Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multimodal Semiosis in Science Read-Alouds: Extending Beyond Text Delivery

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

Abstract

This study examines elementary teachers reading children’s science books aloud to students in the US. Our findings show that science read-aloud semiosis (meaning-making) extends beyond text delivery. In addition to making a written text orally available to students, teachers also deploy different types of gestures (pointing and iconic gesticulation) and pictorial representations (narrative and conceptual) as they scaffold students’ understandings. Further, teachers are shown to engage in two distinct forms of meaning-making: multimodal description and multimodal explanation. A conceptual framework is proposed that elementary science educators can use to systematically incorporate multimodality into aloud reading practices.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Waters, M., & Le, A. (2008). Representations of nature of science in high school chemistry textbooks over the past four decades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 835–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acher, A., & Arcà, M. (2009). Children’s representations in modeling scientific knowledge construction. In C. Andersen, N. Scheuer, M. Perez-Echeverria, & E. Teubal (Eds.), Representational systems and practices as learning tools. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albright, L. K. (2002). Bringing the ice maiden to life: engaging adolescents in learning through picture book read-alouds in content areas. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 45, 418–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2012). Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: evidence from learners’ and teachers’ gestures. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 247–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvermann, D. E., & Phelps, S. F. (1998). Content reading and literacy (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ametller, J., & Pinto, R. (2002). Students’ reading of innovative images of energy at secondary school level. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 285–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, C., Scheuer, N., Perez-Echeverria, M. P., & Teubal, E. V. (2009). Representational systems and practices as learning tools. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bean, T. W., Searles, D., Singer, H., & Cowen, S. (1990). Learning concepts from biology text through pictorial analogies and analogical study guide. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 233–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boroditsky, L. (2001). Does language shape thought? Mandarin and English speakers’ conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boroditsky, L., & Ramscar, M. (2002). The roles of body and mind in abstract though. Psychological Science, 13, 185–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. M., & Mack, R. L. (1999). Metaphor, computing systems, and active learning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 51, 385–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catley, K. F., Novick, L. R., & Shade, C. K. (2010). Interpreting evolutionary diagrams: when topology and process conflict. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 861–882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners’ responses to the demands of conceptual change: considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science & Education, 15, 463–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colin, P., Chauvet, F., & Viennot, L. (2002). Reading images in optics: students’ difficulties and teachers’ views. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 313–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowder, E. M. (1996). Gestures at work in sense-making science talk. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 173–208.

    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 

  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhart, M., & Howe, K. (1992). Validity in educational research. In M. LeCompte, W. Millroy, & J. Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 642–680). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, F. (1996). Ethnographic microanalysis. In S. L. McKay & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching (pp. 283–306). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farnell, B. (1999). Moving bodies, acting selves. Annual Review of Anthropology, 28, 341–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farnell, B., & Varela, C. R. (2008). The second somatic revolution. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 38, 215–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2008). Shared readings: modeling comprehension, vocabulary, text structures, and text features for older readers. The Reading Teacher, 61, 548–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. J. (2006). Representations of science within children’s trade books. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 214–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D., Imai, M., & Boroditsky, L. (2002). As time goes by: evidence for two systems in processing space → time metaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 17, 537–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghiso, M. P., & McGuire, C. E. (2007). “I talk them through it” Teacher mediation of picturebooks with sparse verbal text during whole-class readalouds. Reading Research and Instruction, 46, 341–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, S. W., & Ireton, S. W. (2003). Understanding models in earth and space science. Arlington, VA: NSTA press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Givry, D., & Roth, W. M. (2006). Toward a new conception of conceptions: interplay of talk, gestures, and structures in the setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 1086–1109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glynn, S. M. (2008). Making science concepts meaningful to students: Teaching with analogies. In S. Mikelskis-Seifert, U. Ringelband, & M. Bruckmann (Eds.), Four decades of research in science education: from curriculum development to quality improvement (pp. 112–125). Munster, Germany: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96, 606–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanauer, D. I. (2006). Scientific discourse: Multiliteracy in the classroom. New York: Continuum.

    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, 666–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iverson, J. M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1997). What’s communication got to do with it? Gesture in children blind from birth. Developmental Psychology, 33, 453–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iverson, J. M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1998). Why people gesture when they speak. Nature, 396, 228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. S., Morrison, T. G., & Swinyard, W. R. (2000). Reading aloud to students: a national probability study of classroom reading practices of elementary school teachers. Reading Psychology, 21, 171–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodality and literacy in school classrooms. Review of Research in Education, 32, 241–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keogh, B., & Naylor, S. (1999). Concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science: an evaluation. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 431–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kletzien, S. B., & Dreher, M. J. (2004). Informational text in K-3 classrooms: Helping children read and write (pp. 45–54). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13, 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G., Ogborn, J., & Martins, I. (1998). A satellite view of language: some lessons from science classrooms. Language Awareness, 7, 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. H. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (1986). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Jonhson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, J., & Lynch, M. (1990). Lists, field guides, and the descriptive organization of seeing: Bird watching as an exemplary observational activity. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J. F., & Snow, C. E. (2010). Oral discourse and reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. IV, pp. 320–338). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of science questionnaire (VNOS): toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maki, C., & Sekido, I. (1993). Snowflakes, sugar and salt: Crystals up close. Minneapolis, MN: Lerner Publications Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marquez, C., Izquierdo, M., & Espinet, M. (2006). Multimodal science teachers’ discourse in modeling the water cycle. Science Education, 90, 202–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture and thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (NGA Center CCSSO) (2010). Common core state standards. Retrieved on March 13th from http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards.

  • Noh, T., & Scharmann, L. C. (1997). Instructional influence of a molecular-level pictorial presentation of matter on students’ conceptions and problem-solving ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 199–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olien, B. (2003). Light. Mankato, MN: Bridgestone Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira, A. W., Colak, H., & Akerson, V. L. (2009). “Who polluted the Potomac?” The translation and implementation of a US environmental story in Brazilian and Turkish classrooms. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4, 89–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pappas, C. C., Varelas, M., Barry, A., & Rife, A. (2002). Dialogic inquiry around information texts: the role of intertextuality in constructing scientific understandings in urban primary classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 13, 435–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pappas, C. C., Varelas, M., Barry, A., & Rife, A. (2004). Promoting dialogic inquiry in information book read-alouds: Young urban children’s ways of making sense. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction (pp. 161–189). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peacock, A., & Weedon, H. (2002). Children working with text in science: disparities with ‘literacy hour’ practice. Research in Science and Technological Education, 20, 185–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, C. S. (1955). Logic as semiotic. In J. Buchler (Ed.), Philosophical writings of Pierce (pp. 98–119). New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pozzer, L. L., & Roth, W. M. (2003). Prevalence, function, and structure of photographs in high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1089–1114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pozzer-Ardenghi, L., & Roth, W.-M. (2005a). Photographs in lectures: gestures as meaning-making resources. Linguistics and Education, 15, 275–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pozzer-Ardenghi, L., & Roth, W.-M. (2005b). Making sense of photographs. Science Education, 89, 219–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pozzer-Ardenghi, L., & Roth, W.-M. (2007). On performing concepts during science lectures. Science Education, 91, 96–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, H. (1996). The meaning of “meaning. In A. Pessin & S. Goldberg (Eds.), The twin earth chronicles: Twenty years of reflection on Hilary Putnam’s “The meaning of meaning” (pp. 3–52). London: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rearden, K. T., & Broemmel, A. D. (2008). Beyond the talking groundhogs: trends in science trade books. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20, 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robson, C. (2002). Real world research (2nd ed.). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M., & Pozzer-Ardenghi, L. (2006). Tracking situated, distributed, and embodied communication in real time. In M. A. Vanchevsky (Ed.), Focus on cognitive psychology research (pp. 237–261). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saul, E. W., & Dieckman, D. (2005). Choosing and using information trade books. Reading Research Quarterly, 40, 502–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulman, J. H. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. Schulman (Ed.), Case methods in teacher education (pp. 1–30). New York: Teacher College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, M., Radinsky, J., & Goldman, S. (2008). The role of gesture in meaning construction. Discourse Processes, 45, 365–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, D., & Smath, J. (2003). Almost invisible Irene. New York: Kane Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stylianidou, F., Ormerod, F., & Ogborn, J. (2002). Analysis of science textbook pictures about energy and pupils’ reading of them. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 257–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treagust, D. F., Harrison, A. G., & Venville, G. J. (1998). Teaching science effectively with analogies: an approach for preservice and inservice teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9(2), 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasquez, J., Comer, M., & Troutman, F. (2010). Developing visual literacy in science, K-8. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1987). Theories of knowledge restructuring in development. Review of Educational Research, 57, 51–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, J. K., Miller, E., & Brubaker, D. (2004). The role of visual image: what are students really learning from pictorial representations? Journal of Visual Literacy, 24, 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei, C. Y. (2006). Not crazy, just talking on the mobile phone: gestures and mobile phone conversations. In Proceedings of the 2006 International Professional Communication Conference (pp. 299–307). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.

  • Wertsch, J. V., & Hickman, M. (1987). Problem solving in social interaction: A microgenetic analysis. In M. Hickman (Ed.), Social and functional approaches to language and thought (pp. 251–266). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whorf, B. L. (1956). The relation of habitual thought and behavior to language. In J. B. Caroll (Ed.), Language, thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (pp. 134–159). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Wilkinson, I., & Son, E. H. (2010). A dilogic turn in research on learning and teaching to comprehend. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, & P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (IV, pp. 359–387). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. F. (2012). Image schemas in clock-reading: latent errors and emerging expertise. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 216–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, T. A., Ward, A. E., & Justice, L. M. (2009). Print referencing during read-alouds: a technique for increasing emergent readers’ print knowledge. The Reading Teacher, 63, 62–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Educational Theory and Practice Department, State University of New York, 1400 Washington Ave., ED 113B, Albany, NY, 12222, USA

    Alandeom W. Oliveira

  2. Educational Theory and Practice Department, State University of New York, 1400 Washington Ave., Albany, NY, 12222, USA

    Seema Rivera, Rory Glass, Michael Mastroianni, Francine Wizner & Vincent Amodeo

Authors
  1. Alandeom W. Oliveira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seema Rivera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rory Glass
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Mastroianni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Francine Wizner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vincent Amodeo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alandeom W. Oliveira.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oliveira, A.W., Rivera, S., Glass, R. et al. Multimodal Semiosis in Science Read-Alouds: Extending Beyond Text Delivery. Res Sci Educ 44, 651–673 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9396-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9396-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation