Learning to Read Science

Osborne, Jonathan; Sedlacek, Quentin; Lemmi, Catherine; Friend, Michelle

doi:10.2505/4/ss16_040_03_36

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Textbooks are inherently designed to be level appropriate and well rounded in terms of content: They train students in disciplinary vocabulary (e.g., bold key words in a textbook; Osborne, Sedlacek, Friend, & Lemmi, 2016), so it does not require a lot of expertise or time to select and assign pages from a course textbook, as compared with what is required for identifying relevant articles from popular press and scholarly sources. Graduate-student instructors may also choose to assign textbooks because they assume that textbooks better match the academic level of the students to a greater extent than scholarly or popular press articles.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do graduate students’ teaching values align with their approaches to teaching and teaching practices?

Schwartz¹,

Whiteman²,

Brooks³

2022

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An online survey of graduate-student instructors of undergraduate courses (N ϭ 156) explored their teaching values, teaching approaches, teaching practices, career teaching expectations, and experience of receiving support as teachers. Our aim was to uncover what graduate students value as important for teaching excellence and whether those values are expressed in their teaching practices. Participants most valued ethics and diversity and higher-order thinking skills in their teaching along with instructor expertise. Of these 3 domains, the first 2 aligned with endorsements of a conceptual-change, student-focused approach to teaching (r ϭ .36 and r ϭ .28, respectively). Despite this, most participants reported making use of non-student-centered teaching practices, such as lecturing (93.6%) or assigning textbook readings (84.0%), rather than studentfocused practices, like using small-group discussions (48.0%). However, when some student-centered practices were adopted, there were links to endorsements of studentfocused values: Assigning popular press articles (19.2%) correlated with valuing ethics and diversity (r ϭ .29), whereas structuring writing assignments to be collaborative (28.8%) correlated with valuing higher-order thinking skills (r ϭ .27). Regarding career teaching expectations and perceptions of teaching support, two thirds of participants expected teaching to be part of their career responsibilities, but fewer than half believed they received as much support as needed. The findings indicate further need for training and support to better ensure that graduate-student instructors adopt evidence-based teaching practices that align with their student-focused teaching values and approaches.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do graduate students’ teaching values align with their approaches to teaching and teaching practices?

Schwartz¹,

Whiteman²,

Brooks³

2022

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given these demands of the science classroom, researchers have identified a variety of features that make science language especially difficult to learn. Challenges of scientific language include nominalizations (processes turned into a single noun), lexical density (text tightly packed with terminology), polysemy (terms with multiple meanings), and multimodality (ideas represented with words, charts, and diagrams; Osborne, Sedlacek, Friend, & Lemmi, ; Snow, ). When students are asked to do receptive language tasks like reading or listening in a science class, they face discipline‐specific linguistic challenges.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language ideologies in science education

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on sociolinguistics research regarding commonbeliefs and justifications about language, we applied notions of language ideology to an analysis of the formative assessment practices of secondary science teachers from linguistically diverse schools. We identified two language ideologies that were demonstrated by teachers as they engaged in the formative assessment of student work. Here, we introduce the terms language-exclusive ideology and language-inclusive ideology. A language-exclusive ideology holds that certain forms of language are expected in a science class, and others are not appropriate. What we have termed a language-inclusive ideology suggests that multiple forms of language use are acceptable in science classrooms, and this approach finds synergies with the literature on translanguaging, or the integration of multiple languages for complex communicative purposes. We argue that science teacher educators should consider teachers' language ideologies as they prepare professional development and preservice teacher education curriculum materials, and we discuss potential implications for science education and teacher education. Finally, we call for more explicit consideration of issues of language ideology within the science education community to understand how various approaches to language can provide affordances or barriers to content learning and language development. K E Y W O R D S English Language Learners, formative assessment, ideology, language Science Education. 2019;103:854-874. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/sce 854 |

show abstract

“…This was supported by higher test scores on the problemsolving task for those students who read the difficult article accompanied by hands-on manipulation than for those who read the same article without hands-on manipulation. One possible explanation was because the difficult article contains more unfamiliar academic language and higher lexical density (Halliday & Martin, 1993;Snow, 2010;Wellington & Osborne, 2001) and requires hands-on manipulation to concretize abstract concepts (Osborne et al, 2016;Patterson et al, 2018). Although reading difficult texts might occupy learners' cognitive capacity (Roy-Charland et al, 2016), using hands-on manipulation could help them free up some cognitive capacity.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scientific texts have unique properties that make reading comprehension challenging for readers such as lexical density (the number of content words within a text; Halliday & Martin, 1993), technical vocabulary and academic language (scientific words have specific meanings within a science discipline; Snow, 2010;Wellington & Osborne, 2001), and multimodality (graphs, tables, and mathematics that express relationships; Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001). Science texts determine students' reading comprehension (Osborne et al, 2016), and texts are supported by performing experiments that help students to understand abstract concepts (van den Broek, 2010). The relationship between reading science texts and performing experiments may influence students' conceptual understanding.…”

Section: Relevant Factors That Influence Reading Comprehension and Hands-on Manipulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, the researchers speculated that the benefit effect of hands-on manipulation for learning the pulley system concept would be mediated by difficulty (Hypothesis 1b). For instance, learning a difficult concept by reading a difficult article should be affected by less familiarity with academic terms and higher lexical density (Halliday & Martin, 1993), hindering reading comprehension (Osborne et al, 2016;Patterson et al, 2018). Thus, hands-on manipulation may be needed to make abstract concepts concretely accessible.…”

Section: The Present Study and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of science text reading difficulty and hands‐on manipulation on science learning: An eye‐tracking study

Jian

2021

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study used eye-movement tracking to investigate how students engage with the learning process of reading science articles with or without hands-on manipulation of a pulley system and their influences on learning outcomes. This experiment used a 2 (reading easy or difficult articles) Â 2 (with or without hands-on manipulation) between-subject design. Seventy-nine undergraduate students participated. They first read a science article about rotational mechanics and then completed a problem-solving task. While completing the problem-solving task, the two pure reading groups could reread the article to write down their answers, and the two read-and-manipulation groups were allowed to manipulate the pulley system in addition to reading the article. The participants' eye movements were recorded during the completion of this task.Results showed that hands-on manipulation benefited those learners who read the difficult article, since they had better scores regarding the problem-solving task; this was not the case for those who read the easy article. Eye movement data showed that the two pure reading groups spent more processing time rereading the article as well as writing their answers to the problemsolving task than did the other two read-and-

show abstract

Learning to Read Science

Cited by 6 publications

References 10 publications

Do graduate students’ teaching values align with their approaches to teaching and teaching practices?

Do graduate students’ teaching values align with their approaches to teaching and teaching practices?

Language ideologies in science education

Influence of science text reading difficulty and hands‐on manipulation on science learning: An eye‐tracking study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About