RMLE Online

Research in Middle Level Education

ISSN: (Print) 1940-4476 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/umle20

The Efficacy of Context Clue Strategy Instruction

on Middle Grades Students’ Vocabulary
Development

İlhan İlter

To cite this article: İlhan İlter (2019) The Efficacy of Context Clue Strategy Instruction
on Middle Grades Students’ Vocabulary Development, RMLE Online, 42:1, 1-15, DOI:
10.1080/19404476.2018.1554522

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2018.1554522

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by

Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.© 2018 İlhan
Ilter

Published online: 16 Jan 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 188

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=umle20
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

2019 ● Volume 42 ● Number 1 ISSN 1940-4476

The Efficacy of Context Clue Strategy Instruction on Middle Grades

Students’ Vocabulary Development

İlhan İlter
University of Kahramanmaraş Sutcu Imam
Kahramanmaraş, Turkey
[email protected]

Abstract comprehension increase their proficiency in

learning from context and hence build their
This study compares the effectiveness of context vocabularies.
clue strategy instruction to wide reading practices
in terms of their impact on the vocabulary Keywords: vocabulary knowledge, context clues
knowledge of students who read at frustration instruction, direct instruction, middle grades, wide
level. The participants were 44 sixth-grade reading, frustration-level comprehension
students from a middle grades school. Students
were randomly assigned to experimental and Vocabulary is defined as the breadth, depth, and
control conditions. The experimental condition variety of all the words, concepts or specific terms we
students were trained to use context clues to infer know: the words we use, recognize, and respond to in
meaning from context using a direct instruction acts of communication, speaking, and listening
method. A contextual vocabulary test consisting of (Vacca et al., 2008). Vocabulary knowledge closely
30 multiple-choice items was used to assess the reflects the breadth of a person’s real-world and
students' understanding of the word meanings in vicarious experiences in learning from context
context. The results indicated that the (Harmon, 2002; citied Lewis, 2009; Neuman &
experimental condition demonstrated higher levels Dwyer, 2009). Because people’s vocabulary
of improvement in the vocabulary knowledge than knowledge is dependent on their own experiences, it
the control condition (which practiced a wide is best for the content of a curriculum to reflect these
reading strategy. The findings suggest that a experiences (Rupley & Nichols, 2005). Vocabulary
reading intervention focused on using context knowledge contributes to phonological awareness,
clues can have a worthwhile effect on the ways in which in turn contributes to word identification skills
which students who experience difficulties with and the ability to understand the meaning of a broad

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 1
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

range of words presented in a variety of textual vocabulary improves comprehension and the learning
contexts (Goswami, 2001 cited Graves, 2006; Nagy, of content-area materials. The expansion and
2005). Furthermore, having a broad vocabulary not extension of vocabulary is centered on literacy
only helps us understand what we have read but it development. Vocabulary learning is a central
also has an important role in terms of long-term learning need of all students in content-area
academic success in overall education (Kuhn & Stahl, classrooms in which each student is expected to read
1998; National Reading Panel, 2000; Walters, 2004). and inquire—whether as a historian, author, scientist,
For instance, students who have large vocabularies or mathematician (Bintz, 2011; Harmon, Wood, &
have a better understanding of what they read than Hedrick, 2008a; Harmon, Wood, & Kiser, 2009;
students with smaller vocabularies (Minskoff, 2005). Lapp, Flood, & Farnan, 2005; Manzo, Manzo, &
Thomas, 2006; Robb, 2009). Yet many students in
Reading comprehension becomes increasingly crucial as middle grades schools experience difficulties learning
students make improvements and rise through the grades, from texts for many reasons. Some reading problems
with knowledge inferred from content increasingly are attributable primarily to the students themselves.
becoming a major source of conceptual knowledge For example, common sources of difficulty for
(Smagorinsky, 2001). Researchers have acknowledged middle grades students include a lack of knowledge
the importance of vocabulary knowledge as a critical of content words, a lack of appropriate background
component of connecting to a text and of the resulting knowledge to learn from content, and a lack of
comprehension of what was read (Beck, McKeown, & effective reading strategies to assist them in
Kucan, 2002; Silva & Cain, 2015; Paris, Carpenter, Paris, efficiently comprehending texts for their grade level
& Hamilton, 2005; Wright, & Cervetti, 2017). Increases (Lapp et al., 2005, p. 49; National Assessmen of
in the depth and breadth of one’s vocabulary are an Educational Progress, 2003). There is increasing
excellent indicator of how well one understands what he evidence that a lack of vocabulary is a key factor
or she is reading (Akyol, 2011; Rupley, Logan, & underlying the failure of students to achieve their
Nichols, 1999). In other words, the richer and more reading goals (Biemiller, 2004; Chall, Jacobs, &
developed a student’s vocabulary, the better he or she is Baldwin, 1990; Hart & Risley, 1995). In addition,
able to analyze text for meaning and to comprehend text. many middle grades students can read words, but
Moreover, the better a student is at understanding what he they do not know or cannot use or identify the
or she is reading, the more likely that student is to contextual information in or around the recognized
continue reading, thus increasing his or her exposure to words to infer or derive the meaning of any unknown
a new and enriched vocabulary (Lewis, 2009, p. 179). In words they encounter while reading the content-area
contrast, a lack of word knowledge or knowledge of the textbooks. Finally, many content-area textbooks
word meanings reflected in the text may explain include content-specific words that may be unfamiliar
difficulties in reading comprehension (Leslie & Caldwell, to students or take on new meanings within
2011, p. 48). It is clear that vocabulary growth requires a particular subject area (Beck, McKeown, Sinatra, &
the learning of a number of words and is recognized as Loxterman, 1991; Fukkink & de Glopper, 1998; Hall,
a predictor of the student comprehending the text being 2005; Kamil et al., 2008). This might result in
read (Graves, 2006; Graves, Schneider, & Ringstaff, students struggling with comprehension and
2018; RAND Reading Study Group, 2002). encountering major problems in gaining knowledge
from a text or in effectively understanding what they
Vocabulary Knowledge in Middle Grades have read (Hall, 2005).
Education
Many students have weaknesses or deficits in their ability
As vocabulary knowledge influences both word to learn from texts, so that engaging with grade-level
recognition and reading comprehension (Language materials will cause frustration and anxiety (Carnine,
and Reading Research Consortium, 2015), Silbert, Kameíenui, & Tarver, 2010); hence, they have
vocabulary instruction is an essential component of difficulty inferring the meaning of unknown words using
a cross-curricular middle grades education because it context clues such as examples, comparisons, definitions,
provides a foundation in the form of background synonym, contrast or visual image. These are descriptive
knowledge (Bintz, 2011; Kamil et al., 2008). As clues to a word’s meaning in the text, which can include
a continual process of coming across new words, sentences, passages, discussions, or illustrations, the
word-learning strategies are a crucial part of all meaning of which they do know, that can assist them in
content-area curricula to the extent that a strong understanding new or unknown words they come across

