The Literacy Component of Mathematical and Scientific Literacy

Article

Abstract

This opening article of the Special Issue makes an argument for parallel definitions of scientific literacy and mathematical literacy that have shared features: importance of general cognitive and metacognitive abilities and reasoning/thinking and discipline-specific language, habits-of-mind/emotional dispositions, and information communication technology strategies to prepare people for adult life and democratic citizenship. These frameworks provide potential insights into research and pedagogy. Furthermore, they provide guidelines for second-generation standards, curriculum development and assessment so as not to overlook or underemphasize the fundamental literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy for all students, which can result in fuller participation in the public debate about science, mathematics, technology, society, and environment issues.

Key words

educational reform literacy mathematical literacy scientific literacy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, J.O., Lin, H.-S., Treagust, D.F., Ross, S.P. & Yore, L.D. (this issue). Using large-scale assessment datasets for research in science and mathematics education: Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Int J Sci Math Edu.Google Scholar
  3. Barton, D. & Hamilton, M. (1998). Local literacies: Reading and writing in one community. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Barwell, R. (2004). What is numeracy? For the Learning of Mathematics, 24(1), 20–22.Google Scholar
  5. Baxter, J.A., Woodward, J. & Olson, D. (2005). Writing in mathematics: An alternative form of communication for academically low-achieving students. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 20(2), 119–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boero, P., Douek, N. & Ferrari, P.L. (2002). Developing mastery of natural language: Approaches to theoretical aspects of mathematics. In L.D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 241–268). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum/National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  7. Borasi, R. & Siegel, M. (2000). Reading counts: Expanding the role of reading in mathematics classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  8. British Columbia Ministry of Education (2007a). Foundation skills assessment. Retrieved 28 May 2007, from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/assessment/fsa/.
  9. British Columbia Ministry of Education (2007b). FSA numeracy specifications. Retrieved 28 May 2007, from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/assessment/fsa/specifications/numeracy_specs.pdf.
  10. Cooper, B. (2004). Dilemmas in designing problems in “realistic” school mathematics: A sociological overview and some research findings. In M. Olssen (Ed.), Culture and learning: Access and opportunity in the classroom (pp. 183–202). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.Google Scholar
  11. Cooper, B. & Dunne, M. (2000). Assessing children’s mathematical knowledge: Social class, sex and problem-solving. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes, K to 12. Toronto, ON: Author. Retrieved 21 June 2007, from http://www.cmec.ca/science/framework/.Google Scholar
  13. de Lange, J. (1996). Using and applying mathematics in education. In A. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 49–97). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  14. Dole, J.A. (2000). Readers, texts and conceptual change learning. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 16, 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dole, J.A. & Smith, E.L. (1989). Prior knowledge and learning from science text: An instructional study. In S. McCormick & J. Zutell (Eds.), Cognitive and social perspectives for literacy research and instruction (pp. 345–352). Chicago: National Reading Conference.Google Scholar
  16. Elliott, P.C. & Kenney, M.J. (Eds.) (1996). Communication in mathematics, K-12 and beyond. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  17. English, L.D. (2002). Priority themes and issues in international research on mathematics education. In L.D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 3–15). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum/National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  18. Fellows, N.J. (1994). A window into thinking: Using student writing to understand conceptual change in science learning. J Res Sci Teach, 31, 985–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferreiro, E. (2000). Reading and writing in a changing world. Publishing Research Quarterly, 53–61, Fall.Google Scholar
  20. Ferreiro, E. (2003). Past and present of the verbs to read and to write: Essays on literacy. Berkeley, CA: Douglas & McIntyre.Google Scholar
  21. Florence, M.K. & Yore, L.D. (2004). Learning to write like a scientist: Co-authoring as an enculturation task. J Res Sci Teach, 41, 637–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ford, C.L. (1998). Educating preservice teachers to teach for an evaluative view of knowledge and critical thinking in elementary social studies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
  23. Ford, C.L., Yore, L.D. & Anthony, R.J. (1997). Reforms, visions and standards: A cross-curricular view from an elementary school perspective. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 406 168).Google Scholar
