Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Connecting Theory and Practice: a Systematic Review of K-5 Science and Math Literacy Instruction

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Literacy instruction in science and math in elementary education lays a critical foundation for later content literacy development and the learning of content subjects in middle and high school. However, limited research has investigated the theoretical basis of instructional practices for science and math literacy instruction at the elementary level. Extending Wright et al., (2016), the present systematic review aims to critically examine the connection between theory and practice for K-5 science and math literacy instruction. Instructional practices recommended in the Reading Teacher, a flagship practitioner–oriented journal published by the leading literacy education association, International Literacy Association, were analyzed to identify the underlying theories. Our findings revealed that most of the science and math literacy practices recommended to elementary reading teachers are well aligned with social theories, which dominate the field of literacy education and conceptualize literacy as a social practice. Following social theories of literacy development, students are encouraged to make connections between the text and their personal interest and life experiences. The current study also revealed gaps between theory and practice in elementary science and math literacy instruction, where key theories were not or underrepresented in practices. Further strengthening the connection between theory and practice requires a joint effort between researchers and practitioners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Asterisk indicates articles included in the final analysis in the current study

  • Alverman, D. E., Unrau, N. J. & Ruddell, R. B. (Eds.). (2013). Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

  • Anderson, E. & Fenty, N. (2013). Integrating early literacy and other content curriculum in an ear of increased accountability: A review of the literature. In L. E. Cohen & S. Waite-Stupiansky (Eds.), Learning across the early childhood curriculum (pp. 153–177). Bingley, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

  • *Atkinson, T. S., Matusevich, M. N. & Huber, L. (2009). Making science trade book choices for elementary classrooms. The Reading Teacher, 62(6), 484–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Batchelor, K. E. & Bintz, W. P. (2012). Hand-clap songs across the curriculum. The Reading Teacher, 65(5), 341–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, I. L. & McKeown, M. G. (1984). Application of theories of reading to instruction. American Journal of Education, 93(1), 61–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Bintz, W. P. (2010). Fibbin with poems across the curriculum. The Reading Teacher, 63(6), 509–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Bintz, W. P., Moore, S. D., Wright, P. & Dempsey, L. (2011). Using literature to teach measurement. The Reading Teacher, 65(1), 58–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britt, M. A., Richter, T. & Rouet, J. F. (2014). Scientific literacy: The role of goal-directed reading and evaluation in understanding scientific information. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 104–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Broemmel, A. D., & Rearden, K. T. (2006). Should teachers use the Teachers' Choices books in science classes? The Reading Teacher, 60(3), 254-265.

  • *Cappello, M., & Lafferty, K. E. (2015). The roles of photography for developing literacy across the disciplines. The Reading Teacher, 69(3), 287-295.

  • *Carrier, K. A., & Tatum, A. W. (2006). Creating sentence walls to help English‐language learners develop content literacy. The Reading Teacher, 60(3), 285-288.

  • *Brozo, W. G. (2010). The role of content literacy in an effective RTI program. The Reading Teacher, 64(2), 147-150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Carter, S. (2009). Connecting mathematics and writing workshop: It’s kinda like ice skating. The Reading Teacher, 62(7), 606–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Coleman, J. M., Bradley, L. G., & Donovan, C. A. (2012). Visual representations in second graders' information book compositions. The Reading Teacher, 66(1), 31-45.

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2018). English Language Arts Standards. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RI/5/. Accessed 30 Nov 2018

  • Dressman, M. (2007). Theoretically framed: Argument and desire in the production of general knowledge about literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(3), 332–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Frye, E. M., Bradbury, L. & Gross, L. A. (2016). Teaching students to compose informational poetic riddles to further scientific understanding. The Reading Teacher, 69(4), 435–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Frye, E. M., Trathen, W. & Schlagal, B. (2010). Extending acrostic poetry into content learning: A scaffolding framework. The Reading Teacher, 63(7), 591–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg, A., Willford, J., Gibson, B., Goldberg, A. & Zhu, X. (2012). Improving reading to improve math. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(4), 316–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodson, P. (2010). Theory in health promotion research and practice: Thinking outside the box. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Hoa, A. L. W., Wigfield, A., Tonks, S. M., Humenick, N. M. & Littles, E. (2007). Reading motivation and reading comprehension growth in the later elementary years. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 282–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T. & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Reading research handbook (Vol. III, pp. 403–424). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Metsala, J. L. & Cox, K. E. (1999). Motivational and cognitive predictors of text comprehension and reading amount. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(3), 231–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Halladay, J. L. & Neumann, M. D. (2012). Connecting reading and mathematical strategies. The Reading Teacher, 65(7), 471–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Hedin, L. R. & Conderman, G. (2010). Teaching students to comprehend informational text through rereading. The Reading Teacher, 63(7), 556–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Heisey, N. & Kucan, L. (2010). Introducing science concepts to primary students through read-alouds: Interactions and multiple texts make the difference. The Reading Teacher, 63(8), 666–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. M. (2014). A literature review on disciplinary literacy: How do secondary teachers apprentice students into mathematical literacy? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(5), 397–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Hintz, A. & Smith, A. T. (2013). Mathematizing read-alouds in three easy steps. The Reading Teacher, 67(2), 103–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, T. S., Feng, L., Kuo, L. -J., & McTigue, E. (2016). Discovering the literacy gap: A systematic review of reading and writing theories in research. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1228284.