2 © 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

during reading (Mason, Reid, & Hagaman, 2012). This approaches to build a model of the meaning of a text as
inability interferes with the comprehension of the text to a way of supporting their students with their reading and
be read (Biancarosa & Snow, 2004; Lewis, 2009; Rupley vocabulary development (Graves, 2006; Tierney &
et al., 1999). According to Gunning (2002), if a student Pearson, 1981). Such instruction should focus on the
cannot understand at least 95% of the words, words necessary to understand the content being
comprehension will be hampered. Their lack of presented (Lapp et al., 2005). This will increase the
vocabulary disrupts reading fluency and results in amount of reading the students do and increase the
interferences with comprehension, because inferring or number of words they learn (Graves, 2006). Previous
deriving word meanings from the context can make up as research has confirmed that students could clarify and
much as 70–80% of the comprehension of a text enrich their understanding of the meanings of known
(Pressley, 2002). words if they are taught in a way that positively supports
vocabulary growth and the comprehension of texts (Beck
Typically, content-area teachers expect their students to et al., 2002; Brett, Rothlein, & Hurley, 1996; İlter, 2017-
learn to read and write, with reading materials coming 2018; Lesaux et al., 2010; Nash & Snowling, 2006;
from the textbook and from classroom discussions. Nelson & Stage, 2007; Tomensen & Aarnoutse, 1998).
Students are expected to understand and discuss
sophisticated readings from a range of materials across Teaching Frustrated Readers Word
the various content-areas as they progress through the Meanings
middle grades (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 1991; Minskoff,
2005). The middle level curriculum demands that Students who read at a frustration level—those
students read from their content-area textbooks to learn considered to be struggling readers—have a limited
content effectively. This demand likely comes with an ability to learn new words, a limited knowledge of
expectation that those students have the ability to learn learning strategies, and an inadequate strategy use
from context (Bulgren & Scanlon, 1998; Hall, 2005; regarding reading as a way to enhance their
Klingner, Vaughn, & Schumm, 1998). Researchers have understanding of texts (Harmon, 2002; Vacca, Vacca, &
acknowledged that the ability to use context clues is an Mraz, 2011; Tomensen & Aarnoutse, 1998). For this
effective independent word-learning strategy because it reason, they are unable to master and retain the use of the
can enhance children’s comprehension (Blachowicz, strategy of using contextual information to recognize
Ogle, Fisher, & Taffe, 2013; Klingner, Vaughn, & words when they are reading, as a way of building the
Boardman, 2015; Lesaux, Kieffer, Faller, & Kelley, 2010; meanings of words, and they are thus unable to do the
Minskoff, 2005). It has a sound and persuasive rationale amount of reading needed to improve their
relating it to students’ vocabulary growth as a critical comprehension. They perform poorly on the reading
component of comprehension (Paris et al., 2005). This comprehension tests for their grade levels, because they
rationale depends on the fact that students need a specific commit incorrect word meanings to memory (Grace,
set of word-learning strategies that can help them when it 1998). As a result, they become rightfully frustrated when
comes to using and discussing the contextual key points, they encounter more words that they do not know in a text
in order to unlock the meaning of unknown words (Blachowicz et al., 2013; Pressley, 2006). When students
(Fukkink & de Glopper, 1998). However, the essential could not overcome the vocabulary problems during
nature of comprehension development involves inferring reading (e.g. unknown words in a text), then they have
meaning from content (Norris & Phillips, 1994; experience frustration and a decrease in contextual focus
Smagorinsky, 2001; Tierney & Pearson, 1981). (Nation, 2008). The ability to infer word meanings from
context can be a good solution to overcome frustrated
Getting students who are struggling with comprehension readers vocabulary problems during reading (Parel,
to read more will certainly help them learn from context; 2004).
they need to master word-learning strategies—
recognizing and using word parts and context clues to “Frustration level” in comprehension is taken to be an
infer the meaning of unknown words (Graves, 2006; indication of a student’s low-level of performance in
Harmon, 2002). Parel (2004) noted that the ability to use making inferences to acquire information from the
context to infer word meanings can compensate for reading material (Vacca et al., 2008; Hurst, Franklin, &
learners' lack of vocabulary knowledge. This is because Scales, 2010). For instance, if a sixth-grade student is at
contextual inferencing strategies are essential for read a frustration-level reading, he will likely not have an
comprehension to repair the negative effects of adequate vocabulary or knowledge of concepts to be able
insufficient vocabulary knowledge (Haastrup, 1991) In to read or comprehend any of his content-area textbooks
this respect, content-area teachers can demonstrate (Minskoff, 2005). Students reading at a high-risk level are

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 3
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

likely to have reached frustration level in their grade-level assist students who have difficulty building their
materials (Carnine et al., 2010, p. 202). Leslie and vocabularies, understanding the meaning of words,
Caldwell (2011) state that a student who is at a frustration and recognizing these words while reading
level for comprehension is unable to read the material (Baumann, Kame’enui, & Ash, 2003; Graves,
with adequate word identification, or comprehend 2006). As these demonstrations make clear, all
passages read orally or interactively. At this level, the students in the middle grades need to become
accuracy of word identification is estimated to be less better skilled at using word-learning strategies
than 90%, and less than 70% of the higher-level effectively and efficiently, so they can read like “a
comprehension questions based on the material read will scientist, historian, or mathematician” (Graves,
be answered correctly. For this reason, teachers should 2008; Harmon et al., 2008a). This is because
avoid using materials containing these sorts of vocabulary demands are especially important
challenging words at this level. across all content areas (Baumann, Ware, &
Edwards, 2007; Fukkink & de Glopper, 1998).
Quick access on the part of students who read at
a frustration level for their grade placement can be This current study aims to compare the effects of the use
achieved through providing instructional scaffolding that of context clue strategy instruction with the effects of
encourages the development of contextual and wide reading practices on the vocabulary knowledge of
conceptual knowledge of words so that students may sixth-grade students who read at frustration level. The
comprehend fully what they read (Vacca et al., 2008; reason for choosing the wide reading strategy as
Nagy & Scott, 2000). One effective method to help a comparison with context clues strategy instruction in
struggling readers is strategy-based instruction, using this study is that students acquire many of their new
a strategic instructional model such as direct instruction words from wide reading (Anderson & Nagy, 1993).
or explicit instruction (Armbruster, Lehr, & Osborn, Wide reading is one clear avenue for vocabulary
2003; Baumann, Edwards, Boland, & Font, 2012; knowledge and growth (Blachowicz et al., 2013), and it
Hagaman & Reid, 2008). Teaching students to derive makes the single most substantial contribution to overall
word meanings through a contextual analysis strategy vocabulary development (Graves, 2006). However,
(i.e., analyzing the surrounding linguistic context) researchers have noted that wide reading is also
(Baumann, Edwards, Boland, Olejnik, & Kame’enui, potentially useful as a way of assisting vocabulary
2003) using direct instruction embedded within subject- learning from context and helping students to extend their
matter lessons might take time. However, promoting the vocabulary growth incidentally (Buikema & Graves,
retention of correct word meanings in context is 1993; Gove et al., 2011; Lapp et al., 2005). The literature
a worthwhile investment because it helps develop review also indicates that these two strategies are both
students’ vocabulary and comprehension skills and effective ways to produce a marked improvement in
resulted in increased progress for students’ fluency readers’ vocabulary and comprehension (Graves, 2006;
(Grace, 1998) and because it is effective across academic Walters, 2006). The research questions for this current
domains and across grade levels (Baumann, Edwards, et study are as follows:
al., 2003).
1. What are the effects of context clue strategy
Struggling middle grades readers need to be instruction interventions on the vocabulary
learning to use context clues when encountering acquisition of students who read at a frustration
unknown words to infer those words’ meanings level?
and to understand the content being presented 2. What is the effect of a wide reading strategy on
more effectively (Harmon, 2000). These students the vocabulary acquisition of students who read at
might make better progress in their ability to learn a frustration level?
from texts if placed under direct instruction 3. Which of these strategies is most effective and
(Carnine et al., 2010, p. 202). Direct instruction is most likely to have a significant positive influence
a systematic teacher-centered activity aimed at on students’ vocabulary knowledge?
teaching specific learning strategies; it usually
includes a statement of the objective, modeling,
guided practices, independent practices, a review Methods
of the knowledge gained, and instructional
feedbacks (Klingner et al., 2015, p. 81). Research Design and Participants
Accordingly, direct instruction in the use of In this study, a pretest–posttest quasi-experimental
context clues to infer meaning from context might design was employed to evaluate the effectiveness of

4 © 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

context clue strategy instruction on vocabulary In this study, the QRI-5 instrument consisted of ten
development. The participants consisted of 44 sixth- multiple-choice comprehension and vocabulary
grade students from a suburban middle school in a city questions relating to a 450-word social studies text
in Turkey who were reading at frustration-level containing a number of graded word lists and passages.
comprehension for their grade level. Participant There were two types of questions: explicit and implicit.
selection was based on a number of criteria. The first Explicit questions have answers that are stated directly in
criterion was designed to determine the reading level of the passage that assess the ability to understand and
participants. Three similar intact classes of sixth-grade remember information stated directly by an author.
students were selected to participate. Originally, a total Implicit questions require the reader to use context clues
of 94 students were involved in the selection process. To in the passage to infer meanings in order to answer
identify the reading level of participants, the Qualitative correctly. These questions assess the reader’s inferring
Reading Inventory-5 (QRI-5) was used to determine abilities in context (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Each of the
student’s initial reading proficiency with regard to word participants was asked to read the content-area text
identification and comprehension rate (Leslie & silently and then answer the questions in the QRI-5
Caldwell, 2011). assessment. The investigator (as the author) identified all
participants’ reading levels—independent, instructional,
The QRI-5 measures reading comprehension by or frustration. In the QRI-5, a 99% accuracy rate of word
requiring students to retell a read graded passage recognition represents independent level, 95–99%
orally and answer various types of comprehension represents instructional level, and less than 90%
question based on passage content. It is used to represents frustration level. A comprehension rate of
estimate students’ reading levels—independent, 90–100% represents independent level and 70–89%
instructional, or frustration—for word identification represents instructional level. Frustration level is
in context and for comprehension and to determine if identified as having an average comprehension rate of
materials are appropriate for student use. below 70% for comprehension (Leslie & Caldwell,
Independent-level reading describes students who can 2011). For the assessment of a student’s ability to
read fluently with an excellent comprehension of comprehend, the number of correct answers in the QRI-5
what is read. Instructional level describes students is counted and the student’s level is determined. Table 1
who can make progress in reading with instructional presents a summary of the demographics for the
guidance. Frustration level indicates that students participants of the experiment.
struggle with word identification when they are
reading or are unable to comprehend the material Fifteen of the 95 students scored above 90% for
satisfactorily (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). comprehension and above 99% for the word

Table 1.
Participants demographic and reading levels in treatment conditions

QRI-5 and related measures

Treatment Comprehension Word recognition

conditions Gender N Reading level (%) (%)

Experimental Boy 10 Frustration level 65 (range: 56–68%) 84 (range 82–89%)

Girl 14

Total 24

Control Boy 11 Frustration level 62 (range: 50–65%) 86 (range 84–90%)

Girl 9

Total 20
Qualitative Reading Inventory-5, frustration level for word recognition less than 90% accuracy and less than 70% for
comprehension of the text.

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 5
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

recognition, in the QRI-5, and were thus assigned to keys of the QRI-5 questions and passages. The answer
the independent level. Thirty-six students scored above key was developed by the investigator. Inter-scorer
70% for comprehension (ranging from 75% to 84%) reliability was calculated by dividing the total number
and above 95% for the word recognition, so they were of agreements by the total number of agreements and
placed at the instructional level. As a result, all the disagreements and then multiplying by 100 (Jitendra,
students who scored either instructional level or Kay Hoppes, & Xin, 2000). Agreement was found to be
independent level results were excluded from this 90% (range 88–94%). The intervention in both
current study. This is because the instructional experimental and control conditions was delivered by
program in research questions is aimed at helping the instructor who had experience with reading
students who read at a frustration level for their grade interventions in middle grades schools.
level. Furthermore, five students did not complete the
questions in the QRI-5, and were excluded from the Instructional Procedures in the Experimental
study. The final sample used for this study was 44 Condition
sixth-grade students who were at frustration-level Students in the experimental condition received the
comprehension in reading and thus met the current context clue strategy instruction. They participated in
study’s criteria for participating in the interventions. the intervention program twice a week for 2 weeks.
They scored at the frustration level for their grade level The program consisted of a series of lessons adapted
with a mean 63% (range 50–68%) for comprehension from the components of the vocabulary instruction
and a mean 85% (range 82–90%) for accuracy of word program recommended by Graves (2006). The
recognition in the QRI-5 assessment. components of Graves’s vocabulary program
consisted of a four-step strategy that included direct
Afterward, these students were assigned to one of two instruction in using context clues to infer word
conditions randomly: the experimental condition meaning from context as a means to increase the
(context clue strategy instruction) (N = 24) or the vocabulary growth of readers. Each lesson had
control condition (wide reading strategy) (N = 20) as a duration of 30–40 min.
a comparison group. The percentage of questions
answered correctly on the QRI-5 ranged from 56% to Lessons were arranged in such a way as to improve
68% for students in the experimental condition. The students’ ability to use context clues to infer word
percentage of questions answered correctly for the meaning from context. All of the lessons were
control condition students ranged from 50% to 65%. introduced using the direct instruction approach that
Prior to the intervention, to compare changes between was associated with a modified version of the strategic
the two conditions, differences between the total instructional model (Prado & Plourde, 2011). The
comprehension and word recognition scores of the instructional program activities included (1) describing
treatment conditions as measured by the QRI-5 were the context clue strategy to infer meanings, (2)
calculated. As a result, no statistically significant main modeling how to employ the strategy, (3) guided
effect for two conditions, t(42) = 1.77, p > .05. The practice acquisition of the strategy, (4) independent
third criterion for the study was to measure the practices for the strategy, and (5) reviewing the
participants’ initial vocabulary knowledge, assessing knowledge gained. Direct instruction using a strategic
their knowledge of words and understanding of word instructional model is the best approach to providing
meanings in context. All students were administered interventions for students struggling with reading
with a pretest. This involved a contextual vocabulary comprehension (Klingner et al., 2015; Swanson, 2001).
test (CVT) consisting of 30 multiple-choice items.
This criterion was used in their pretest measures. The Step 1: Introduction of the strategy. The instructor
pretest scores were calculated based on the number of told the class that they will learn a powerful word-
correct answers on the CVT items. The students were learning strategy, called “Inferring Word Meanings
matched to make the treatment conditions comparable, from Context” (Graves, 2006), for using context clues
and no significant differences were observed between to infer the meaning of unknown words they come
the two treatment conditions’ pretest scores, p > .05 as across as they are reading. The instructor presented
measured by the CVT instrument. a large and colorful sample poster with the name of
the four-step strategy for inferring meaning from
To analyze the scoring reliability of the QRI-5, the data context using a computer. He briefly explained its
were delivered to two raters who both had doctoral benefits for becoming more proficient in
degrees in education and who independently scored understanding what one has read. He also stated that
40% of the QRI-5 instrument by considering the answer the lessons are well worth the students’ time because,

