Scientific literacy and discursive identity: A theoretical framework for understanding science learning

Brown, Bryan A.; Reveles, John M.; Kelly, Gregory J.

doi:10.1002/sce.20069

Cited by 246 publications

(170 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

153

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We see the video diaries as an appropriate tool when studying scientific literacy and identity construction (Sadler 2009). The participatory possibilities of video diaries can be used to investigate how decision-making and reasoning can be shared with others in the construction of a discursive identity (Brown et al 2005). However, we agree with Gibson (2005) and Pink (2001) who argue that the informants present themselves in accordance with what is expected of them, but also how they want to be perceived in relation to those expectations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate: how teenagers justified their decision

Lundström

Ekborg

Ideland

2012

Cult Stud of Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports on a study of how teenagers made their decision on whether or not to vaccinate themselves against the new influenza. Its purpose was to identify connections between how teenagers talk about themselves and the decision they made. How do the teenagers construct their identities while talking about a specific socio-scientific issue? Seven teenagers between 17 and 19 years of age participated in the study. The informants were requested to document in video diary situations in which their decisions about the vaccination were discussed. All the teenagers recorded their diaries during the weeks of the vaccination programme. The students were also interviewed 1-4 weeks after completing their diaries. A discourse psychology framework (Potter and Wetherell 1987) was used to analyse the video diaries and the interviews. In this context, decision-making on a socioscientific issue must be understood as an appropriation and use of discursive repertoires, and also as meaning-making in relation to other fields, such as society and identity. It must also be understood in relation to the use of science repertoire-or actually, the school science repertoire-how available is this discourse in different contexts outside school? The repertoires were categorised into two main types; experienced emphases and important actors. The first included the categories of risk, solidarity and knowledge. The second included family and friends, media, school and society. The school repertoire was seldom used by the students, indicating that school and science education seem not to be an interpretative repertoire available to them. Instead, the risk, solidarity, family and friends and the media repertoires were available in their talk about vaccination. These results indicate the need to use media reports in dealing with scientific literacy and also in risk assessment discussions in school. It also indicates the importance of relating school science closely to the students' daily life.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate: how teenagers justified their decision

Lundström

Ekborg

Ideland

2012

Cult Stud of Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One potential area of synergy involves an analysis of the sociopolitical nature of using science language in the classroom. Scholars of science education have identified how some students experience identity conflicts in their attempts to learn science (Brown, 2004;Brown, Reveles, & Kelly 2005;Valeras, Becker, Luster, & Wenzel, 2002). Using Hymes' communicative competence framework allows scholars to identify how using science language has become symbolic of cultural betrayal for many minority students.…”

Section: From Faux Bubba To Using Science Languagementioning

confidence: 99%

Double talk: Synthesizing everyday and science language in the classroom

2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research project explores the language practices that emerged as a teacher taught a lesson designed to promote science literacy development for traditionally underrepresented students. This ethnographic study of a Detroit, Michigan, school examined the teacher's use of science language and its influence on students' use of science language. Using sociolinguistic discourse analysis, two modes of classroom language were identified. First, the teacher used a hybrid method of language involving her explaining science ideas by using vernacular and scientific language. This parenthetical type of speech, which we describe as "double talk," was also found in students. Second, students appropriated this same strategy for using science language in which they produced vernacular and scientific descriptions during explanations. The findings of this study are significant in their contribution to contemporary research about teaching and learning for minority students. These results implicate the need to teach science explicitly as a second language in urban classrooms.

show abstract

“…A common rationale given for studying science subjects in school is the achievement of scientific literacy (AAAS, 1989;Bybee, 1997;OECD, 2003, Brown, Reveles & Kelly, 2005Shwartz, Ben-Zvi, and Hofstein, 2005), although there are different interpretations of its meaning (Jenkins, 1990;DeBoer, 2000;Laugksch, 2000;Tippens, Nichols & Bryan, 2000;Kolstø, 2001;Hodson, 2002;Fensham, 2004). This paper sets out to establish the nature of science education needed to prepare students for the kind of scientific literacy necessary for responsible citizenship.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%