Mnemonics

Part of the learning process is recalling prior knowledge and incorporating new material. When information is not tucked away in memory, it is difficult to embark on a higher level of thinking. Mnemonic devices are effective aids that help children and adults alike remember. According to The Learning Center Exchange, there are nine kinds of mnemonics including rhyme, acronym, music, expression, model, note, outline, image and connection.

The study discussed below supports the use of keywords in learning new vocabulary words. By learning new vocabulary words, students are able to comprehend. Once students can comprehend, they are able to critically think about what they have read.

Study supporting mnemonic devices - In 2003, Keywords Make the Difference reported a study's findings in Teaching Exceptional Children where researchers determined which mnemonic device was more effective in teaching new vocabulary words to children in an inclusion class. Mnemonics, such as the keyword method, the picture method and the definition method were explored.

Questions - The following questions were posed in the study. How do students perform on a pretest consisting of new vocabulary words prior to any instruction? After instruction, were the students able to accurately answer questions about a story read to them? Did the mnemonic instruction method affect performance on the posttest?

Support - Authors conducting the study also referred to other publications in support of mnemonic devices. Mastropieri and Scruggs (2000) pointed out that as inclusive classrooms become more prevalent students with learning disabilities having difficulty learning new material in the same format as general education students is more evident. Implementing strategies to assist students with learning disabilities in learning new vocabulary words can be problematic because so many of those students have language processing difficulties and/or memory deficits (Mann, 1998; Swanson, Cooney, & O'Shaughnessy, 1998). Learning new vocabulary words is an important precursor to effective comprehension (Carnine, Silbert, & Kameenui, 1997; Mastropieri, Scruggs, & Fulk, 1990). Using the keyword method has proven to be quite successful for students with learning disabilities, college undergraduates learning a foreign language, and younger children with learning disabilities (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 1989; Scruggs & Mastropieri, 2000; Atkinson, 1975).

Method - Action research methodology was used for this study. The participants were a special education teacher and three third grade classrooms. The teacher taught each class new vocabulary words selected from the book, June 29, 1999. All vocabulary words were chosen based upon importance, difficulty, and class reading materials. Her specific goal was to determine whether or not the keyword approach would be most effective in helping her entire class learn the new words, apply his/her knowledge in understanding the story read to them containing the words and discuss the story. Each class was taught the new words differently. Class 1 learned via the keyword method. Class 2 learned via the picture method, and Class 3 was administered the definition method.

Every method used vocabulary cards printed on the same computer, but each card contained slightly different information. The keyword method cards showed the word, a keyword (chosen for it similar sound), the definition, and a picture. When teaching the keyword method, it's important that children learn the keyword first. Then remember the picture along with its relationship to the definition. The study refers to the example aloft. Aloft is shown with a leaf floating high up in the air. The picture method cards showed the word, the definition, and a picture. The definition method showed the word and the definition. All pictures used were from clip art.

Prior to teaching new vocabulary methods, children in each class were given a pretest to determine whether or not the students knew the words. All the students performed similarly. Then, each class was instructed in accordance with the methods mentioned above. After the classes completed vocabulary instruction, the special education teacher read the story and the students were asked various questions and participated in a class discussion. To complete the study, the children took a posttest for evaluation purposes.

Participants - This study consisted of a special education teacher and seventy-four participants, including general education and special education children between the ages of 8 and 10 years old. All children participating were in suburban third grade inclusion classes located in a mid-Atlantic state. The school was working towards full inclusion because a large amount of the students had learning disabilities and various other disabilities. Three classes were selected for the study, one with 26 students, a class with 23 students, and another class with 25 students. Classes one and two each had 4 children with learning disabilities while class three had 2 students with learning disabilities and 2 children being evaluated for a learning disability. For the purpose of this study, the students being evaluated were considered learning disabled. All three classes' participants had their IQs measured by the Cognitive Ability Test, and it was found that the IQ was similar in each of the three classes making up this study.

Variable and reliability - The dependent variable (the findings) was measured by the teacher administering a pretest, instructing the classes using different methods, reading and discussing the story, and evaluating with a posttest. Following those steps, the researcher was able to determine that the keyword method was most effective, then the definition method and finally the picture method. Each class was given the same pretest and posttest. Also, the teacher read and discussed the same book with each class. The teacher also pointed out that her findings were specific to her situation, but her procedure could be transferred and evaluated for successfulness in other areas of study. The researcher's results were believable and her findings were supported by other similar studies done in the past.

Conclusions - The special education teacher found that the keyword method was most effective in teaching new vocabulary words to an entire inclusion class. Success was followed by the definition method and then the picture method. The differences between instructions were statistically significant. With all methods, the general education students scored better than the students with learning disabilities. However, the children with learning disabilities showed more improvement when using the keyword method and actually achieved at a higher level than the students without a learning disability.

Findings explained - The teacher found that the keyword method was most effective in teaching new vocabulary words, especially for those students with learning disabilities. This is along the lines of what she thought would happen because other researchers examined the keyword method and found that it was quite successful in helping children with learning disabilities process and retain new material presented (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 1989; Scruggs & Mastropier, 2000). In the past, the keyword method was also effective in helping undergraduate college students pick up a foreign language, young children with a learning disability understand concrete and abstract thoughts via an illustration, and various children increase recall and comprehension (Atkinson, 1975; Pressly, Levin, & Delaney, 1982; Scruggs & Mastropieri, & Levin, 1987; Mastropieri, Scruggs, & Fulk, 1990; Bulgren, Deshler, & Schumaker, 1994). The researcher also found that readings and discussing the story aloud and using the picture method made little improvement in vocabulary retention for the special education students. To the teacher's surprise, both classifications of students performed better with the definition only method rather than the picture method. Other professionals have also found the picture method (without a keyword to reinforce the picture) confusing for some students (Rose & Furr, 1984).

Implications - The implications for practice are quite useful for classroom teachers. They may use the keyword method when instructing new vocabulary and perhaps other new material to an entire inclusion class. The keyword method appears to be effective for general education and special education students alike. Previous to this study, few examinations of inclusion class's successfulness with these various methods was studied (Bulgren, Deshler, & Schumaker, 1994). This study also provides instructions on how to use each method. While this researcher did not attempt these methods in other subject areas, it may be useful to transfer the application and evaluate students' success to determine whether or not the findings make improvements in their classroom.

Uberti, H., Scruggs, T., & Mastropieri, M. (2003). Keywords make the difference! Mnemonic instruction in inclusive classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 56-64.