Scientific modeling and translanguaging: A multilingual and multimodal approach to support science learning and engagement

Abstract

Research suggests that translanguaging can be transformative for teaching and learning by making students' diverse linguistic resources a meaningful part of classroom discourse. Building on this study, researchers have explored how translanguaging practices can support learning in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), primarily in the context of bilingual classrooms. However, in the United States, most students learn in English‐dominant classrooms. In response, researchers and educators have begun to explore strategies for inviting and leveraging translanguaging in English‐dominant classrooms, primarily focusing on literacy learning. Less is known about supporting translanguaging in English‐dominant STEM classrooms, particularly with monolingual teachers. In an English‐dominant sixth‐grade STEM classroom engaging in a 9‐week ecology unit, we explored how scientific modeling could not only provide a context for inviting translanguaging, but how it could also provide a setting where modeling and translanguaging could be experienced as analogous meaning‐making practices. Our findings demonstrate that translanguaging has the potential to support new kinds of learning in English‐dominant STEM classrooms, not only about STEM content and practices but also about what counts as legitimate and valuable participation in these spaces.

Beyond assessing knowledge about models and modeling: Moving toward expansive, meaningful, and equitable modeling practice

“…The field's work on modeling is largely based on the European‐Western scientific canon that values abstracted representational knowledge—and rarely considers how such conceptualization interacts with culturally sustaining pedagogical approaches for children and youth. With some exceptions (see Grapin et al, 2021; Pierson et al, 2021; Salgado, 2021; Suárez, 2020), few studies of scientific modeling focus on equity impacts on children and youth. Alternatively, work on representational practice that could point to more equitable or culturally sustaining practice may not be seen as part of the modeling practice research endeavor (e.g., Scherr et al, 2013; Solomon et al, 2022; Varelas et al, 2022; Washinawatok et al, 2017).…”

Science education with multilingual learners: Equity as access and equity as transformation

“…Specifically, these efforts attend to equity as access by engaging learners with the knowledge, practices, and language expected by the latest science education reform. For example, Pierson and colleagues' learning design in STEM classrooms engaged students in core science ideas (e.g., interdependent relationships in ecosystems) and practices (e.g., modeling) emphasized in the state science standards—a key priority expressed by their teacher collaborator (Pierson, 2023)—as well as the language to engage with those knowledge and practices (e.g., “population levels”). Likewise, Ryu and colleagues' afterschool program helped build learners' knowledge, practices, and language related to weather and climate phenomena (e.g., temperature, air pressure, humidity), thus providing supplementary STEM learning experiences for refugee youth who often had interrupted schooling and emerging English proficiency.…”

“Let’s transform!”: A systematic literature review of science learning in COVID-19 pandemic era

“…In particular, social media can be used for informal science learning (Lundgren et al, 2022). Obstacles & challenges also need to be identified (Christidou et al, 2022) Forms of implementing science learning: formal, informal, & non-formal 3 Integrated urgency (Suraiya et al, 2020) & science learning spaces need to reduce social/gender inequality (Dawson et al, 2020), social positioning (Brookes et al, 2021), ethnopedagogy (Rahmawati et al, 2020), environmentally-based (Nusantari et al, 2020), climate change awareness (Jeong et al, 2021), indigenous science (Zidny et al, 2021), socio-scientific issues-based (Nida, Mustikasari, et al, 2021), life-based experiential learning (Acharya et al, 2022), religion & culture on student attitudes (Kurniawan et al, 2022) (Kim, 2020), spatial abilities (Chen et al, 2020), student engagement (Bae & Lai, 2020;Lee et al, 2021;Pierson et al, 2021), students' situational engagement (Inkinen et al, 2020), & productive disciplinary engagement (Koretsky et al, 2021;Membiela et al, 2022).…”