6 © 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

as a result, they will know what to do when they instructor modeled each step of the strategy as
encounter unknown words while reading. Just before described above, using a good expository text as an
beginning to practice the four-step strategy, the example, by prompting the students to use the
instructor motivated the class by stating that they will strategy effectively. The instructor worked out how to
become more successful by the end of the training infer the meaning of a difficult unknown word in the
and become good readers. The instructor asked the text. He performed the four-step process for students
students to recognize the four-step strategy shown on using a “thinking-aloud” method in which he overtly
the poster and gave a detailed description of how to verbalized metacognitive statements (e.g., “Are there
use the strategy. Here is how each step of the strategy any difficult words in the paragraph? If so, what are
was described in detail by the instructor (Graves, they?”, “What is the word . . . describing? The word
2006): sounds like a . . .”). During this stage, the instructor
verbally, meta-cognitively, and physically modeled
● I will teach you a good strategy for using the effective use of the strategy for the class.
contextual clues to infer something from what we
read. The strategy focuses on the ability to infer Step 3: Guided practice. The instructor and the
word meanings from context. We will spend students practiced the four-step strategy process
2 weeks on it and together we will master this together in pairs. The students in their pairs engaged
strategy. The first step in this strategy, as you can in guided practice or practice acquisition of the
see from the poster, is “Play and Question.” “Play strategy using an instructor-provided expository text.
and Question” means that you must carefully read This enabled the students to acquire the skills to infer
the text, asking yourself, “Does this make sense?” meanings from context. In pairs, students read the
Then, when you come across a word you are passages carefully and tried to understand the text
unfamiliar with or do not know, you pass onto completely. The instructor asked the pairs whether
the second step of the strategy: “Slow Advance.” there were any difficult or unknown words in the
● In the “Slow Advance” step, when you do not paragraph. The instructor read the paragraph aloud to
know a word’s meaning, slow down, read the the whole class. After reading, the instructor asked
sentence at least once more identifying important the pairs to highlight the words that were likely to be
clues related to the word’s meaning, and see if you new or unknown to the students, and to look for
can infer its meaning from context. If you can infer explicit clues to the meanings of unknown words in
the meaning of the word from just rereading the order to infer their meanings from reading the
sentence or surrounding sentences, continue sentence(s). Afterward, the instructor and the student
reading; however, if you can not infer the meaning pairs came up with the four-step strategy together.
of the word from reading the sentences in the text, Following the guided practice of instruction, the
then proceed on to the “Stop and Rewind” step, students rehearsed the four steps of the strategy until
which is the third step of the strategy. they could fluently recite all four steps with 100%
● In the “Stop and Rewind” step, you should stop, go accuracy. Students rehearsed this information and, in
back, and read the preceding sentence or two that pairs, verbally elaborated the steps of the strategy
comes before the one with the unknown word, with guidance from the instructor.
again identifying contextual information that might
help you infer what the word might mean. If you Step 4: Independent practice. The students in
can infer its meaning, then you can pass on to the pairs continue to use the four-step strategy
last step, which is called “Play and Question.” process, but with a more advanced expository text.
● In the “Play and Question” step, once you have The instructor gives the students a brief paragraph
inferred a word’s meaning, then substitute your with some difficult words and asks them to read it
guess for the difficult word you did not know to see several times and mark any words they do not
if it makes sense. If it does, continue reading. If it know or whose meanings they are uncertain about.
does not, go back to “Stop and Rewind” or The instructor tells the students they will discuss
continue to read, or look it up in a dictionary, using the context clue strategy with this
comprehending the passage as well as you can paragraph. As the instruction continues, the
without knowing the word’s meaning. independent practice becomes longer and more
challenging and includes different texts, such as
narrative texts. Increasingly, the students engage
Step 2: Modeling the use of the four-step strategy. in dialogue with each other, and the instructor
After describing how to use the four-step strategy, the talks less. They do more trying out of the strategy

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 7
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

in pairs and take more responsibility for the use of For instance, a student might say to his/her partner: “Are
the strategy. The instructor provides there any unclear or unknown words in this paragraph?
encouragement, scaffolding in the use of the Let’s identify their meaning from the text.” During the
strategy, dialogic support/assistance, and feedback lessons, the instructor randomly monitors the pairs within
as needed. the class by circling around the classroom to ensure they
are completing their tasks on time (Wexler, 2007).
Step 5: Review of instructional program. The
instructor assessed what the students learned, The Instrument
primarily by calling on students to recap what they In this study, a “CVT” consisting of 30 multiple-choice
have learned using worksheets, including exercises to items was used to collect data in the pre- and posttest
practice the four-step strategy process. measures. The CVT included short passages containing
specific difficult words to assess knowledge of the
Procedures in the Control Condition meaning of these words and their understanding in
In the control condition, students practiced wide reading context. Before developing the instrument, the
for 20–30 min, twice a week for 2 weeks. Students were investigator identified 60 word items selected from the
required to read a different passage of text provided by the sixth-grade social studies textbooks. Afterward, the
instructor each week for the duration of the treatment. Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS) developed by
The instructor asked these students to read the same texts Paribakht and Wesche (1997) was used to assess
as the students under the experimental condition so that students’ levels of familiarity with the selected words for
the experimental treatment of this study would be this current study. As a self-reporting instrument, the
consistent. Typically, this practice consists of students’ VKS represents an attempt to capture different levels of
reading, underlining unknown words, summarizing the self-perceived knowledge of specific words. These levels
text, and using a dictionary to learn word meanings in range from unfamiliarity through recognition of the
pairs. The practice of wide reading includes a number of selected word and some idea of its meaning to the ability
procedures recommended by Wexler, Vaughn, Roberts, to use the word in a sentence (Paribakht & Wesche,
and Denton (2010), as follows. 1993). The VKS includes a number of stages, which are
described below.
First, the instructor pairs the students based on who would
work well together to accomplish the daily lesson Stage 1. I have never seen this word.
focusing on the text passages they are required to read.
Every lesson a new instructor-provided text passage is Stage 2. I have seen this word before, but I do not
given to each pair of students. Each partner in each pair know what it means.
must read the same text passage twice while his/her
Stage 3. I have seen this word before, and I think it
partner follows along. Each partner has one opportunity
means______ (synonym or translation).
to read the passage aloud and can listen to it (reading
silently) a total of two times. Students in pairs have the Stage 4. I have the meaning of the word, and I can
opportunity to correct any reading errors during use this word in a sentence context: _______ (write
the second reading. After reading, if necessary, students a completed sentence).
can underline and use a dictionary to find the definition of
any unknown words they have encountered during During the administration of the instrument, students are
reading. For instance, a student might address his/her asked to indicate on the VKS their degree of knowledge
partner as follows: “Here are some unknown words that of each selected wordlist. On the VKS wordlists, the
I underlined in the passage while you were reading. Let’s results showed that the majority of students (88%) found
read those together and think about their meanings by the selected words totally unfamiliar and their correct
reading sentences in the passage.” Students are also asked meanings were not known (i.e., Stage 1 and Stage 2).
to use a pencil to follow along and underline any errors or Some of the students (i.e., Stage 3)—and in other cases,
miscues while they are reading. Each partner is asked to a few students (i.e., Stage 4) —found words familiar,
review all unknown words and their meanings in the text. identifying one or more correct meanings and correctly
Students then ask their partners to summarize what they using 15 out of 60 words. These words were excluded
have read to promote vocabulary growth. This from the study. A final 45-item vocabulary list was found
summarization might include students’ paraphrasing for to fit Stages 1 and 2 of the VKS. After the identification of
their partners what happened in the text after the last the targeted words, a CVT that consisted of 45 multiple-
reading. After summarization, students are asked to choice items was generated using the selected targeted
discuss and clarify any word meanings that were unclear. words from this study embedded within the context of

8 © 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

short expository passages. The passages for this study The pre- and posttest standard score means and
were written in a variety of styles and taken from social standard deviations are reported in Table 2 for the
studies textbooks at fifth- and sixth-grade levels two conditions for the CVT.
(Binbaşaran, 2002; Can, 2017; Heper, 2017; Meredith,
2012; Sıvışoğlu, 2014; Zülal, 2010). The text passages Results were analyzed for the combined overall score
were expository in nature and approximately 135–300 using a 2 × 2 one-way analysis of variance
words in length. The passages had a consistent number of (ANOVA). Pre- and posttest scores of students were
words whose meaning had to be inferred from the represented by proportions of correctly answered
context. The CVT was rated by two raters with doctoral items on the CVT instrument. As seen in Table 2, the
degrees in education, according to a rubric that included results showed that the scores for the control
various standards in relation to test development. Cohen’s condition increased from the pretest (M = .54,
(1988) kappa—a statistical measure of agreement SD = .14) to the posttest (M = .64, SD = .18). On the
coefficient—was calculated by the raters. The Cohen’s other hand, the scores for the experimental condition
kappa coefficient ranged from .82 to .90 for the 45 items also increased from the pretest (M = .56, SD = .16) to
in the CVT. The test was administered to 130 middle the posttest (M = .76, SD = .15) as measured by the
grades students for item-test analysis of the CVT CVT instrument. This finding indicates that the two
instrument. After this process, 15 items were excluded conditions produced significant increases in their
from the test. Finally, 30 multiple-choice items across the level of vocabulary knowledge, following the
expository texts were designed to be use for the pre- and instruction. However, the scores for the experimental
posttest measures. The internal reliability of the CVT was condition surpassed those of the comparison group
.88. In this task, students were required to read the for the posttest.
passages and to infer the meaning of words from their
A one-way ANOVA was used on the students’ posttest
context as they read.
scores with their pretest scores as a covariate to examine
Treatment Fidelity the effects of intervention on students’ vocabulary
The instructional lessons in this study were observed by knowledge. As expected, after adjusting for the means of
two master’s students using a checklist of instructional the pretest scores for all conditions, the ANOVA yielded
steps to determine the fidelity of the treatment a significant main effect for the conditions, F = 12.40,
implementation. The checklist included the direct p < .001, indicating that the context clues strategy
instruction features, such as verbal explanation, instruction affected students’ vocabulary knowledge
modeling, guided practice, independent practice, and scores at the posttest. Experimental condition’s
presenting corrective feedback. The two master’s performance on the posttest was significantly better than
students observed teaching for 30% of the instructional that of the control condition. However, both treatment
lessons. The checklist included the use of responses conditions’ performance on the vocabulary knowledge
“yes,” “no,” or “not applicable” to score the observations increased from the pretest to the posttest. The effect sizes
(Jitendra et al., 2000). Treatment fidelity, which was (ESs) for the two conditions were calculated for the CVT
computed as the percentage of steps correctly completed measure. According to Cohen’s (1992) guidelines for
by the instructor, was found to be 91%. interpreting ESs, .29 and less being considered small,
.30–.49 medium, and .50 and greater large. ESs for the
Results experimental and the control conditions were .42 and .20,
respectively. ES for the experimental condition indicates
In this study, descriptive statistics were used for the that the context clue strategy instruction was moderately
pre- and post- measures for the treatment conditions. effective in increasing students’ vocabulary knowledge

Table 2.
Means and standard deviations for contextual vocabulary test

Pretest score Posttest score

Treatment conditions N M SD M SD

Experimental 24 .56 .16 .76 .15

Control 20 .54 .14 .64 .18

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 9
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

scores. ES for the comparison group who practiced wide Aarnoutse, 1998). All the results support that teaching
reading suggested a small effect on vocabulary scores. students to use context clues to infer meanings from
context is a powerful word-learning strategy that
Discussion ensures a significant improvement in vocabulary
development (Graves, 2006; Nation, 2008; Walters,
This study was conducted to compare the effects of direct
2004)
instruction in the use of the context clue strategy to infer
meaning from context versus wide reading practices on Implications for Research and Practice
the vocabulary knowledge of sixth-grade students
identified as frustrated readers. The results showed that Findings of this study suggest that instructional
the proportion of correct answers on the CVT for students mediation focusing on using context clues can have
under both treatment conditions increased from the pre- a profound effect on increasing the ability to learn new
to the posttest. As expected, the results indicated that the words and to understand word meanings in context
wide reading practices employed in the control condition (Fukkink & de Glopper, 1998). The results indicate that
made a significant contribution to students’ vocabulary. the students receiving the context clue strategy
This finding is consistent with previous studies instruction demonstrated significantly higher gains than
suggesting that wide reading promotes vocabulary the comparison group, which practiced a wide reading
growth and encourages students’ readings (Bamford, strategy with the same texts, in terms of knowledge of
& Day, 2004; Brown, 2009; Chen, Chen, Chen, & Wey, the words and understanding word meanings. The
2013; Hedrick & Cunningham, 2002; Pikulski & Chard, strategy instruction, taught using a strategy instructional
2005). model, helped students increase their proficiency in
learning from context in a relatively short amount of
The current study does support the practice of providing time. The instructional program achieved acceptable or
a wide reading strategy to increase vocabulary among desired levels of success in ensuring a marked
students who read at frustration level in middle grades improvement in the vocabulary of students in the
schools. On the other hand, students in the experimental experimental condition (Walters, 2006). Students’
condition—who received an intervention focusing on levels of word knowledge improved immediately
context clue strategy taught using a direct instruction following the instructional program. Providing such
approach—showed significant gains in their vocabulary instruction has the potential to help students make gains
knowledge as measured by the posttest, following the in the vocabulary knowledge that accompanies subject-
instructional program. A follow-up ANOVA showed matter reading (Hall, 2005).
that the experimental condition outscored the control
condition on the posttest scores. Students in the Given the huge number of words students need to
experimental condition demonstrated significantly learn from content-area textbooks in the middle
higher outcomes in vocabulary knowledge on the grades, students need to learn word-learning
posttest scores than the students in the control condition. strategies and use them independently during reading
The magnitude of the improvements in the experimental (Graves, Ringstaff, Li, & Flynn, 2018). The ability to
and the control conditions found d = .42 (indicating infer meaning from context is arguably one of the
a medium effect) and d = .20 (indicating a small effect), most powerful strategies to teach word meanings for
respectively. A possible explanation for this finding reading success in middle grades education (Graves,
may be the fact that the students participating in the 2006). The findings from the instructional
experimental condition enhanced their ability to infer intervention described in this study lend support for
the meaning of unknown words from context, so that teaching the use of context clues to infer meanings
they likely had this ability when they encountered and thus to improve vocabulary knowledge to
unknown words in context as they were reading. The students with frustration-level comprehension in
findings of this study are consistent with those reported middle grades education. One challenge for teachers
for context clues instruction interventions with students who attempt to use the context clues strategy in their
struggling with reading comprehension, which have own classrooms is the selection of reading materials
yielded positive outcomes (Daalen-Kapteijns, that include natural or instructional contexts for
Schouten-Van Parreren, & Glopper, 1993; Dole, Sloan, difficult words, in order to encourage students to infer
& Trathen, 1995; Goerss, Beck, & McKeown, 1999; their meanings from this contextual information. This
Kermani & Seyedrezaei, 2015; Nash & Snowling, is because the use of context clues by itself is not
2006; Nelson & Stage, 2007; Rinaldi, Sells, & always a reliable aid to word comprehension of the
McLaughlin, 1997; Soureshjani, 2011; Tomensen & text. The context might not be pointed enough to

