Reading Scientifically: Practices supporting intertextual reading using science knowledge
Subject/Problem
National standards call for students to learn about and participate in scientific inquiry
(National Research Council, 1996, 2000). This places practitioners at the center of enacting
research-based findings about inquiry. This becomes problematic as elementary teachers face
many curricular demands for student performance (Mathison & Freeman, 2003). One
recommendation is to develop integrated learning experiences including reading appropriate text
genres in science learning (C. Ford, Yore, & Anthony, 1997; D. Ford, 2004; Hapgood,
Magnusson, & Palincsar, 2004; Magnusson & Palincsar, 2004; Pappas, Varelas, Barry, & Rife,
2004). While there is limited research on effective approaches to integrating science and literacy
(Cervetti, Pearson, Bravo, & Barber, 2006), researchers agree that integrated approaches benefit
science and literacy learning. Furthermore, a primary research focus of science-literacy
integrations – with a few exceptions – focuses on scientific knowledge to be learned through
literacy processes. This research sought to explore and build on prior pilot research (Enfield,
2007) that investigated how text genres related to stimulating student driven inquiry.
This
study extends on that work. The study follows two research questions. How can teachers
facilitate dialogic discussion (see Billings & Fitzgerald, 2002) situated in read-aloud events of
narrative and informational texts in elementary science teaching? How does this create a situated
context that supports students learning to read scientifically?
There is a growing body of research about use of informational texts in elementary
teaching. Elementary teachers infrequently use informational texts, resulting in students who
lack of familiarity with genre and struggle to learn from these texts (Duke, 2000). However,
informational texts in elementary classrooms provide students experiences with the language
scientists use, provide prototypical experiences with experiences of science, can model for
children how scientists build theory from data, and serve as tools in inquiry to facilitate students’
sense-making (Pappas et al., 2004; Varelas & Pappas, 2006). Furthermore, authentic
experiences, experiences in which texts are used for purposes that mimic those in the real world,
have the greatest influence on children’s familiarity with the genre (Purcell-Gates, Duke, &
Martineau, 2007). Additionally, uses of informational texts can support development of
conceptual understandings as well as understandings of the nature of science (Smolkin &
Donovan, 2001; Girod & Twyman, 2009). However, the majority of this work argues for uses of
informational texts and even argues for how narratives in science learning can be problematic
(Smolkin & Donovan, 2001).
An important consideration is the role of teachers in facilitating students’ use of
informational texts (Ford, 2004; Donovan & Smolkin, 2001). The genre itself, as well as
teachers’ assumptions about the genre, effects the selection of texts for use in science learning
experiences. Teachers tend to choose text because of their assumption that students feel science
is boring. These assumptions effect not only teachers’ selection of texts, but also the ways that
they read those texts in classrooms. (Donovan & Smolkin, 2001) However, this point should be
considered against the idea that individuals textualize their experiences in the world and that
juxtaposition of multiple texts about the world is important to developing understandings (Blome
& Egan-Roberston, 1993). From this perspective to counteract problems in discussions during
read-aloud events, the teacher can share power with students as well as engage in students’
textualized experiences, which can result in students making connections to their personal
experiences resulting in greater comprehension of informational texts.
Engagement with students’ textualized experiences reflects findings describing how
discussions about informational texts provide opportunities for teachers and students to engage in
dialogic inquiry (Pappas et al. 2004). Since it has been argued that students can connect their
experiences more readily with narratives (Short & Pierce, 1990), we might speculate that
‘reading scientifically’ may benefit from an intertextuality that reflects multiple text genres.
Thinking about the construct, ‘reading scientifically’ relates to previously documented benefits
of intertextuality in making meaning from texts in science learning (Varelas & Pappas, 2006).
The findings and the construct of intertextuality support an argument that science and literacy
learning can benefit from engagement with texts using participants collective body of knowledge
and experiences to examine, question, and wonder about the claims, events, or ideas presented.
This becomes a kind of critical literacy that has been shown to be useful in both improving
comprehension as well as science learning (Cervetti et al., 2006). This study conceptualizes such
intertexuality that engages in critical literacy as ‘reading scientifically’ – a construct that needs
further research.