  • Howes, E. V., Lim, M. & Campos, J. (2009). Journeys into inquiry-based elementary science: Literacy practices, questioning, and empirical study. Science Education, 93(2), 189–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunsader, P. D. (2004). Mathematics trade books: Establishing their value and assessing their quality. The Reading Teacher, 57(7), 618–629.

    Google Scholar 

  • InCites Journal Citation Report. (2017). Retrieved from https://jcr.incites.thomsonreuters.com. Accessed 10 Feb 2019

  • International Literacy Association (2019). The Reading Teacher. Retrieved from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/get-resources/journals

  • *Lee, A. (2010). A way of understanding the world of science informational books. The Reading Teacher, 63(5), 424–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Maloch, B. & Horsey, M. (2013). Living inquiry: Learning from and about informational texts in a second-grade classroom. The Reading Teacher, 66(6), 475–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *McTigue, E. M. & Flowers, A. C. (2011). Science visual literacy: Learners’ perceptions and knowledge of diagrams. The Reading Teacher, 64(8), 578–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moje, E. B. (2007). Developing socially just subject-matter instruction: A review of the literature on disciplinary literacy teaching. Review of Research in Education, 31, 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody, S., Hu, X., Kuo, L. -J., Jouhar, M., Xu, Z., & Lee, S. (2018). Vocabulary instruction: A critical analysis of theories, research, and practice. Education Sciences, 8(4), 180.

  • Moss, B. (2005). Making a case and a place for effective content area literacy instruction in the elementary grades. The Reading Teacher, 59(1), 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel (US). (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

  • Pearson, P. D., Moje, E. & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. Science, 328, 459–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Pollard-Durodola, S. D., Gonzalez, J. E., Simmons, D. C., Davis, M. J., Simmons, L. & Nava-Walichowski, M. (2012). Using knowledge networks to develop preschoolers’ content vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 65(4), 265–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblatt, L. M. (2013). The transactional theory of reading and writing. In D. E. Alverman, N. J. Unrau & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed., pp. 923–956). Bingley, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

  • *Santoro, L. E., Chard, D. J., Howard, L., & Baker, S. K. (2008). Making the very most of classroom read‐alouds to promote comprehension and vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 396-408.

  • Shanahan, T. & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (2013). Effective programmes in reading and mathematics: Lessons from the best evidence encyclopaedia. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 24(4), 383–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Hanley, P. & Thurston, A. (2014). Experimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(7), 870–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Spencer, B. H., & Guillaume, A. M. (2006). Integrating curriculum through the learning cycle: Content‐based reading and vocabulary instruction. The Reading Teacher, 60(3), 206-219.

  • Tracey, D. H. & Morrow, L. M. (2006). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and models. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vacca, R. T., Vacca, J. A. L. & Mraz, M. (2013). Content area reading: Literacy and learning across the curriculum (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Washburn, E. & Cavagnetto, A. (2013). Using argument as a tool for integrating science and literacy. The Reading Teacher, 67(2), 127–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A. (1997). Reading motivation: A domain-specific approach to motivation. Educational Psychologist, 32(2), 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, K. L., Franks, A. D., Kuo, L.- J., McTigue, E. M., & Serrano, J. (2016). Both theory and practice: Science literacy instruction and theories of reading. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(7), 1275-1292.

  • Yang, X., Kuo, L.-J., Ji, X., & McTigue, E. (2018). A critical examination of the relationship among research, theory, and practice: Technology and reading instruction. Computers & Education, 125, 62-73.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Teaching, Learning, and Culture, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    Xinyuan Yang, Li-Jen Kuo & Luchen Jiang

Authors
  1. Xinyuan Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Li-Jen Kuo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luchen Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xinyuan Yang.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 93 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, X., Kuo, LJ. & Jiang, L. Connecting Theory and Practice: a Systematic Review of K-5 Science and Math Literacy Instruction. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 18, 203–219 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09957-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09957-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation