Engaging English Language Learners in Model-Based Science Instruction

  • Magdalena PandoEmail author
  • Zenaida Aguirre-Muñoz
Part of the English Language Education book series (ELED, volume 17)


A model-based instructional approach offers English language learners instruction that integrates content and language to provide them with linguistically rich opportunities while learning science. This approach allows ELLs opportunities to construct models as hands-on activities to represent some aspect of reality. Language practice opportunities using the language of science are provided for ELLs to evaluate and defend their model constructions through oral and written argumentation. Science instruction through this approach ensures ELLs are provided with learning experiences that mirror the social practices of scientists, such as conducting inquiry investigations, constructing models, evaluating models and creating arguments to communicate experimental findings. In this approach, ongoing assessment is important to provide continuous feedback to students on their content and language learning. Rubrics developed in model-based instruction offer an alternative assessment method to measure ELL performance in science language use.


  1. Aguirre-Muñoz, Z., Park, J. E., Amabisca, A., & Boscardin, C. K. (2009). Developing teacher capacity for serving ELLs’ writing instructional needs: A case for systemic functional linguistics. Bilingual Research Journal, 31(1–2), 295–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Develaki, M. (2007). The model-based view of scientific theories and the structuring of school science programmes. Science & Education, 16(7), 725–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2004). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  4. Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Giere, R. N. (1999). Science without laws. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Giere, R. N. (2004). How models are used to represent reality. Philosophy of Science, 71, 742–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gilbert, J. K., & Justi, R. (2016). Modelling-based teaching in science education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Halliday, M. A. (1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5(2), 93–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hamayan, E. V. (1995). Approaches to alternative assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 212–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winters, L. (1992). A practical guide to alternative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curricular Development.Google Scholar
  11. Huerta-Macias, A. (1995). Alternative assessment: Responses to commonly asked questions. TESOL Journal, 5, 8–10.Google Scholar
  12. Humphrey, S., Droga, L., & Feez, S. (2012). Grammar and meaning. Newtown, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association.Google Scholar
  13. Justi, R., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Modelling, teachers’ views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 369–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (2011). Supporting grade 5–8 students in constructing explanations in science: The claim, evidence, and reasoning framework for talk and writing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  15. Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 937–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pando, M. (2016). Teaching middle school science to English language learners through modeling and argumentation using a functional approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX.Google Scholar
  17. Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistic perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D., … Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 632–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Suppe, F. (2000). Understanding scientific theories: An assessment of developments, 1969-1998. Philosophy of Science, S102–S115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Van Fraassen, B. C. (1980). The scientific image. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Windschitl, M. (2008). What is inquiry? A framework for thinking about authentic scientific practice in the classroom. In J. Luft, R. Bell, & J. Gess-Newson (Eds.), Science as inquiry in the secondary setting (pp. 1–20). Arlington, VA: NSTA press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.New Mexico State UniversityLas CrucesUSA
  2. 2.University of HoustonHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations