Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Towards a Framework of Socio-Linguistic Analysis of Science Textbooks: The Greek Case

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims at presenting a grid for analysing the way the language employed in Greek school science textbooks tends to project pedagogic messages. These messages are analysed for the different school science subjects (i.e., Physics, Chemistry, Biology) and educational levels (i.e., primary and lower secondary level). The analysis is made using the dimensions of content specialisation (classification) and social-pedagogic relationships (framing) promoted by the language of the school science textbooks as well as the elaboration and abstraction of the corresponding linguistic code (formality), thus combining pedagogical and socio-linguistic perspectives. Classification and formality are used to identify the ways science textbooks tend to position students in relation to the interior of the corresponding specialised body of knowledge (i.e., in terms of content and code) while framing is used to identify the ways science textbooks tend to position students as learning subjects within the school science discourse. The results show that the kind of pedagogic messages projected by the textbooks depends mainly on the educational level and not particularly on the specific discipline. As the educational level rises a gradual move towards more specialised forms of scientific knowledge (mainly in terms of code) with a parallel increase in the students' autonomy in accessing the textbook material is noticed. The implications concern the way both students and teachers approach science textbooks as well as the roles they can undertake by internalising the textbooks' pedagogic messages and also the way science textbooks are authored.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, P. A., & Kulikowich, J. M. (1994). A secondary analysis: Learning from physics text. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 895–911.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apple, M. W. (2002). Does education have independent power? Bernstein and the question of relative autonomy. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23, 607–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, C. (1998). Emerging perspectives on the many dimensions of scientific discourse. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 15–30). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsen, W. S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: A sociolinguistic perspective. Review of Educational Research, 61, 157–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Champliss, M. J., & Calfee, R. C. (1998). Textbooks for learning. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiapetta, E., Sethna, G., & Fillman, D. (1993). Do middle school life science textbooks provide a balance of scientific literacy themes? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 787–797.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie, F. (1998). Science and apprenticeship: The pedagogic discourse. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 152–180). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie, F., Gray, P., Gray, B., Macken, M., Martin, J., & Rothery, J. (1992). Language: A resource for meaning – Exploring explanations. Sydney, NSW: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (1993). The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V., & Sklaveniti, S. (2003). Towards an analysis of visual images in school science textbooks and press articles about science and technology. Research in Science Education, 33, 189–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, C. A., & Smolkin, L. B. (2001). Genre and other factors influencing teachers' book selections for science instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 412–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Education Research Center of Greece. (2004). A report on education and training in Greece. Athens, Greece: Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs.

  • Edwards, A. D., & Westgate, D. P. G. (1987). Investigating classroom talk. Lewes, UK: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2002). Key data on education in Europe – 2002. Luxembourg, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourse. London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, F. H. (1995). Science vocabulary load of selected secondary science textbooks. School Science and Mathematics, 95, 231–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1996). On the language of physical science. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 54–68). London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (Eds.). (1996). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.

