Reframing Literacy in the Discipline of Science with the Disciplinary Literacy Observation Tool (DLOT)

Abstract

This article explains how teams of special educators, science teachers, literacy consultants, and administrators can use the Disciplinary Literacy Observation Tool (DLOT) and accompanying planning tool to improve disciplinary literacy instruction in inclusive secondary science classrooms. The DLOT was developed in partnership with practitioners as a tool for professional development and coaching. First, the tool's development and five dimensions are described: (a) aspects of disciplinary literacy in science, (b) instructional grouping, (c) student engagement, (d) quality of pedagogy, and (e) overall quality. Then, an illustration is provided for how special educators can collaborate with science educators and other colleagues to use the DLOT to identify, document, reflect upon, and set goals regarding disciplinary literacy instruction in science in ways that benefit students with learning disabilities. With the DLOT, practitioners can approach literacy integration in science to address both general and discipline‐specific strategies aligned synergistically to Common Core State Standards and Next Generation Science Standards through three‐dimensional science learning.

Addressing an Unfulfilled Expectation: Teaching Students With Disabilities to Write Scientific Arguments

“…Additional studies may also focus on explicit instruction in vocabulary and syntax, which will be helpful for students given the abstract and lexically dense characteristics of scientific writing (Drew & Thomas, 2022b; Schleppegrell, 2004; Whittaker et al, 2006). A recent study by Telesca et al (2020) demonstrated benefits in metalinguistic instruction (involving sentence combining and learning compare and contrast transition words) helped middle school students who struggled with literacy to better understand and express similarities and differences between related scientific concepts.…”

“…As the writing-to-learn movement has evolved, there has been an enhanced focus on disciplinary writing in science (De La Paz & Levin, 2018; Drew & Thomas, 2022a; Goldman et al, 2016; Graham et al, 2020). In the science classroom, evidence from neurotypical students shows that writing arguments can improve students’ conceptual understanding and engagement in science practices (Akkus et al, 2007; Chen et al, 2016; Nam et al, 2008), and students’ written arguments can provide opportunities for assessment (Turner & Broemmel, 2006; Drew & Thomas, 2022b), thus providing sound rationale for introducing similar forms of instruction with SWDs. To support neurotypical students in writing arguments, several research groups have developed writing strategies to scaffold students’ cognitive skills in learning to argue (Hand et al, 2021; McNeill et al, 2006; Sampson et al, 2011).…”

“…Recent work by Drew and Thomas (2022a, 2022b) suggests how science teachers might coordinate teaching writing with science, with an approach to instruction and assessment to support all students’ disciplinary writing, including their argument writing. 3D+U(DL) was developed to be aligned with the NGSS three-dimensional learning vision and emphasizes discipline-specific writing approaches.…”

Current Research Informing the Conceptualization of STEM Interventions for Students With LD: An Introduction to the Special Series

“…While more work is clearly needed, special education researchers are contributing to the development of robust STEM interventions for SLD, often by integrating effective instructional scaffolds and evidence-based approaches to instruction in meaningful contexts (Bulgren et al, 2014; van Garderen et al, in press). Recent work by Drew and Thomas (2022a, 2022b) provides an example of an interdisciplinary team whose work can inform how science teachers might coordinate teaching writing with science, with an approach to instruction and assessment to support all students’ disciplinary writing. The 3D+U(DL) model was developed to align with the NGSS three-dimensional learning vision, and it emphasizes discipline specific writing approaches.…”