Abstract
In the present study, we examined the use of academic language in students’ scientific explanations in the form of written claim, written evidence, and written reasoning (CER) statements during science inquiry within an intelligent tutoring system. Results showed that students tended to use more academic language when constructing their evidence and reasoning statements. Further analyses showed that both the number of words and pronouns used by students were significant predictors for the quality of students’ written CER statements. The quality of claim statements was significantly reduced by the lexical density (type-token ratio), but the quality of reasoning significantly increased with lexical density. The quality of evidence statements increased significantly with the inclusion of causal and temporal relationships, verb overlap, and descriptive writing. These findings indicate that students used language differently when constructing their CER statements. Implications are discussed in terms of how to increase students’ knowledge of and use of academic language.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Biber, D.: Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge University Press, New York (1988)
Common Core State Standards Initiative: Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects (2010). http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/
Gobert, J.D., Baker, R.S., Sao Pedro, M.A.: Inquiry skills tutoring system. U.S. Patent No. 9,373,082. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC (2016)
Gobert, J., Sao Pedro, M., Betts, C., Baker, R.S.: Inquiry skills tutoring system (alerting system). U.S. Patent No. 9,564,057. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC (2016)
Gotwals, A.W., Songer, N.B.: Reasoning up and down a food chain: using an assessment framework to investigate students’ middle knowledge. Sci. Educ. 94(2), 259–281 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20368
Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S.: Computational analyses of multilevel discourse comprehension. Topics Cog. Sci. 3(2), 371–398 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01081.x
Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S., Cai, Z., Conley, M., Li, H., Pennebaker, J.: Coh-Metrix measures text characteristics at multiple levels of language and discourse. Elem. School J. 115, 210–229 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1086/678293
Landauer, T.K., Dumais, S.T.: A solution to Plato’s problem: the latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psych. Rev. 104(2), 211 (1997)
Li, H., Cai, Z., Graesser, A.C.: Comparing two measures for formality. In: Boonthum-Denecke, C., Youngblood, G.M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty Sixth International FLAIRS Conference, pp. 220–225 (2013)
Li, H., Cheng, C., Graesser, A.C.: A measure of text formality as a human construct. In: Russel, I., Eberle, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference, pp. 175–180. AAAI Press, Palo Alto (2015)
Li, H., Graesser, A.C., Conley, M., Cai, Z., Pavlik, P., Pennebaker, J.W.: A new measure of text formality: an analysis of discourse of Mao Zedong. Disc. Processes 53(3), 205–232 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1010191
Li, H., Cai, Z., Graesser, A.C.: How good is popularity? summary grading in crowdsourcing. In: 9th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 430–435. EDM Society, Raleigh (2016)
Li, H., Cai, Z., Graesser, A.C.: Computerized summary scoring: crowdsourcing-based latent semantic analysis. Behav. Res. Meth. (2017). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0982-7
Li, H., Graesser, A.: Impact of pedagogical agents’ conversational formality on learning and engagement. In: André, E., Baker, R., Hu, X., Rodrigo, M., du Boulay, B. (eds.) AIED 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10331, pp. 188–200. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61425-0_16
Li, H., Gobert, J., Dicker, R.: Dusting off the messy middle: assessing students’ inquiry skills through doing and writing. In: André, E., Baker, R., Hu, X., Rodrigo, Ma.M.T., du Boulay, B. (eds.) AIED 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10331, pp. 175–187. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61425-0_15
Li, H., Gobert, J., Dickler, R.: Automated assessment for scientific explanations in on-line science inquiry. In: Hu, X., Barnes, T., Hershkovitz, A., Paquette, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 214–219. EDM Society, Wuhan (2017)
McNamara, D.S., Graesser, A.C., McCarthy, P.M., Cai, Z.: Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge University Press, New York (2014)
McNamara, D.S., Crossley, S.A., Roscoe, R.D., Allen, L.K., Dai, J.: A hierarchical classification approach to automated essay scoring. Assess. Writ. 23, 35–59 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2014.09.002
McNeill, K., Lizotte, D.J., Krajcik, J., Marx, R.W.: Supporting students’ construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. J. Learn. Sci. 15, 153–191 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1
McNeill, K.L.: Elementary students’ views of explanation, argumentation, and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 48, 793–823 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20430
NAEP: 2015 Reading Assessment [Data file] (2015). http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2015/pdf/2016008AZ4.pdf
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers: Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts. Washington D.C. (2010)
National Research Council: A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscut- ting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press, Washington (2012)
Ruiz-Primo, M., Li, M., Shin-Ping, T., Schneider, J.: Testing one premise of scientific inquiry in science classrooms: examining students’ scientific explanations and student learning. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 47, 583–608 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20356
Snow, C.E., Uccelli, P.: The challenge of academic language. In: Olson, D.R., Torrance, N. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy, vol. 121, pp. 112–133. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511609664.008
Snow, C.E.: Academic language and the challenge of reading for leaning about science. Science 328 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182597
Toulmin, S.: The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1958)
Wiley, J., Hastings, P., Blaum, D., et al.: Different approaches to assessing the quality of explanations following a multiple-document inquiry activity in science. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 27, 758 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0138-z
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences (R305A120778) and National Science Foundation (1629045) to Janice Gobert, principal investigator at Rutgers University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Li, H., Gobert, J., Dickler, R., Morad, N. (2018). Students’ Academic Language Use When Constructing Scientific Explanations in an Intelligent Tutoring System. In: Penstein Rosé, C., et al. Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10947. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93843-1_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93843-1_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-93842-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-93843-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)