Search

This article describes how researchers take a multidisciplinary approach to investigating how middle grades students learn science vocabulary. The authors investigated teaching strategies for increasing retention of science vocabulary with seventh graders and stumbled upon an interesting finding that was not even a target for their study, yet it offered some possible explanations for why students mix up some words. Following this offshoot of evidence led them out of their fields of education and psychology in and down a path to linguistic studies of morphological awareness and to possible explanations of their unexpected results. In this article, they present a review of the literature on prefixes and memory confusions due to similarity among terms to provide some context for their findings. They analyze word morphology and cite studies on morphological instruction, noting that the use of morphological instruction to improve retention of vocabulary words is inconclusive, especially with prefix study. (Contains 1 figure.)

A public Web site (Goolkasian & Van Wallendael, 2001), established to provide educational materials in cognitive science, served as the primary text for an interdisciplinary course. We tracked student use of the Web site online and with self-report questionnaires. A majority (74%) of the students rated the Web site to be as useful or more useful than a traditional textbook. Although time spent online with the Web materials predicted scores for 2 of the 4 exams, class attendance was the strongest predictor of exam performance.

Four experiments are reported in which participants attempted to remember three or six concrete nouns, presented as pictures, spoken words, or printed words, while also verifying the accuracy of sentences. Hypotheses meant to explain the higher recall of pictures and spoken words over printed words were tested. Increasing the difficulty and changing the type of processing task from arithmetic to a visual/spatial reasoning task did not influence recall. An examination of long-term modality effects showed that those effects were not sufficient to explain the superior performance with spoken words and pictures. Only when we manipulated the allocation of attention to the items in the storage task by requiring the participants to articulate the items and by presenting the stimulus items under a degraded condition were we able to reduce or remove the effect of presentation format. The findings suggest that the better recall of pictures and spoken words over printed words result from the fact that under normal presentation conditions, printed words receive less processing attention than pictures and spoken words do.