Show simple item record

Core Vocabulary: Its Morphological Content and Presence in Exemplar Texts

dc.contributor.authorHiebert, Elfrieda H.
dc.contributor.authorGoodwin, Amanda P.
dc.contributor.authorCervetti, Gina N.
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-05T16:47:41Z
dc.date.available2019-03-01T21:00:18Zen
dc.date.issued2018-01
dc.identifier.citationHiebert, Elfrieda H.; Goodwin, Amanda P.; Cervetti, Gina N. (2018). "Core Vocabulary: Its Morphological Content and Presence in Exemplar Texts." Reading Research Quarterly 53(1): 29-49.
dc.identifier.issn0034-0553
dc.identifier.issn1936-2722
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/142180
dc.description.abstractThis study addresses the distribution of words in texts at different points of schooling. The first aim was to identify a core vocabulary that accounts for the majority of the words in texts through the lens of morphological families. Results showed that 2,451 morphological families, averaging 4.61 members, make up the core vocabulary of school texts. The 11,298 words in the 2,451 morphological families account for 58% of the approximately 19,500 most frequent words in written English. The majority of the morphological families appear by the end of the elementary school period (85%), but a small group of morphological families (15%) is added through the middle to high school period. Analyses of the ranks of words across grade bands indicated that late‐appearing words gain in prominence in higher level texts as some elementary‐level words become less frequent. The second aim of the study was to determine the degree to which the core vocabulary accounted for the words in an independent but critical set of texts: the exemplar texts identified within the Common Core State Standards. The 2,451 families accounted for 97.1% (grades K and 1) to 89.1% (grade 11 through college) of the total words in texts and 95.6% (grades K and 1) to 74.9% (grade 11 through college) of the unique words in texts. Implications of the findings on the nature and role of the core vocabulary in complex texts are suggested for researchers, curriculum developers, and publishers.Chinese本研究调查文本中的单字在学校教育不同时间点的分布问题。第一个调查目的是通过同类构字性质的字群这个透镜,确认出在文本中占大多数单字的核心字汇。结果显示︰组成学校文本的核心字汇属于2,451个同类构字性质的字群,每个字群平均有4.61个字。而在这2,451个字群里的11,298个单字共占英语书面语中约19,500个最频繁单字的58%。大多数(85%)这样的字群出现于小学时期,但少数(15%)的字群却添加到初中至高中时期。横跨各个级别的单字等级分析显示,较迟出现的单字在较高级别的文本显现凸出,同时有些小学时期的单字却变得不那么频繁出现。第二个调查目的是要在一套独立但关键的文本(美国共同核心州立标准内的范例文本)中,确认这些核心字汇所占的程度。这2,451个字群占了这些范例文本中单字的总数由97.1%(幼儿园和小一)至 89.1%(11年级至大学),以及占了这些范例文本中独特单字的总数由95.6%(幼儿园和小一)至74.9%(11年级至大学)。本文最后为研究者、课程开发者和出版商提出本研究结果对复杂文本中的核心字汇性质和作用的启示。SpanishEste estudio aborda la distribución de palabras en textos en diferentes momentos de la educación. El primer objetivo fue identificar un vocabulario básico que representase la mayoría de las palabras en textos según sus familias morfológicas. Los resultados mostraron que 2,451 familias morfológicas, con un promedio de 4.61 miembros, constituyen el vocabulario básico de textos escolares. Las 11,298 palabras en las 2,451 familias morfológicas representan un 58% de las aproximadamente 19,500 palabras más frecuentemente usadas en el inglés escrito. La mayoría de las familias morfológicas aparecen hacia el final del periodo de la escuela primaria (85%), pero un grupo pequeño de familias morfológicas (15%) es añadida entre el sexto y octavo grado. Análisis de las categorías de las palabras a traves de los grados indicaron que las palabras que aparecen más tarde ganan prominencia en textos mas avanzados a medida que algunas palabras de la escuela primaria se usan con menos frecuencia. El segundo objetivo del estudio fue determinar el grado al cual el vocabulario básico representaba las palabras en una colección independiente pero importante de textos: los textos ejemplares identificados dentro de las Normas Comunes Básicas Estatales. Las 2,451 familias representaban desde un 97.1% (del jardín de niños al primer grado) a un 89.1% (del undécimo grado hasta la universidad) del total de palabras en los textos y del 95.6% (del jardín de niños al primer grado) al 74.9% (del undécimo grado hasta la universidad) de las palabras originales en los textos. Se sugieren las implicaciones de las conclusiones sobre la naturaleza y el papel del vocabulario básico en textos complejos para investigadores, creadores de plan de estudios y editores.Arabicتتناول هذه الدراسة توزيع الكلمات في النصوص في مراحل مختلفة من التعليم. كان الهدف الأول التعرف على المفردات الأساسية التي تشكل الغالبية العظمى من الكلمات في النصوص من خلال عدسة العائلات المورفولوجية. وأظهرت النتائج أن 2،451 أسرة مورفولوجية، حيث بلغ متوسطها 4.61 عضواً، يشكلون المفردات الأساسية من الكتب المدرسية. 