首页> 外文学位 >The effect of morphological instruction in improving the spelling, vocabulary, and reading comprehension of high school English Language Learners (ELLs).
【24h】

The effect of morphological instruction in improving the spelling, vocabulary, and reading comprehension of high school English Language Learners (ELLs).

机译:形态教学对提高高中英语学习者(ELL)的拼写,词汇和阅读理解的作用。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This purpose of this study was to determine if Morphological Instruction (knowledge of the Germanic, Latin, and Greek words, roots, and affixes of English) was an effective instructional approach towards accelerating the acquisition of spelling, vocabulary, and reading comprehension and closing at least a 6,000 word gap between English language learners and their English dominant peers.;Studies show that there exists a gap between English dominant high school students who bring 10-12,000 words to reading instruction as opposed to the 5,000-7000 words of English Language Learners (ELLs) (Hart & Risley, 1995; Biemiller & Slonim, 2001). For many ELLs, this gap has resulted in school failure, higher dropout rates, and dead-end careers (Fleishman, 2004). One possibility for closing this gap is Morphological Instruction which can provide learners with expansive knowledge of the Germanic, Latin, and Greek words, roots, and affixes of English. This knowledge can help students acquire meanings of unfamiliar, morphologically complex words and expose them to the structure of English from a cross-language perspective through structural linguistic elements that have rarely been included in the current language arts or English curriculum (Fashola, Drum, Mayer & Kang, 1996). From early elementary grades and continuing into the college years, a major reason for Morphological Instruction in English, when included in the curriculum, has been to increase knowledge of high-level vocabulary that is essential for comprehension of text (Carlo et al., 2004). In addition, Morphological Instruction, with its focus on affixing, may result in spelling improvement and increased decoding ability (Beck & Juel, 1995; Foorman, Francis, Fletcher, Schnatschneider, & Metha, 1998; Rothstein, Rothstein, & Lauber, 2007).;The study involved ELLs (ages 15-17 years of age; n=140) in a true experimental design to determine if Morphological Instruction is an effective instructional approach towards accelerating the acquisition of spelling, vocabulary, and reading comprehension for high school ELLs who face linguistic disadvantages and thereby close the gap between high school English dominant speakers and second language learners.;Bivariate and multivariate analyses revealed that each of the t-tests and ANCOVAs were found to be of statistical significance in reading, vocabulary, and spelling. The data was significant alone, which made it abundantly clear that each group---control and treatment---regardless of their covariates were judged based on their performance as a class, or cohort, and on the instruction they received, for reading, vocabulary, and spelling vis-a-vis traditional instruction or Morphological Instruction. Thus, Morphological Instruction suggests that it did have a significant effect on whether or not ELL students improved in reading, vocabulary, and spelling to the exclusion of the null and to the acceptance of the alternative hypothesis and research questions indicating, without equivocation, that it can serve as an instructional tool in accelerating the closing of the word gap between ELLs and English dominant high school students.
机译:本研究的目的是确定形态学指导(德语,拉丁语和希腊语的单词,词根和附加词的知识)是否是一种有效的教学方法,可加速拼写,词汇量以及阅读理解和结语的掌握。英语学习者和英语占主导地位的同伴之间至少有6,000个单词的差距。;研究表明,英语占主导地位的高中生将10-12,000个单词用于阅读指导,而英语学习者的5,000-7000个单词之间存在差距(ELL)(Hart&Risley,1995; Biemiller&Slonim,2001)。对于许多ELL来说,这种差距导致了学校的失败,辍学率的提高以及职业生涯的尽头(Fleishman,2004)。弥补这种差距的一种可能是形态学教学,它可以为学习者提供日耳曼语,拉丁语和希腊语单词,词根和词缀的广泛知识。这些知识可以帮助学生获得陌生的,形态复杂的单词的含义,并通过跨语言的角度,通过结构语言元素将它们理解为英语的结构,这些语言元素在当前的语言艺术或英语课程中很少出现(Fashola,Drum,Mayer &Kang,1996)。从小学早期到大学学习,将英语形态学教学纳入课程表的主要原因是,它增加了对理解文字必不可少的高级词汇的知识(Carlo等人,2004年)。此外,以词缀为重点的形态学教学可能会改善拼写并提高解码能力(Beck&Juel,1995; Foorman,Francis,Fletcher,Schnatschneider和Metha,1998; Rothstein,Rothstein和Lauber,2007)。 。;这项研究将ELL(年龄在15-17岁; n = 140)纳入真正的实验设计中,以确定形态学教学法是否是一种有效的教学方法,可加快高中ELL的拼写,词汇量和阅读理解能力他们面临语言上的不利因素,从而弥合了高中英语为主的说话者和第二语言学习者之间的鸿沟。二元和多元分析表明,每项t检验和ANCOVA在阅读,词汇和拼写方面均具有统计学意义。单独的数据就很重要,这清楚地表明,每个组-对照组和治疗组-都不考虑他们的协变量,都是根据他们作为一个班级或同类的表现以及他们所接受的阅读说明来判断的,相对于传统教学或词法教学的词汇和拼写。因此,形态学教学表明,它确实对ELL学生的阅读,词汇和拼写是否有所改善产生了显着影响,排除了空值,并接受了其他假设和研究问题,这些表明在没有模棱两可的情况下,可以作为加速ELL与英语占主导地位的高中生之间的单词差距缩小的指导工具。

著录项

  • 作者

    Diaz, Ivan.;

  • 作者单位

    TUI University.;

  • 授予单位 TUI University.;
  • 学科 Language Linguistics.;Education English as a Second Language.;Language General.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2010
  • 页码 105 p.
  • 总页数 105
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 医学心理学、病理心理学;
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:37:16

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号