Advertisement

Supporting English Language Learners Through Inquiry-Based Science: Three Strategies for Your Classroom

  • Joshua W. ReidEmail author
  • Cindi Smith-Walters
  • Katherine A. Mangione
  • Alison Dorris
  • Terri Tharp
Chapter
Part of the English Language Education book series (ELED, volume 17)

Abstract

This chapter uses inquiry-based learning as an approach to discuss three strategies for teaching English Language Learners science content: (a) short silent movies, (b) interactive word walls, and (c) interactive science notebooks. This approach has theoretical grounding in cognitive and social learning theories (i.e., Piaget, Vygotsky, and Cambourne). We discuss the best methods to implement these strategies, suggestions to modify them, as well as the limitations of each. We provide vignettes that focus on natural selection to give context for each strategy. The chapter concludes with a summary of each strategy, a brief discussion on how to combine these strategies for maximum benefit, as well as, questions to reflect on how to promote best practices with these strategies.

References

  1. Amaral, O. M., Garrison, L., & Klentschy, M. (2002). Helping English language learners increase achievement through inquiry-based science instruction. Bilingual Research Journal, 26(2), 213–239.Google Scholar
  2. August, D., Carlo, M., Dressler, C., & Snow, C. (2005). The critical role of vocabulary development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(1), 50–57.Google Scholar
  3. Bravo, M., & Garcia, E. E. (2014, April). Learning to write like scientists: English language learners’ science inquiry and writing understandings in responsive learning contexts. Paper presented at the American Educational Researchers Association Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  4. Bruna, K. R., Vann, R., & Escudero, M. P. (2007). What’s language got to do with it?: A case study of academic language instruction in high school “English learner science” class. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6, 36–54.Google Scholar
  5. Butler, M. B., & Nesbit, C. (2008). Using science notebooks to improve writing skills and conceptual understanding. Science Activities, 44(4), 137–146.Google Scholar
  6. Buxton, C. A., & Lee, O. (2014). English language learners in science education. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 204–222). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Cambourne, B. (1995). Toward an educationally relevant theory of literacy learning: Twenty years of inquiry. The Reading Teacher, 49(3), 182–192.Google Scholar
  8. Carrier, K. A. (2005). Supporting science learning through science literacy objectives for English language learners. Science Activities, 42(2), 5–11.Google Scholar
  9. Clark, D., Nelson, B., Atkinson, R. K., Ramirez-Marin, F., & Medina-Jerez, W. (2014). Integrating flexible language supports within online science learning environments. In R. Bloymeyer, T. Ganesh, & H. Waxman (Eds.), Research on technology use in multicultural settings (pp. 75–106). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publications.Google Scholar
  10. Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (2001). Educating linguistically and culturally diverse students in correctional settings. The Journal of Correctional Education, 52(2), 68–73.Google Scholar
  11. Cuevas, P., Lee, O., Hart, J., & Deaktor, R. (2005). Improving science inquiry with elementary students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(3), 337–357.Google Scholar
  12. Danan, M. (2004). Captioning and subtitling: Undervalued language learning strategies. Meta: Journal des traducteurs/Meta: Translators’ Journal, 49(1), 67–77.Google Scholar
  13. Elliot, J. (2007). Summarizing with drawings: A reading-comprehension strategy. Science Scope, 30(5), 23–27.Google Scholar
  14. Fulton, L., & Campbell, B. (2004). Student-centered notebooks. Science and Children, 42(3), 26–29.Google Scholar
  15. Gambrell, L., & Marinak, B. (1997). Incentive and intrinsic motivation to read. In J. T. Guthrie & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction (pp. 205–217). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  16. Gilbert, J., & Kotelman, M. (2005). Five good reasons to use science notebooks. Science and Children, 43(3), 28–32.Google Scholar
  17. Harmon, J., Wood, K., & Kiser, K. (2009). Promoting vocabulary learning with the interactive word wall. Middle School Journal, 40(3), 58–63.Google Scholar
  18. Herr, N. (2008). The sourcebook for teaching science: Strategies, activities, and instructional resources. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Imprint.Google Scholar
