Morphological Teaching and Singaporean Children’s English Word Learning

  • Dongbo ZhangEmail author
  • Li Li
Part of the Education Innovation Series book series (EDIN)


This chapter reports some preliminary findings of a semester-long morphological intervention study on Grade 4 children in Singapore, focusing on the development of English derivational awareness and word learning ability, and the relationship between these competencies. Students in two compatible primary schools were pretested at the end of Grade 3 on their derivational awareness and meaning inference ability. During the first semester of Grade 4, students in one school received the intervention, whereas those in the other school were taught with their regular English Language curriculum. At the end of the semester, all students were posttested with the same tasks. One-way ANCOVA controlling for pretest scores revealed low but significant effects of the morphological intervention. Correlation-based analyses found that the relationship of morphological awareness to lexical inference became stronger from Grade 3 to Grade 4.


Mother Tongue Morphological Awareness Vocabulary Knowledge Pretest Score Word Learning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The study reported in this chapter was based on a research project funded by the Office of Education Research (OER), National Institute of Education (NIE) (OER 24/10 ZDB), to which we express our gratitude. Our thanks are also due to Professors Che Kan Leong and Keiko Koda and Dr. Elizabeth Pang, who offered a lot of help and support at various stages of the project. We also thank the generous support from the teachers and the students in the participating schools and the hard work of many full-time and part-time research assistants. Views expressed in this chapter do not necessarily reflect those of OER or NIE.


  1. Anglin, J. M. (1993). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 58(10), 1–187. doi: 10.2307/1166112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bauer, L., & Nation, P. (1993). Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6, 253–279. doi: 10.1093/ijl/6.4.253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baumann, J. F., Edwards, E. C., Font, G., Tereshinski, C. A., Kame’enui, E. J., & Olejnik, S. (2002). Teaching morphemic and contextual analysis to fifth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 150–176. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.37.2.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumann, J. F., Edwards, E. C., Boland, E., & Font, G. (2012). Teaching word-learning strategies. In J. F. Baumann & E. J. Kame’enui (Eds.), Vocabulary instruction: Research to practice (2nd ed., pp. 139–166). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  6. Berninger, V., Nagy, W., Carlisle, J., Thomson, J., Hoffer, D., Abbott, S., & Aylward, E. (2003). Effective treatment for dyslexics in grades 4 to 6. In B. Foorman (Ed.), Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 382–417). Timonium: York Press.Google Scholar
  7. Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Nagy, W., & Carlisle, J. (2010). Growth in phonological, orthographic, and morphological awareness in Grades 1 to 6. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39, 141–163. doi: 10.1007/s10936-009-9130-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowers, P. N., & Kirby, J. R. (2010). Effects of morphological instruction on vocabulary acquisition. Reading and Writing, 23, 515–537. doi: 10.1007/s11145-009-9172-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bowers, P. N., Kirby, J. R., & Deacon, S. H. (2010). The effects of morphological instruction on literacy skills: A systematic review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 80, 144–179. doi: 10.3102/0034654309359353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlisle, J. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing, 12, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carlisle, J. F. (2010). Effects of instruction in morphological awareness on literacy achievement: An integrative review. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 464–487. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.45.4.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carroll, J. B., Davies, P., & Richman, B. (1971). The American heritage word frequency book. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  13. Casalis, S., & Cole, P. (2009). On the relationship between morphological and phonological awareness: Effects of training in kindergarten and in first-grade. First Language, 29, 113–142. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.45.4.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chall, J. S., & Jacobs, V. A. (2003). The classic study on poor children’s four-grade slump. American Educator, 27(1), 14–15, 44.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, E. V. (1993). The lexicon in acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clark, E. V., Gelman, S. A., & Lane, N. M. (1985). Compound nouns and category structure in young children. Child Development, 56, 84–94. doi: 10.2307/1130176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deterding, D. (2007). Singapore English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goodwin, A. P., & Ahn, S. (2010). A meta-analysis of morphological interventions: Effects on literacy achievement of children with literacy difficulties. Annals of Dyslexia, 60, 183–208. doi: 10.1007/s11881-010-0041-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2007). Breaking down words to build meaning: Morphology, vocabulary, and reading comprehension in the urban classroom. The Reading Teacher, 61, 134–144. doi: 10.1598/RT.61.2.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kuo, L.-J., & Anderson, R. C. (2006). Morphological awareness and learning to read: A cross-language perspective. Educational Psychologist, 41, 161–180. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4103_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mahony, D. L. (1994). Using sensitivity to word structure to explain variance in high school and college level reading ability. Reading and Writing, 6, 19–44. doi: 10.1007/BF01027276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McCutchen, D., Green, L., & Abbott, R. D. (2008). Children’s morphological knowledge: Links to literacy. Reading Psychology, 29, 289–314. doi: 10.1080/02702710801982050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. MOE. (2008). English language syllabus 2010. Singapore: Curriculum Planning and Development Division, MOE.Google Scholar
  24. MOE. (2011a). Nurturing active language learners and proficient users: 2010 Mother Tongue Languages Review Committee report. Singapore: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  25. MOE. (2011b). STELLAR teachers’ guidelines (unpublished curriculum documents). Singapore: Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  26. Nagy, W. (2009). Understanding words and word learning. In S. Rosenfield & V. Berninger (Eds.), Implementing evidence-based academic interventions in school settings (pp. 479–500). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304–330. doi: 10.2307/747823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 269–284). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  29. Nagy, W. E., Diakidoy, I.-N., & Anderson, E. C. (1993). The acquisition of morphology: Learning the contribution of suffixes to the meanings of derivatives. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25, 155–169. doi: 10.1080/10862969309547808.Google Scholar
  30. Nagy, W., Berninger, V., & Abbott, R. (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 134–147. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pakir, A. (2008). Bilingual education in Singapore. In J. Cummins & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (Bilingual education 2nd ed., Vol. 5, pp. 91–203). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Plag, I. (2003). Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ramirez, G., Chen, X., Geva, E., & Luo, Y. (2011). Morphological awareness and word reading in English language learners: Evidence from Spanish- and Chinese-speaking children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 601–618. doi: 10.1017/S0142716411000233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Silver, R. E. (2005). The discourse of linguistic capital: Language and economic policy planning in Singapore. Language Policy, 4, 47–66. doi: 10.1007/s10993-004-6564-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Singapore Department of Statistics. (2010). Census of population 2010: Advance census release. Retrieved from
  36. Tyler, A., & Nagy, W. (1989). The acquisition of English derivational morphology. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 649–667. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(89)90002-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. White, T. G., Sowell, J., & Yanagihara, A. (1989). Teaching elementary students to use word-part clues. The Reading Teacher, 42, 302–308.Google Scholar
  38. Zhang, D. (2013). Linguistic distance effect on cross-linguistic transfer of morphological awareness. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34(5), 917–942. doi: 10.1017/S0142716412000070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhang, D., & Koda, K. (2012). Contribution of morphological awareness and lexical inferencing ability to L2 vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension: Testing direct and indirect effects. Reading and Writing, 25, 1195–1215. doi: 10.1007/s11145-011-9313-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Teacher EducationMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  2. 2.Singapore Centre for Chinese LanguageNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations