Literature review !

Literature Review- “Supporting Young Children’s Vocabulary Growth Using F.R.I.E.N.D.S.

Model”


Amy Hutton


National University


TED 690- Professor Weintraub

Literature review !2

Abstract:

In the following paper I will be doing a literature review of “Supporting Young

Children’s Vocabulary Growth Using F.R.I.E.N.D.S. Model (Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki,

2014, p. 512).” I wanted to review this article because I felt that it may give me more techniques

and strategies that I can use in supporting my students vocabulary growth. It introduced the

F.R.I.E.N.D.S. model which included 7 different instructional approaches that help students to

learn vocabulary. These approaches ranged from having a “literacy-rich environment (Dashiell

and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014, p. 513), to student-teacher conversations, to usage of more rare and

complex words, to consistent practice, to interactive storybook reading (Dashiell and DeBruin-

Parecki, 2014, p. 514). Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki (2014), who authored this article, also

included many techniques to use with each instructional approach. While all these approaches

are great, they work the best when done together. I personally realized that I already use quite a

few in the classroom, but found a few additional strategies I want to try.

Ann M. Nash of Henrico County Public School said, “If you can get a child engaged in

what they’re doing, they’re going to be a lot more interested in learning the material (Hennick,

2017, paragraph 18)” This is the truth! Without engagement the student is not retaining any of

the information. We as teachers would have better luck teaching a wall than we would trying to

teach a disengaged student. A key component to classroom engagement, is knowing the students
Literature review !3

and knowing what interest them. If they are interested in a topic they are much more likely want

to focus on it. Creating a relationship with the students is important and knowing what will

intrigue them is paramount. Another element that keeps students engaged is their perception of

whether the topic is challenging or not, and whether they will successfully master it. Students

will often become disengaged when they feel that they don’t understand something and they may

fail. It is often easier for them to never try, than for them to feel the sting of failure. While it is

important to promote failure as a growth opportunity in the classroom, students need more than

just words, they need to have the correct and appropriate support (Slavin, 2018). Both of these

elements fall into Domain C of the California Teaching Performance Expectations put out by the

Commission on Teacher Credentialing. “Domain C (is) engaging and supporting students in

learning (California Teaching Performance Expectations, 2013, p. 2),” which looks at whether

teachers are “making content accessible, teaching English learners, (using) developmental

appropriate teaching practices (California Teaching Performance Expectations, 2013, p.2),” and

engaging students. I feel that I do well getting to know my students, building a relationship with

them, creating engaging lessons, and thusly engaging my students. Supporting my students is

where I could develop further as an effective teacher. While I put supports in place, I feel that I

can always improve and find more effective ways to reach my students. With this thought in

mind, I found the article “Supporting Young Children’s Vocabulary Growth Using F.R.I.E.N.D.S.

Model (Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014, p. 512).” The following paper will be the literature

review of this article and what I have learned from it.

First, I decided to do a literature review on “Supporting Young Children’s Vocabulary

Growth Using F.R.I.E.N.D.S. Model (Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014, p. 512)” because I
Literature review !4

am currently teaching first grade, and vocabulary development is one of the major ELA

standards. Additionally, the more vocabulary that a student can learn will help them as they

continue in their education and on into life. I have already implemented a few strategies in the

classroom to support my students’ development, but I have not heard of the F.R.I.E.N.D.S model.

This intrigued me and I was hoping that through reading this article, I could learn new strategies

to employ.

The article written by Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki (2014) “presents a research-to-

practice approach to vocabulary instruction that contains engaging strategies and activities that

can be incorporated into instructional planning (p. 513). I had initially thought that they had

conducted their own research in regards to this model, but as I continued to read through the

article, it was a run down of the model. This was okay, as it was still very helpful information.

F.R.I.E.N.D.S is an acronym that stands for “(1)Fostering quality teacher and child

converstations, (2)Robust and motivational instruction, (3) Interactive Storybook reading,

(4)Engaging and literacy-rick environments, (5)Numerous opportunities to practice vocabulary,

(6) Direct and explicit instruction, and focusing on (7) Sophisticated and rare words (Dashiell

and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014, p. 513).” Each element of F.R.I.E.N.D.S. represents a different

instructional approach. Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki (2014) break each instructional approach

down within the article, give the reason it is effective, and provide teaching strategies for the

specific instructional approach.

