ABSTRACT

All students, despite differences in socio-economic status, ethnic or cultural backgrounds need effective vocabulary instruction. At-risk English language learners or students from low socioeconomic backgrounds have a higher incidence of insufficient

vocabulary knowledge and comprehension. Previous literature suggests that the most
successful way for teachers to assist students and their vocabulary development is to implement highly effective, repetitious and intensive intervention strategies (Jalongo & Sobolak, 2011). This study was conducted in a large, public urban middle school with at-risk students in the seventh grade located in Texas. In this study, intensive vocabulary comprehension strategies were used weekly in one pre-AP class consisting of at-risk seventh grade students in order to facilitate student vocabulary attainment, comprehension and retention. Another similar pre-AP class consisting of seventh grade at-risk students received the same vocabulary instruction but did not utilize intensive vocabulary strategies

to facilitate vocabulary attainment, comprehension and retention. All other variables

between classes remained the same. Class data from unit tests were compared and determined a significant change in test scores between the classes. The results supported the hypothesis of evidence-based vocabulary intervention techniques were effective strategies. Further research should encompass identifying individual evidence-based strategies that are effective tools for vocabulary comprehension.

INTRODUCTION/HYPOTHESIS
There have been various assessment methods developed to identify students with reading difficulties and employ intervention strategies, however they has not been as much advancement in the area of remediating reading comprehension difficulties involving older students (Speece, Ritchey, Silverman, Schatschneider, Walker, & Andrusik, 2010). Though some students have struggled with reading since the beginning of their formal education, some students do not begin to have noticeable reading difficulty until they have reached the middle grade years. The ability to read and understand vocabulary is a necessary and imperative ability students must have in order to attain academic success. Academic success is largely measured through both formative and summative assessments in public schools. This study examined the effect of evidence-based vocabulary strategies on test scores of at-risk students. The researcher hypothesized that an intensive vocabulary intervention program would positively affect the

METHODS
Participants and Sampling The sample for this study was randomly assigned to one of the two classes prior to the start of the school year using a computer software program. To ensure that the groups were equivalent, a pretest was administered. The mean score for group A was 70% and the mean score for Group B was 71.2%. At least 80% of students from both classes were considered to be at-risk students. The sample size consisted of sixty students, divided into two class periods, named class A and class B for this study. Both classes were pretested before any intervention strategies began to ensure that classes were appropriately matched for comparison. The mean score at the beginning of the study for group A was 70% and the mean score for Group B was 71.2% Measures The measures utilized in this study were the unit tests designed by the seventh grade science department staff. One unit test was given each six weeks throughout the duration of the study. Each unit test consisted of content area vocabulary and concepts learned during the six weeks. The unit tests were used as the measure for this study, because specific testing vocabulary was consistently utilized on each unit test.. The same tests were administered to both class A and class B. Design A quantitative pretest-posttest control group design was used for this study. The independent variables involved using two different approaches to vocabulary instruction. Group A, the experimental group received evidence-based vocabulary instruction (Treatment A). The control group, Group B received the traditional

RESULTS
The sample consisted of 60 seventh grade students with 30 in each class. The class averages for both pre-test and post-test conditions can be seen in Table 1. A ttest of independent samples was done for treatment and control classes prior to intervention (pretest) and after intervention was implemented (posttest). A t-test was chosen to analyze the data from this research to determine if resulting differences between the control and treatment groups was significant. According to the data, both classes were not significantly different from each other at the

pretest, prior to intervention (t = -.335, df =58, p =.739). This data indicated the
two groups were accurately matched for comparison. After the intervention was completed, the data from both classes were analyzed and the data analysis concluded that the classes were significantly different from each other at posttest

test (t = -2.567, df = 58, p = .013). The treatment class had a mean of 80.60 (SD =
13.21) and the control class had a mean of 72.06 (SD =12.52). Please see figure 2.1. The posttest mean score of Class A (treatment group) showed significant improvement when compared to Class B (control group). The results support the hypothesis that an intensive vocabulary intervention program will positively affect