Theoretical Framework
This study assumes that learning occurs as a result of activity in a situated context. In
these contexts, participants collaborate to communally validate what constitutes meaningful
questions and inquiries (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Situated activity can occur in discussions that
allow dialogic interactions which define meanings and participants in relation to one another
(Bakhtin, 1986). From this perspective, communities both define contexts and explanations that
are meaningful to the members of the community and the questions and evidence that will be
validated as relevant and useful. Furthermore, defining text as any symbolic representation of
meaning (Wells & Chang-Wells, 1992) means that texts become part of and products of the
situated context. Texts support development of intrapersonal mental functioning. This facilitates
epistemic engagement, which facilitates social action (Wells & Chang-Wells, 1992).
Individuals’ actions are impacted by institutional, cultural and historic knowledge and
tools embedded in personal repertoires; referred to as mediational means (Cobb & Bowers, 1999;
Wertsch, del Rio, & Alvarez, 1995). Mediational means can include subject matter knowledge,
strategies for engaging with and making sense of texts, and experiences in the world and with
texts that enable reasoning with and about concepts, ideas, and phenomena represented in texts.
Teachers, as participants with more robust and complex repertoires of knowledge, can mediate
students’ participation in that context.
Lave and Wenger (1991) also theorize that situated in contexts engage participants in
resolving some implicit or explicit dilemma. Dilemmas involve participants in negotiation to
arrive at shared, collective understanding. Thus, teachers and children have shared responsibility
for learning and collective development of understanding. Connecting this with practice, teachers
and students can share responsibility to resolve a dilemma around text. Engagement with text
replicates inquiry processes, including identification of problems/questions and then defining
procedures to answer those questions. The theoretical perspective elevates the notion of the
problem as crucial to development of situated learning and defines the construct of ‘reading
scientifically’ as engagement with texts to identify or resolve problems.
Design and Procedures
The study took place in two classrooms in a neighborhood elementary school in an urban
district (Weiner, 2000). Consistent with typical assumptions, the students were predominantly
minorities from low-income families. In the past the school has struggled to meet state
assessment standards as required for AYP under NCLB; this year the school met AYP. Contrary
to common assumptions, both classrooms were well equipped with materials, books, and
supplies. In both classrooms, whole group instruction was limited but did occur. In all content
areas there was limited use of textbook based curriculum materials. Finally, students had
experiences talking about their ideas during teacher directed discussions.
The data for this study were collected using purposive sampling (Patton, 1990). The
researcher invited teachers based on past experience with the teachers, the researcher’s
knowledge of the teacher’s pedagogical approaches, and the teacher’s willingness to participate.
The study focuses on whole-group, classroom interactions, making classrooms and lessons the
units of analysis. Primary data for this study are video recordings of reading events includeing
pre-reading activities, the read-aloud, and any follow-up discussion that occurs in conjunction
with the readings. Videos were reviewed and coded using HyperResearch. Then transcripts
were analyzed using discourse analysis procedures. Additional data sources include field notes,
informal interviews with teachers, and email exchanges between the teacher and the researcher.
The theoretical framework for the study guided the analytic framework examining
students’ discourse during discussions. Thus analysis focused on instances of intertextuality
with texts read and utterances that led to instances of inquiry. The analysis focuses on students’
utterances in whole group discussions informational and narrative texts. Following Pappas et al
(2004), transcripts were examined for utterances that represent instances of intertextual
engagement with text. Related to this, discourse actions were annotated to determine how
specific actions affected the situated context. Finally, the transcripts were examined for attributes
of inquiry as described in the National Science Education Standards (2000).
Findings
This study focused on teacher actions and the ways that actions impacted the context of
learning for students. Thus findings are presented here according to these interacting elements.
First, these findings will describe the teachers’ actions in terms of uses of texts in science
learning experiences. Within these findings, it is possible to consider the ways that the teachers’
actions created contexts that supported students learning to read scientifically.
Teachers’ Actions
In this study, the two participating teachers engaged in a number of actions in discussions
to facilitate dialogic discussions. The teachers used relatively typical comprehension strategies
with students. For example both of the teachers engaged students in substantial discourse around
pre-reading strategies to stimulate interest, raise questions, and help the students to apply ideas of
strategic reading in the context of a read-aloud experience. In many ways, the reading events
allowed teachers to model reading strategies for children. In addition, the teachers engaged in
some reading strategies that facilitated inquiry both about texts and also about phenomena. The
following graph summarizes categories and numbers of actions taken by the two teachers in this
study.
This figure highlights the different actions teachers made in the discussion. The
important points for this paper involve the number of questions that teachers asked about pictures
and phenomena in the texts. These actions both scaffolded and modeled for students modes of
engagement with texts that can be productive. However, looking across the two cases, it is
possible to consider a couple of aspects of the teachers actions that seem important todeveloping
an inquiry stance toward texts in science learning. One aspect to consider is how the teachers
shared autority with their students. This became important in providing opportunities for student
generated inquiry. The second aspect of teacher action involved the ways that teachers mediated
discourse in the classroom to scaffold students’ engagement with texts.
Shared Authority
Throughout the observed lessons, both teachers shared limited authority with students,
which resulted in more focused, teacher-directed discussions. For example, both teachers used
pre-reading strategies in order to engage children with the text. But, in all cases the teacher led
discussion about pre-reading by asking questions in an IRE pattern that limited students’
opportunities to engage with or direct the discussion. Teachers asked students to look at the
cover illustration, recall prior lessons, or recall prior knowledge related to the text. Teachers did
attempt to provide a purpose for reading that might establish authenticity. However, again these
purposes were established by the teachers and did not engage students in developing or
identifying a purpose for reading.
One observation that arises out of the teachers’ actions involves how the pre-reading
varied according to genres. During readings of informational texts, teachers’ pre-reading
focused on students’ prior conceptual knowledge and experiences. For example, when reading
an informational book about how forces affect the motion of objects, the teacher asked students
to recall their first-hand investigations as well as the ideas that they had learned in prior lessons
before reading the book. In contrast, during readings of narrative texts focused on activating
prior literary knowledge and experiences from other readings. The same teacher in the same unit
read the book Mirette on a High Wire. During the pre-reading of this book the teacher focused
on the Caldecott award and students’ prior experiences with Caldecott award winning books.
She also talked about how she was excited about the illustrations in the book because she thought
the pictures were ‘beautiful’.
Regardless of these observations, a more important point is that both teachers controlled
and, to some extent, dominated the discussions providing students few chances to invest
themselves or their own ideas into the reading events. Primarily, students responded to teacher
questions and prompts. This results in a context that limits opportunities for student generated
inquiries about the ideas or phenomena in the text.
Mediation of Discourse
The teachers’ actions mediated students’ discourse to connect students’ experiences, the
ideas in the texts, and designing first hand investigations. The idea of mediation in this case is
that a teacher can either elevate a student comment or interpret a student comment so that the
comment facilitates developing understandings or generating authentic student generated inquiry.
As a result in both classrooms, the teachers’ actions seemed pivotal to transitioning from text to
inquiry. A couple of cases highlight this point.
Beginning with the lesson that focused on reading Mirette on a High Wire, students
identified many relevant experiences. The students became very engaged with affective
elements of the story. They made personal connections with the feelings of the characters and
attempted to interpret why different characters might feel they ways that they did in the story.
Students related these feelings to their personal experiences of successes and failures. The
teacher took actions to mediate these comments, while also attempting to have students consider
phenomenological aspects of the story. Students had previously done first-hand investigations of
balancing, so they had some prior knowledge and experience with concepts in the story. At one
point during the reading, the teacher attempted to have students consider an image that showed a
high-wire walker cooking breakfast on the high-wire. The event in the story seems somewhat
improbable, but even with teacher mediation, the students continued to focus on affective aspects
of the story as opposed to phenomenological elements of the story.
However, teacher actions can productively mediate discourse. For example, when the
teacher read Roller Coasters, she was able to engage students in discussion that led to the
generation of an inquiry-oriented question that resulted in a first-hand investigation. The teacher
relied on students sharing their lived experiences riding roller coasters to identify a conceptual
problem in their inferences about their experiences. One student, based on an illustration in the
book, claimed that it was important that riders wear their seatbelts in the roller coaster because
this prevented the rider from falling out when the roller coaster went through a loop. The
teacher, using the pictures in the book, pursued the student’s claim and helped the students
recognize that there was an implicit testable question in that claim. Based on this discussion, the
class investigated objects moving through loops on tracks to determine if a restraint was needed
to keep those objects on the track. Through first-hand investigations and explorations of
simulations, the students explored the concept of centripetal force. These investigations were
stimulated by the reading of the book, but also through the teacher’s actions to mediate students
claims and the content of the book.
Creating a context for students’ actions
The teachers’ actions helped to create contexts for students to begin engaging with both
texts and ideas. For the most part, in this study, the teachers constrained students’ opportunities
to act by limiting the amount of authority students had in directing discussions. However, there
remain interesting points about students’ actions that deserve attention. Similar to the teacher
data presented above, the following figure describes the nature and frequency of students’
actions.
This figure highlights some important features of the students’ talk. The students made
several connections with the texts and also several comments about pictures in the text. Students
made fewer utterances about vocabulary or comphrension.
Students’ observations and comments
Students made many observations and comments that related their personal experiences
with the ideas, concepts or events portrayed in the text. Students’ utterances showed that the
students were engaged with both genres of text and making connections to their lived
experiences. For example, when reading about Come on rain, the students shared their own
experiences on hot summer days (the context of the story) and how summer rain showers feel
good on a hot summer day. Thus, the students were connecting their personal experiences with
weather to phenomena portrayed in the story. However, this ultimately did not lead to
generating an investigation of the relationship between temperature and precipitation.
Students’ utterances were ripe opportunities to engage students in reading texts
scientifically by engaging in inquiry experiences around ideas, concepts and events portrayed in
texts. For example, when reading about evaporation and condensation, students identified many
relevant personal experiences that could have stimulated further inquiry. Concurrent to reading
informational texts about evaporation and condensation, students investigated these phenomena
in the classroom. The teacher directed investigation reflected fairly typical approaches, using
cups of water, ice, and ice water placed in different locations, and provided students with direct
experiences with the phenomena. When reading narratives that included phenomena of
evaporation and condensation, students did make limited connections to their experiences. But
the problem was that the overall context was discretely compartmentalized. Each event –
reading or first-hand investigation – was not connected to other, related events. Thus there were
opportunities to engage in scientific reading, but these were not actualized in practice.
Critically examining texts
Seeing texts as including problematic symbolic representations of phenomena was less
prominent in these classrooms. The teachers created contexts in which students were expected to
focus on comprehension strategies. Thus, the context implicitly privileged getting information
from text, as opposed to viewing texts as having values, impressions and beliefs that influence
the writing. Both classrooms were devoted to developing students’ reading fluency and
comprehension. As a result, there were limited opportunities for students to learn to or engage in
critical examination of texts. However, there were limited exceptions. For example, during the
reading of Down came the rain, the teacher initiated a discussion into the plausibility of events of
the story. In the story, there had been a big storm, when the storm passed; the characters were
immediately seen on a picnic. The teacher wondered about this with students, suggesting this it
might be problematic. However, the students made few comments about this event in the story.
In this study, there were few overall instances that involved students critically examining the
story or phenomena represented in the texts.
Teacher actions and student actions
One important observation in comparing teacher actions and student actions involved the
nature of their actions in the context. Teachers tended to make more comments focused on
comprehension of the texts and developing comprehension skills. In contrast, students tended to
ask questions about the texts and also making connections between the text and their
experiences. Thus, the teachers and students seemed to have different purposes for reading and
making connections between the text and science investigations.
Discussion & Implications
The findings reported in this study raise additional questions about the role of text genres
in children’s science learning. Scholars have argued that narrative ways of knowing and
reasoning are useful in making concrete connections between experiences and abstract
phenomena. Regardless of this argument, in science, research has focused almost exclusively on
a single genre – informational text.
In the context of this study the teachers’ actions during discussion were pivotal to
scaffolding students’ engagement with both genres. This supports prior suggestions that the role
of the teacher is important (D. Ford, 2004; Pappas et al., 2004). The findings from this study
suggest that teachers may need support to leverage the opportunities of texts to support inquiry
learning, literacy learning, and learning to read scientifically. Thus, it may be useful to teachers
to have content related lists of titles useful in engaging students in inquiry around narrative texts.
