Pros & Cons of Continuing Formal Vocab Study?

[Chrysalis Academy]

Hi Honored Gurus,

 

Will you please talk to me about the pros & cons of formal vocabulary/word root study in junior high and high school?

 

My 6th grader has completed MCT's Caesar's English 1 & 2.  We loved the program, and it did exactly what I wanted it to do for her: it taught her the most common vocabulary used in the great literature she is just beginning to read, and will be reading throughout high school and the rest of her life.

 

I'm trying to decide where to go from here.  My own experience was that the vocab programs I did in high school were a joke - I knew all the words.  This is because I was a voracious reader of excellent books.  I scored nearly perfect verbal scores on PSAT, SAT, and GRE without studying, and I attribute that to the fact that I read hundreds of classics and "older" books stuffed with wonderful words that don't tend to show up in today's YA lit . . . 

 

So my own experience tells me that learning vocabulary through reading is effective.  I'd like to think I've launched dd with the CEs, and from here her vocabulary will develop through good reading without further formal study.  

 

Am I right or wrong, do you think?  Does a student need formal study of word roots in jr high/high school, for standardized test prep or other reasons?  And if so, can you suggest materials and/or strategy?

 

Materials - no-brainer, what have you used that you liked?  Anything you tried and disliked?

 

Strategy - by this I mean, did you have your student study vocab continuously?  Or focus on it in jr. high and then be done (this, I think, is what SWB suggests in WTM).  Or not worry about studying it until the year before the PSAT/SAT, figuring that a focused study of word roots for one year would pay off?

 

Thanks in advance for your advice!

 

 

[regentrude]

We found that reading a wide variety of literature from different time periods and genres was a very effective way to increase vocabulary and score extremely well on the SAT and the ACT.

I have not done a vocab program with DD and won't do one with DS either.

[Soror]

I'm curious about this as well. Ds is a voracious reader and his vocab is always increasing just from reading but we are going through MCt's Building Language now and plan to do CE1 and 2 just because I've read such great reviews. I don't know that we will continue w/ vocab as a separate program past these programs though.

[Lori D.]

Certainly NOT a guru here! ;) But I can certainly give you my 2 cents worth!  :tongue_smilie:

 

While I can see that a formal vocabulary program can help accomplish the goals of exposure to new words, my personal opinion is that most formal vocabulary programs are designed to be a great fit for *workbook learners*, while far more people tend to most easily and naturally pick up vocabulary through exposure. Personally, I think too often a workbook *can* be treated by students like: "Memorize for test... test over — now *purge*..."

 

So, I'm in total agreement with you about exposure through reading: solo reading, read-alouds a bit above the child's natural reading level, older classics...

 

But I will put in a plug for exposure through doing a possible root study, too (maybe 10 min., 2x/week??) before hitting high school, as that can help students *make connections* and think through new words and be prepared for the vocabulary they will meet as they read the classics. Even better if you can find/transform it into a learning style that is better suited to your student's learning style, esp. if they are not a workbook-learner, and the program is workbook-based.

 

Our experience: when in elementary/early middle school, we used English from the Roots Up, and made it more of a game, which worked well to help cement some roots for DSs. I think you could adapt other root programs that way, too. You might also check out some of the Vocabulary Cartoons: SAT Word Power books; the style is a goofy cartoon to help you connect the striking/unusual visual image with the meaning/sound of the vocabulary word. I created DSs spelling throughout high school from The ABCs and All Their Tricks, and often included vocabulary roots, as another layer of exposure (spelling pattern AND vocab all in one).

 

Free Rice is a fun online vocab game for guessing words, and through multiple exposure, you tend to learn a few word definitions. The motivator being that every time you guess correctly, 10 grains of rice will be donated to the hungry.

 

One of our DSs made up a game he (still!) likes to play in the car every so often, where one person thinks of a song title, music group name, movie title, phrase, etc., and then rewords it with much higher vocabulary words, and the rest try to guess. Example: "Scintillate, scintillate, miniscule luminious body..." ("Twinkle Twinkle Little Star") — 

 

So, what vocabulary exposure we did in high school was solely through reading, a little through spelling, and a little through spontaneous games. No prep for SAT in the vocabulary department, and DSs did fine.

 

JMO, but specifically for SAT prep, I'd first want to wait and see what the new test is like next year... BUT if it's at all similar to the current test, I'd say you'll have had plenty of exposure to vocab through reading and other informal exposure. *I* would spend the SAT prep time MUCH more on learning the "tricks and tips" for answering the critical reading and math portions. JMO! :)

 

Warmest regards, Lori D.

[snowbeltmom]

I didn't have my oldest formally study vocabulary, and I came to regret that decision.  I am using a formal vocabulary program for my younger two. 

 

[Garga]

I'd try a program just to see what she knows.  If she already know it, ditch the program.  But if she doesn't, then it's worthwhile.

[flyingiguana]

I tried a formal program with my kids -- it didn't accomplish much. Nothing stuck so it was just a waste of time.

 

And I find word roots confusing. Sometimes you can get an accurate clue, but more often it seems it has nothing to do with the modern meaning.

 

Reading is effective for a lot of people. If you were to find it wasn't effective for your student, then you might want to supplement. But I suspect the best supplementation would not be going through a formal program.

 

I had a teacher in high school who had us pick words we didn't know in something we were reading. We had to look up definitions. That was BY FAR the most effective vocab program I was ever part of. Didn't have to bother with words I already knew, and I was seeing them in context through the reading. And it was super simple.

[Chrysalis Academy]

I tried a formal program with my kids -- it didn't accomplish much. Nothing stuck so it was just a waste of time.

 

And I find word roots confusing. Sometimes you can get an accurate clue, but more often it seems it has nothing to do with the modern meaning.

 

Reading is effective for a lot of people. If you were to find it wasn't effective for your student, then you might want to supplement. But I suspect the best supplementation would not be going through a formal program.

 

I had a teacher in high school who had us pick words we didn't know in something we were reading. We had to look up definitions. That was BY FAR the most effective vocab program I was ever part of. Didn't have to bother with words I already knew, and I was seeing them in context through the reading. And it was super simple.

 

Ok, you just put your finger on what bugs me about word root programs.  We like it when we can puzzle out the meaning based on the roots, it's kind of a fun exercise.  But we notice how often it doesn't seem to relate to the modern meaning, also!  I think roots can be helpful, but I'm not convinced they are the be-all end-all of vocabulary development.  What I liked about MCT's lower level programs (the CEs) was that they alternated between roots and whole words, and even with the root lessons, it presented "nonfiction" words that used the roots.  What I dislike about WWtW (among other things) is that it's all roots.  It has huge lists of words that use the roots, but my understanding is that you are meant to memorize the roots, but not the words.

 

And, can I confess?  I have a hard time memorizing the roots.  My brain is old.  My dd is much better at rote memorization than I am.  But my vocabulary is great, and I can usually suss out the meaning of the roots . . . because I know what the word means!   Which is, theoretically, backwards . . . but does make me question whether root study is all it is cracked up to be.

[regentrude]

And, can I confess?  I have a hard time memorizing the roots.  My brain is old.  My dd is much better at rote memorization than I am.  But my vocabulary is great, and I can usually suss out the meaning of the roots . . . because I know what the word means!   Which is, theoretically, backwards . . . but does make me question whether root study is all it is cracked up to be.

 

But does it not also work the opposite way: students with a rich vocabulary discover that certain roots have certain meanings.

Also, foreign language studies are extremely helpful, because especially words derived from Latin will occur in Romance languages.

 

[Crimson Wife]

But does it not also work the opposite way: students with a rich vocabulary discover that certain roots have certain meanings.

This is how I remember the meaning of the roots. I didn't start learning Latin until high school and by that point I already had a strong vocabulary from reading. So I remember "cred" means "believe" by thinking "credible, incredulous, creed, etc."

 

DH attended Catholic schools growing up and swears that the Sadlier-Oxford Vocabulary Workshop books helped him tremendously on his SAT. The workbook exercises are formatted in a way very similar to the questions on the verbal portions of the SAT. So it does double duty- teaching vocab and standardized test prep.

[Matryoshka]

But does it not also work the opposite way: students with a rich vocabulary discover that certain roots have certain meanings.

Also, foreign language studies are extremely helpful, because especially words derived from Latin will occur in Romance languages.

