WTS 1 & 2 page 1 of 27

Impact of Marzanos Six-Step Vocabulary Instruction Model on English Language Learners

Cody Meyers

Saint Marys University of Minnesota

Schools of Graduate and Professional Programs

Portfolio Entry for Wisconsin Teacher Standard 1 & 2

EDUW 691 Professional Skills Development

Caroline Hickethier, Instructor

April 12, 2016

 WTS 1 & 2 page 2 of 27

Selected Wisconsin Teacher Standard Descriptors

Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 1: Teachers know the subjects they are teaching.

The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the

discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of

subject matter meaningful for students.

Knowledge. The teacher relates his/her disciplinary knowledge to other subject areas.

Dispositions. The teacher realizes that subject matter knowledge is not a fixed body of

facts but is complex and ever-evolving. S/he seeks to keep abreast of new ideas and

understandings in the field.

Performances.(a) The teacher effectively uses multiple representations and explanations

of disciplinary concepts that capture key ideas and links them to students' prior understandings.

Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 2: Teachers know how children grow.

The teacher understands how children with broad ranges of ability learn and develop, and

can provide instruction that supports their intellectual, social, and personal development.

Knowledge. The teacher understands how learning occurs-how students construct

knowledge, acquire skills, and develop habits of mind-and knows how to use instructional

strategies that promote student learning for a wide range of student abilities.

Dispositions. The teacher is disposed to use students strengths as a basis for growth, and

their errors as an opportunity for learning.

Performances. The teacher assesses individual and group performance in order to design

instruction that meets learners current needs in each domain (cognitive, social, emotional,

moral, and physical) and that leads to the next level of development.
 WTS 1 & 2 page 3 of 27

Danielson Domains

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation

Component 1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy

Component 1c: Selecting Instructional Goals

Component 1d: Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources

Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction

Component 1f: Assessing Student Learning

Domain 3: Instruction

Component 3a: Communicating Clearly and Accurately

Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning

Component 3d: Providing Feedback to Students

Component 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness

 WTS 1 & 2 page 4 of 27

Pre-assessments

Self-assessment of Instruction Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

A solid grasp of Wisconsin Teaching Standards (WTS) 1 and 2 will be evidenced through

my research on academic vocabulary instruction and the strategies I implement to better prepare

my English Language Leaner (ELL) students for success in the general education classroom.

Due to pressures from state and national governments, the structure of our local educational

system has evolved to incorporate new frameworks designed to ensure that ELLs make adequate

yearly progress toward becoming fully-English proficient. Most school districts now have

programs to help ELL students attain this linguistic benchmark, while simultaneously supporting

them to achieve required content objectives. However, as an ELL teacher, I have witnessed many

limited-English proficient students struggle with the tumultuous task of meeting classroom

expectations along with state and national standards.

While there are many linguistic hurdles for ELLs, one principal area of difficulty hovers

over academic vocabulary acquisition. The lack of content vocabulary knowledge can both stifle

advances in English proficiency as well as prohibit access to critical components surrounding

classroom learning objectives. To combat this pressing issue, the World-Class Instructional

Design and Assessment Consortium (WIDA) has developed a series of descriptors that describe

what ELL students are able to accomplish from language level one through six. Each increasing

level represents a greater understanding and ability to use the English language to accomplish

specific tasks. Within this framework, a student will not be able to reach full English proficiency

until she/he has demonstrated the ability to consistently use specialized or technical vocabulary.

Additionally, the Common Core State Standards place a high demand on vocabulary acquisition
 WTS 1 & 2 page 5 of 27

in order to succeed in the general education classroom as there are a number of standards focused

on academic vocabulary development.

Therefore, while the importance of vocabulary development for ELLs is abundantly

clear, it is equally important to tie this enormous educational component back to WTS 1 and 2

and to the visible roles of these standards within my professional practice. My knowledge

descriptor for WTS 1 appears in my daily activities through co-teaching as I apply ELL

strategies in a variety of core classes. As for WTS 2, my understanding on the learning process is

evident as I am able to utilize second language acquisition principles to help assist my learners

toward developing an accurate understanding of new key terms.

Seeking out new ways and ideas to improve my students academic performance clearly

embodies the WTS 1 disposition descriptor as I understand that subject matter knowledge is not

a fixed body of facts but is complex and ever-evolving. Regarding WTS 2, a professional

disposition that appears in my day-to-day contact with students is the fact that I utilize student

strengths to help them build confidence when learning new information. This can also be

witnessed through encouraging them to discover that mistakes provide a gateway toward

academic improvement.

While understanding content and knowing how to relate it to students are important, the

actual deed of carrying out effective instruction is vital toward molding adolescents into

successful students. My teaching practice involves performance descriptors from both WTS 1

and WTS 2 in that the former guides my crafting of meaningful learning experiences through

activating students prior understandings, while the latter drives my instructional planning

through the use of individual assessment data to better meet my learners current needs.

Ultimately, this combination of instructional principles helps my students to reach their next
 WTS 1 & 2 page 6 of 27

level of development. Both of these performance descriptors have a tremendous influence on

my approach to instruction and more specifically on my desire to help my ELL students bridge

the academic vocabulary gap.

Assessment of Student Performance and Assessment of Learning Environment While

Learning Targeted Objective(s)

With background on my skills and practice as an ELL teacher, I will begin to

contextualize my experience working with ELL students at Holmen Middle School. I began

working in Holmen, Wisconsin this past fall as an 8th grade ELL teacher. My students are

primarily of Hmong ethnicity, but there is also one Latino student. The students arrived to my

classroom with a wide range of linguistic abilities as measured by the ACCESS for ELLs. Within

my caseload, I work with students ranging from overall composite levels of three up to level five

according to WIDAs language proficiency descriptors. While I see my students daily during an

ELL resource period, I also co-teach in their science, English language arts, and math courses.

After working a couple of weeks with my students, I had them complete a writing prompt

to get baseline data on their writing abilities. Using the district ELL writing rubric (Artifact A), I

was able to accurately assess their language abilities with a specific focus on vocabulary usage. I

noticed that the students either struggled to use academic terminology or avoided it by relying

solely on general language. There are several instances where limited vocabulary knowledge

beyond general language inhibited students from accurately expressing their ideas. Therefore, the

data provided in these writing samples clearly pointed out that content vocabulary development

would be a critical area for the class to focus on during the school year.

While a focus on vocabulary instruction would likely affect vast improvement in writing

abilities, it would also help students attain greater success in their core classrooms. In the core
 WTS 1 & 2 page 7 of 27

classes, students are held accountable for learning content terminology, which shows up

throughout each unit of study. Thus far, my ELL students have struggled to consistently reach

benchmark on vocabulary assessments. Since I do work with these students in several content

courses, it is important to recognize that this endeavor will not only impact their language

proficiency, but it will also work toward helping them to achieve a number of vocabulary-driven

Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

Recognizing both the curricular importance of academic terminology and my students

everyday need to use it, I raced toward developing a plan to expand their vocabulary skills. I

began to use the ELL resource period to front-load content vocabulary using Google Slides

presentations that included a term, visual, and definition. I would go through each term with the

group of ELL students so that they would enter their core class with background knowledge on

carefully selected content words. Additionally, I have carried out several mini-units on replacing

general words with academic vocabulary. These units involved learning how to use dictionaries

and thesauruses to identify appropriate terms to replace overused language. Together, these

approaches have resulted in some success, which can be observed in the mid-year student writing

samples (Artifact B).

After analyzing the language used in the current writing prompts and evaluating it

according to the district ELL writing rubric, it is apparent that the focused instruction on

vocabulary development has had some impact on students abilities to use academic terms.

However, while a few students have shown some gain in their abilities to acquire and use

academic vocabulary, it is evident that there is still vast room for improvement. As a result, my

targeted student learning objective will be to increase both my ELL students accurate usage of

academic terminology in writing samples as well as vocabulary comprehension.

 WTS 1 & 2 page 8 of 27

Assessment Conclusion and Essential Question to Guide Research

The self-assessment, assessment of student performance, and learning environment

assessment together show that academic vocabulary instruction is an area in need of tremendous

growth among my ELL students. My current classroom strategies have made an impact for a few

learners, but my objective will be for all students to make substantial gains in their usage and

comprehension of academic words. This objective will also help me to develop professionally by

possibly uncovering potential gaps in my teaching, which have limited student achievement. For

this reason, I have decided that I need to seek out and explore other vocabulary teaching models.

I will begin exploring a research-based instructional strategy by Robert J. Marzano called the

six-step process. My essential question to guide this research will be How does Marzanos

six-step process affect academic language acquisition and usage by ELL students?

Research Summary

Before diving into the research surrounding Marzanos six-step process, one must first

have a solid grasp on the nature of language acquisition. While there are many theories and

approaches dealing with language instruction, there is common understanding about what

constitutes as language acquisition. Warfelt (2012) described language acquisition as the

process by which humans acquire the capacity to perceive, produce and use words to

understand and communicate (p. vii). By this definition, it is clear that the role of academic

vocabulary is paramount within this process as language learners needs for communication

become increasingly complex over time. As the communicative purposes of ELL students

become more intricate, the ability to comprehend and utilize specific and technical terms can

dictate overall success in both their education and future careers.

 WTS 1 & 2 page 9 of 27

While it is clear that vocabulary plays a significant role in the current and future success

of ELL students, the next area that must be addressed specifically concerns second language

acquisition (SLA). An understanding on how SLA occurs in English language learners will better

equip an educator to select appropriate vocabulary instructional strategies. Therefore, a critical

next-step is to become informed on research-based language acquisition theory. Since there is an

ocean of research on SLA theory that goes beyond the scope of this paper, the work of Krashen,

a well-respected expert in the field, will serve as this papers guide to explain how SLA occurs.

According to Krashen (2009), SLA can be described through a series of hypotheses. The first of

Krashens hypotheses used to describe SLA is the acquisition-learning distinction, which states

that humans have two means by which they are able to acquire language. The first path is by way

of acquisition, which is a subconscious process in which learners are so focused on the purpose

of communication that they are unaware of the occurrence of language acquisition. The second

path is through conscious or explicit language learning, which involves internalizing grammar

or rules (p. 10).

In addition to language acquisition occurring as both a conscious and subconscious

process, Krashens next hypothesis, the natural-order hypothesis, states that there is a specific

order in which learners pick up grammatical structures. Krashen reported that both first and

second language learners show similar results regarding the order in which they develop certain

grammatical morphemes (p. 12). As these grammatical structures become increasingly

internalized, a new question begins to surface. How do learners access and know how and when

to implement them to produce comprehensible language output? The monitor hypothesis

claims that acquisition initiates utterances while learning serves as a monitor, or editor.
 WTS 1 & 2 page 10 of 27

Essentially, this means to say that conscious learning of grammatical rules helps one to edit

her/his acquired system of language before it is produced orally or in written form (p. 16).

Considered to be the most significant of Krashens five hypotheses, the input

hypothesis states that new language is acquired through meaningful use of language in which

new grammatical structures are presented. Krashen refers to this phenomenon as i + 1. The i

represents comprehensible input provided to the learner by the source of language while the +

1 refers to the new grammatical structure (p. 22). Essentially, through meaningful and

contextualized language use, the learner is able to also internalize the new language structure

while simultaneously achieving a linguistic task.

While students learning English continue to acquire new language forms, many of them

are concurrently impacted by emotional factors, which are addressed in Krashens affective

filter hypothesis. This hypothesis declares that SLA occurs most efficiently when motivation

and self-confidence are high and anxiety levels are low (p. 29). Many educators would agree that

maintaining a positive and non-threatening classroom environment is a key component to

lowering student affective filters, thus improving both student engagement and learning

outcomes.

While all five hypotheses surrounding Krashens SLA theory add essential background

information needed to select a vocabulary instructional strategy, the most significant of these is

the input hypothesis. Krashen (1989) clearly stated that academic language is most successfully

acquired through comprehensible input, especially when encountered within reading passages (p.

440). By incorporating academic vocabulary into reading passages, a meaningful context is

created in which the learner can place her/his conscious focus on the message, not [on the]

form (p. 440). Additionally, this results in providing learners with i + 1 in that they are able to
 WTS 1 & 2 page 11 of 27

focus on a comprehensible message while being pushed to internalize and store new vocabulary

within their linguistic repertoire. Therefore, reading activities appear to be a critical component

to any comprehensive vocabulary instructional strategy.

Having reviewed Krashens hypotheses on SLA, the vocabulary instructional strategy

that stands out above the rest is Marzanos six-step process. The six-step process is a highly

regarded method of vocabulary instruction that was developed by Robert J. Marzano through

years of research surrounding language acquisition and classroom instructional strategies. The

six-step process is scientifically grounded on principles closely associated with the hypotheses

posed within Krashens theory on SLA. This vocabulary instructional process is composed of the

following steps:

1. Provide a description, explanation, or example of the new term.

2. Ask students to restate the description, explanation, or example in their own words.

3. Ask students to construct a picture, pictograph, or symbolic representation of the

term.

4. Engage students periodically in activities that help them add to their knowledge of the

terms in their vocabulary notebooks.

5. Periodically ask students to discuss the terms with one another.

6. Involve students periodically in games that enable them to play with terms. (Marzano,

para. 5, 2009)

The first three steps are utilized when presenting a new vocabulary word to a group of

students. It is important to highlight that the strategy promotes using a description or

explanation of the term rather than a dictionary definition when introducing the new term.

Teachers may also use an interesting anecdote to explain the meaning of the word through
 WTS 1 & 2 page 12 of 27

context. In either scenario, this first step can serve to help build students background

knowledge surrounding the academic word. In the second step, students will reinterpret the

meaning of the new word through use of their own language (Marzano, 2009). In support of

Marzanos inclusion of this step Sprenger (2013) argued, recodingis a vital step in the

memory process, which helps to ensure that students learn the new term. In conjunction with

the memory process, the third step involved requires students to create an image or symbolic

representation of the word, which further commits a terms meaning to memory.

In the days following initial instruction, the educator will review the vocabulary word by

following steps four, five, and six. These steps do not necessarily need to be followed in this

specific order, but maintaining fidelity with each step is extremely important in order to achieve

optimal learning results. Step four states that students will complete activities using the studied

word in their vocabulary notebooks. Marzano (2012) advocated periodic review of language

notebooks in order to add new information and correct misconceptions associated with word

entries. Step five involves students using the terms within discussions. Finally, the sixth step

revolves around the inclusion of vocabulary games as a tool to help reinforce language

acquisition. Sprenger (2013) supported this element of Marzanos strategy asserting that using

vocabulary words in a variety of active exercises allows the brain to store information in

multiple memory systems, thus promoting deeper internalization of academic vocabulary terms

(para. 25).

With a solid grasp on how the six-step process is carried out, it is equally important to

investigate current research on the impact this strategy has had on learning. When followed with

fidelity, Marzanos six-step process has yielded strong results leading to higher vocabulary

achievement. In support of his six-step strategy Marzano (2009), described that data from over
 WTS 1 & 2 page 13 of 27

50 studies has revealed success at all grade levels regarding improvement of student vocabulary

attainment. Within these studies, one particular school district was noted to have had 24

teachers who used the six-step process with one class each. After completing the process, they

compared vocabulary acquisition data to the classes in which the strategy was not used. The

findings reported that groups regularly exposed to the six-step process obtained an average

increase in vocabulary acquisition scores by a 24-percentile point gain on a local assessment

(p. 83).

Additionally, studies have shed light on what has worked and what has not. Regarding

the first step, decreased achievement was observed when students simply used the teachers

explanation rather than writing one from their own personal experience. Achievement was noted

to escalate when students were asked to draw an image to represent their understanding of the

new vocabulary word. Finally, games were most supportive with vocabulary acquisition in cases

where there was a group discussion that followed to review the important characteristics

associated with the new set of words (Marzano, 2009). Ultimately, this strategy appears to be an

appropriate selection to use with ELLs as it produces positive results in vocabulary learning and

also aligns well with Krashens five hypotheses regarding SLA.

Research Implications

With a comprehensive understanding of SLA, the essay will now refocus on the research

question to be addressed: How does Marzanos six-step process affect academic language

acquisition and usage by ELL students? The six-step strategy laid out by Marzano closely

coincides with Krashens theories on SLA, and each step can be incorporated into my classroom

routines. For the first two steps, I will design a variety of ways to both present word meanings

and have the students construct their own definitions to solidify their understanding of the
 WTS 1 & 2 page 14 of 27

academic vocabulary terms. Step three will add an extra dimension to my classroom through

promoting creativity and the use of artistic skills to generate pictures and symbols to help

remember word meaning. Regarding step four, I will have students practice using the vocabulary

in a variety of ways including sentence frames, word webs, and other warm-up activities in their

language notebooks. In the final two steps, vocabulary usage will be incorporated into reading

discussions and a variety of games. While this strategy will require extra preparation on my part,

the time spent to improve student comprehension and usage of academic vocabulary will

ultimately enrich my ELL students current and future educational experiences.

Research-based Action Plan

Action Plan Summary Outline

1. Identify a set of academic vocabulary words appropriate for ELL students.

2. Complete a pre-assessment on vocabulary knowledge/usage.

3. Use language notebook as whole group and individually to learn new vocabulary

words.

4. Complete reading that contains academic words in context.

5. Utilize academic vocabulary to discuss reading.

6. Incorporate vocabulary words into a game to help promote vocabulary acquisition.

7. Complete post-assessment to obtain data on student learning of vocabulary terms.

8. Compare pre- and post-writing prompt samples to determine effect on vocabulary

usage in open-ended student writing.

Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

1. Standardized goal: Students will be able to acquire and use accurately grade-

appropriate general academic and domain-specific words and phrases and gather vocabulary
 WTS 1 & 2 page 15 of 27

knowledge when considering a word or phrase important to comprehension or expression."

(CCSS ELA Literacy Standard, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, 2016).

2. Targeted learning objective: same

Task(s) and Essential Proficiency Criteria for Targeted Learning Objective(s)

1. Task: Students will demonstrate improvement in academic vocabulary usage

when completing a writing prompt.

2. Task: Students will demonstrate improvement in vocabulary comprehension

pertaining to content originating from a classroom reading unit.

2. Criteria that Prove Proficiency in Meeting Targeted Learning Objective(s)

a. Task 1: Students will successfully achieve the objective by using 2-3

more academic words than on the previous writing prompt.

b. Task 2: Students will successfully achieve the objective by raising their

scores to at least a 70% on the vocabulary comprehension post-assessment.

Method(s) to Assess Progress of Proficiency for Targeted Learning Objective(s)

1. Students will write a persuasive essay where they will be required to use

academic vocabulary. Within the essay, correctly used academic vocabulary will

be identified to determine the extent to which students are able to use specific and

technical terminology when producing a piece of writing.

2. Students will complete a study of vocabulary terms within a classroom book

study using Marzanos six-step strategy. They will take a 10 point pre-assessment

on the vocabulary terms as well as a10-point post-assessment to determine the

effectiveness of the instructional strategy.

Post-assessments
 WTS 1 & 2 page 16 of 27

Instructional Insights Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

Initially, I felt like my approach to helping ELL students learn and use academic

vocabulary was fairly successful. However, when analyzing writing prompt and vocabulary

comprehension quiz data, I was surprised to see that I still had students who were not meeting

benchmark standards. So, I began to do further research on what could be done to help

strengthen my approach to vocabulary instruction in order to bring about improved results in

both vocabulary comprehension and usage. The challenge to improve my vocabulary instruction

led me to revisit the SLA theories of Dr. Krashen, a world-renown linguistics researcher. With a

revitalized understanding on how language is acquired, I was able to seek out an appropriate

strategy that aligned well with the aforementioned theories. Ultimately, the instructional method

I chose to research and implement was Marzanos six-step process, which has been used by

educators across the country.

While I explored the steps and strategies that form Marzanos six-step process, I found

that they could be integrated smoothly into my ELL class. In order to do this, however, I did

need to make some minor adjustments to my classroom routine. I began by having my learners

dedicate a notebook specifically to academic language where they could keep the key vocabulary

terms separate from other classroom work. Marzanos process also challenged me to become

more creative when designing opportunities for vocabulary practice. One example of this would

be my investigation into using quizizz.com, which is a website that provides a competitive and

engaging platform to review vocabulary terms.

Moreover, integrating Marzanos six-step process into my own instruction has motivated

me to attempt new vocabulary practice strategies. This has resulted in students receiving multiple

exposures to terms and extra opportunities to use key vocabulary words in context. Not only has
 WTS 1 & 2 page 17 of 27

this process created greater opportunity for vocabulary practice, but it has also fostered the

development of a sense of scholarly swagger among my students. I have noticed that my

students appear to be more confident when using the terms in our classroom discussions as well

as in their daily writing. Overall, the fruits of my labor were clearly evident in my students

ability to comprehend and utilize academic vocabulary: both of which are fundamental skills

needed to reach higher academic milestones.

