Reading, Writing, and Thinking Like a Scientist

Abstract

In this commentary, the authors bring insights from their work on science‐literacy integration at the elementary level to bear on the ongoing conversation about disciplinary literacy at the middle and secondary levels. In particular, the authors discuss what they have learned about inquiry, disciplinary reading strategies, and the role of text in disciplinary learning. The authors conclude that reading, writing, and language are best viewed as closely tied to inquiry and meaning‐making in different disciplines, and, as such, are best positioned as a set of tools used to support student involvement in the unique practices of each discipline.

Disciplinary Literacy

“…This is the kind of scaffolding found in Juel et al. 's work with first graders (2010) as well as the work reviewed by Cervetti and Pearson ().…”

“…However, Juel, Hebard, Haubner, and Moran () described first graders learning about how scientists and historians think, and Cervetti and Pearson described research in which elementary students were engaged in doing science and were simultaneously learning about reading and writing practices in science. Cervetti and Pearson's stance that it does not make sense to teach comprehension of scientific text isolated from engaged exploration and scientific inquiry strikes a chord with me as a science teacher. If primary and elementary students can learn discipline‐appropriate ways of thinking, why do we assume secondary students cannot do so?…”

Reading for tracing evidence: developing scientific knowledge through science text

“…Students who refer more web pages or popular news shows low motivation and reading habit because they take information instantly from internet browsing or refer to the conclusions of previous research without seeing scientific process happened in it [22], [23], [12]. It has an impact on the students' lack of understanding of science comprehensively, especially in appreciating how scientists think and act, how a study leads to new findings and how to use the results of research as empirical foundation of further research [24], [25].…”

Enhancing Information Literacy Using Bernard Lonergan's Generalized Empirical Method: A Three-year Case Study in a First Year Biology Course

“…They have heard of the scientific method, but seem to associate it solely with completing hands-on experiments or Eureka style discovery rather than with background reading, hypothesis formation and testing and finally communication of results. As Cervetti and Pearson (2012) note, students treat science texts as if they contained established truths, without understanding how facts are determined or thinking of science as way of answering questions. Furthermore, most first year science students do not know how to generate interesting research questions that would lead to the discovery of new information and contribute to their learning.…”