Learning the words AND knowing the concepts: an in‐depth study of one expert teacher's use of language as a cultural tool to support inquiry

Abstract

This research explored the practices of one science teacher, expert in her field, as she worked to enact science discourse that incorporated language in naturalistic and rigorous ways. Difficulties in mastering the language of science contribute to troubling and persistent achievement gaps across demographic and gender groups. Science learning is based in discourse, with knowledge built by asking questions, exploring, revising views and asking new questions. But all too often students are not able to participate fully in these opportunities for discourse that is engaging and exploration due to the difficulty of science language. Qualitative analysis of this teacher's use of science discourse to establish clear links between essential science language and concepts and pre/post analysis of a science language assessment reveal important ways that teachers and researchers can work together to design and deliver instruction and assessment that supports students' mastery of sophisticated language and concepts. Results have implications for theory regarding science discourse; language learning, and conceptual development; and provide a model for teacher-researcher partnerships exploring important problems of teaching practice.

Disciplinary Literacy and the 4Es: Rigorous and Substantive Responses to Interdisciplinary Standards

“…Difficulties with science language often keep students from mastering content (Hayden et al, 2020;Pearson, 2010), and in her summer research Danielle had experienced firsthand the challenges of science vocabulary. Moje (2015) Simon's binary approach was reflected in standards enacted during teaching observations when time was split equally between direct instruction of facts and developing foundational science skills.…”

“…Although Danielle missed opportunities to E licit/Engineer by infusing science vocabulary into inquiry-based activities (Moje, 2015), her focus on vocabulary was well founded. Difficulties with science language often keep students from mastering content (Hayden et al, 2020; Pearson, 2010), and in her summer research, Danielle had experienced firsthand the challenges of science vocabulary. Moje (2015) noted that “learning [definitions] of the technical language of disciplinary subjects is not as useful…if students are not engaged in disciplinary inquiry, because they have no way to apply the language they are learning” (p. 255).…”

“…Hands-on investigation of different surfaces also provided the opportunity to connect important concepts about light with the vocabulary labels for these concepts: reflection and dispersion. Teaching science language in such interactive ways is crucial to developing ownership of science concepts (Hayden et al, 2020; Pearson, 2010). “Drawing attention to the technical language” (Moje, 2015, p. 268), in this case, means recognizing subtle differences between knowing what a reflection in a mirror is and understanding the principles of light reflection and dispersion learned in science.…”

Reflecting upon 30 Years of STEM Partnerships between Industry, University, and Public Schools: Past Lessons, Current Successes, and Future Dreams

“…Gee's definition insists discourse orchestrates change and understanding from an exchange of ideas. A teacher's ability to allow for the process of inquiry along with discourse increases a student's ability to engage with the content and retain information [20]. The domains of instruction within the academy are framed in the power of discourse led by teachers who help to elevate students' voices, understandings, and learning outcomes in the critical areas of STEM.…”

Simplifying Biology Vocabulary via Morphology

“…Comparing the morphologies of words may even result in novel connections for the students (Zoski et al, 2018). Educational schema theory suggests that students can implement this knowledge of terminology to improve comprehension and retention of deeper ideas (Hayden et al, 2020; Wilhelmsson et al, 2013; Wright et al, 2016).…”