Abstract
Disciplinary literacy is the specific ways of talking, reading, writing, and thinking valued and used by people in a discipline in order to successfully access and construct knowledge in that discipline. This paper reports on a case study of the classroom practices of two physics and two chemistry teachers in Singapore in order to better understand how disciplinary literacy is currently addressed in the teaching of secondary school science. The study found that disciplinary literacy in science teaching was limited to the language aspects of science terminologies and the literacy practice of constructing explanation. Even then, these disciplinary language aspects were only implicitly embedded within the predominant practice of teacher-led talk. Based on these findings, current realities and future possibilities of disciplinary literacy instruction building on science teachers’ current teaching practices are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Achinstein, P. (1983). The nature of explanation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2009). Shape of the Australian Curriculum: Science. National Curriculum Board.
Barton, D. & Hamilton, M. (Eds.). (2000). Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context. New York, NY: Routledge.
Bloome, D. & Egan-Robertson, A. (1993). The social construction of intertextuality in classroom reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 305–333.
Chin, C. (2006). Classroom interaction in science: Teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (11), 1315–1346. doi:10.1080/09500690600621100
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards. Washington D.C.: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers.
Driver, R., Newton, P. & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84 (3), 287–312.
English Language Institute of Singapore. (2013). Disciplinary literacy: A study of the literature. ELIS Research Digest, 1 (1), 1–14. Retrieved from http://www.elis.moe.edu.sg/research/elis-research-digest
Erickson, F. (1992). Ethnographic microanalysis of interaction. In M.D. LeCompte, W. Millroy & J. Preissle (Eds.). The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 201–225). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Fang, Z. (2005). Scientific literacy: A systemic functional linguistics perspective. Science Education, 89 (2), 335–347.
Fang, Z. (2014). Preparing content area teachers for disciplinary literacy instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57 (6), 444–448. doi:10.1002/jaal.269
Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language and meaning. London, England: Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London, England: Arnold.
Hand, B., Alvermann, D.E., Gee, J., Guzzetti, B.J., Norris, S.P., Phillips, L.M., … Yore, L.D. (2003). Message from the ‘Island group’: What is literacy in science literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40 (7), 607–615.
Heath, S.B. (1983). Ways with words: language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge; England: Cambridge University Press.
Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: the modes and media of contemporary communication. London, England: Arnold.
Lemke, J.L. (1989). Social semiotics: A new model for literacy education. In D. Bloome (Ed.). Classrooms and literacy (pp. 289–309). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
Lemke, J.L. (1990). Talking science: language, learning and values: Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lemke, J.L. (2000). Multimedia literacy demands of the scientific curriculum. Linguistics and Education, 10 (3), 247–271.
Martin, J.R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
Martin, J.R. & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: meaning beyond the clause (2nd ed.). London, England: Continuum.
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Moje, E.B. (2007). Developing socially just subject-matter instruction: a review of the literature on disciplinary literacy teaching. Review of Research in Education, 31, 1–44.
Mortimer, E.F. & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2014). Literacy for Science: Exploring the Intersection of the Next Generation Science Standards and Common Core for ELA Standards, A Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Norris, S.P. & Phillips, L.M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87 (2), 224–240.
Scribner, S. & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Shanahan, T. & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78 (1), 40–59.
Street, B.V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Tang, K.S. (In press). Constructing scientific explanations through Premise-Reasoning-Outcome (PRO): An exploratory study to scaffold students in structuring written explanations. International Journal of Science Education.
Tang, K.S. & Rappa, N. (under review). Integrating disciplinary-specific genre structure in questioning techniques to foster effective classroom talk.
Unsworth, L. (1998). ‘Sound’ explanations in school science: A functional linguistic perspective on effective apprenticing texts. Linguistics and Education, 9 (2), 199–226.
Veel, R. (1997). Learning how to mean-scientifically speaking: apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. In C. Frances & J. Martin (Eds.). Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 161–195). London, England: Cassell.
Wellington, J. & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Yin, R.K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Washington D.C.: Sage.
Yore, L.D. & Treagust, D.F. (2006). Current Realities and Future Possibilities: Language and science literacy - empowering research and informing instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (2), 291–314.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tang, KS. How is disciplinary literacy addressed in the Science classroom?: A Singaporean case study. AJLL 39, 220–232 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651975
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651975