10 © 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

allow the precise meaning of a word to be predicted Baumann, J. F., Edwards, E. C., Boland, E., &
(Beck, McKeown, & McCaslin, 1983; Schatz & Font, G. (2012). Teaching word-learning
Baldwin, 1986). strategies. In E. J. Kame’enui & J. F. Baumann
(Eds.), Vocabulary instruction: Research to
To underscore the benefit of using the context clues practice (2nd ed., pp. 139–166). New York, NY:
strategy, content-area teachers may wish to vary the Guilford Press.
text materials they use to teach their students. Gains Baumann, J. F., Edwards, E. C., Boland, E. M.,
in mastering word-learning strategies have the Olejnik, S., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2003).
potential to actively encourage greater growth in Vocabulary tricks: Effects of instruction in
vocabulary, supporting the comprehension of reading morphology and context on fifth-grade students’
materials (Graves, 2006). The study results were ability to derive and infer word meanings.
promising in terms of contributing to students’ ability American Educational Research Journal, 40(2),
to learn new word meanings from context. The results 447–494. doi:10.3102/00028312040002447
also confirmed that a small development in their Baumann, J. F., Ware, D., & Edwards, E. C. (2007).
ability to infer the meaning of unknown words can Bumping into spicy, tasty words that catch your
result in a sizable number of words being learned tongue: A formative experiment on vocabulary
from context (Dole et al., 1995; Graves et al., 2018). instruction. The Reading Teacher, 61((2)),
Results of this study suggest the effectiveness of 108–122.
context clues strategy-focused interventions that Beck, I., McKeown, M., Sinatra, G., & Loxterman, J.
direct students to improve their ability to infer (1991). Revising social studies text from a
meaning from context as they are reading. Teachers text-processing perspective: Evidence of
can use direct instructional methods to help students improved comprehensibility. Reading Research
acquire this strategy, which they can use to learn Quarterly, 26(3), 251–276. doi:10.2307/747763
words they come across in texts they are reading, to Beck, I., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002).
support vocabulary development (Bintz, 2011; Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary
Dixon-Krauss, 2001; Graves, 2006; Greenwood, development. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
2004; Harmon, Wood, Hedrick, & Gress, 2008). Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & McCaslin, E. S.
(1983). Vocabulary development: All contexts
are not created equal. The Elementary School
ORCID Journal, 83(3), 177–181. doi:10.1086/461307
İlhan İlter http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4411-200X Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next
—A vision for action and research in middle and
References high school literacy: A report to Carnegie
Corporation of New York. Washington, DC:
Akyol, H. (2011). Türkçe öğretim yöntemleri. Alliance for Excellent Education.
Ankara, TU: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık. Biemiller, A. (2004). Teaching vocabulary in the
Anderson, R. C., & Nagy, W. E. (1993). The primary grades: Vocabulary instruction needed.
vocabulary conundrum. Center for the Study of In J. F. Baumann & E. J. Kame’enui (Eds.),
Reading Technical Report; No. 570. Urbana, IL: Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice (pp.
Center for the Study of Reading. 28–40). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Armbruster, B. B., Lehr, F., & Osborn, J. (2003). A child Binbaşaran, B. (2002). Asit yağmurları ve Dünyamız.
becomes a reader: Birth through preschool. Ankara, TU: Tübitak Bilim Çocuk Kitapları.
Champaign, IL: National Institute for Literacy. Bintz, W. P. (2011). Teaching vocabulary across the
Bamford, J., & Day, R. R. (2004). Extensive reading curriculum. Middle School Journal, 42(4),
activities for teaching language. Cambridge, UK: 44–53. doi:10.1080/00940771.2011.11461773
Cambridge University Press. Blachowicz, C., Ogle, D., Fisher, P., & Taffe, S. W.
Baumann, J., Kame’enui, E., & Ash, G. (2003). (2013). Teaching academic vocabulary K-8:
Research on vocabulary instruction: Voltaire Effective practices across the curriculum.
redux. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. Squire, & J. Jensen New York, NY: Guilford Press.
(Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the Brett, A., Rothlein, L., & Hurley, M. (1996).
English language arts (2nd ed., pp. 752–785). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. and explanations of target words. TheElementary

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 11
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

School Journal, 96(4), 415–422. doi:10.1086/ Reading Psychology, 20(2), 151–175.