  • Harre, R. (1972). The philosophies of science. Oxford, UK: Opus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapsalis, A., & Charalambous, D. (1995). School textbooks: Institutional evolution and modern problematic. Athens, Greece: Ekfrasi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearsey, J., & Turner, S. (1999). Evaluating textbooks: The role of genre analysis. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17, 35–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. G., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keys, C. W. (1999). Language as an indicator of meaning generation: An analysis of middle school students' written discourse about scientific investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1044–1061.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knain, E. (2001). Ideologies in school science textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 319–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koulaidis, V., Dimopoulos, K., & Matiatos, S. (2002). Science and technology centers as ‘Texts.’ In Proceedings of the ninth learning conference (pp. 5–21). Beijing, Republic of China: University of Beijing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koulaidis, V., Dimopoulos, K., & Sklaveniti, S. (2002). Analysing the texts of science and technology: School science textbooks and daily press articles in the public domain. In M. Kalantzis, G. Varnava-Skoura, & B. Cope (Eds.), Learning for the future (pp. 209–240). Sydney, NSW: Common Ground.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koulaidis, V., & Tsatsaroni, A. (1996). A pedagogical analysis of science textbooks: How can we proceed? Research in Science Education, 26, 55–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. (1970). Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (1998). Multiplying meaning: Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 87–113). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 296–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. R. (1997). Analysing genre: Functional parameters. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 3–39). London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthiessen, C. (1995). Lexicogrammatical cartography: English systems. Tokyo, Japan: International Languages Sciences Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishler, E. (1984). The discourse of medicine. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morais, A. (2002). Basil Bernstein at the micro level of the classroom. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23, 559–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morais, A., & Miranda, C. (1996). Understanding teachers' evaluation criteria: A condition for success in science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 601–624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulkey, L. M. (1987). The use of a sociological perspective in the development of a science textbook evaluation instrument. Science Education, 71, 511–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, D. P., & Gott, R. (1989). Process in lower school science textbooks. British Educational Research Journal, 15, 249–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, E. W. (2001). Structuring the composition process in scientific writing. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peacock, A., & Gates, S. (2000). Newly qualified primary teachers' perceptions of the role of text material in teaching science. Research in Science and Technological Education, 18, 155–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polias, J. (1998). Teaching ESL through science. Adelaide, South Australia: Department of Education Training and Employment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (1979). Objective knowledge. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1996). Writing for learning in the junior secondary science classroom: issues arising from a case study. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 117–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pueyo, I. G., & Val, S. (1996). The construction of technicality in the field of plastics: A functional approach towards teaching technical terminology. English for Specific Purposes, 15, 251–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues, S., & Bell, B. (1995). Chemically speaking: A description of student–teacher talk during chemistry lessons using and building on student's experiences. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 797–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues, S., & Thompson, I. (2001). Cohesion in science learning discourse: clarity, relevance and sufficient information. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 929–940.

    Google Scholar 

  • She, H. C., & Fisher, D. (2001). Teacher communication behavior and its association with students' cognitive and attitudinal outcomes in science in Taiwan. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 63–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shymansky, J. A., Yore, L. D., & Good, R. (1991). Elementary school teachers' beliefs about and perception of elementary school science, science reading, science textbooks, and supportive instructional factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 437–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speering, W., & Rennie, L. (1996). Students' perceptions about science: The impact of transition from primary to secondary school. Research in Science Education, 26, 283–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staver, J., & Bay, M. (1987). Analysis of project synthesis goal structure orientation and inquiry emphasis on elementary science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 629–643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stubbs, M. (1994). Grammar, text, and ideology: Computer-assisted methods in the linguistic of representation. Applied Linguistics, 15, 201–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unsworth, L. (2001). Evaluating the language of different types of explanations in junior high school science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 585–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veel, R. (1998). The greening of school science: Ecogenesis in secondary classrooms. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 114–151). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H., & Schmidt, W. H. (2001). History, philosophy and sociology of science in science education: Results from the third international mathematics and science study. Science & Education, 10, 51–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wignell, P., Martin, J. R., & Eggins, S. (1996). The discourse of geography: Ordering and explaining the experiential world. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 136–165). London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, J. (1999). A quantitative analysis of physics textbooks for scientific literacy themes. Research in Science Education, 29, 385–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager, E. R. (1983). The importance of terminology in teaching K-12 science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 577–588.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yore, L. D. (1991). Secondary science teachers' attitudes toward and beliefs about science reading and science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 55–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yore, L., Craig, M., & Maguire, T. (1998). Index of science reading awareness: An interactive-constructive model, test verification, and grades 4–8 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 27–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Peloponnese, Greece

    Kostas Dimopoulos, Vasilis Koulaidis & Spyridoula Sklaveniti

Authors
  1. Kostas Dimopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vasilis Koulaidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Spyridoula Sklaveniti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V. & Sklaveniti, S. Towards a Framework of Socio-Linguistic Analysis of Science Textbooks: The Greek Case. Res Sci Educ 35, 173–195 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-8162-z

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-8162-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation