Implementation of the Science Writing Heuristic (Swh) Approach in 8th Grade Science Classrooms

Abstract

Current initiatives in science education in Korea have emphasized science literacy as the most important purpose of science education; that is, science education needs to focus on helping each student to become a scientifically literate person who is able to make reasoned decisions. In attempting to address this focus concern about science literacy, the researchers of this study attempted to implement the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach and examined both the SWH and the control groups using the modified Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP). Students' performance on a Summary Writing Test (SWT) was also examined. Participant students of this study were eighth grade students in three middle schools located in the second biggest city in Korea. Each of the three teachers from three schools taught both the SWH and the control classes. The results of this study showed significant differences between the SWH and the control groups on the SWT. There was a difference in the total RTOP scores between the SWH and the control groups. Differences among schools imply that higher level of teachers' implementation of the SWH approach would appear to result in better student achievement.

A combined approach to strengthen children’s scientific thinking: direct instruction on scientific reasoning and training of teacher’s verbal support

“…There are indeed strong indications that literacy and science education can be combined in the classroom to promote both of them (Clark & Lott, 2017). Different aspects of language have been integrated effectively in science education: reading (Vitale & Romance, 2012), writing (Nam, Choi, & Hand, 2011) and discourse (Mercer et al, 2004). A crucial component in all integrated instructions are teachers' verbal instruction strategies.…”

Adapted Primary Literature

“…Hand and his colleagues (e.g., Nam et al 2011) have shown, for example, that teaching students to use only the three concepts-"scientific question", "claim", and "reason"-can lead to considerable improvement in young students' knowledge of and facility with scientific reasoning, reading, and writing. Scientific meta-language provides the concepts for talking about science, and it is an ability to talk intelligently about science that is the mark of scientific literacy.…”

Arguing Like a Scientist

“…Several researchers have lamented the fact that science instruction in schools currently inhibits this type of negotiated discourse, which is drastically different from the goal of inquiry in school science (Duschl, 2008;Varelas et al, 2008). In supporting this orientation, Nam et al (2011) pointed out that, through engaging in argumentative practice, students should be aware of the process of producing, testing, and revising knowledge claims and the criteria of evaluating evidence shaped by data. That is, students need to use the argument structure to learn science concepts, just as scientists do.…”

“…We present the negotiation model to demonstrate how to engage students in using the scientific argument structure to learn science' s big ideas through argumentative practices. Empirical studies have shown that engaging students in the negotiation model can help them develop deeper conceptual understanding, advance critical thinking skills, and promote literacy in science (Cavagnetto et al, 2011;Chen, 2011;Nam et al, 2011). It is time for all of us to move away from activity-driven inquiry to argument-based inquiry in which students can construct and critique scientific knowledge through authentic and core practices of science.…”