Effects of Inconsiderate vs. Considerate Text on Secondary Students' Vocabulary Learning

Abstract

This study examined differences in secondary students' vocabulary learning from original and revised contextual information. Materials included two passages from a U.S. history text, each embedding 10 pertinent target words. One version left the original passage intact; a second version was revised for each target word according to four contextual characteristics: proximity, clarity of connection, explicitness, and completeness. Subjects were 55 high-ability and average-ability students enrolled in U.S. history classes. Prior to reading, subjects were asked to indicate their knowledge of each target word and to write a definition. Then, over a two-day period, they read an original version of one passage and a revised version of the second passage; text and version were counterbalanced within groups. Following their readings, the subjects were asked again to indicate their knowledge of each word and to provide a meaning. In addition, they were asked to write the significance of each word in understanding the topic. Results showed that the high- ability group outscored the average-ability group on all dependent measures, although both groups did significantly better on posttest over pretest tasks. On the revised text passages, subjects received higher scores on both the definition and significance measures but not on the indication of knowledge measure. These findings suggest that contextual information in natural text may be inconsiderate for word learning, but students may be satisfied with the partial/erroneous knowledge acquired.