11،298 كلمة في 2451 أسرة مورفولوجية مثلت 58٪ من ما يقرب من 19،500 كلمة الأكثر شيوعا في اللغة الإنجليزية المكتوبة. تظهر غالبية الأسر المورفولوجية بحلول نهاية الفترة الابتدائية (85٪)، ولكن يتم إضافة مجموعة صغيرة من العائلات المورفولوجية (15٪) في الفترة المتوسطة والثانوية. وأشارت التحاليل التي أجريت على رتب الكلمات عبر المراحل الدراسية أن الكلمات التي تظهر في وقت متأخر تنال بمكانة بارزة في النصوص العالية المستوى في حين بعض الكلمات على المستوى الابتدائي تصبح أقل تواترا. وكان الهدف الثاني من الدراسة تحديد الدرجة التي شكلتها المفردات الأساسية لكلمات في مجموعة من النصوص مستقلة ولكنها بالغة الأهمية: حُدِدَتْ نموذج النصوص ضمن المعايير المشتركة الأساسية للدولة. شكلت 2451 أسرة 97.1٪ (الصفوف من الروضة و1) إلى 89.1٪ (الصف 11 إلى الجامعة) من مجموع الكلمات في النصوص و95،6٪ (الصفوف من الروضة و1) إلى 74.9٪ (الصف 11 إلى الجامعة) من الكلمات الفريدة في النصوص. وتم اقتراح الآثار المترتبة عن النتائج على طبيعة ودور المفردات الأساسية في النصوص المعقدة للباحثين وواضعي المناهج الدراسية، والناشرين.RussianИсследование посвящено распределению слов в текстах на разных уровнях обучения. Первая цель состояла в том, чтобы идентифицировать основную лексику, из которой состоят учебные тексты, и определить принадлежность этой лексики к морфологическим семьям. Результаты показали, что основной словарь школьных текстов входит в 2451 морфологические семьи, в каждой из которых в среднем по 4,61 лексических единицы. Всего в этих семьях 11298 слов, что составляет 58% от приблизительно 19500 наиболее часто употребляемых слов в письменном английском языке. Большинство морфологических семей осваивается к возрасту 15‐16 лет (85%), но небольшая группа морфологических семей (15%) добавляется к середине старшей школы. Анализ словарных рядов по возрастным группам показал, что поздно появляющаяся лексика занимает ведущее положение в текстах высокого порядка, в то время как некоторые элементарные слова употребляются в них все реже. Вторая цель исследования состояла в том, чтобы определить, в какой степени лексика из основного словарного блока употребляется в независимом, но важнейшем наборе текстов, образцы которых представлены в Общих базовых государственных стандартах. Упомянутые морфологические семьи (2451) соответствуют 97,1% (средняя + 1 класс старшей школы) и 89,1% (11 класс—колледж) от всей лексики в текстах и 95,6% (средняя + 1 класс старшей школы) и 74,9% (11 класс — колледж) от уникальных слов в текстах. Результаты исследования предложены вниманию ученых, составителей учебных программ и издателей.FrenchCette recherche porte sur la distribution des mots dans les textes, à différents niveaux de la scolarité. Le premier objectif était d’identifier un vocabulaire central qui rende compte de la majorité des mots dans les textes à travers la loupe de la famille morphologique. Les résultats ont fait apparaître 2 451 familles morphologiques, ayant en moyenne 4,61 membres, qui couvrent le vocabulaire central des textes scolaires. Les 11 298 mots des 2 451 familles morphologiques rendent compte de 58% des 19 500 mots approximativement les plus fréquents de l’anglais écrit. La majorité des familles morphologiques apparaissent en fin de scolarité élémentaire (85%), mais un petit groupe de familles morphologiques (15%) s’ajoute vers le milieu de la période du collège. L’analyse du rang des mots aux différents niveaux scolaires indiquent que les mots qui apparaissent tard émergent dans les textes des niveaux plus élevés, tandis que certains mots du niveau élémentaire deviennent moins fréquents. Le second objectif de cette recherche était de définir à quel degré le vocabulaire central rend compte des mots dans un ensemble de textes indépendants mais critiques qui ont été identifiés : ces textes ont été identifiés au sein du Common Core State Standards. Les 2 451 familles rendent compte de 97,1% (Maternelle et 1e année) à 89.1% (11e année à licence) du nombre total des mots des textes, et 95,6% (Maternelle et 1e année) à 74,9% (11e année à licence) des mots uniques dans les textes. Les implications de ces résultats sur la nature et le rôle du vocabulaire central sont suggérées pour les chercheurs, les rédacteurs des programmes scolaires et les éditeurs.
dc.publisherAcademic
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherVocabulary
dc.subject.otherGeneral vocabulary
dc.subject.otherMorphology
dc.subject.otherEarly childhood
dc.subject.otherChildhood
dc.subject.otherAdolescence
dc.subject.otherCollege/university students
dc.subject.otherAdult
dc.subject.otherSpecial needs
dc.subject.otherEarly adolescence
dc.subject.otherDecoding
dc.subject.otherHigh‐frequency words
dc.subject.otherMorphemic analysis
dc.subject.otherPolysyllabic analysis
dc.subject.otherSight words
dc.subject.otherword recognition
dc.subject.otherStructural analysis
dc.titleCore Vocabulary: Its Morphological Content and Presence in Exemplar Texts
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEducation
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142180/1/rrq183.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142180/2/rrq183_am.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/rrq.183
dc.identifier.sourceReading Research Quarterly
dc.identifier.citedreferencePreacher, K.J., Curran, P.J., & Bauer, D.J. ( 2006 ). Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31 ( 4 ), 437 – 448. doi: 10.3102/10769986031004437
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNation, I.S.P., & Waring, R. ( 1997 ). Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 6 – 19 ). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Center for Education Statistics. ( 2012 ). The Nation’s Report Card: Vocabulary results from the 2009 and 2011 NAEP reading assessments (NCES 2013‐452). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Center for Education Statistics. ( 2015 ). The Nation’s Report Card: 2015 mathematics and reading assessments (NCES 2015‐136). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. ( 2010a ). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. ( 2010b ). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects: Appendix A: Research supporting key elements of the standards and glossary of key terms. Washington, DC: Authors.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. ( 2010c ). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects: Appendix B: Text exemplars and sample performance tasks. Washington, DC: Authors.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePearson, P.D., Hiebert, E.H., & Kamil, M.L. ( 2007 ). Vocabulary assessment: What we know and what we need to know. Reading Research Quarterly, 42 ( 2 ), 282 – 296. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.2.4
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRabin, J., & Deacon, H. ( 2008 ). The representation of morphologically complex words in the developing lexicon. Journal of Child Language, 35 ( 2 ), 453 – 465. doi: 10.1017/S0305000907008525
dc.identifier.citedreferenceReed, D.K. ( 2008 ). A synthesis of morphology interventions and effects on reading outcomes for students in grades K–12. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23 ( 1 ), 36 – 49. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‐5826.2007.00261.x
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRicketts, J., Nation, K., & Bishop, D.V. ( 2007 ). Vocabulary is important for some, but not all reading skills. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11 ( 3 ), 235 – 257. doi: 10.1080/10888430701344306
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRoe, B., Smith, S., & Burns, P.C. ( 2011 ). Teaching reading in today’s elementary schools ( 11th ed. ). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceScott, J.A., Lubliner, S., & Hiebert, E.H. ( 2006 ). Constructs underlying word selection and assessment tasks in the archival research on vocabulary instruction. In J.V. Hoffman, D.L. Schallert, C.M. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, & B. Maloch (Eds.), 55th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 264 – 275 ). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSénéchal, M., Ouellette, G., & Rodney, D. ( 2006 ). The misunderstood giant: On the predictive role of early vocabulary to future reading. In D.K. Dickinson & S.B. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (Vol. 2, pp. 173 – 182 ). New York, NY: Guilford.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpache, G. ( 1953 ). A new readability formula for primary‐grade reading materials. The Elementary School Journal, 53 ( 7 ), 410 – 413. doi: 10.1086/458513
