Educational system is very important part of our modern life. Language education may take place as a general school subject or in a specialized language school.
There are many methods and approaches of teaching foreign languages. Vocabulary is the first and foremost important step in language acquisition.
Vocabulary knowledge aids in activating and building background knowledge to make connections to text, and having vocabulary knowledge can increase reading understanding and fluency while reading. Teachers used widely ways of teaching vocabulary. For instance, repetition, visual aids, communicating games and by texts. There are given some thoughts and theories about teaching vocabulary in context to elementary learners from different point of view.
Vocabulary can be defined as “the words we must know to communicate productively: words in speaking and words in listening. a comprehensive body of research exists on teaching and learning vocabulary. That research clearly revealed that magnification of vocabulary had always been and continued to be an important goal in ability to read and write and learning. Graves (1986) estimated that the number of words purchased from context throughout the course of a school year is between 1,000 and 5,000, with the exact number dependent on both the amount of text encountered and the reader’s capacity. He suggested that a 4,000-word distinction between the upper and lower estimates of vocabulary learning accrues of a single academic year, and that the gap increase, in complete terms, as elementary learners through studying. According to Stanovich (1986), this difficulty can be illustrated by an interaction between vocabulary knowledge and reading ability. Elementary learners who are good readers encounter greater amounts of text than do poor readers. Thus, better readers are disclosed to more words and are able to reach a greater number of meanings from context than their group mates who are experiencing reading difficulties. They learn the meanings of greater number of words accidentally, making further reading easier. On the other hand, struggling readers experience a negative cycle. They begin with a smaller reading vocabulary, are exposed to less text, and encounter fewer words. In addition, it is likely they will be less able to make effective use of content to derive the meanings of new words, thereby minimizing their ability to expand their reading vocabulary accidentally. This result in an ever-widening gap between good and poor readers. Stanovich has dubbed this process the “Matthew Effects,” alluding to the passage from the Book of Matthew that states that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The difference in the number of words acquired through context is a significant one. Using Graves (1986) figures, an accomplishment reader will learn up to five times as many words through reading than will a struggling reader. For those students who learn nearly 5,000 new words simply through their encounters with text, the additional 300 to 400 words they could gain through direct instruction would have less significant an effect than it would for those students whose incidental learning would normally insure an increase in reading vocabulary of approximately 1,000 words. The question then becomes whether teaching vocabulary makes reasonable use of the limited time attainable for reading instruction is indeed a valuable part of reading curriculum, we must conclude the relative profit of teaching students’ individual words directly as opposed to presenting instruction in contextual analysis. If most words are learned from context and there are vast individual differences in vocabulary, it would seem that to raise the amount of new words that learners each year, one would have to increase the volume of reading that learners do, raise their efficiency in learning new words, or preferentially both. The purpose of this review is to check studies that have tried to teach learners to be more efficient in learning words from context, through instruction in context clues or instruction in a more general process of learning words from context. McKeown (1985) found that struggling readers are significantly less efficient at deriving words from context. They have a more difficult time separating the meaning of the word from the meaning of the context as a whole and have greater difficulty finding overlaps in the information derived from more than one context. One possible implication from this research and others is that learners might be taught procedures for learning words from context, so that they would be more efficient at learning words that they encounter. The initial approaches to teaching children to use context more effectively involved the development and direct teaching of taxonomies of context clues. For example, Ames (1966) developed taxonomy of content clues by having graduate students think aloud while reading texts into which nonsense words had been inserted.
This taxonomy was later validated by Quealy (1966) with elementary learners. Such taxonomies were to be taught to students directly to increase their use of context as a means of deriving word meanings. Although these taxonomies were developed through observation of what readers do when encountering unfamiliar words, they proved to be too immovable to be of much use in most situation. As a result, educators and psychologists developed more flexible strategic approaches to derive word meanings. An example is Sternberg’s perceptive task analysis. Sternberg suggested that the process of deriving word meanings from context included three dimensions: text features, task features and cognitive processes that acted on the text. The cognitive processes were part of his theory of intelligence.
Thus, along with Powell, he attempted to teach students and adults to become more efficient at using context as part of a general attempt to train intelligent behavior. Their result was mixed. In one study, the training seemed to increase learning from context; in another, it did not.