One such milestone involves my students improvement in vocabulary usage within their

writing. The majority of students were able to incorporate at least two additional academic

vocabulary terms when compared to their previous writing prompt. For example, students were

able to correctly use words such as: staff, urge, and irritating. These were part of a list of

words taught and practiced through Marzanos strategy in preparation for the final writing

prompt. While one student was unable to fully meet the objective criteria, the individual did

correctly use one additional academic term (Artifact C). The special education needs of this

student may have led to a lower rate of improvement on the post-assessment. However, the data

shows that the strategy has had a positive impact on vocabulary usage by students at all language

levels including one with special education needs.

Additionally, the positive impact of Marzanos six-step process is evidenced by improved

vocabulary comprehension when comparing quiz scores taken from my class book study on

Harriet Tubman (Artifact D). The data shows that my low, mid, and high students vocabulary

knowledge increased up to at least 70%, which was the targeted benchmark. This evidence points

out that Marzanos six-step process has had a positive effect on students of ranging language

proficiency levels. This finding is extremely important to take into account as most classrooms

are composed of learners who are at different language levels. This means that the strategy could
 WTS 1 & 2 page 18 of 27

prove to be successful in any class where there are ELL and non-ELL students with different

linguistic competencies.

Considering this data, I believe that Marzanos six-step process is a valuable tool to help

guide educators when teaching new academic vocabulary to students. Essentially, the six-step

process works to fill instructional gaps by ensuring that vocabulary is taught and practiced

through a variety of ways and referred to multiple times throughout a unit. For students, this

constant exposure creates an authentic and purposeful pathway to study and internalize

vocabulary meanings and usages.

Comparison of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

Based on the post-assessment results, the majority of my students have met the targeted

learning objective. They have demonstrated that they are able to acquire and use accurately

grade-appropriate general academic and domain-specific words and phrases and gather

vocabulary knowledge when considering a word or phrase important to comprehension or

expression (CCSS ELA Literacy Standard, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, 2016).

The vocabulary quiz scores show that students were successfully able to acquire the targeted

academic terms from the Harriet Tubman reading. Additionally, analyzing the writing prompt

vocabulary scores revealed an increased ability to use academic terms when writing persuasive

essays.

Comparison of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)

The use of Marzanos six-step process created a positive change in the learning

environment of my classroom. In the past, I would have done vocabulary instruction primarily

through a Google Slides presentation so that students would be able to see a definition, an image

and an example of how a word was used. Students would then copy down the information and
 WTS 1 & 2 page 19 of 27

create their own example sentence to help them internalize the words meaning. However,

Marzanos six-step process has created a more interactive learning environment where students

can collaborate more frequently through games like Quizizz. Additionally, language notebook

activities have helped create more opportunities for students to practice new vocabulary in all

four language domains. For example, one activity requires students to write their own sentence

using a newly studied word. Next, the students read their sentence to a partner, who will make

suggestions to improve the sentence. When finished, students say their sentence out loud for the

group individually in order until everyone has shared. However, after the first person says her/his

sentence, the following student has to listen carefully so she/he can repeat the preceding sentence

before sharing her/his own. This activity has resulted in a highly motivated classroom of students

who are deeply engaged in learning. Additionally, the increased motivation and engagement can

be clearly observed especially while students compete against one another during the vocabulary

games. Ultimately, this has created a more exciting and interactive learning environment as

compared to my classroom a few months ago.

Reflection of Entire Learning Process

My research question was How does Marzanos six-step process affect academic

language acquisition and usage by ELL students? This was closely tied to my student learning

objective involving the accurate comprehension and usage of grade-level academic vocabulary.

The main idea I have taken away from this process is the importance of providing students with

multiple exposures to learn and practice academic vocabulary terms.

What Worked and Why

1. Incorporating the vocabulary words into a reading context was critical to the success of

this strategy. Dr. Krashens assertion regarding the fact that vocabulary is acquired through
 WTS 1 & 2 page 20 of 27

reading was a driving force that led me to incorporate a reading component into Marzanos six-

step process. The ability to identify and use vocabulary to better understand and discuss a

reading definitely provided students with a deeper working-knowledge of the terms, which was

clearly evident in their post-assessment data.

2. The addition of the Quizizz game provided an attractive and engaging medium through

which students could take their minds off of learning and direct their mental energy towards

achieving a purpose, thus enabling them to acquire language. Again, the alignment between

Marzanos sixth step involving vocabulary games and Krashens theory on acquisition-learning

distinction proved to have dynamite results for my students vocabulary acquisition.

What Did Not Work and Why

1. While the language notebooks were useful, there were times when students would

forget to bring them to class or leave them at home. This made it extremely difficult for students

to keep terms organized. Additionally, students who were absent for extended periods had

difficulty making sure their notebooks stayed organized. However, moving forward, I think I

would transition to implement this through a digital format. Rather than using physical

notebooks, I would design a shared document for students to individually access through their

school-issued Chromebooks.

2. Another aspect of this strategy that did not work as well as I had initially anticipated

dealt with time. To carry out the strategy with fidelity, a tremendous amount of time is required.

Aside from the preparation of materials, Marzanos six-step process takes up a great deal of

classroom instruction time that also needs to be dedicated to content learning. Further

investigation into different technologies could help speed up some of the process, but an
 WTS 1 & 2 page 21 of 27

educator will need to be skilled in finding creative solutions to balance time between content and

vocabulary instruction.

My Next Steps

1. One of my next steps will be to continue researching new games to create opportunities

for enjoyable and interactive practice of content vocabulary.

2. Another step will be to work with my co-teachers to start identifying critical

vocabulary for our units of instruction and try to build activities from Marzanos six-step process

into our teaching process.

3. A third step would be to collect data from core classes on student vocabulary

performance as a result of Marzanos six-step process and directly tie it to overall achievement

of unit objectives. In turn, this data could be shared at a building level to advocate the infusion

of Marzanos six-step process into other classrooms, thus impacting learning on an even greater

scale.
 WTS 1 & 2 page 22 of 27

References

Krashen, S. D. (2009, July). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Retrieved

February 20, 2016, from

http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf

Krashen, S. D. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for

the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, (4). 440.

Marzano, R. J. (2012). A Comprehensive approach to vocabulary instruction: Voices from the

Middle, 20(1), 31-35. Retrieved February 20, 2016, from

http://www.missionliteracy.com/uploads/3/1/5/8/3158234/marzano_vm0201comp_vocab

.pdf

Marzano, R. J. (2009). Six steps to better vocabulary instruction. Educational Leadership, (1),

83.

Sprenger, M. (2013). Teaching the critical vocabulary of the common core. Retrieved February

20, 2016, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/113040/chapters/What-Does-the-

Research-Say-About-Vocabulary.aspx

Warfelt, L. M. (2012). Language acquisition. Hauppauge, N.Y.: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
 WTS 1 & 2 page 23 of 27

Artifact A

Artifact A: District ELL Writing Rubric (1 of 2)

This two-page rubric was used to score writing prompts while specifically focusing on
vocabulary development.

Artifact B: Writing Prompt Pre-assessment

 WTS 1 & 2 page 24 of 27

Artifact A: District ELL Writing Rubric (2 of 2)

 WTS 1 & 2 page 25 of 27

Artifact B: Writing Prompt Pre-assessment

These writing samples demonstrate high, mid and low performances regarding academic
vocabulary usage on a writing prompt prior to the implementation of Marzanos six-step process.

High

Middle

Low
 WTS 1 & 2 page 26 of 27

Artifact C: Writing Prompt Post-assessment

These writing samples demonstrate high, mid and low performances regarding academic
vocabulary usage on a writing prompt after the implementation of Marzanos six-step process.

High

Middle

Low
 WTS 1 & 2 page 27 of 27

Artifact D: Pre- and Post-test Results on Vocabulary Comprehension

The percentages below show the results of student vocabulary comprehension before and after
implementation of Marzanos six-step process. While the rates of improvement vary, the data
shows that students at various levels of understanding all benefitted from the strategy.

Harriet Tubman Vocabulary

High Middle Low
1) Pre-Test 30% 60% 60%
2) Post-Test 100% 100% 70%