How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy

Abstract

This paper draws upon a distinction between fundamental and derived senses of literacy to show that conceptions of scientific literacy attend to the derived sense but tend to neglect the fundamental sense. In doing so, they fail to address a central component of scientific literacy. A notion of literacy in its fundamental sense is elaborated and contrasted to a simple view of reading and writing that still has much influence on literacy instruction in schools and, we believe, is widely assumed in science education. We make suggestions about how scientific literacy would be viewed differently if the fundamental sense of literacy were taken seriously and explore some educational implications of attending to literacy in its fundamental sense when teaching science.

Scientific literacy: A Freirean perspective as a radical view of humanistic science education

“…On the other hand, there are some other STL and STS curricula that could be considered naïve in terms of the students' political engagement, though some do convey a radical view of science education. For instance, a common category of STL is the practical view of technological literacy (DeBoer, 2000;Laugksch, 2000;Millar, 1996;Norris & Phillips, 2003), as a means for immediate use of technological apparatus. Another category is related to the social or cultural aim, which is to prepare citizens to be sympathetic toward science or to understand science as human culture (Arons, 1983;DeBoer, 2000;Millar, 1996;Norris & Phillips, 2003;Ramsey, 1993;Shen, 1975).…”

Do student perceptions of teaching predict the development of representational competence and biological knowledge?

“…To be scientifically literate, students need to be supported in reading, writing, and communicating in science (Krajcik & Sutherland, 2010;Norris & Phillips, 2003;Yore, Pimm, & Tuan, 2007). Reading, writing, and communicating in science do not only rely on verbal discourse and written text.…”

“…These skills have been referred to as representational competence (RC, Kozma, Chin, Russell, & Marx, 2000;Kozma & Russell, 1997, 2005 and contribute to being scientific literate. Scientific literacy thus comprises of the interacting dimensions of fundamental literacy, including the abilities to construct and interpret scientific discourses (inter alia RC), and the derived understanding about the principles and foundations of science (Norris & Phillips, 2003;Yore et al, 2007).…”

Response to Carter's postmodern, postcolonial analysis of Snively and Corsiglia's (2000) article “Discovering science”

“…We also find that science educators (Norris & Phillips, 2003;Yore, Hand, & Florence, 2004;Yore & Treagust, in press) disregard these radical postmodern positions as nonscientific. These science educators understand that language is a means to constructing science knowledge, and a means to communicate inquiries, observation, problems, and science understandings to other community members, and to outside people so that they can assess the validity of the knowledge claims, make informed decisions and take action.…”