 

 

That is how I figured out the meanings of the roots - comparing words I knew the meaning of, and seeing the commonalities.  I did also study Spanish, and I'm sure picked up a lot of Latin roots there, and I read a ton of books replete with rich vocabulary.  I really never needed a formal study.  If my kids were like me, I probably would never have bothered doing vocab at all. 

 

However somehow my kids, in spite of being all genetically related to me, do not automatically make these connections (I blame dh - must be his genes).  The reason I like WwtW so much is that it has the kids make these connections explicitly - it trains them to see what I gleaned by osmosis.  If you only have the kids memorize a list of roots, I agree that's confusing.  But WwtW is full of a wide variety of activities that have the kids tease out the meanings of lots of full words based on their stems.  I do all of these exercises orally with my kid; if I just let them read it themselves, they'd skim it and get nothing out of it other than a list of roots to memorize.  Doing the whole thing gets their brains to see how one gets the meanings of new words from rearranging pieces of words or roots one already knows.  The "mystery spelling" activity also helped their spelling especially of Latin/Greek root-based words.

 

I go through it slowly - like I said in the other thread, virtually every root covered in the whole Greek section of Vocabulary for the College Student is covered in just the first few lessons of the first book of WWtW - what's the rush?  And they really, really stick.  All the workbooky vocab programs I did with my kids resulted in brain dump.

 

Makes me sad my kids are doing S-O in ps high school.  They already know most of the words, and it seems very much to me like a brain-dump-after-test type program - rather a waste.  And they have so much homework there's no way I can afterschool them.  Guess I'm glad we got as far into it as we did in middle school!  Dd12 is doing the first WwtW now (and she actually likes it better than CEI and II...)

[Crimson Wife]

Makes me sad my kids are doing S-O in ps high school.  They already know most of the words, and it seems very much to me like a brain-dump-after-test type program - rather a waste.

I think the retention issue really depends on the individual child. I've seen good incorporation of the S-O words into DD's writing and also general day-to-day vocabulary. Maybe it's because she is a lexophile? (ducking and running, LOL!)

[WishboneDawn]

Now that we're into high school I tend to think it's the time for a lot more work in less subjects and anywhere there's overlap I prune.

 

So no vocabulary. That's what reading and the dictionary on my daughter's headboard are for. We have done it in the past and she still has a Jensen's Vocabulary book she does for her own enjoyment but I don't require it anymore. Why bother when that time could be spent reading literature?

[flyingiguana]

When we've just stuck with literature, I've had the pleasure of having my kids occasionally coming to me and saying LOOK at this work!  Isn't it great!  It means this -- but listen how this character or narrator is using it....

 

Never got that with a vocab program.

 

Both vocab and grammar also seem to make way more sense when studying a foreign language (more likely a Romance language for the vocabulary).  The straight grammar programs we've tried have also not stuck too well -- but couch it in terms of learning another language and it suddenly makes a lot more sense.

 

I also can't do rote memory.  But I've somehow managed to learn an awful lot of stuff without it.

 

But different minds work differently, so we all have to experiment.

 

 

[Woodland Mist Academy]

When we've just stuck with literature, I've had the pleasure of having my kids occasionally coming to me and saying LOOK at this work!  Isn't it great!  It means this -- but listen how this character or narrator is using it....

 

Never got that with a vocab program.

 

I have. It doesn't need to be either/or. It can be both/and. My daughter has many times comes to me delighted to find a word from her vocab list in a book. (OK, in truth she just calls out the word and sentence to anyone who happens to be in earshot. --The dogs learn lots of new vocab this way. :tongue_smilie: )

 

She also uses words in conversations that she has learned from lowly vocab lists.

 

Kids, go figure, they're not all the same. ;)

 

Some people (and kids) actually find word study interesting all on its own.

 

[teeterbunch]

I heard Debra Bell recommend Vocabulary for Achievement, and we continue it through high school for SAT prep.  My understanding is that it is written by the people who write the SAT.  The words are pretty advanced for each grade level, and they touch on roots and analogies.  The student book does not include correct answers, so I have to answer them as well (which takes some time).  You can buy a teacher manual, but it's as expensive as the student book ($23) and only has answers for 1 year.

 

Ashley