Language in Science Classrooms: An Analysis of Physics Teachers’ Use of and Beliefs About Language

The Laboratory Work Style’s Influence on Students’ Communication

“…The research shows that activities such as planning, processing data and analysis of results produce talk of an exploratory character, but for this to happen physics teachers must realise the inherent educational value of mastering the language of physics and start to design the laboratory work accordingly. Oyoo (2012) points out that for effective teaching to occur, the teachers need to attend more to the nature of the instructional language of the science classroom. Maloney and Simon (2006) advocate group activities in science education where students have the opportunity to develop the ability to reason.…”

“…Based on this research results, it is clear that the context of laboratory work can create an appropriate environment for joint consideration and reflection. Both teachers and students need to understand the importance of communicating physics to apprehend a better conceptual understanding of the subject, which is not the present case (Högström, Ottander & Benckert, 2010;Oyoo, 2012).…”

“…Studies about laboratory work in science education have, over the last fifteen years, been the subject of a large body of research (for example Abrahams & Millar, 2008;Dillon, 2008;Hofstein & Lunetta, 2004;Jacobsen, 2010). Parallel to this, the number of studies about communication in the science classroom has grown considerably, becoming a research domain of its own (for example, Bennet, Hogarth, Lubben, Campbell & Robinson, 2010;Dawes & Staarman, 2009;Kind, Kind, Hofstein & Wilson, 2011;Mercer, 2010;Oyoo, 2012. Researchers in the field of laboratory work and in the field of communication stress the importance of science teachers eliciting students to communicate about science and giving them opportunities to perform laboratory work. If students' communication is affected by the context of laboratory work, this might have consequences for the efficiency of the lesson, both in aspects of learning outcomes and of new experiences for students.…”

Clasificación y análisis de los problemas terminológicos asociados con el aprendizaje de la química: obstáculos a superar

“…(Tabla 2A). Diferentes trabajos, centrados principalmente en alumnos de ciencias de edades comprendidas entre 14 y 17 años (Cassels y Johnstone, 1980Gardner, 1980a;Pickershill y Lock, 1991;Marshall, Gilmour y Lewis, 1991;Johnstone y Kellet, 1980;Farell y Ventura, 1998;Prophet y Towse, 1999), así como algunos estudios referidos a estudiantes universitarios (Dalcq, Van Raemdonck y Wilmet, 1989;Jacobs, 1989;Oyoo, 2012), han mostrado las dificultades del alumnado en la comprensión de esta clase de palabras. Además, algunos de estos trabajos (Cassels y Johnstone, 1985;Dalcq et al, 1989;Pickershill y Lock, 1991) encontraron que, en ocasiones, los estudiantes asignan el significado opuesto a un determinado término científico (e.g.…”

Linguistic Challenges in Mendelian Genetics: Teachers’ Talk in Action

“…Since teachers are important for student learning and a major source of information for students is the teachers’ spoken language, there is a need to acquire knowledge about the teachers’ language. There have been several studies of teachers’ talk in classrooms, for example, Dagher and Cossman () examined different types of explanations teachers used in science classrooms; Wilson () focused on teachers’ use of words with metacognitive and metalinguistic functions in chemistry classes; Oyoo () investigated physic teachers’ instructional language; Brown and Spang () investigated teachers’ use of everyday and science language in teaching; and Nygård Larsson () analyzed teachers’ language within the systematics domain in biology. However, despite recognition of the central role of language in learning science and the importance of the teacher's role in this matter (Mortimer & Scott, ), few studies have examined teachers’ language in action associated with specific science content.…”