  19. Hodson, D. (2009). Teaching and learning about science. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Jackson, J., & Durham, A. (2016). Put your walls to work: Planning and using interactive word walls to support science and reading instruction. Science and Children, 54(3), 78–84.Google Scholar
  21. Jackson, J., & Narvaez, R. (2013). Interactive word walls. Science and Children, 51(1), 42–49.Google Scholar
  22. Jackson, J., Tripp, S., & Cox, K. (2011). Interactive word walls: Transforming content vocabulary instruction. Science Scope, 35(3), 45–49.Google Scholar
  23. Lee, O., & Buxton, C. A. (2013). Integrating science and English proficiency for English language learners. Theory Into Practice, 52, 36–42.Google Scholar
  24. Lee, O., & Fradd, S. H. (1998). Science for all, including students from non-English-language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 27(4), 12–21.Google Scholar
  25. MacKinnon, G., & Williams, P. (2006). Models for integrating technology in higher education: The physics of sound. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35, 22–25.Google Scholar
  26. Manz, E. (2012). Understanding the codevelopment of modeling practice and ecological knowledge. Science Education, 96, 1071–1105.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21030 Google Scholar
  27. Martin, D. J. (2000). Elementary science methods: A constructivist approach (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  28. Michaels, S., Shouse, A. W., & Schweingruber, H. A. (2008). Ready, set, SCIENCE!: Putting research to work in K-8 science classrooms. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  29. Miller, B., & Martin, C. (2016). Digital notebooks for digital natives: Supporting early childhood science and engineering practices with e-notebooks and whiteboard applications. Science and Children, 53(5), 84–89.Google Scholar
  30. Murcia, K. (2014). Interactive and multimodal pedagogy: A case study of how teachers and students use interactive whiteboard technology in primary science. Australian Journal of Education, 58(1), 74–88.Google Scholar
  31. National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  32. NCTE. (2013). The NCTE definition of 21st century literacies. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinition
  33. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  34. NSTA. (2003). Position statement: Scientific inquiry (under revision). Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/inquiry.aspx
  35. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  36. Reynolds, P., & Symons, S. (2001). Motivational variable and children’s text search. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 14–22.Google Scholar
  37. Roth, W. M. (2005). Talking science: Language and learning in science classrooms. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. Sibold, C. (2011). Building English language learners’ academic vocabulary: Strategies & tips. Multicultural Education, 18(2), 24–28.Google Scholar
  39. Soto Huerta, M. (2012). Guiding biliteracy development: Appropriating cross-linguistic and conceptual knowledge to sustain second-language reading comprehension. Bilingual Research Journal: The Journal of the National Association for Bilingual Education, 35(2), 179–196.Google Scholar
  40. Stoddart, T., Pinal, A., Latzke, M., & Canaday, D. (2002). Integrating inquiry science and language development for English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(8), 664–687.Google Scholar
  41. Talaván, N., & Rodríguez-Arancón, P. (2014). The use of reverse subtitling as an online collaborative language learning tool. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8(1), 84–101.Google Scholar
  42. Towndrow, P. A., Ling, T. A., & Venthan, A. M. (2008). Promoting inquiry through science journal writing. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science, & Technology Education, 4, 279–283.Google Scholar
  43. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). 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
  44. Wong, M. (2014). Smart virtual word walls: Moving away from the traditional into the digital. English in Texas, 40(1), 27–29.Google Scholar
  45. Young, J. (2003). Science interactive notebooks in the classroom. Science Scope, 26(4), 44–47.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joshua W. Reid
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cindi Smith-Walters
    • 1
  • Katherine A. Mangione
    • 1
  • Alison Dorris
    • 2
  • Terri Tharp
    • 1
  1. 1.Middle Tennessee State UniversityMurfreesboroUSA
  2. 2.Cumberland UniversityLebanonUSA

Personalised recommendations