1887
image of Towards a functional literacy approach to teach the language of science in the Singapore classroom
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper describes a pilot study exploring how an approach drawing on systemic functional linguistics can inform science teaching. This study is an exploratory effort between researchers from a linguistics background and secondary school science teachers in the Singapore science classroom. The teachers designed activities in the joint construction of texts to support students’ negotiation of meanings and clarification of conceptual understandings. With this, the teachers applied strategies to draw attention to the language of science in their lessons. The study points to the value of the functional literacy approach in science teaching and presents implications on teacher professional learning as well as the role of linguistics in developing disciplinary literacy in students.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pl.19008.ada
2020-03-23
2020-05-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Accurso, K., Gebhard, M., & Selden, C.
    (2016) Supporting L2 elementary science writing with SFL in an age of school reform. InL. C. D. Oliveira & T. Silva (Eds.), Second Language Writing in Elementary Classrooms: Instructional Issues, Content-area Writing and Teacher Education (pp.126–150). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R.
    (2011) Drawing to Learn in Science. Science, 333, 1096–1097. 10.1126/science.1204153
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204153 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bruner, J. S.
    (1986) Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Burns, A., & Joyce, H.
    (2007) Adult ESL programs in Australia. Prospect, 22(3), 5–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chin, T.-Y., & Poon, C.-L.
    (2014) Design and implementation of the National Primary Science Curriculum: A partnership approach in Singapore. InA.-L. Tan, C.-L. Poon, & S. Lim (Eds.), Inquiry into the Singapore science classroom: Research and practices (pp.27–46). Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑4585‑78‑1_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4585-78-1_2 [Google Scholar]
  6. Christie, F., & Derewianka, B.
    (2008) School discourse: Learning to write across the years of schooling. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Creswell, J.
    (2013) Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Derewianka, B.
    (2015) The contribution of genre theory to literacy education in Australia. InJ. Turbill, G. Barton, & C. Brock (Eds.), Teaching writing in today’s classrooms: Looking back to looking forward (pp.69–86). Norwood, Australia: Australian Literary Educators’ Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Evagorou, M., & Osborne, J.
    (2010) The role of language in the learning and teaching of science. InJ. O. J. Dillon (Ed.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say (pp.135–157). New York: Open University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fang, Z.
    (2006) The language demands of science reading in middle school. International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), 491–520. 10.1080/09500690500339092
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500339092 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2014) Preparing content area teachers for disciplinary literacy instruction: The role of literacy teacher educators. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(6), 444–448. 10.1002/jaal.269
    https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.269 [Google Scholar]
  12. Fang, Z., Lamme, L., & Pringle, R.
    (2010) Language and literacy in inquiry-based science classrooms, grades 3–8. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press and Arlington.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Halliday, M. A. K.
    (2006) Systemic background. InJ. J. Webster (Ed.), Language and Linguistics (Vol.3, pp.185–198). London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.
    (2004) An Introduction to Functional Grammar (Third Edition ed.). London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hammond, J.
    (2001) Scaffolding and language. InJ. Hammond (Ed.), Scaffolding: Teaching and Learning in Language and Literacy Education (pp.15–30). Newtown, N.S.W.: Primary English Teaching Association (Australia).
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Hammond, J., Burns, A., Joyce, H., Brosnan, D., & Gerot, L.
    (1992) English for social purposes: A handbook for teachers of adult literacy. Sydney: NCELTR.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lara-Alecio, R., Tong, F., Irby, B. J., Guerrero, C., Huerta, M., & Fan, Y.
    (2012) The effect of an instructional intervention on middle school English learners’ science and English reading achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(8), 987–1011. 10.1002/tea.21031
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21031 [Google Scholar]
  18. Lee, O., Llosa, L., Jiang, F., Haas, A., O’Connor, C., & Van Booven, C. D.
    (2016) Elementary teachers’ science knowledge and instructional practices: Impact of an intervention focused on English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(4), 579–597. 10.1002/tea.21314
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21314 [Google Scholar]
  19. Lemke, J.
    (1990) Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Lim, F. V., O’Halloran, K. L., Tan, S., & Marissa, K. L. E.
    (2015) Teaching visual texts with multimodal analysis software. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(6), 916–935.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lim, F. V., & Tan, S. K. Y.
    (2017) Multimodal translational research: Teaching visual texts. InO. Seizov & J. Wildfeuer (Eds.), New Studies in Multimodality: Conceptual and Methodological Elaborations (pp.175–200). London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. (2018) Developing multimodal literacy through teaching the critical viewing of films in Singapore. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 62(3), 291–300. 10.1002/jaal.882
    https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.882 [Google Scholar]
  23. Luke, A., Freebody, P., Shun, L., & Gopinathan, S.
    (2005) Towards research-based innovation and reform: Singapore schooling in transition. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 25(1), 5–28. 10.1080/02188790500032467
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02188790500032467 [Google Scholar]
  24. Mahboob, A., & Knight, N.
    (2010) Appliable linguistics. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Martin, J. R.
    (2001) Language, Register and Genre. InA. Burns & C. Coffin (Eds.), Analysing English in a Global Context (pp.149–166). London, UK: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Mohan, B., Leung, C., & Slater, T.
    (2010) Assessing language and content: A functional perspective. InA. Paran & L. Sercu (Eds.), Testing the Untestable in Language Education (pp.217–240). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847692672‑013
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692672-013 [Google Scholar]
  27. Norris, S.
    (2004) Analyzing Multimodal Interaction. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203379493
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203379493 [Google Scholar]
  28. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M.
    (2009) Bridging the gap between the language of science and the language of school science through the use of adapted primary literature. Research in Science Education, 39, 313–319. 10.1007/s11165‑008‑9111‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9111-z [Google Scholar]
  29. Oliveira, L. C. D., & Lan, S.-W.
    (2014) Writing science in an upper elementary classroom: A genre-based approach to teaching English language learners. Journal of Second Language Writing (24), 23–39. 10.1016/j.jslw.2014.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  30. Polias, J.
    (2016) Apprenticing students into science: doing, talking & writing scientifically. Melbourne: Melbourne Lexis Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Rose, D.
    (2015a) Building a pedagogic metalanguage I: curriculum genres. A major discussion of R2L pedagogy focused on teacher education. InJ. Martin (Ed.), Appliable Linguistics and Academic Discourse. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. (2015b) Building a pedagogic metalanguage II: knowledge genres. A major discussion of R2L pedagogy focused on teacher education. InJ. Martin (Ed.), Appliable Linguistics and Academic DiscourseShanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Rose, D., & Martin, J.
    (2012) Learning to write, Reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy of the Sydney School. Sheffield: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Soong, B., & Mercer, N.
    (2011) Improving students’ revision of physics concepts through ICT-based co-construction and prescriptive tutoring. International Journal of Science Education, 33(8), 1055–1078. 10.1080/09500693.2010.489586
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.489586 [Google Scholar]
  35. Soong, B., Mercer, N., & Er, S. S.
    (2010) Revision by means of computer-mediated peer discussions. Physics Education, 45(3), 264–269. 10.1088/0031‑9120/45/3/006
    https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/45/3/006 [Google Scholar]
  36. Tan, P.-H., & Tan, A.-L.
    (2014) Teachers’ ideas and concerns with assessment practices in inquiry science. InA.-L. Tan, C.-L. Poon, & S. Lim (Eds.), Inquiry into the Singapore Science Classroom: Research and Practices (pp.67–87). Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑4585‑78‑1_4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4585-78-1_4 [Google Scholar]
  37. Tang, K. S., & Moje, E. B.
    (2010) Relating multimodal representations to the literacies of science. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 81–85. 10.1007/s11165‑009‑9158‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9158-5 [Google Scholar]
  38. Tang, K. S., & Putra, G. B. S.
    (2016) Disciplinary literacy instructions on writing scientific explanations: a case study from a chemistry classroom in an all-girls school. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(3), 569–579. 10.1039/C6RP00022C
    https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00022C [Google Scholar]
  39. Tobin, K.
    (2014) Transforming science education by expanding teacher and student collaboration. InA.-L. Tan, C.-L. Poon, & S. Lim (Eds.), Inquiry into the Singapore science classroom: Research and practices (pp.47–66). Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑4585‑78‑1_3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4585-78-1_3 [Google Scholar]
  40. Unsworth, L.
    (1998) “Sound” explanations in school science: A functional linguistic perspective on effective apprenticing texts. Linguistics and Education, 9(2), 199–226. 10.1016/S0898‑5898(97)90013‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(97)90013-9 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2001) Evaluating the language of different types of explanations in junior high school science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 23(6), 585–609. 10.1080/09500690010006473
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010006473 [Google Scholar]
  42. Vygotsky, L.
    (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wallace, C., & Hand, B.
    (2007) Using a science writing heuristic to promote learning from laboratory. InC. Wallace, B. Hand, & V. Prain (Eds.), Writing and learning in the science classroom (pp.67–90). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Wallace, C., Hand, B., & Prain, V.
    (2007) Breakthroughs, classroom implications, on-going, and future research. InC. Wallace, B. Hand, & V. Prain (Eds.), Writing and learning in the science classroom (pp.123–135). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Wellington, J., & Osborne, J.
    (2001) Language and literacy in science education. Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Wong, D., & Lau, C. Y.
    (2014) The development and implementation of a guided-inquiry curriculum for secondary school physics. InA.-L. Tan, C.-L. Poon, & S. Lim (Eds.), Inquiry into the Singapore science classroom: Research and practices (pp.89–110). Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑4585‑78‑1_5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4585-78-1_5 [Google Scholar]
  47. Yeo, J., & Gilbert, J.
    (2014) Constructing a scientific explanation – A narrative account. International Journal of Science Education, 36(11), 1902–1935. 10.1080/09500693.2014.880527
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.880527 [Google Scholar]
  48. Yin, R.
    (2009) Case study methods. InJ. Green, G. Camilli, & P. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods for research in education. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/pl.19008.ada
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/pl.19008.ada
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error