scholarly journals Unraveling Contradictions: Which Glosses Facilitate Reading Comprehension Among ELLs, and Why?

2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Andrea Lofgren
Keyword(s):  
English Language Learners ◽  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
English Language ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Incidental Vocabulary ◽  
Text Genre ◽  
Text Length ◽  
Text Information

This critical literature review provides study details for 36 studies examining the effect of glossing for language acquisition among English language learners (ELLs). Useful tables include specificity of participants, gloss types, target vocabulary items and text information about all studies. An analysis of these studies reveals that glossing is an effective means to enhance reading comprehension among ELLs. However, gloss language—whether L1 or English, may depend on learner factors. Other findings include the importance of proximity of gloss to text and the need for glosses that do not require readers to leave the text to access meaning. Considerations such as text genre, text length, targeted items for glossing, number of items to gloss, and gloss presentation are also examined and discussed, including which gloss types may result in trade-offs when glossing is used as a means to promote incidental vocabulary acquisition through independent reading. Several recommendations for further research are offered.

scholarly journals Language testing

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 268-271
Keyword(s):  
English Language Learners ◽  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
Bilingual Education ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
English Language ◽  
Language Teaching ◽  
Language Testing ◽  
National Association ◽  
Research Journal

07–449Barber, Richard (Dubai Women's College, UAE), A practical model for creating efficient in-house placement tests. The Language Teacher (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 31.2 (2007), 3–7.07–450Chang, Yuh-Fang (National Chung Hsing U, Taiwan), On the use of the immediate recall task as a measure of second language reading comprehension. Language Testing (Hodder Arnold) 23.4 (2006), 520–543.07–451Hyun-Ju, Kim (U Seoul, Korea), World Englishes in language testing: A call for research. English Today (Cambridge University Press) 22.4 (2006), 32–39.07–452Mahon, Elizabeth A. (Durham Public Schools, North Carolina, USA), High-stakes testing and English language learners: Questions of validity. Bilingual Research Journal (National Association for Bilingual Education) 30.2 (2006), 479–497.07–453McCoy, Damien (Australian Centre for Education and Training, Vietnam), Utilizing students' preferred language learning strategies for IELTS test preparation. EA Journal (English Australia) 23.1 (2006), 3–13.07–454Menken, Kate (City U New York, USA), Teaching to the test: How no child left behind impacts language policy, curriculum, and instruction for English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal (National Association for Bilingual Education) 30.2 (2006), 521–547.07–455Pae, Tae-Il (Yeungnam U, China) & Gi-Pyo Park, Examining the relationship between differential item functioning and differential test functioning.Language Testing (Hodder Arnold) 23.4 (2006), 475–496.07–456Rimmer, Wayne (U Reading, UK), Measuring grammatical complexity: The Gordian knot. Language Testing (Hodder Arnold) 23.4 (2006), 497–519.07–457Rupp, André A. (Humboldt U, Berlin, Germany) Tracy Ferne & Hyeran Choi, How assessing reading comprehension with multiple-choice questions shapes the construct: A cognitive processing perspective. Language Testing (Hodder Arnold) 23.4 (2006), 441–474.07–458Vanderveen, Terry (Kangawa U, Japan), The effect of EFL students' self-monitoring on class achievement test scores. JALT Journal (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 28.2 (2006), 197–206.07–459Van Moere, Alistair (Lancaster U, UK), Validity evidence in a university group oral test. Language Testing (Hodder Arnold) 23.4 (2006), 411–440.

The use of online annotations in reading instruction and its impact on students’ reading progress and processes

ReCALL ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui-Chin Yeh ◽  
Hsiu-Ting Hung ◽  
Yu-Hsin Chiang
Keyword(s):  
English Language Learners ◽  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Collaborative Learning ◽  
Reading Instruction ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
English Language ◽  
Reciprocal Teaching ◽  
Reading Processes ◽  
Collaborative Learning Environment ◽  
Support Students

AbstractStudies suggest that the incorporation of online annotations in reading instruction can improve students’ reading comprehension. However, little research has addressed how students use online annotations in their reading processes and how such use may lead to their improvement. This study thus adopted Reciprocal Teaching (RT) as an instructional framework to support students’ reading comprehension progress and processes, facilitated by the use of online annotations. A total of 54 English language learners at a university were recruited to read with online annotations based on the RT procedure, namely predicting, clarifying, questioning, and summarizing. The data collected included the students’ scores on pre- and post-tests and their participation records in a collaborative learning environment. The results reveal that the students enhanced their reading comprehension after the intervention. Their reading processes were also analyzed, and the major differences between the groups making more and less progress were identified. Those who made more progress not only frequently reviewed their previously generated predictions, clarifications, questions, and summaries but also actively provided feedback to their peers in a reciprocal manner. Pedagogical implications and recommendations are discussed.

scholarly journals Words for English-Language Learners

2012 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Biemiller
Keyword(s):  
English Language Learners ◽  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
English Language ◽  
Native English Speakers ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Similar Sequence ◽  
Word Meanings

It is well-established that vocabulary is the strongest predictor of reading comprehension from grades 2 or 3 on. In this article, I argue (a) that English vocabulary is acquired in a similar sequence by native-English speakers and English-language learners; and (b) that it is possible to identify words that both lower-vocabulary English-speakers and English-language learners need to acquire. At least one published listing of these needed word meanings is available.

Examining Reading Comprehension Profiles of Grade 5 Monolinguals and English Language Learners Through the Lexical Quality Hypothesis Lens

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 232-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan O’Connor ◽  
Esther Geva ◽  
Poh Wee Koh
Keyword(s):  
English Language Learners ◽  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Listening Comprehension ◽  
English Language ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Grade 5 ◽  
Poor Comprehenders ◽  
Component Skills ◽  
Lexical Quality

This study set out to compare patterns of relationships among phonological skills, orthographic skills, semantic knowledge, listening comprehension, and reading comprehension in English as a first language (EL1) and English language learners (ELL) students and to test the applicability of the lexical quality hypothesis framework. Participants included 94 EL1 and 178 ELL Grade 5 students from diverse home-language backgrounds. Latent profile analyses conducted separately for ELLs and EL1s provided support for the lexical quality hypothesis in both groups, with the emergence of two profiles: A poor comprehenders profile was associated with poor word-reading-related skills (phonological awareness and orthographic processing) and with poor language-related skills (semantic knowledge and, to a lesser extent, listening comprehension). The good comprehenders profile was associated with average or above-average performance across the component skills, demonstrating that good reading comprehension is the result of strong phonological and orthographic processing skills as well as strong semantic and listening comprehension skills. The good and poor comprehenders profiles were highly similar for ELL and EL1 groups. Conversely, poor comprehenders struggled with these same component skills. Implications for assessment and future research are discussed.

Incorporating Vocabulary Instruction in Individual Reading Fluency Interventions With English Language Learners

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-81
Author(s):  
Lauren E. Johnston ◽  
Sterett H. Mercer ◽  
Rhonda Geres-Smith
Keyword(s):  
English Language Learners ◽  
Reading Comprehension ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Reading Fluency ◽  
English Language ◽  
Vocabulary Instruction ◽  
Instructional Procedures ◽  
Building Activities ◽  
Fluency Building ◽  
Individual Reading

The purpose of this preliminary study was to determine whether incorporating vocabulary instruction in individual reading fluency interventions for English Language Learners (ELLs) would improve reading comprehension. Two vocabulary instructional procedures were contrasted with a fluency-building only condition in an alternating-treatments design with four ELL students in Grades 3 and 5. Results indicated that the two vocabulary instructional procedures, on average, did not affect reading comprehension. Despite no consistent overall effects, one student had better comprehension of passages used in fluency-building activities when definitions of key target words were taught, and two students demonstrated better comprehension of untaught passages following vocabulary instruction that included processing questions; however, all effects were of small magnitude. Reducing instructional time spent on fluency-building activities to incorporate the vocabulary activities did not attenuate intervention effects on reading fluency. Practical recommendations and future directions for incorporating vocabulary instruction in individual reading interventions are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document