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStahl, S.A., & Heubach, K.M. ( 2005 ). Fluency‐oriented reading instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 37 ( 1 ), 25 – 60. doi: 10.1207/s15548430jlr3701_2
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStallman, A.C., Commeyras, M., Kerr, B., Reimer, K., Jimenez, R., Hartman, D.K., & Pearson, P.D. ( 1989 ). Are “new” words really new? Reading Research and Instruction, 29 ( 2 ), 12 – 29.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStenner, A.J., Burdick, H., Sanford, E.E., & Burdick, D.S. ( 2007 ). The Lexile Framework for reading technical report. Durham, NC: MetaMetrics. Retrieved from https://lexile-website-media-2011091601.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/materials/Stenner_Burdick_Sanford__Burdick-_The_LFR_Technical_Report.pdf
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSwanborn, M.S., & de Glopper, K. ( 1999 ). Incidental word learning while reading: A meta‐analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69 ( 3 ), 261 – 285. doi: 10.3102/00346543069003261
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThorndike, E.L. ( 1917 ). Reading as reasoning: A study of mistakes in paragraph reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 8 ( 6 ), 323 – 332. doi: 10.1037/h0075325
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThorndike, E.L. ( 1921 ). The teacher’s word book. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThorndike, E.L. ( 1932 ). A teacher’s word book of 20,000 words. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThorndike, E.L., & Lorge, I. ( 1944 ). The teacher’s handbook of 30,000 words. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVenezky, R.L. ( 1999 ). The American way of spelling: The structure and origins of American English orthography. New York, NY: Guilford.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWest, M.P. (Ed.). ( 1953 ). A general service list of English words: With semantic frequencies and a supplementary word‐list for the writing of popular science and technology. London, UK: Addison‐Wesley Longman.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWright, T.S., & Cervetti, G.N. ( 2016 ). A systematic review of the research on vocabulary instruction that impacts text comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1002/rrq.163
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYang, M.C. ( 2005 ). A study of prototypes, design activity, and design outcome. Design Studies, 26 ( 6 ), 649 – 669. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2005.04.005
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZeno, S.M., Ivens, S.H., Millard, R.T., & Duvvuri, R. ( 1995 ). The educator’s word frequency guide. Brewster, MA: Touchstone Applied Science Associates.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBabbitt, N. ( 1975 ). Tuck everlasting. New York, NY: Scholastic.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEmerson, R.W. ( 1875 ). Society and solitude. Boston, MA: James R. Osgood.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKing, M.L., Jr. ( 1963 ). I have a dream. Address delivered at the March on Washington, D.C., for Civil Rights on August 28, 1963.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePfeffer, W. ( 2004 ). From seed to pumpkin. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSeuss, Dr.. (T.S. Geisel). ( 1960 ). Green eggs and ham. New York, NY: Random House.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaylor, M.D. ( 1976 ). Roll of thunder, hear my cry. New York, NY: Dial.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAnglin, J.M. ( 1993 ). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 58 (10, Serial No. 238).