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Interpretation of Findings The statistical findings of the study supported the hypothesis in this study. The results from this study were similar to an earlier study that identified students who received evidence-based vocabulary treatment, test scores improved more from pre-test to post test in comparison to students in the control group (Vaughn et al., 2010). A 2007 Scammacca, Roberts, Vaughn, Edmonds, Wexler, Reutebuch, & Torgesen study determined that vocabulary interventions by teachers and researchers were linked with positive test outcomes for the students and that students benefitted from enhanced knowledge of word meanings and concepts. In a previous 2011 study, vocabulary experts applied evidence-based vocabulary instructional methods with different groups of students, from multiple grade levels and content areas. The study concluded that specific and intentional vocabulary instruction helped to improve student vocabulary comprehension (Sweeny & Mason, 2011)

Strengths and Limitations

A strength of this study was the fact that the study conducted could be easily replicated. All classroom teachers could replicate the evidence-based strategies in their classroom because extensive training was not required for implementation. School-wide implementation of evidence-based vocabulary strategies could be both efficient and cost effective because few teachers would need to receive formal training and those teachers could train other faculty members to implement evidence based vocabulary strategies effectively. Another strength of this study was the method in which data from the study was collected. The teacher researcher was able to collect test data from students utilizing the same method prior to the beginning of the study. This aspect helped keep data secure and organized throughout the duration of the study. One limitation to this study is the duration of time the study was conducted. Since the study was a short three months of time, results of the study may be skewed. Another limitation to this study is that teachers may not implement evidence based vocabulary strategies consistent enough for students to reap evidence-based vocabulary strategy benefits. Recommendations and Action Planning Based on the results of this study, educators should explore the inclusion of evidence based vocabulary strategies to improve at-risk student vocabulary understanding and comprehension. Secondary students with reading difficulties benefit from intensive vocabulary interventions (Scammacca et. al, 2007). Another recommendation was that educators should explore methods of how to effectively implement evidence-based vocabulary strategies on a consistent basis in their classrooms (White & Kim, 2009). For example, a specific evidence-based vocabulary strategy, such as daily use of an interactive word wall with students has the potential to promote greater understanding of the content and should be incorporated into teacher planning considerations (Yates et. al, 2011). Evidence-based vocabulary strategies cannot work, if teachers and students do not utilize these methods. Educators are posed with the difficult task of improving the test scores of all students, no matter where the students achievement level begins. According to the findings of this study, evidence -based strategies are successful with most students and aid in the improvement of student test scores. Evidence-based vocabulary strategies may help educators have more success with helping students to reach academic goals. Additional

REFERENCES
Jalongo, M., & Sobolak, M. (2011). Supporting Young Children's Vocabulary Growth: The Challenges, the Benefits, and Evidence-Based Strategies. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38(6), 421-429. doi:10.1007/s10643-010-0433-x Scammacca, N., Roberts, G., Vaughn. S., Edmonds, M., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C. K., &

Speece, D. L., Ritchey, K. D., Silverman, R., Schatschneider, C., Walker, C. Y., & Andrusik, K.
N. (2010). Identifying Children in Middle Childhood Who Are at Risk for Reading Problems. School Psychology Review, 39(2), 258-276. Sweeny, S., & Mason, P. (2011, August). Research-based practices in vocabulary instruction: An analysis of what works in grades prek-12. Retrieved from http://massreading.org/resources/vocpaper.pdf White, C., & Kim, J. (2009, May). Putting the pieces of the puzzle together: How systemic vocabulary instruction and expanded learning time can address the literacy gap. Retrieved from Americanprogress.org Yates, P. H., Cuthrell, K., & Rose, M. (2011). Out of the room and into the hall: Making content word walls work. Clearing House, 84(1), 31-36. doi:10.1080/00098655.2010.496810