What Content-Area Teachers Should Know About Adolescent Literacy

According to Nagy (1998), in the article “Teaching Vocabulary to Improve Reading Comprehension,” in order to produce vocabulary growth what is needed is “more reading” and “not more vocabulary instruction” (Bintz, 2011, p. 3). Moreover, a major tenet of vocabulary development is that vocabulary is better produced through a context-dependent activity (such as reading, where the vocabulary is learned and engaged in context) rather than traditional methods of directly teaching vocabulary terms and definitions in isolation of a context. However, as the National Institute of Literacy (2007) acknowledges in What Content-Area Teachers Should Know About Adolescent Literacy, there is “not a single best way to teach vocabulary...rather a variety of techniques

In “What Content-Area Teachers Should Know about Adolescent Literacy” (2007), it states, “Pre-teaching vocabulary facilitates the reading of new text by giving students the meanings of words before they encounter them” (p. 16). With this in mind, the teacher can put less focus on the memorization of vocabulary words and their definitions and more focus on helping students access the reading material so that they can keep reading and further derive new meaning and construct new conclusions and arguments based on the text. However, to maximize the potential comprehension advantages of pre-teaching vocabulary as well as the likelihood of students’ retention of the words, educators should be purposeful in their selection of pre-taught words. Blintz (2011) recommends that educators approach vocabulary instruction with four factors in mind: “(1) the students they are teaching, (2) the nature of the words they decide to teach, (3) their instructional purpose in teaching each of these words, and (4) strategies they employ to teach the words” (47). Of particular importance to the selection of pre-taught vocabulary is the instructional purpose of the words. For example, will the selected vocabulary be relevant and central to the content concepts the educator is attempting to teach? In choosing words that have direct

Sweeny & Mason (2011) in the article, “Research-based Practices in Vocabulary Instruction: An Analysis of What Works in Grades K-12” write:

“just like with reading instruction, vocabulary instruction should involve cognitive skills instruction…[students should] be metacognitive as they encounter new words, notice things about words, predict and infer meanings, question the use of specific words, analyze words and parts of words” (p. 3).

To build this “metacognition” educators can use explicit instruction of word analysis strategies to prompt students on what they can do when they encounter an unfamiliar word. One such strategy is know as CSSR, which stands for Context, Structure, Sound, and Reference (Ruddell, 2008, 160). By explicitly practicing with students the steps of moving from contextual information to analyzing a word’s structure (prefix, root, suffix) and ultimately to reference materials if needed, educators help develop metacognitive critical thinking about words (Ruddell, 2008, pg. 160-161). Students can then employ these skills as they are exposed to the final and most comprehensive practice for secondary vocabulary development: providing multiple opportunities for exposure to new