This paper discusses a vocabulary intervention programme for monolingual Polish children. Vocabulary instruction was conducted in a group of children aged 7–9 (N = 77) attending a primary school near Gdansk in Poland. Following a pre-test an intervention group (22 pupils receiving instruction over 10 weeks) and a control group (55 pupils) were selected. The taught vocabulary consisted of 20 Polish words. Additionally, another 20 words were carefully selected to form an untaught vocabulary list (control list). Although the intervention group did not achieve a higher mean post-test result in taught words than the control group, the mean increase was larger in the intervention group, confirmed by a test for two means (p = 0.036). The difference was not confirmed for untaught words (p = 0.236). A linear regression model was used to explain which factors influenced post-test results. For taught words only pre-test results had an impact. For untaught words pre-test results and interaction of pre-test results with groups had an impact. The number of sessions attended also influenced post-test results.
The paper includes the results of a survey where teachers and parents provided feedback. Although the intervention programme increased children’s vocabulary, it raised some important questions concerning the size of the gain, word selection and conditions of the instruction.This paper discusses a vocabulary intervention programme for monolingual Polish children. Vocabulary instruction was conducted in a group of children aged 7–9 (N = 77) attending a primary school near Gdansk in Poland. Following a pre-test an intervention group (22 pupils receiving instruction over 10 weeks) and a control group (55 pupils) were selected. The taught vocabulary consisted of 20 Polish words. Additionally, another 20 words were carefully selected to form an untaught vocabulary list (control list). Although the intervention group did not achieve a higher mean post-test result in taught words than the control group, the mean increase was larger in the intervention group, confirmed by a test for two means (p = 0.036). The difference was not confirmed for untaught words (p = 0.236). A linear regression model was used to explain which factors influenced post-test results. For taught words only pre-test results had an impact. For untaught words pre-test results and interaction of pre-test results with groups had an impact. The number of sessions attended also influenced post-test results.
The paper includes the results of a survey where teachers and parents provided feedback. Although the intervention programme increased children’s vocabulary, it raised some important questions concerning the size of the gain, word selection and conditions of the instruction
