Abstract
How can classrooms become communities of inquiry that connect intellectually challenging science content with language-based activities (opportunities to talk, listen, read, and write) especially in settings with diverse populations? This question guided a 3-year mixed-methods research study using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach in cooperation with 2 universities, area education agencies, 6 school districts, 32 elementary teachers, and over 700 students each year. The participating teachers engaged in a yearly summer institute, planned units, implemented this curriculum in the classroom, and contributed to ongoing data collection and analysis. Findings demonstrate that critical embedded language opportunities contribute to an increase in student Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) scores in science and language based on level of implementation particularly for elementary students who receive free and reduced lunch (an indicator of living at the poverty level).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agresti, A. & Finlay, B. (1997). Statistical methods for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Akkus, R., Gunel, M. & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the Science Writing Heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education, 29(14), 1745–1765.
Ford, M. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92(3), 404–423.
Ford, M. J. & Forman, E. A. (2006). Chapter 1: Redefining disciplinary learning in classroom contexts. Review of Research in Education, 30(1), 1–32.
Graham, M., Milanowski, A. & Miller, J. (2012). Measuring and promoting inter-rater agreement of teacher and principal performance ratings. Washington, DC: Center for Educator Compensation Reform.
Greenbowe, T. & Burke, K. (2008). Instruction by using the writing heuristic. In B. Hand (Ed.), Science inquiry, argument and language: A case for the science writing heuristic. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Grimberg, I. & Hand, B. (2009). Cognitive pathways: Analysis of students’ written texts for science understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 503–521.
Gunel, M. (2006). Investigating the impact of teachers’ practices of inquiry and non-traditional writing on students’ academic achievement of science during longitudinal professional development program (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean. London, UK: Arnold Press.
Hand, B. (Ed.). (2008). Science inquiry, argument, and language: A case for the science writing heuristic. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Howe, K. (2003). Closing methodological divides: Toward democratic educational research. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
Klein, P. D. (2006). The challenges of science literacy: From the viewpoint of second generation cognitive science. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 143–178.
Krippendorff, K. (2011). Agreement and information in the reliability of coding. Communication Methods and Measures, 5(2), 93–112.
Kulik, J. A. (2002). School mathematics and science programs benefit from instructional technology. Report No. NSF 03-301. Retrieved from Science Resources Statistics website: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf03301/.
Lamb, R., Cavagnetto, A. & Akmal, T. (2014). Examination of the nonlinear dynamic systems associated with science student cognition while engaging in science information processing. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-014-9593-2.
Levine, J. H., & Roos, T. B. (2002). Introduction to data analysis: The rules of evidence. Retrieved March 13, 2007, from http://www.dartmouth.edu/~mss/docs/Volumes_1-2.pdf
Mertler, C. A. & Vannatta, R. A. (2002). Advanced and multivariate statistical methods: Practical application and interpretation (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Pyrczak.
Norris, S. P. & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224–240.
Norton-Meier, L., Hand, B., Hockenberry, L. & Wise, K. (2008). Questions, claims, & evidence: The important place of argument in children’s science writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Norton-Meier, L. A., Hand, B. & Ardasheva, Y. (2013). Examining teacher actions supportive of cross-disciplinary science and literacy development among elementary students. International Journal of Education in Mathematics Science and Technology, 1(1), 43–55.
Poock, J. R., Burke, K. A., Greenbowe, T. J. & Hand, B. M. (2007). Using the science writing heuristic in the general chemistry laboratory to improve students’ academic performance. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(8), 1371–1379.
Rosenthal, R. & Rosnow, R. L. (1984). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Sheskin, D. (2004). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures (3rd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Smith, M. (2006). Multiple methodology in education research. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in educational research (pp. 457–476). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tinsley, H.E.A. & Weiss, D.J. (2000). Interrater reliability and agreement. In H. E. A. Tinsley & S. D. Brown (Eds.), Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 95–124). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
Wilkinson, L. & Task Force on Statistical Inference APA Board of Scientific Affairs (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. The American Psychological Association, 54(8), 594–604.
Yore, L. D. & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Current realities and future possibilities: Language and science literacy–empowering research and informing instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 291–314.
Acknowledgments
This project was funded through a Math-Science Partnership grant and the National Science Foundation (ESI - 0537035). The opinions and interpretations herein are solely that of the authors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hand, B., Norton-Meier, L.A., Gunel, M. et al. Aligning Teaching to Learning: A 3-Year Study Examining the Embedding of Language and Argumentation into Elementary Science Classrooms. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 14, 847–863 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9622-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9622-9