Science Without Literacy: A ship without a sail?

Abstract

This article argues that reading, writing and argument are central to any conception of science as it is currently constituted. Moreover, it is through the texts of science, popular accounts or journalistic reported versions that the majority of the public interact with and consider the implications of the ndings that science presents. However, the study of the language of science, science's epistemic base and the cultural norms and values that underpin its practice are currently considered only marginal to the teaching of science. Rather, the specialised laboratories provided for science teachers and the narrow conception of science embodied in the curriculum gives pre-eminence to science as an empirical activity in the naive belief that this is central to understanding the nature of science. The consequent failure to recognise the centrality of language, literacy and argument to science education leaves the majority ill equipped to become critical consumers of science. Change requires a concerted attempt to reconceptualise the priorities for science education through a mix of new curricula, new strategies and last, but not least, new modes of assessment.

The Effectiveness of Practical Work in Physics to Improve Students’ Academic Performances

“…Teaching objectives can be achieved easily by doing practical work especially in teaching physics (El-rabadi, 2013). Furthermore, first-hand knowledge of the physics concept will be generated where students can understand the abstract ideas which are difficult to explain during the class (Osborne, 2002). Students' understanding of theories and models can also be developed (Millar & Abrahams, 2009).…”

Challenges and Support When Teaching Science Through an Integrated Inquiry and Literacy Approach

“…First of all, this thesis emphasizes a view of literacy as situated social practices, not as a set of universal skills that can be applied independent of the context in which they are situated (i.e., the ability to read and write), which has long been the prevalent view among science teachers and educators Pearson et al, 2010; see also Section 6.3). In a social view of literacy, reading and writing cannot be seen as additional elements to inquiry-based science education (or to scientific inquiry), but must be regarded as constitutive of its practice (Gee, 2004;Osborne, 2002). Not only does this challenge how reading and writing in school science are often reduced to copying scientific information (e.g., Lyons, 2006;Osborne & Collins, 2001), it also questions why experimentation tends to be taught in isolation from the specialized ways of reading, writing, and talking science in many inquiry-based approaches to science education (National Research Council, 2012).…”

Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argümantasyon Temelli Fen Derslerinin İncelenmesi: Eylem Araştırması

“…Sürekli değişim halinde olan bilimsel bilginin anlaşılması için öğrencilerin sorgulamalarına da yer verilmesi gerekir (Trend, 2009). Bunun için de öğrencilerin 'fikirlerle etkileşim içine girmeleri' sağlanmalıdır (Osborne, 2002). Bakış açısındaki bu değişiklik sınıf içi etkinliklerini de değiştiren önemli pedagojik çalışmaları beraberinde getirmiştir.…”