Creating and Using Adapted Primary Literature

  • Anat Yarden
  • Stephen P. Norris
  • Linda M. Phillips
Part of the Innovations in Science Education and Technology book series (ISET, volume 22)


In Chap.  2 we outlined the attributes characterizing four genres of scientific texts used for science learning: Primary Scientific Literature (PSL), Adapted Primary Literature (APL), Journalistic Reported Version (JRV), and textbooks. We discussed the resemblance between PSL and APL in terms of genre, content, organizational structure, and the presentation of science. In this chapter we describe the various steps taken for developing APL, starting from selecting the appropriate PSL along with the various modifications that are incorporated into the text to make it understandable and usable by the target audience. Subsequently, we outline several instructional approaches that were developed for the use of APL in schools, and the benefits and limitations of those approaches. The last part of this chapter focuses on the materials that were developed to support teachers in using APL, including workshops for teachers implementing APL-based curricula and a multimedia teachers’ guide with videotaped teaching episodes.


Pedagogical Content Knowledge Learning Material Opening Section Instructional Approach Introduction Section 


  1. Aiuti, A., Slavin, S., Aker, M., Ficara, F., Deola, S., Mortellaro, A., Morecki, S., Andolfi, G., Tabucchi, A., Carlucci, F., Marinello, E., Cattaneo, F., Vai, S., Servida, P., Miniero, R., Roncarolo, M. G., & Bordignon, C. (2002). Correction of ADA-SCID by stem cell gene therapy combined with nonmyeloablative conditioning. Science, 296(5577), 2410–2413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandoni Muench, S. (2000). Choosing primary literature in biology to achieve specific educational goals. Journal of College Science Teaching, 29, 255–260.Google Scholar
  3. Baram-Tsabari, A., & Yarden, A. (2005). Text genre as a factor in the formation of scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(4), 403–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brill, G., Falk, H., & Yarden, A. (2004). The learning processes of two high-school biology students when reading primary literature. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cuccio-Schirripa, S., & Steiner, H. E. (2000). Enhancement and analysis of science question level for middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 210–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Cosa, B., Moar, W., Lee, S. B., Miller, M., & Daniell, H. (2001). Overexpression of Bt cry2Aa2 operon in chloroplasts leads to formation of insecticidal crystals. Nature Biotechnology, 19, 71–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dillon, J. T. (1984). The classification of research questions. Review of Educational Research, 54(3), 327–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dillon, J. T. (1988). Questioning in science. In M. Meyer (Ed.), Questions and questioning (pp. 68–80). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  9. Dori, Y. J., & Herscovitz, O. (1999). Question-posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 411–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Driever, W., & Nusslein-Volhard, C. (1988). A gradient of bicoid protein in Drosophila embryos. Cell, 54, 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Falk, H., & Yarden, A. (2011). Stepping into the unknown: Three models for the teaching and learning of the opening sections of scientific articles. Journal of Biological Education, 45(2), 77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Falk, H., Piontkevitz, Y., Brill, G., Baram, A., & Yarden, A. (2003). Gene tamers: Studying biotechnology through research (In Hebrew and Arabic, 1st ed.). Rehovot: The Amos de-Shalit Center for Science Teaching.Google Scholar
  13. Goldman, S. R., & Bisanz, G. L. (2002). Toward a functional analysis of scientific genres: Implications for understanding and learning processes. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of text comprehension. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publication.Google Scholar
  14. Hasty, P., Bradley, A., Morris, J. H., Edmondson, D. G., Venuti, J. M., Olson, E. N., & Klein, W. H. (1993). Muscle deficiency and neonatal death in mice with a targeted mutation in the myogenin gene. Nature, 364, 501–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hill, S. S., Soppelsa, B. F., & West, G. K. (1982). Teaching ESL students to read and write experimental-research papers. TESOL Quarterly, 16(3), 333–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Israeli Ministry of Education. (2011). Syllabus of biological studies (10th–12th grade). Jerusalem: State of Israel Ministry of Education Curriculum Center (In Hebrew)
  17. Lawson, A. E. (1988). A better way to teach biology. The American Biology Teacher, 50, 266–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Le Douarin, N. M., & Teiller, M. A. M. (1974). Experimental analysis of the migration and differentiation of neuroblasts of the autonomic nervous system and of neuroectodermal mesenchymal derivatives, using a biological cell marking technique. Developmental Biology, 41, 162–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Le Douarin, N. M., Teiller, M. A. M., & Le Douarin, G. H. (1975). Cholinergic differentiation of presumptive adrenergic neuroblats in interspecific chimeras after heterotopic transplantations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U S A, 72, 728–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McClune, B., & Jarman, R. (2012). Encouraging and equipping students to engage critically with science in the news: What can we learn from the literature? Studies in Science Education, 48(1), 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mourez, M., Kane, R., Mogridge, J., Metallo, S., Deschatelets, P., Sellman, B., Whitesides, G., & Collier, R. (2001). Designing a polyvalent inhibitor of anthrax toxin. Nature Biotechnology, 19, 958–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Musheno, B. V., & Lawson, A. E. (1999). Effects of learning cycle and traditional text on comprehension of science concepts by students at differing reasoning levels. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2008). Reading as inquiry. In R. A. Duschl & R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation (pp. 233–262). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Norris, S. P., Stelnicki, N., & de Vries, G. (2012). Teaching mathematical biology in high school using adapted primary literature. Research in Science Education, 42(4), 633–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nusslein-Volhard, C., Frohnhofer, H. G., & Lehmann, R. (1987). Determination of anteroposterior polarity in Drosophila. Science, 238, 1675–1681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Phillips, L. M., Norris, S. P., & Macnab, J. S. (2010). Visualization in mathematics, reading and science education. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Riddle, R. D., Johnson, R. L., Laufer, E., & Tabin, C. (1993). Sonic hedgehog mediates the polarizing activity of the ZPA. Cell, 75, 1401–1416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab & P. F. Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Shepardson, D. P., & Pizzini, E. L. (1991). Questioning levels of junior high school science textbooks and their implications for learning textual information. Science Education, 75(6), 673–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shkedi, A. (1998). Can the curriculum guide both emancipate and educate teachers? Curriculum Inquiry, 28, 209–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Swales, J. M. (2001). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings (1990, 1st ed.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (3rd ed.). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  34. Yarden, A., & Brill, G. (1999). The secrets of embryonic development: Study through research (In Hebrew and Arabic, 2004, 4th ed.). Rehovot: The Amos de-Shalit Center for Science Teaching.Google Scholar
  35. Yarden, A., Brill, G., & Falk, H. (2001). Primary literature as a basis for a high-school biology curriculum. Journal of Biological Education, 35(4), 190–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zer-Kavod, G., & Yarden, A. (2013). Engineered bacteria produce biofuel from switchgrass (an adapted primary literature article), Gene tamers – Studying biotechnology through research (In Hebrew, 2nd ed.). Rebovot: Department of Science Teaching, Weizmann Institute of Science.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anat Yarden
    • 1
  • Stephen P. Norris
    • 2
  • Linda M. Phillips
    • 3
  1. 1.Weizmann Institute of ScienceRehovotIsrael
  2. 2.Educational Policy StudiesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  3. 3.Canadian Centre for Research on LiteracyUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations