Language is the everpresent medium of teaching and learning, the element that infuses every classroom interaction. Yet, how often do we explicitly plan the content, structure, and quality of this critical element?

While we meticulously map out and prepare for the activities we engage our students in, the specific linguistic structures and vocabulary we employ often remains implicit, almost accidental. This raises critical questions: which aspects of our classroom talk truly accelerate literacy – is it sheer volume, vocabulary precision, or syntactic complexity? And how can we become more deliberate and intentional architects of this vital linguistic environment for all students, including those developing multi-dialectalism and multilingualism?

My recent presentation at ResearchED in NYC ventured into this territory, examining the research on how the linguistic environment we curate can influence student literacy achievement.

Teacher Vocabulary Use and Student Language and Literacy Achievement

• Citation: Wanzek, J., Wood, C., & Schatschneider, C. (2023). Teacher Vocabulary Use and Student Language and Literacy Achievement. Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 66(9), 3574–3587. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_JSLHR-22-00605

The Power of Teacher Talk

We know that the explicit teaching of unfamiliar words that students will encounter in written text is important. But what about the language that is used by teachers throughout the school day? What implicit learning opportunities are constrained or afforded through the model of the language that a teacher uses while teaching, and what are the impacts on student learning?

I'm going to try out a new type of post here, in which I'll share one interesting research item I've happened across in greater depth. In the past, I've simply tweeted them out, but then I forget about them. I'm hoping this will be a better way of retaining them in memory and deepening my understanding — and of course, sharing them with you!

Individual differences in L2 listening proficiency revisited: Roles of form, meaning, and use aspects of phonological vocabulary knowledge

• Citation: Saito, K., Uchihara, T., Takizawa, K., & Suzukida, Y. (2023). Individual differences in L2 listening proficiency revisited: Roles of form, meaning, and use aspects of phonological vocabulary knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1-27. doi:10.1017/S027226312300044X

This paper explores how various aspects of phonological vocabulary knowledge affect second language (L2) listening proficiency. The study involved 126 Japanese learners of English.

Back in 1978, Bloom & Lahey presented a simple and useful model of language: form, meaning, and use.