis Muñoz Marín Box 399 Barranquitas, Puerto Rico

787-857-3714/ Fax 857-3714

Escuela Superior Luis Muñoz Marín

28 de febrero de 2013

Directora Escuela Superior

Distrito Escolar de Barranquitas

Sra. Wanda Peña

Directora Escuela

AUTORIZACION PARA LLEVAR A CABO INVESTIGACION EN

ESCUELA DEL DEPARTAMENTO DE EDUCACION

La Sra. Eneida Rivera Colon, estudiante del Programa Doctoral de la Escuela de

Educación de la Universidad del Turabo Recinto de Gurabo, llevara a cabo la

investigacion titulada The Development of Character Education through

Vocabulary Instruction for the enhancement of Oral Communication of high

school students.

Se autoriza a la Sra. Rivera Colon a llevar a cabo la investigación la cual pretende

examinar la integración de valores en la adquisición de vocabulario receptivo de

268

palabras por los adolescentes al ser expuestos a una metodología de lectura

repetida e interactiva de cuentos y de instrucción enriquecida de vocabulario clave

preseleccionado en los de los cuentos. Asimismo, pretende integral la

comunicación oral en la instrucción de vocabulario y educación de valores. La

investigación tratara de analizar si existe relación entre la educaci6n de valores, el

nivel de habilidad de comunicación verbal y la ganancia de vocabulario. Para

realizar esta investigación la Sra. Rivera Colon solicita autorización requerida

tanto a la Directora de la escuela seleccionada como de los padres y de los

estudiantes que formaran parte de la muestra.

El Departamento de Educación no se solidariza necesariamente con los

resultados de la investigación. Se releva al Departamento de Educación de

toda responsabilidad por cualquier reclamación que pueda surgir como

consecuencia de la investigación y de la información que se solicite y

provea a través de esta. El Departamento de Educación no se hace

responsable de cualquier daño o reclamación producto del proceso de

realización, o del resultado de la investigación, ya que la misma es

independiente y no está auspiciada por

el Departamento. Esta autorización tiene vigencia de un (1) ano, a partir de

la fecha de expedición.


Doctoral Candidate

269

Appendix E

Parent and District Consent form of Study


Escuela de Educacion

Programa Doctoral

Carta de Consentimiento para Padres

25 de enero de 2013

Saludos cordiales. Mi nombre es Eneida Rivera Colón y soy

estudiante del Programa Graduado de la Escuela de Educación de la

Universidad del Turabo. Estudio el grado doctoral en Currículo,

Enseñanza y Ambientes de Aprendizaje. Como requisito para obtener el

grado, estoy llevando a cabo una investigación titulada “The Effect of

Character Education through vocabulary instruction for the enhancement

of oral communication of high school students”. Su hij@ ha sido invitad@

a participar en esta investigación.

El propósito de este estudio es educativo. Su propósito es examinar el

aprendizaje de palabras de vocabulario adquiridas por los estudiantes en

nivel superior al participar de la lectura y discusión del proyecto “Tus

Valores Cuentan”, lecturas del libro (Borincuan Times por Dr. Anibal

Muñoz) y la enseñanza de estas palabras a través de la comunicación oral.

Además, la investigación pretende observar si hay relación entre el

aprendizaje de valores, discusión oral de cuentos y presentación de

vocabulario repetido (comunicación verbal produce mayor aprendizaje de

vocabulario y viceversa).

Si acepta que su hij@ participe en este estudio, la maestra altamente

cualificada y certificada por el Departamento de Educación de Puerto Rico

administrará a su hij@ una pre prueba y pos prueba que mide la habilidad

270

que tienen los estudiantes de comprender la palabra y el significado en

Inglés. Para administrar y evaluar la pre y pos prueba, la maestra necesita

la información personal como: nombre, sexo, fecha de nacimiento y edad

de su hij@. Es necesario que autorice a la maestra de su hij@ a ofrecer esa

información a la investigadora. En vez del nombre se escribirá en la hoja

de evaluación de la prueba el código numérico asignado a estudiantes para

así mantener la confidencialidad. El tiempo de administración de esta

prueba es de 15 a 20 minutos, aproximadamente. La prueba no será

contada como nota para el estudiante por maestr@.

Para realizar este estudio, habrá dos grupos (A y B). El grupo A (maestra

grado regular) tendrá una pre prueba de las palabras, la maestra les

presentará actividades relacionadas al proyecto “ Tus Valores Cuentan,

Character Counts Program”, leerá unos cuentos, discutirá los mismos y le

enseñará palabras de vocabulario que están en los cuentos. Luego, los

estudiantes tendrán una pos prueba de las palabras. El grupo B, (maestra

grado regular) tendrá una pre prueba de las palabras, la maestra leerá los

cuentos y discutirá palabras de vocabulario. Luego, los estudiantes tendrán

una pos prueba de las palabras. El estudio se realizará en cinco semanas

(dos a tres días cada semana). Ambas pruebas de vocabulario (pre y pos)

consisten de 25 palabras de vocabulario. La administración de las pruebas

toma 15 a 20 minutos, aproximadamente. Durante y después del estudio,

se ofrecerá orientación de Facilitadora del programa de Inglés del Distrito

de Barranquitas relacionado al currículo para el grado y estándares.

En este estudio, el riesgo es mínimo. Los estudiantes se beneficiarán del

Proyecto Tus Valores Cuentan- Character Counts Program), los cuentos

discutidos y el trabajo con el vocabulario. Si el método utilizado resulta

efectivo, aprenderán los pilares de valores y algunas palabras de

vocabulario. La prueba que administrará la maestra (no participante en el

271

estudio) no debe ser repetido dentro de 6 a 9 meses posteriores a la

administración de la misma: se debe esperar este tiempo antes de repetirla.

La identidad de los estudiantes será protegida. Toda información o datos

que puedan identificarle serán manejados con confidencialidad. La

participación de su hij@ en este estudio es voluntaria. Usted tiene derecho

a abstenerse de la participación de su hij@, o retirarle del estudio en

cualquier momento, sin ninguna penalidad ni perdida de beneficios.

Se releva al Departamento de Educación de toda responsabilidad por

cualquier reclamación que pueda surgir como consecuencia de las

actividades del estudio y de la información que se solicite y provea a

través de éste. El Departamento de Educación no se hace responsable de

cualquier daño o reclamación producto del proceso de realización o del

resultado de la investigación y la misma es una independiente, no

auspiciada por el Departamento. El Departamento de Educación de Puerto

Rico no necesariamente se solidariza con los resultados de esta

investigación.

He leído la información de esta hoja de consentimiento, o se me ha leído

de forma adecuada. El contenido del estudio me ha sido explicado y todas

las preguntas sobre el mismo han sido aclaradas. Marque, en el encasillado

correspondiente, si acepta o no que su hij@ participe del estudio.

_____ Si, autorizo que mi hij@ participe en este estudio y se provea la

información personal necesaria.

_____ No, deseo que mi hij@ participe en este estudio.

__________________ _________________

Nombre del Padre, Madre Firma del Padre, Madre o

Fecha Encargado (Letra de Molde) Encargado

272

___________________ _________________

Nombre de Hij@ Firma del estudiante participante

Fecha

Letra de Molde

_Eneida Rivera Colón_ _________________

________________

Nombre del Investigador (a) Firma del Investigador(a)

Fecha

(Letra de Molde)

Documents

THE EFFECTS OF CHARACTER EDUCATION IN VOCABULARY