461836 doi:10.1080/027027199278457
Brown, D. (2009). Why and how textbooks should Gove, M., Vacca, J. A. L., Vacca, R. T.,
encourage extensive reading. ELT Journal, 63(3), Burkey, L. C., Lenhart, L. A., & McKeon, C. A.
238–245. doi:10.1093/elt/ccn041 (2011). Reading and learning to read (7th ed.).
Buikema, J. L., & Graves, M. F. (1993). Teaching Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
students to use context cues to infer word Grace, C. A. (1998). Retention of word meanings
meanings. Journal of Reading, 36(6), 450–457. inferred from context and sentence-level
Bulgren, J., & Scanlon, D. (1998). Instructional translations: Implications for the design of
routines and learning strategies that promote beginning-level call software. The Modern
understanding of content area concepts. Journal Language Journal, 82(4), 533–544. doi:10.1111/
of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 41(4), 292–302. j.1540-4781.1998.tb05541.x
Can, T. (2017). Destanların kültürümüzdeki yerini Graves, M. F. (2006). The vocabulary book: Learning
öğrenmek ister misiniz? Ankara, TU: Tübitak and instruction. New York, NY: Teachers
Bilim Çocuk Kitapları. College Press.
Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., Kameíenui, E. J., & Graves, M. F. (2008). Instruction on individual
Tarver, S. (2010). Direct instruction reading (5th words: One size does not fit all. In A. E. Farstrup
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say
Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The about vocabulary instruction (pp. 56–79).
reading crisis: Why poor children fail behind. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Graves, M. F., Ringstaff, C., Li, L., & Flynn, K.
Chen, C. N., Chen, S. C., Chen, S. H., & Wey, S. C. (2018). Effects of teaching upper elementary
(2013). The effects of extensıve reading via grade students to use word learning strategies.
e-books on tertiary level EFL students’ reading Reading Psychology, 1–21. doi:10.1080/
attitude, reading comprehension and vocabulary 02702711.2018.1496503
to jet. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Graves, M. F., Schneider, S., & Ringstaff, C. (2018).
Technology, 12(2), 303–312. Empowering students with word-learning
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the strategies: Teach a child to fish. The Reading
behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Teacher, 71(5), 533–543. doi:10.1002/
Lawrence Erlbaum. trtr.2018.71.issue-5
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Greenwood, S. (2004). Content matters: Building
Bulletin, 112, 155–159. doi:10.1037/ vocabulary and conceptual understanding in
0033-2909.112.1.155 the subject areas. Middle School Journal,
Daalen-Kapteijns, M. M., Schouten-Van Parreren, C., 35(3), 27–34. doi:10.1080/00940771.2004.114
& Glopper, K. (1993). Het afleiden van 61428
woordbetekenissen uit de context. (The Gunning, T. G. (2002). Assessing and correcting
derivation of word meanings from context). reading and writing difficulties (2nd ed.). Boston,
Levende Talen, 485, 589–593. MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Dixon-Krauss, L. (2001). Using literature as a context Haastrup, K. (1991). Lexical inferencing procedures or
for teaching vocabulary. Journal of Adolescent & talking about words. Retrieved November 5, 2018.
Adult Literacy, 45(4), 310–318. https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=TB475eVI
Dole, J. A., Sloan, C., & Trathen, W. (1995). Q_MC&printsec=frontcover&hl=tr&source=
Teaching vocabulary within the context of gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&
literature. Journal of Reading, 38(6), 452–460. f=false
Fukkink, R. G., & de Glopper, K. (1998). Effects of Hagaman, J. L., & Reid, R. (2008). The effects of the
instruction in deriving word meaning from paraphrasing strategy on the reading
context: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational comprehension of middle school students at risk
Research, 68(4), 450–469. doi:10.3102/ for failure in reading. Remedial and Special
00346543068004450 Education, 29(4), 222–234. doi:10.1177/
Goerss, B. L., Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. 0741932507311638
(1999). Increasing remedial students’ ability to Hall, L. A. (2005). Struggling readers and content
derive word meaning from context. Journal of area text: Interactions with and perceptions of

12 © 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

comprehension, self, and success. Research in level. Journal of Education. doi:10.1177/

Middle Level Education Online, 29(4), 1–19. 0022057418818818.
Hammadou, J. (1991). Interrelationships among prior Jitendra, A. K., Kay Hoppes, M., & Xin, Y. P. (2000).
knowledge, inference, and language proficiency Enhancing main idea comprehension for students
in foreign language reading. The Modern with learning problems: The role of
Language Journal, 75(1), 27–38. a summarization strategy and self-monitoring
Harmon, J. M. (2000). Assessing and supporting instruction. The Journal of Special Education, 34
independent word learning strategies of middle (3), 127–139. doi:10.1177/002246690003400302
school students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C.,
Literacy, 43(6), 518–527. Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J. (2008). Effective
Harmon, J. M. (2002). Teaching independent word classroom and intervention practices: A practice
learning strategies to struggling readers. Journal guide (NCEE# 2008-4027). Washington, DC:
of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(7), 606–615. U.S. Department of Education.
Harmon, J. M., Wood, K. D., & Hedrick, W. B. Kermani, S. K., & Seyedrezaei, S. H. (2015). The effect
(2008a). Vocabulary instruction in middle and of contextualized vocabulary teaching on learners’
secondary content classrooms: Understandings vocabulary learning and retention. Journal of
and direction from research. In A. E. Farstrup & Language Sciences & Linguistics, 3(5), 90–95.
S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say Klingner, J., Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. (1998).
about vocabulary instruction (pp. 150–181). Collaborative strategic reading during social
Newark, DE: International Reading Association. studies in heterogeneous fourth-grade
Harmon, J. M., Wood, K. D., Hedrick, W. B., & classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 99
Gress, M. (2008b). Pick a word—Not just any (1), 3–22. doi:10.1086/461914
word: Using vocabulary self-selection with Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2015).
expository texts. Middle School Journal, 40(1), Teaching reading comprehension to students with
43–52. doi:10.1080/00940771.2008.11461664 learning difficulties (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Harmon, J. M., Wood, K. D., & Kiser, K. (2009). Guilford Press.
Promoting vocabulary learning with the Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (1998). Teaching
interactive word wall. Middle School Journal, 40 children to learn word meanings from context:
(3), 58–63. doi:10.1080/ A synthesis and some questions. Journal of
00940771.2009.11495588 Literacy Research, 30(1), 119–138. doi:10.1080/
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences 10862969809547983
in the everyday experience of young American Language and Reading Research Consortium. (2015).
children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing. Learning to read: Should we keep things simple?
Hedrick, W. B., & Cunningham, J. W. (2002). Reading Research Quarterly, 50(2), 151–169.
Investigating the effect of wide reading on doi:10.1002/rrq.2015.50.issue-2
listening comprehension of written language. Lapp, D., Flood, J., & Farnan, N. (Eds). (2005). Content
Reading Psychology, 23(2), 107–126. area reading and learning: Instructional strategies
doi:10.1080/027027102760351025 (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Heper, S. G. (2017). Deniz suyu neden tuzludur? Lesaux, N. K., Kieffer, M. J., Faller, S. E., &
Ankara, TU: Tübitak Bilim Çocuk Kitapları. Kelley, J. G. (2010). The effectiveness and ease
Hurst, B., Franklin, K., & Scales, K. B. (2010). How of implementation of an academic vocabulary
does a high school reading class influence intervention for linguistically diverse students in
students’ reading levels, habits, and perceptions? urban middle schools. Reading Research
Journal of Reading Education, 35(3), 10–18. Quarterly, 45(2), 196–228. doi:10.1598/
İlter, I. (2017). Teaching word meanings to students RRQ.45.2.3
at different reading ability: A controlled Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. S. (2011). Qualitative reading
assessment of the contextual-based vocabulary inventory-5. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
instruction on reading comprehension. Education Lewis, J. (2009). Essential questions in adolescent
and Science, 42(190), 437–463. literacy. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
İlter, İ. (2018). Effects of the instruction in inferring Manzo, A. V., Manzo, U. C., & Thomas, M. M.
meanings from context on the comprehension of (2006). Rationale for systematic vocabulary
middle school students at frustration reading development: Antidote for state mandates.

