Examining the Relationship between Vocabulary and Listening and Reading Comprehension Skills of Middle School Students
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the relationship between middle school students' oral and written vocabulary and their listening and reading comprehension skills. A quantitative research design, employing survey and correlational methods, was utilized. The sample comprised 343 middle school students from the central district of Kırşehir and the Akpınar districts of Türkiye. Participants completed a personal information form and listening and reading comprehension tests. To assess their oral and written vocabulary, students were provided with a pool of topics and asked to speak and write on a topic of their choice. Students delivered their speeches in suitable areas outside the classroom, during which researchers recorded their voices. These recordings were transcribed into Word and processed using a program adapted to calculate vocabulary size. Additionally, the essays written by the students on their selected topics were analyzed using a word count website. A second-level structural equation model was then constructed to illustrate the relationships between all variables and comprehension. The data collection took place during the spring semester of the 2024-2025 academic year. The findings indicated that middle school students' written vocabulary was more developed than their oral vocabulary. A significant correlation was found between vocabulary size (both oral and written) and reading and listening comprehension. Furthermore, gender, grade level, place of residence, and income level were found to be significantly associated with comprehension skills. Finally, a model explaining comprehension skills based on the examined variables was established.
Keywords
Project Number
Ethical Committee decision date and number 26.02.2025/ 2025-04-04
Ethical Statement
We hereby declare that the rules stated in the Council of Higher Education's Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive have been adhered to in this study and that we have not engaged in any actions based on activities contrary to scientific research and publication ethics. At the same time, we declare that all authors contributed to the study, that there is no conflict of interest among the authors, and that all responsibility in case of ethical violations belongs to the authors of the article.
Thanks
We would like to thank the ethics committee, National Education School Principals, parents and students who allowed us to conduct this research.
References
- Akaydın, Ş. (2018). The relationship between seventh grade students’ vocabulary knowledge levels and their reading comprehension skills. (Unpublished master's thesis). İnönü University, Malatya.
- Aksan, D. (2016). Topics in semantic and semantics of Turkish. Ankara: Bilgi Publishing.
- Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. T. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77–117). International Reading Association.
- Anglin, J. M., Miller, G. A., & Wakefield, P. C. (1993). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis. Monographs of the society for research in child development, i-186. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1166112
- Ayana H., Mereba T. & Alemu A. (2024) Effect of vocabulary learning strategies on students’ vocabulary knowledge achievement and motivation: the case of grade 11 high school students. Front. Educ. 9:1399350. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1399350
- Aytaş, G. (2021). Comprehension and expression skills in Turkish education. Ankara: Akçağ Publishing.
- Baumann, J. F. (2005). Vocabulary-comprehension relationships. In B. Maloch, J. V. Hoffman, D. L. Schallert, C. M. Fairbanks, & J. Worthy (Eds.), Fifty-fourth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 117–131). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
- Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G. & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. Guilford Press.
- Biemiller, A. (2003). Vocabulary: Needed if more children are to read well. Reading Psychology, 24, 323–335.
- Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessingmodel fit. In K. A. Bollen ve J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162).Sage.