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBalota, D.A., Yap, M.J., & Cortese, M.J. ( 2006 ). Visual word recognition: The journey from features to meaning (a travel update). In M. Traxler & M.A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics ( 2nd ed., pp. 285 – 375 ). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Academic.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBeck, I.L., McKeown, M.G., & Kucan, L. ( 2013 ). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York, NY: Guilford.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBecker, W.C., Dixon, R., & Anderson‐Inman, L. ( 1980 ). Morphographic and root word analysis of 26,000 high frequency words. Eugene: University of Oregon Follow Through Project, College of Education.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBetts, E.A. ( 1946 ). Foundations of reading instruction. New York, NY: American Book.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBiemiller, A. ( 2005 ). Size and sequence in vocabulary development: Implications for choosing words for primary grade vocabulary instruction. In E.H. Hiebert & M.L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 223 – 242 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBiemiller, A. ( 2010 ). Words worth teaching: Closing the vocabulary gap. Columbus, OH: McGraw‐Hill SRA.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBiemiller, 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 ( 3 ), 498 – 520. doi: 10.1037/0022‐0663.93.3.498
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBowers, P.N., Kirby, J.R., & Deacon, S.H. ( 2010 ). The effects of morphological instruction on literacy skills: A systematic review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 80 ( 2 ), 144 – 179. doi: 10.3102/0034654309359353
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBreland, H M., Jones, R.J., & Jenkins, L. (with Paynter, M., Pollack, J., & Fong, Y.F. ). ( 1994 ). The College Board vocabulary study (College Board Report No. 94‐4). New York, NY: College Entrance Examination Board.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrysbaert, M., & New, B. ( 2009 ). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41 ( 4 ), 977 – 990. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrysbaert, M., Warriner, A.B., & Kuperman, V. ( 2014 ). Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 46 ( 3 ), 904 – 911. doi: 10.3758/s13428‐013‐0403‐5
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarlisle, J.F. ( 2010 ). Effects of instruction in morphological awareness on literacy achievement: An integrative review. Reading Research Quarterly, 45 ( 4 ), 464 – 487. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.45.4.5
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarlisle, J.F., & Katz, L.A. ( 2006 ). Effects of word and morpheme familiarity on reading of derived words. Reading and Writing, 19 ( 7 ), 669 – 693. doi: 10.1007/s11145‐005‐5766‐2
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarlisle, J.F., & Stone, C. ( 2005 ). Exploring the role of morphemes in word reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 40 ( 4 ), 428 – 449. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.40.4.3
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarroll, J.B., Davies, P., & Richman, B. ( 1971 ). The American Heritage word frequency book. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceClay, M.M. ( 1991 ). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCoxhead, A. ( 2000 ). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34 ( 2 ), 213 – 238. doi: 10.2307/3587951
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDale, E., & Chall, J.S. ( 1948 ). A formula for predicting readability: Instructions. Educational Research Bulletin, 27 ( 2 ), 37 – 54.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDale, E., & O’Rourke, J. ( 1981 ). The living word vocabulary: A national vocabulary inventory. Chicago, IL: World Book‐Childcraft International.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDavies, M. ( 2009 ). The 385+ million word Corpus of Contemporary American English (1990–2008+): Design, architecture, and linguistic insights. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14 ( 2 ), 159 – 190. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.14.2.02dav
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDavies, M. ( 2012 ). The Corpus of American Soap Operas: 100 million words, 2001–2012. Retrieved from http://corpus2.byu.edu/soap/
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDolch, E.W. ( 1936 ). A basic sight vocabulary. The Elementary School Journal, 36 ( 6 ), 456 – 460. doi: 10.1086/457353
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEndress, A.D., & Hauser, M.D. ( 2011 ). The influence of type and token frequency on the acquisition of affixation patterns: Implications for language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37 ( 1 ), 77 – 95. doi: 10.1037/a0020210
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFry, E. ( 1980 ). The new instant word list. The Reading Teacher, 34 ( 3 ), 284 – 289.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGardner, D., & Davies, M. ( 2014 ). A new academic vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics, 35 ( 3 ), 305 – 327. doi: 10.1093/applin/amt015
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGates, A.I. ( 1962 ). The word recognition ability and the reading vocabulary of second‐ and third‐grade children. The Reading Teacher, 15 ( 6 ), 443 – 448.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoodwin, A.P., & Ahn, S. ( 2010 ). A meta‐analysis of morphological interventions: Effects on literacy achievement of children with literacy difficulties. Annals of Dyslexia, 60 ( 2 ), 183 – 208. doi: 10.1007/s11881‐010‐0041‐x
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoodwin, A.P., Gilbert, J.K., & Cho, S.J. ( 2013 ). Morphological contributions to adolescent word reading: An item response approach. Reading Research Quarterly, 48 ( 1 ), 39 – 60. doi: 10.1002/rrq.037
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoodwin, A.P., Gilbert, J.K., Cho, S.J., & Kearns, D.M. ( 2014 ). Probing lexical representations: Simultaneous modeling of word and reader contributions to multidimensional lexical representations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106 ( 2 ), 448 – 468. doi: 10.1037/a0034754
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGraves, M.F., Elmore, J., Bowen, K., Sanford‐Moore, E.E., Copeland, M., Fitzgerald, J., … Stenner, A.J. ( 2014, December). The vocabulary of core reading programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, Marco Island, FL.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGraves, M.F., Juel, C.F., Graves, B.B., & Dewitz, P.F. ( 2010 ). Teaching reading in the 21st century: Motivating all learners ( 5th ed. ). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHalladay, J.L. ( 2012 ). Revisiting key assumptions of the reading level framework. The Reading Teacher, 66 ( 1 ), 53 – 62. doi: 10.1002/TRTR.01093
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHazenberg, S., & Hulstun, J.H. ( 1996 ). Defining a minimal receptive second‐language vocabulary for non‐native university students: An empirical investigation. Applied Linguistics, 17 ( 2 ), 145 – 163. doi: 10.1093/applin/17.2.145
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHiebert, E.H. ( 2002 ). Standards, assessment, and text difficulty. In A.E. Farstrup & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction ( 3rd ed., pp. 337 – 369 ). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHiebert, E.H. ( 2005 ). In pursuit of an effective, efficient vocabulary curriculum for the elementary grades. In E.H. Hiebert & M.L. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 243 – 263 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHiebert, E.H. ( 2013 ). Core vocabulary and the challenge of complex text. In S.B. Neuman & L.B. Gambrell (Eds.), Quality reading instruction in the age of Common Core Standards (pp. 149 – 161 ). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHiebert, E.H., & Raphael, T.E. ( 1996 ). Psychological perspectives on literacy and extensions to educational practice. In D.C. Berliner & R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 550 – 602 ). New York, NY: Macmillan.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHill, D.R. ( 2008 ). Graded readers in English. ELT Journal, 62 ( 2 ), 184 – 204. doi: 10.1093/elt/ccn006
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHirsh, D., & Nation, I.S.P. ( 1992 ). What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts for pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language, 8 ( 2 ), 689 – 696.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJohnson, D.D., Smith, R.J., & Jensen, K.L. ( 1972 ). Primary children’s recognition of high‐frequency words. The Elementary School Journal, 73 ( 3 ), 162 – 167. doi: 10.1086/460750
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJones, N. ( 1991 ). Development of morphophonemic segments in children’s mental representations of words. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12 ( 2 ), 217 – 239. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400009152
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJust, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. ( 1980 ). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87 ( 4 ), 329 – 354. doi: 10.1037/0033‐295X.87.4.329
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKučera, H., & Francis, W.N. ( 1967 ). Computational analysis of present‐day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKuperman, V., Stadthagen‐Gonzalez, H., & Brysbaert, M. ( 2012 ). Age‐of‐acquisition ratings for 30,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44 ( 4 ), 978 – 990. doi: 10.3758/s13428‐012‐0210‐4
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeech, G., & Rayson, P. ( 2014 ). Word frequencies in written and spoken English: Based on the British National Corpus. New York, NY: Routledge.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O’Brien, K.K. ( 2010 ). Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5 ( 1 ), article 69. doi: 10.1186/1748‐5908‐5‐69
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLund, K., & Burgess, C. ( 1996 ). Producing high‐dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co‐occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28 ( 2 ), 203 – 208. doi: 10.3758/BF03204766
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcCutchen, D., Logan, B., & Biangardi‐Orpe, U. ( 2009 ). Making meaning: Children’s sensitivity to morphological information during word reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 44 ( 4 ), 360 – 376. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.44.4.4
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMilone, M. ( 2009 ). The development of ATOS: The Renaissance readability formula. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Renaissance Learning.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMugglestone, L. ( 2013 ). The Oxford history of English. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNagy, W.E., & Anderson, R.C. ( 1984 ). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19 ( 3 ), 304 – 330. doi: 10.2307/747823
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNagy, W., & Townsend, D. ( 2012 ). Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 47 ( 1 ), 91 – 108. doi: 10.1002/RRQ.011
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNation, I.S.P. ( 2013 ). Learning vocabulary in another language. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.