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 13
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(7), a perspectival view of reading. Journal of
610–619. doi:10.1598/JAAL.49.7.6 Reading Behavior, 26(4), 391–412.
Mason, L. H., Reid, R., & Hagaman, J. L. (2012). doi:10.1080/10862969409547860
Building comprehension in adolescents: Parel, R. (2004). The impact of lexical inferencing
Powerful strategies for improving reading and on second language reading proficiency.
writing in content areas. Baltimore, MD: Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary
Brookes Publishing. Journal, 17, 847–873.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1991). Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary
Teaching students ways to remember: Strategies enhancement activities and reading for
for learning mnemonically. Cambridge, MA: meaning in second language vocabulary
Brookline Books. acquisition. In J. Coady & T. Huckins (Eds.),
Meredith, S. (2012). Neden geri dönüştürmeliyim? Second language vocabulary acquisition:
Ankara, TU: Tübitak Bilim Çocuk Kitapları. A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174–200).
Minskoff, E. (2005). Teaching reading to struggling Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
learners. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing. Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. B. (1993). Reading
Nagy, W. E. (2005). Why vocabulary instruction comprehension and second language
needs to be long-term and comprehensive. In development in a comprehension-based ESL
E. Hiebert & M. L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching program. TESL Canada Journal, 11(1), 9–29.
and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to doi:10.18806/tesl.v11i1.623
practice (pp. 27–44). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Paris, S. G., Carpenter, R. D., Paris, A. H., &
Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. A. (2000). Vocabulary Hamilton, E. E. (2005). Spurious and genuine
processes. In M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, correlates of children’s comprehension. In S. G. Paris
P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children’s reading
reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 269–284). Mahwah, comprehension and assessment (pp. 131–160).
NJ: Erlbaum. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nash, H., & Snowling, M. (2006). Teaching new Pikulski, H., & Chard, D. (2005). Fluency: Bridge
words to children with poor existing vocabulary between decoding and reading comprehension.
knowledge: A controlled evaluation of the The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 510–519.
definition and context methods. doi:10.1598/RT.58.6.2
InternationalJournal of Language & Prado, L., & Plourde, L. A. (2011). Increasing
Communication Disorders, 41(3), 335–354. reading comprehension through the explicit
doi:10.1080/13682820600602295 teaching of reading strategies: Is there
National Assessmen of Educational Progress. (2003). a difference among the genders? Reading
2003 reading results. Retrieved from http://nces. Improvement, 48(1), 32–43.
ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/ Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension instruction:
Nelson, J. R., & Stage, S. A. (2007). Fostering the What makes sense now, what might make sense
development of vocabulary knowledge and reading soon. Reading Online, 5(2). Retrieved from
comprehension though contextually-based multiple http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.
meaning vocabulary instruction. Education and asp?HREF=articles/handbook/pressley/index.htm
treatment of children, 30(1), 1–22. Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The
Nation, I. S. P. (2008). Teaching vocabulary: case for balanced teaching. New York, NY:
Strategies and techniques. USA: Heinle. Guildford Press.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for
read: An evidence-based assessment of the understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading
scientific research literature on reading and its comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND
implications for reading instruction. Bethesda, Corporation.
MD: National Institute of Child Health and Rinaldi, L., Sells, D., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1997).
Human Development. The effects of reading racetracks on sight word
Neuman, S. B., & Dwyer, J. (2009). Missing in action: acquisition of elementary students. Journal of
Vocabulary instruction in pre-K. The Reading Behavioral Education, 7(2), 219–234.
Teacher, 62(5), 384–392. doi:10.1598/RT.62.5.2 doi:10.1023/A:1022845209417
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (1994). The Robb, L. (2009). Reading strategy lessons for science
relevance of a reader’s knowledge within and social studies. New York, NY: Scholastic.

14 © 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
RMLE Online—Volume 42, No. 1

Rupley, W. H., Logan, J. W., & Nichols, W. D. (1999). meanings. Educational Studies, 24(1), 107–128.
The role of vocabulary in a balanced view of reading. doi:10.1080/0305569980240108
The Reading Teacher, 52(4), 238–247. Vacca, R. T., Vacca, J. L., & Mraz, M. E. (2011).
Rupley, W. H., & Nichols, W. D. (2005). Vocabulary Content-area reading: Literacy and learning
instruction for the struggling reader. Reading & across the curriculum (10th ed.). Boston, MA:
Writing Quarterly, 21(3), 239–260. doi:10.1080/ Allyn & Bacon.
10573560590949368 Vacca, J. L., Vacca, R. T., Gove, M. K., Burkey, L.
Schatz, E. K., & Baldwin, R. S. (1986). Context clues C., Lenhart, L. A., & McKeon, C. A. (2018).
are unreliable predictors of word meanings. In Reading and learning to read. (10th ed.). Boston,
Reading research quarterly (pp. 439–453). MA: Pearson.
Sıvışoğlu, K. (2014). Ozon tabakasındaki delik küçülüyor Walters, J. (2004). Teaching the use of context to
mu? Ankara, TU: Tübitak Bilim Çocuk Kitapları. infer meaning: A longitudinal survey of L1 and
Silva, M. T., & Cain, K. (2015). The relations L2 vocabulary research. Language Teaching, 37
between lower- and higher-level oral language (4), 243–252. doi:10.1017/S0261444805002491
skills and their role in prediction of early reading Walters, J. (2006). Methods of teaching inferring
comprehension. Journal of Educational meaning from context. Regional Language
Psychology, 107(1), 321–331. Centre Journal, 37(2), 176–190.
Wexler, J., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., & Denton, C. A.
Smagorinsky, P. (2001). If meaning is constructed
(2010). The efficacy of repeated reading and wide
what’s it made from? Toward a cultural theory of
reading practice for high school students with severe
reading. Review of Educational Research, 71(1),
reading disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research
133–169. doi:10.3102/00346543071001133
and Practice, 25(1), 2–10. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
Soureshjani, K. H. (2011). Gender-oriented use of
5826.2009.00296.x
vocabulary strategies: A comparative study.
Wexler, J. A. P. (2007). The relative effects of repeated
Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(7),
reading, wide reading, and a typical ınstruction
898 902. doi:10.4304/tpls.1.7.898-902
comparison group on the comprehension, fluency,
Swanson, H. L. (2001). Reading intervention research
and word reading of adolescents with reading
outcomes and students with LD: What are the
disabilities (Unpublished dissertation). University of
major instructional ingredients for successful
Texas at Austin.
outcomes? Perspectives (Gerontological Nursing
Association (Canada)), 27(2), 18–20. Wright, T. S., & Cervetti, G. N. (2017). A systematic
Tierney, R. J., & Pearson, P. D. (1981). Learning to learn review of the research on vocabulary instruction
from text: A framework for improving classroom that impacts text comprehension. Reading
practice. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Research Quarterly, 52, 203–226.
Illinois Center for the Study of Reading. Zülal, A. (2010). Denize petrol döküldüğünde neler
Tomensen, M., & Aarnoutse, C. (1998). Effects of an oluyor?. Ankara, TU: Tübitak Bilim Çocuk
instructional program for deriving word Kitapları.

© 2019 Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. 15