Abstract
This paper reports on a study of teachers’ actions when reading informational and narrative texts in the context of elementary science learning experiences. Focusing on the development of fundamental and derived senses of science literacy through the integrated science lessons, the research further explores the affordances of different genres of text in science learning. The findings highlight that teacher actions can support students engaging in inquiry provoked during reading events. However, this was not easy to do and required more than providing students with opportunities to discuss and share their questions. Furthermore, the study revealed that purposes for reading and the notion of making predictions were contextualized activities that impact the nature of students’ engagement with texts. Based on these findings it is possible to make inferences that raise questions for future research. The construct of fundamental and derived senses of science literacy revealed that most of the actions of teachers focused on fundamental senses. Yet, there were moments of derived senses of science literacy that offer glimpses of the usefulness of this construct for supporting integrated learning. Thus the outcome is to consider this framework when developing integrated learning experiences in science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Austin, J. L. (1999). How to do things with words. In A. Jaworksi & N. Coupland (Eds.), The discourse reader. London: Routledge.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres & other late essays (V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bloom, J. (2001). Discourse, cognition, and choatic systems: An examination of students’ argument about density. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(4), 447–492.
Bloome, D., & Egan-Robertson, A. (1993). The social construction of intertextuality in classroom reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 305–333.
Branley, F. M., & Hale, J. G. (1997). Down comes the rain. New York: Harper Collins Children’s Books.
Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, P. D., Bravo, M., & Barber, J. (2006). Reading and writing in the service of inquiry-based science. In R. Douglas, M. Klentschy, & K. Worth (Eds.), Linking science and literacy in the K-8 classroom. Alexandria: NSTA Press.
Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and situated learning perspectives in theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4–15.
Curry, D., & Saunders-Smith, G. (1999). How things move. North Mankato, MN: Capston Press.
De Lisi, R., & Golbeck, S. L. (1999). Implicaitons of Piagetian theory for peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahweh: Lawrence Erlbaum, Inc.
Donovan, C. A., & Smolkin, L. B. (2001). Genre and other factors influencing teachers’ book selections for science instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 412–440.
Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202–224.
Edelsky, C. (1993). Who’s got the floor? In D. Tannen (Ed.), Gender and conversational interaction (pp. 189–227). New York: Oxford University Press.
Enfield, M. (2007). Could that really happen? Elementary childrens inquiry around informational and narrative texts Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research on Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
Ford, D. (2004). HIghly recommended trade books: Can they be used in inquiry science? In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice. Newark: International Reading Association.
Ford, C., Yore, L. D., & Anthony, R. J. (1997). Reforms, visions and standards: A cross-curricular view from an elementary school perspective. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Resarch in Science Teaching, Oak Brook, IL, March 1997.
Frazee, M. (2003). Roller coaster. New York: Harcourt Children’s Books.
Gee, J. P., & Green, J. L. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: A methodological study Review of Research in Education (Vol. 23, pp. 119–169). Washington D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
Girod, M., & Twyman, T. (2009). Evaluating the science and literacy connection by comparing three curricular units in second grade classrooms. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(3), 13–32.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldnine.
Hapgood, S., Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (2004). Teacher, text and experience: A case of young children’s scientific inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(4), 455–505.
Hesse, K., & Muth, J. (1999). Come on rain. New York: Scholastic Press.
Hogan, K., Nastasi, B. K., & Pressley, M. (2000). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 379–432.
King, A. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In A. M. O’Connell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahweh: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lemke, J. L. (1989). Making text talk. Theory into Practice, 28(2), 136–141.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Magnusson, S., & Palincsar, A. S. (2004). Learning from text designed to model scientific thinking in inquiry-based instruction. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice. Newark: International Reading Association.
Mathison, S., & Freeman, M. (2003). Constraining elementary teachers’ work: Dilemmas and paradoxes created by state mandated testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(34). Available at http://epaa.eas.edu/epaa/v11n34/.
McCully, E. A. (1997). Mirette on the highwire. New York: Puffin.
McEwan, H., & Egan, K. (Eds.). (1995). Narrative in teaching, learning, and research. New York: Teachers College Press.
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Norris, S. P., Guilbert, S. M., Smith, M. L., Hakimelahi, S., & Phillips, L. M. (2005). A theoretical framework for narrative explanation in science. Science Education, 89(4), 535–563.
Olitsky, S. (2007). Promoting student engagement in science: Interaction rituals and the pursuit of common practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 33–56.
Oyler, C. (1996). Sharing authority: Student initiations during teacher-led read-alouds of information books. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(2), 149–160.
Palincsar, A. S., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (1999). Designing collaborative contexts: Lessons from three research programs. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahweh: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pappas, C., Varelas, M., Barry, A., & Rife, A. (2004). Promoting dialogic inquiry in information book read-alouds: Young children’s ways of making sense of science. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice. Newark: International Reading Association.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qaulitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.
Robertson, A. (2007). Development of shared vision: Lessons from a science education community collaborative. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 681–705.
Saul, W., Reardon, J., Pearce, C., Dieckman, D., & Neutze, D. (2002). Science workshop: Reading, writing, and thinking like a scientist (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Shannon, D. (2000). The rain came down. New York: Blue Sky Press.
Shultz, J. J., Florio, S., & Erickson, F. (1982). Where’s the floor? Aspects of cultural organization of social relationships in communication at home and school. In P. Gilmore & A. A. Glatthorn (Eds.), Children in and out of school: Ethnography and education (pp. 88–123). Washington DC: The Center for Applied Linguistics.
Smolkin, L. B., & Donovan, C. A. (2001). The contexts of comprehension: The information book read aloud, comprehension acquisition, and comprehension instruction in a first-grade classroom. Elementary School Journal, 102(2), 97–102.
Varelas, M., & Pappas, C. C. (2006). Intertextuality in read-alouds of integrated science-literacy units in urban primary classrooms: Opportunities for the development of thought and language. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 211–259.
Varelas, M., Pappas, C. C., Kane, J. M., Arsenault, A., Hankes, J., & Cowan, B. M. (2008). Urban primary-grade children think and talk science: Curricular and instructional practice that nurture participation and argumentation. Science Education, 92(1), 65–95.
Varelas, M., Pappas, C. C., & Rife, A. (2006). Exploring the role of intertextuality in concept construction: Urban second graders make sense of evaporations, boiling, and condensation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(7), 637–666.
Wells, G., & Chang-Wells, G. L. (1992). Constructing knowledge together: Classrooms as centers of inquiry and literacy. Portsmouth: Heinnemann.
Wertsch, J. V., del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (1995). Sociocultural studies: History, action, and mediation. In J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studis of the mind (pp. 1–36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Whitin, P., & Whitin, D. J. (1997). Inquiry at the window: Pursuing the wonders of learners. Portmouth: Heinemann.
Yore, L. D., Hand, B., Goldman, S. R., Hildebrand, G. M., Osborne, J. F., Treagust, D. F., et al. (2004). New directions in language and science education research. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(3), 347–352.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the Elon University’s Faculty Research and Development program and the Hultquist Award for supporting this work. In addition, I am most grateful to the thoughtful, supportive, and helpful reviews received by the anonymous reviewers and the editor.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Enfield, M. Reading Scientifically: Practices Supporting Intertextual Reading Using Science Knowledge. J Sci Teacher Educ 25, 395–412 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9347-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9347-y