Relationship Between Language and Concept Science Notebook Scores of English Language Learners and/or Economically Disadvantaged Students
- 716 Downloads
Despite research interest in testing the effects of literacy-infused science interventions in different contexts, research exploring the relationship, if any, between academic language and conceptual understanding is scant. What little research exists does not include English language learners (ELLs) and/or economically disadvantaged (ED) student samples—students most at risk academically. This study quantitatively determined if there exists a relationship, and if so, how strong of a relationship, between ELL and ED students’ academic language and conceptual understanding based on science notebook scores used in a larger science and literacy-infused intervention with a sample of culturally diverse students. The study also considered strengths of relationships between language and concept science notebook scores within student language status groups (ELL, former ELL, and English speaking). Correlational analyses noted positive, large, and significant correlations between students’ language and concept scores overall, with the largest correlations for science notebook entries using more academic language. Large correlations also existed for ELL student entries at the end of the school year. Implications of the findings for future research and practice in science classrooms including literacy interventions, such as science notebooks, with populations of culturally diverse students are discussed.
KeywordsAcademic language Conceptual understanding Economically disadvantaged English language learners Science assessment Science education Science notebook
- Achieve, Inc (2013). Next generation science standards. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards.
- Butler, M. B. & Nesbit, C. N. (2008). Using science notebooks to improve writing skills and conceptual understanding. Science Activities, 44(4), 137–145.Google Scholar
- Calkins, L. (1994). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Collier, V. P. & Thomas, W. P. (1989). How quickly can immigrants become proficient in school English? Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, 5, 26–38.Google Scholar
- Cummins, J. (1981). Empirical and theoretical underpinnings of bilingual education. Journal of Education, 163(1), 16–29.Google Scholar
- Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A. & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.Google Scholar
- Gee, J. P. (2005). Language in the science classroom: Academic social languages as the heart of school-based literacy. In R. Yerrick & W. M. Roth (Eds.), Establishing scientific classroom discourse communities: Multiple voices of teaching and learning research (pp. 19–37). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Halldén, O. (1999). Conceptual change and contextualization. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 53–66). Oxford, England: Pergamon.Google Scholar
- Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literary and discursive power. London, England: Falmer.Google Scholar
- Huerta, M. & Jackson, J. (2010). Connecting literacy and science to increase achievement for English language learners. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38(3), 205–211.Google Scholar
- Huerta, M., Lara-Alecio, R., Tong, F. & Irby, B. J. (2014). Developing and validating a science notebook rubric for fifth grade non-mainstream students. International Journal of Science Education, 36(11), 1849–1870.Google Scholar
- Huerta, M., Tong, F., Irby, B. J. & Lara-Alecio, R., (2015). Measuring and comparing academic language development and conceptual understanding via science notebooks. The Journal of Educational Research. (in press).Google Scholar
- Kohlhass, K., Lin, H. & Chu, K. (2010). Disaggregated outcomes of ethnicity, gender, and poverty on fifth grade science performance. Research in the Middle Level Education Online, 33(6), 1–12.Google Scholar
- Lara-Alecio, R., Tong, F., Irby, B. J., Guerrero, C., Huerta, M. & Fan, Y. (2012). The effect of an instructional intervention on middle school learners’ science and English reading achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(8), 987–1011.Google Scholar
- Lee, O., Maerten-Rivera, J., Penfield, R. D., LeRoy, K. & Secada, W. G. (2008). Science achievement of English language learners in urban elementary schools: results of a first-year professional development intervention. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4(1), 31–52.Google Scholar
- Lee, O., Quinn, H. & Valdés, G. (2013). Science and language for english language learners in relation to next generation science standards and with implications for common core state standards for english language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42(4), 223–233.Google Scholar
- Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
- National Center for Education Statistics (2014). The nation’s report card: Science 2011 (NCES 2012–465). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
- Raykov & Marcoulides (2011). Introduction to psychometric theory. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Li, M., Tsai, S. P. & Schneider, J. (2010). Testing one premise of scientific inquiry in science classrooms: Examining students’ scientific explanations and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 583–608.Google Scholar
- Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework. Technical Reports, University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6pd082d4.
- Shaw, J. M., Lyon, E. G., Stoddard, T., Mosqueda, E. & Menon, P. (2014). Improving science and literacy learning for English language learners: Evidence from a pre-service teacher preparation intervention. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 65(5), 621–643. doi: 10.1007/s10972-013-9376-6.
- Texas Education Agency (2010). Texas education agency 2009–10 state performance report. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/2010/state.html.
- Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System [TELPAS] (2011). Manual for raters and test administrators grades K-12 . Austin, TX: Texas Education Agency.Google Scholar
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Tool and symbol in child development. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Webb, N. M., Shavelson, R. J. & Haertel, E. H. (2006). Reliability coefficients and generalizability theory. In C. R. Raoa, S. Sinharay (Eds.), Handbook of Statistics, Volume 26 (pp. 1–44). Amsterdam: Elsiever.Google Scholar