Abstract
This study provides two exemplars of how grammatical analysis of language use in elementary science classroom discourse enhances the explication of students’ epistemic process in the language use in that discourse. Methodologically, both practical epistemology analysis (PEA) and discourse register analysis (DRA) from systemic functional linguistics were employed as a combinatory approach. The former was used to construe epistemic process of students’ language use and the latter was to articulate grammatical features of the language use. The exemplary analysis was administered for the discourse data collected at two elementary science classes in South Korea. The exemplars showed that ideational metafunction and its semantic relation analyses in DRA facilitated identifying gaps and relations in PEA, and interpersonal and textual metafunction analyses in DRA supported construing the flow of gap-filling or lingering process in PEA. Analysing students’ language use by PEA combined with DRA can help science teachers find the points where the language use in school science gets epistemological productivity, while it is different from the language game in science disciplines.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Christie, F. (2002). Classroom discourse analysis: a functional perspective. London: Continuum.
Christie, F., & Martin, J. R. (1997). Genre and institutions: social processes in the workplace and school. London: Continuum.
Davies, E. C. (2014). A retrospective view of systemic functional linguistics, with notes from a parallel perspective. Functional Linguistics, 1(4), 1–11.
Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268–291.
Eggins, S. (2004). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics (2nd ed.). London: Continuum.
Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2008). Reading in secondary content areas: a language-based pedagogy. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Fang, Z. H., Lamme, L. L., & Pringle, R. M. (2010). Language and literacy in inquiry-based science classrooms, grades 3–8. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Hodder Arnold.
Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 53–90.
Jakobson, B., & Axelsson, M. (2012). ‘Beating around the bush’ on the how and why in elementary school science. Education Inquiry, 3(4), 495–511.
Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Transformation through language use: Children’s spontaneous metaphors in elementary school science. Science & Education, 16, 267–289.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Crujeiras, B. (2017). Epistemic practices and scientific practices in science education. In K. S. Taber & B. Akpan (Eds.), Science education: an international course companion (pp. 69–80). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Kelly, G. J. (2016). Methodological considerations for the study of epistemic cognition in practice. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Braaten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 393–408). New York: Routledge.
Kelly, G. J., & Licona, P. (2017). Epistemic practices and science education. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy, and science teaching: New perspectives (pp. 139–165). Springer.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lidar, M., Almqvist, J., & Östman, L. (2010). A pragmatist approach to meaning making in children’s discussions about gravity and the shape of the earth. Science Education, 94, 689–709.
Maeng, S., & Kim, C.-J. (2011). Variations in science teaching modalities and students’ pedagogic subject positioning through the discourse register and language code. Science Education, 95(3), 431–457.
Maivorsdotter, N., & Quennerstedt, M. (2012). The act of running: a practical epistemology analysis of aesthetic experience in sport. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 4(3), 362–381.
Östman, L., & Wickman, P.-O. (2014). A pragmatic approach on epistemology, teaching, and learning. Science Education, 98(3), 375–382.
Seah, L. H., Clarke, D. J., & Hart, C. E. (2014). Understanding the language demands on science students from an integrated science and language perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 952–973.
Tang, K.-S. (2016). Constructing scientific explanations through premise–reasoning–outcome (PRO): an exploratory study to scaffold students in structuring written explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 38(9), 1415–1440.
Tang, K.-S., & Tan, S.-C. (2017). Intertextuality and multimodal meanings in high school physics: written and spoken language in computer supported collaborative student discourse. Classroom Discourse, 8(1), 19–35.
Wickman, P.-O. (2004). The practical epistemologies of the classroom: a study of laboratory work. Science Education, 88, 325–344.
Wickman, P.-O. (2006). Aesthetic experience in science education: learning and meaning-making as situated talk and action. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: a sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86, 601–623.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maeng, S. Explicating Epistemic Process in Elementary Students’ Language Use by Practical Epistemology and Discourse Register Analyses. Res Sci Educ 51, 153–170 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09974-2
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09974-2