For the F, or fostering conversations, it has been shown that the more students talk with

adults and teachers, they are able to pick up more complex vocabulary because they are able to

hear it in context. For this instructional strategy it is important to not shy away from using more
Literature review !5

complex vocabulary, yet they can explain what a word means in further detail if it appears that

the student is confused. A few strategies they suggested was to use open-ended questions,

maintain a two way dialogue with the student regarding what they are learning, and be

intentional on the more complex language used. The next instructional approach was labeled R

for being robust teaching (Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014). Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki

(2014) contend that this type of instruction is very intentional and included a lot of fun activities.

Activities that promote vocabulary let the students “construct their own meanings of words,

while simultaneously developing a rich and long-lasting vocabulary (Dashiell and DeBruin-

Parecki, 2014, p. 514).” A few techniques that could be employed with this instructional

approach are to have the students use new words in their writing, involving the vocabulary in

games, incorporate technology, and something I would like to try, have the students make their

own word wall. The I part of F.R.I.E.N.D.S., has to do with reading. While reading we should

pick books that increase a students language. We should also stop and ask questions throughout

the reading to involve the students (Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014). The E, which has to

do creating an environment that is very “literacy rich (Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014, p.

514).” As it sounds this when the teacher makes sure to have a lot of access to words and

literature thought out the classroom, through books, word walls, games, etcetera. Just like with

F, where students are exposed to vocabulary verbally through discussions, the “literacy rich

(Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014, p. 514)” classroom exposes students to the vocabulary

visually. The more exposure the more they will retain. The N, Stands for “Numerous

Opportunities to Practice (Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014, p. 514).” This instruction is just

like it sounds. As students learn new words, they need to practice them to be able to be able to
Literature review !6

retain it. This can be done with including it in writing or during conversations with the student.

The D has to do with the interaction, which should be direct. The most important part of this

approach is that teachers should be cognizant of words that students need to learn for the

comprehension of what they are learning and teachers should make sure they teach this

vocabulary to the students. Lastly, the S stands for the instructional approach that teachers

should use sophisticated words. While scaffolding should occur, the verbiage used in the

classroom and thought lessons should be more sophisticated, since these may rarely be heard

outside of the classroom. The classroom may be the only place that students are exposed to these

words. While all of these are great instructional approaches, they are much more effective when

used together (Dashiell and DeBruin-Parecki, 2014). Dashieel and DeBruin-Parecki (2014)

contend that by using the F.R.I.E.N.D.S. model and the associated techniques, students will have

more interest in vocabulary, which will increase their engagement, and their long-term

vocabulary growth.

In conclusion, I found that already incorporate many of the techniques suggested by the

F.R.I.E.N.D.S. model. I have a literacy rich environment, I engage in discussions with the

students using more complex vocabulary, I make sure to teach students vocabulary that will help

their comprehension, and I make it engaging with technology. Overall this article helped me to

feel like I was on the right track with what I was doing in the classroom. With that being said,

there were a few strategies that I would like to implement or do more of. I really liked the idea

of having the students be the ones to create their own word wall. I also want to incorporate more

word games and activities, as I think this is a fun way to get the students involved without them
Literature review !7

even knowing it. Also since they are having fun they are much more likely to be engaged, and as

Ann Nash said, much more likely to learn.

Reference:

California Teaching Performance Expectations. (2013, March). Retrieved April 12, 2019

from https://www.ctc.ca.gov/docs/default-source/educator-prep/standards/adopted-

tpes-2013.pdf

Dashiell, J. and DeBruin-Parecki, A. (2014). Supporting young children’s vocabulary using

F.R.I.E.N.D.S. model. The Reading Teacher 67(7), 512-516.

Hennick, C. (2017). How Tech Can Help Students with Disabilities Thrive in STEM Education.

Retrieved from https://edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2017/10/how-tech-can-help-

students-disabilities-thrive-stem-education on April 28, 2019.

Slavin, R. (2018). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (12th ed.) [e-text version]. New

York, NY: Pearson.