Research in Science Education

, Volume 49, Issue 4, pp 977–988 | Cite as

Understanding Science and Language Connections: New Approaches to Assessment with Bilingual Learners

  • Cory BuxtonEmail author
  • Ruth Harman
  • Lourdes Cardozo-Gaibisso
  • Lei Jiang
  • Khanh Bui
  • Martha Allexsaht-Snider


We report on the use of bilingual constructed response science assessments in the context of a research and development partnership with secondary school science teachers. Given the power that assessments have in today’s education systems, our project provided a series of workshops for teachers where they explored students’ emergent reform-oriented science meaning-making in our project-designed assessments. Within the context of these workshops, we used discourse analysis to explore how three different groups grappled with the new reform-oriented relationship between science and language: (1) the research team’s emergent understandings of how to create improved resources for teachers to better integrate science and language; (2) students’ emergent understandings as expressed in their assessment responses; and (3) teachers’ emergent understandings of how to integrate science and language in their instruction as expressed in interviews in the teacher writing workshops. Implications for curriculum designers, assessment developers, and professional learning facilitators are discussed.


Bilingual learners Science assessment Bilingual assessment Cultural validity Legitimation code theory Systemic functional linguistics 


Funding Information

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number # DRL-1316398. Opinions and conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.


  1. Achieve (2018). Next generation science standards task screener. Downloaded Nov 28, 2018 from: .
  2. Banilower, E., Smith, P. S., Weiss, I. R., Malzahn, K. A., Campbell, K. M., & Weiss, A. M. (2013). Report of the 2012 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research Inc.Google Scholar
  3. Banks, J. A. (2017). Citizenship education and global migration: Implications for theory, research, and teaching. New York, NY: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  4. Buxton, C., Allexsaht-Snider, M., Kayumova, S., Aghasaleh, R., Choi, Y., & Cohen, A. (2015). Teacher agency and professional learning: Rethinking fidelity of implementation as multiplicities of enactment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 489–502.
  5. Buxton, C., Cardozo Gaibisso, L., Xia, Y., & Li, J. (2018). How perspectives from linguistically diverse classrooms can help all students unlock the language of science. In L. Bryan & K. Tobin (Eds.). 13 Questions: Reframing Education’s Conversation: Science (pp. 273–291). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  6. Canada 2067. (2017). Canada 2067 STEM learning roadmap. Accessed on Mar 28, 2019 from
  7. Christie, F. (2005). Language education in the primary years. Sydney: University of South Wales Press.Google Scholar
  8. European Commission. (2015). Science education for responsible citizenship. Brussels: Authors.Google Scholar
  9. Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92.Google Scholar
  10. García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Gibbons, P. (2006). Bridging discourses in the ESL classroom: Students, teachers and researchers. London: A&C Black.Google Scholar
  12. Gottlieb, M. (2016). Assessing English language learners: Bridges for language proficiency to academic achievement. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.Google Scholar
  13. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  14. Harman, R., Buxton, C., Cardozo-Gaibisso, L., Jiang, L., & Bui, K. (2018). Gotta know the tune to riff? Culturally sustaining SFL praxis in science classrooms. Presentation at the 2018 meeting of the International Systemic Functional Congress (ISFC). Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  15. Herbel-Eisenmann, B., Steele, M., & Cirillo, M. (2013). (developing) teacher discourse moves: A framework for professional development. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 1(2), 181–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Karlsson, A., Larsson, P. N., & Jakobsson, A. (2018). Multilingual students’ use of translanguaging in science classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 1–21.Google Scholar
  17. Lemmi, C., Brown, B. A., Wild, A., Zummo, L., & Sedlacek, Q. (2019). Language ideologies in science education. Science Education, 1–21. Early view downloaded May 1, 2019 from
  18. Lyon, E. G. (2013). Conceptualizing and exemplifying science teachers’ assessment expertise. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 1208–1229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
  20. Maton, K. (2013). Making semantic waves: A key to cumulative knowledge-building. Linguistics and Education, 24(1), 8–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Matthiessen, C. M. (2015). Register in the round: Registerial cartography. Functional Linguistics, 2(9), 1–48.Google Scholar
  22. Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2002). Using instructional discourse analysis to study the scaffolding of student self-regulation. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018a). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Scholar
  24. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018b). English learners in STEM subjects: Transforming classrooms, schools, and lives. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Scholar
  25. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  26. National Research Council. (2017). Seeing students learn science: Integrating assessment and instruction in the classroom. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  27. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies.Google Scholar
  28. Penuel, W. R., & Shepard, L. A. (2016). Assessment and teaching. In D. Gitomer & C. Bell (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 787–850). Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Salleh, R., Venville, G., & Treagust, D. (2007). When a bilingual child describes living things: An analysis of conceptual understandings from a language perspective. Research in Science Education, 37(3), 291–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Solano-Flores, G., & Nelson-Barber, S. (2001). On the cultural validity of science assessments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 553–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Turkan, S., & Liu, O. L. (2012). Differential performance by English language learners on an inquiry-based science assessment. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2343–2369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Unsal, Z., Jakobson, B., Molander, B.-O., & Wickman, P.-O. (2018). Language use in a multilingual class: A study of the relation between bilingual students’ languages and their meaning-making in science. Research in Science Education, 48(5), 1027–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA
  2. 2.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  3. 3.Universidad ORT UruguayMontevideoUruguay

Personalised recommendations