Current Event #1
Running head: CURRENT EVENT #1
Rethinking Science Literacy: Enhancing Communication and Participation in School Science through
Affirmational Dialogue Journal Writing
Current Event #1
Andrew Stephens
California State University, Northridge
1
Current Event #1
2
Rethinking Science Literacy: Enhancing Communication and Participation in School Science through
Affirmational Dialogue Journal Writing
Current Event #1
In this article, Hanrahan examines the connection between a researcher led literacy
strategy called dialogue journal writing and students’ scientific literacy. She specifically focused
on one class of secondary biology students and employed action research strategies to perform
the study. The participating group of students, taught by one science teacher, was joined for
seven months by the action researcher who engaged in classroom observations, data collection,
and some teaching of the course. The researcher hypothesized that students view science as
authoritarian and thus experienced disempowerment, lack of motivation, and alienation from the
subject. To test this prediction in conjunction with a specific literacy strategy, Hanrahan used
mixed method research techniques that included ethnography and action research.
The author did find some significance to her hypothesis through many sound action
research methods. Hanrahan exercised multiple varieties of data collection that included action
planning, review meetings, observational notes, interviews, and informal conversations. This
fact shows exemplary triangulation, a requirement of good action research, especially one in
which the researcher is so entrenched. The observations proved systematic, but flexible as some
variables changed throughout the project. The whole process was guided by a sound cycle of
collection, reflection, discussion, and planning. The researcher made sure that all the
participants were comfortable through extensive interaction and conversations while examining
the classroom as a whole rather than independent parts. This comfort was evident through the
interaction between researcher-teacher and researcher-students as well as through the shared
feedback. While examining this realistic picture as a whole, Hanrahan applied much theory as a
result of her extensive review of the literature. As a final display of exemplary action research,
Current Event #1
3
she ended with an appropriate caveat explaining the limitations of her action research. In this
stipulation, she mentioned that one cannot apply the results inductively to many other groups
because of the lack of control for many variables.
A few areas of the research methods came up on the reverse side of the continuum.
While the author did much to explain and employ her action research methods, she did little
besides mention her ethnographic research methods. This dual research methodology may have
led to complications in the findings as well. The writing, at intervals, also displayed a lack of
objectivity, which is somewhat common in such action research products. Perhaps a bigger issue
was Hanrahans’ time structure for the project. It was completed over seven months, short of a
school year, and was interrupted by summer break. This could have led to an array of other
uncontrolled and unobservable variables. Another observable barrier that seemed to provide
complication of the research was the researcher’s and teacher’s disagreement over some of the
fundamental constructive literacy practices exercised. Finally, two issues with the action
research that came up after reviewing the study as a whole were a lack of any quantified data and
the questionable selection of action research on an esoteric group of students for by an outside
researcher.
While the research paper as whole came up short of vanguard exemplar, the application
of the research analysis could help me in my own project. First off, the socioeconomics and
classroom issues of the students studied were very similar those of my own students. Secondly,
the research project was one of participatory nature, similar to the one I plan on conducting.
Therefore, I learned some techniques, such as dialogue journals, to solicit continuous feedback
from students. Also, Hanrahan’s planning and flexibility gave me a good idea of what to expect
within my own action research. Finally, the finding that affirmational dialogue as a literacy
Current Event #1
4
strategy improves both the students scientific and writing literacy could be loosely applied in my
own classroom with the intent of furthering the research.
Current Event #1
5
References
Hanrahan, M. (1999) Rethinking science literacy: enhancing communication and participation in school
science through affirmational dialogue journal writing. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching 36, (6) 699-717.