  24. Fuson, K.C., Kalchman, M. & Bransford, J.D. (2005). Mathematics understanding: An introduction. In National Research Council, How students learn: Mathematics in the classroom. Committee on How People Learn, A Targeted Report for Teachers, M.S. Donovan & J.D. Bransford (Eds.). Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  25. Gee, J.P. (2004). Language in the science classroom: Academic social languages as the heart of school-based literacy. In E.W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives in theory and practice (pp. 13–32). Newark, DE: International Reading Association/National Science Teachers Association.Google Scholar
  26. Gerofsky, S. (2004). A man left Albuquerque heading east: Word problems as genre in mathematics education. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  27. Good, R.G., Shymansky, J.A. & Yore, L.D. (1999). Censorship in science and science education. In E.H. Brinkley (Ed.), Caught off guard: Teachers rethinking censorship and controversy (pp. 101–121). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  28. Halliday, M. (1978). Sociolinguistic aspects of mathematical education. In M. Halliday (Ed.), Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning (pp. 194–204). Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hand, B.M., Prain, V. & Yore, L.D. (2001). Sequential writing tasks’ influence on science learning. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 105–129). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  30. Hand, B.M., Alvermann, D.E., Gee, J., Guzzetti, B.J., Norris, S.P., Phillips, L.M., Prain, V. & Yore, L.D. (2003). Message from the “Island Group”: What is literacy in science literacy? J Res Sci Teach, 40, 607–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hurd, P.D. (1998). Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82, 407–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jablonka, E. (2003). Mathematical literacy. In A.J. Bishop, M. A. Clements, C. Keitel & F.K.S. Leung (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 75–102). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  33. Kaiser, G. & Willander, T. (2005). Development of mathematical literacy: Results of an empirical study. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 24(2–3), 48–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keys, C.W. (1994). The development of scientific reasoning skills in conjunction with collaborative writing assignments: An interpretive study of six ninth-grade students. J Res Sci Teach, 31, 1003–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kilpatrick, J. (2001). Understanding mathematical literacy: The contribution of research. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(1), 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Klein, P.D. (2000). Elementary students’ strategies for writing-to-learn in science. Cognition and Instruction, 18(3), 317–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lemke, J. (1998). Multiplying meaning: Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J.R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives of discourse of science (pp. 87–111). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Mason, J. (1988). Modelling: What do we really want pupils to learn? In D. Pimm (Ed.), Mathematics, teachers and children: A reader (pp. 201–215). London: Hodder & Stoughton.Google Scholar
  39. McEneaney, E. (2003). The worldwide cachet of scientific literacy. Comparative Education Review, 47(2), 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Morgan, C. (1998). Writing mathematically: The discourse of investigation. Bristol, PA: Falmer.Google Scholar
  41. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  42. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  43. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  44. National Research Council (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  45. National Research Council (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, J.D. Bransford, A.L. Brown & R.R. Cocking (Eds.), Commission on behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  46. National Research Council (2005a). How students learn: Mathematics in the classroom. Committee on How People Learn, A Targeted Report for Teachers, M.S. Donovan & J.D. Bransford (Eds.), Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  47. National Research Council (2005b). How students learn: Science in the classroom. Committee on How People Learn, A Targeted Report for Teachers, M.S. Donovan & J.D. Bransford (Eds.), Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  48. National Research Council (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten Through Eighth Grade. R.A. Duschl, H.A. Schweingruber & A.W. Shouse (Eds.), Board on Science Education, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  49. Norris, S. & Phillips, L. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Noss, R. (1998). New numeracies for a technological culture. For the Learning of Mathematics, 18(2), 2–12.Google Scholar
  51. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Paris: Author.Google Scholar
  52. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework - mathematics, reading, science and problem solving: Knowledge and skills. Paris: Author.Google Scholar
  53. Osborne, R.J. & Wittrock, M.C. (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67, 489–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Phillips, E. & Crespo, S. (1996). Developing written communication in mathematics through math penpal letters. For the Learning of Mathematics, 16(1), 15–22.Google Scholar
  55. Pimm, D. (1987). Speaking mathematically: Communication in mathematics classrooms. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  56. Pimm, D. (1988). Mathematical metaphor. For the Learning of Mathematics, 8(1), 30–34.Google Scholar
  57. Pimm, D. & Wagner, D. (2003). Investigation, mathematics education and genre. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 53(2), 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rivard, L.P. (1994). A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for practice and research. J Res Sci Teach, 31, 969–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sfard, A., Nesher, P., Streefland, L., Cobb, P. & Mason, J. (1998). Learning mathematics through conversation: Is it as good as they say? For the Learning of Mathematics, 18(1), 41–51.Google Scholar
  60. Shymansky, J.A., Yore, L.D., Treagust, D.F., Thiele, R.B., Harrison, A., Waldrip, B.G., Stocklmayer, S.M. & Venville, G. (1997). Examining the construction process: A study of changes in level 10 students’ understanding of classical mechanics. J Res Sci Teach, 34, 571–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Siegel, M., Borasi, R., Fonzi, J.M., Sanridge, L.G. & Smith, C. (1996). Using reading to construct mathematical meaning. In P.C. Elliott & M.J. Kenney (Eds.), Communication in mathematics, K-12 and beyond (pp. 66–75). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  62. Siegel, M., Borasi, R. & Smith, C. (1999). A critical review of reading in mathematics instruction: The need for a new synthesis. In S. McCormick & J. Zutell (Eds.), Cognitive and social perspectives for literacy research and instruction (pp. 269–277). Chicago: National Reading Conference.Google Scholar
  63. Swafford, J. & Bryan, J. K. (2000). Instructional strategies for promoting conceptual change: Supporting middle school students. Reading and Writing Q, 16, 139–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tall, D. (2007, May). The long-term cognitive development of different types of reasoning and proof. Paper presented at the international conference on Reading, Writing, and Argumentation in Science and Mathematics Education, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  65. Tall, D. & Mejia-Ramos, J.P. (2007, May). Embodiment, symbolism, argumentation and proof. Paper presented at the international conference on Science and Mathematics Education, National Taitung University, Taitung City, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  66. United Kingdom Ministry of Education (1959). 15–18: A report of the Central Advisory Council for Education (England). London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  67. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (2000). Science and technology education: Philosophy of project 2000+. Retrieved 20 June 2007, http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/ste/projects/2000/meaning.htm.
  68. Unsworth, L. (2007, May). The grammatical construction of meaning in science books in English for primary and junior secondary school students: Implications for reading to learn in science. Paper presented at the international conference on Reading, Writing, and Argumentation in Science and Mathematics Education, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  69. Wallace, C.S. (2004). An illumination of the roles of hands-on activities, discussion, text reading, and writing in constructing biology knowledge in seventh grade. School Science and Mathematics, 104(2), 70–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Waywood, A. (1992). Journal writing and learning mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12(2), 34–43.Google Scholar
  71. Western and Northern Canadian Protocol (2006). Common curriculum framework for mathematics. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Education. Retrieved 18 June 2007, from http://www.wncp.ca/.Google Scholar
  72. Wittrock, M.C. (1974). Generative model of mathematics learning. J Res Math Edu, 5, 181–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Yore, L.D. (2004). Why do future scientists need to study the language arts? In E.W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives in theory and practice (pp. 71–94). Newark, DE: International Reading Association/National Science Teachers Association.Google Scholar
  74. Yore, L.D. (in press). Science literacy for all students: Language, culture, and knowledge about nature and naturally occurring events. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature.Google Scholar
  75. Yore, L.D. & Treagust, D. (2006). Current realities and future possibilities: Language and science literacy-empowering research and informing instruction. Int J Sci Educ, 28(2–3), 291–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Yore, L.D., Hand, B.M. & Prain, V. (2002). Scientists as writers. Science Education, 86(5), 672–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Yore, L.D., Bisanz, G.L. & Hand, B.M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. Int J Sci Edu, 25, 689–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Yore, L.D., Hand, B.M. & Florence, M.L. (2004a). Scientists’ views of science, models of writing, and science writing practice. J Res Sci Teach, 41(4), 338–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Yore, L.D., Hand, B.M., Goldman, S.R., Hildebrand, G.M., Osborne, J.F., Treagust, D.F. & Wallace, C.S. (2004b). New directions in language and science education research. Reading Res Q, 39(3), 347–352.Google Scholar
  80. Yore, L.D., Florence, M.K., Pearson, T.W. & Weaver, A.J. (2006). Written discourse in scientific communities: A conversation with two scientists about their views of science, use of language, role of writing in doing science, and compatibility between their epistemic views and language. Int J Sci Edu, 28, 109–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  2. 2.University of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  3. 3.National Changhua University of EducationChanghuaTaiwan, R.O.C.

Personalised recommendations