Additionally, it may be useful to have recommended strategies (e.g. question types) that might be
more effective in scaffolding student inquiry. This builds on thinking about the kinds of actions
a teacher takes in situated contexts to engage children with texts. More specific to science, how
can teachers use texts to stimulate inquiry?
An implication from these findings involves considering how we think about the role of
problems in science as being useful for thinking about integration of science into other content
areas. Often our notions about integration focus on either topical integrations or following
disciplinary perspectives (e.g. Schwab, 1978) to create authentic learning experiences. However
these findings suggest potential for thinking about using the conceptual and epistemic nature of
science as a mediator for integration. This would create a very different kind of integration that
focused on highlighting the problematic nature of texts to launch investigation, inquiry, and units
of study. Whitin & Whitin (1997) effectively describe this model of inquiry and integration.
Yet, it seems that these ideas could be advanced further in science education.
Finally it is important to note that these findings describe two classrooms. The findings
do not: lead to causal claims, offer comparable cases to determine which genre more effectively
supports inquiry, or offer generalizable claims. All of which suggest the need for further study
and investigation to explore the implications of these findings. Furthermore, the findings should
not lead to the inference that teachers should abandon efforts to increase uses of informational
texts in elementary classrooms. We must continue to develop literate members of discourse
communities. As such, students need abilities to engage with all genres of text. Furthermore,
learning to read scientifically will be supported through experiences with multiple text genres.
References
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres & other late essays (V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin:
University of Texas Press.
Billings, L. & Fitzgerald, J. (2002). Dialogic discussion and the Paideia seminar. American
Educational Research Journal, 39(4).
Bloome, D. & Egan-Robertson, A. (1993). The social construction of intertextuality in classroom
reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Quarterly 28(4). 305-333.
Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, P. D., Bravo, M., & Barber, J. (2006). Reading and writing in the
service of inquiry-based science. In R. Douglas, M. Klentschy & K. Worth (Eds.),
Linking science and literacy in the K-8 classroom. Alexandria: NSTA Press.
Cobb, P., & Bowers, J. (1999). Cognitive and Situated Learning Perspectives in Theory and
Practice. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4-15.
Donovan, C.A. & Smolkin, L.B. (2001). Genre and other factors influencing teachers' book
selections for science instruction. Reading Research Quarterly. 36(4). 412-440.
Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 Minutes per day: the scarcity of informational texts in first grade.
Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202-224.
Enfield, M. (2007) Could that really happen? Elementary children’s inquiry around
informational and narrative texts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National
Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
Ford, C., Yore, L. D., & Anthony, R. J. (1997, March 1997). Reforms, visions and standards: A
cross-curricular view from an elementary school perspective. Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Oak
Brook, IL.
Ford, D. (2004). HIghly Recommended Trade Books: Can They Be Used in Inquiry Science? In
E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing Borders in Literacy and Science Instruction: Perspectives on
Theory and Practice. Newark: International Reading Association.
Girod, M. & Twyman, T. (2009). Comparing the value added of blended science and literacy
curricula to inquiry-based curricula in two second-grade classrooms. Journal of
Elementary Science Education, 21(3). 13-33.
Hapgood, S., Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (2004). Teacher, text and experience: A case
of young children's scientific inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(4), 455505.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Magnusson, S., & Palincsar, A. S. (2004). Learning From Text Designed to Model Scientific
Thinking in Inquiry-Based Instruction. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing Borders in Literacy
and Science Instruction: Perspectives on Theory and Practice. Newark: International
Reading Association.
Mathison, S., & Freeman, M. (2003). Constraining Elementary Teachers' Work: Dilemmas and
Paradoxes Created by State Mandated Testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives,
11(34).
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington DC:
National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards:
A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Pappas, C., Varelas, M., Barry, A., & Rife, A. (2004). Promoting Dialogic Inquiry in Information
Book Read-Alouds: Young Children's Ways of Making Sense of Science. In E. W. Saul
(Ed.), Crossing Borders in Literacy and Science Instruction: Perspectives on Theory and
Practice. Newark: International Reading Association.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qaulitative evaluation and research methods (2 ed.). Newbury Park: Sage
Publications.
Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N. K., & Martineau, J. A. (2007). Learning to read and write genrespecific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research
Quarterly, 42(1), 8-45.
Schwab, J. J. (1978). Science, Curriculum and Liberal Education. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Short & Pierce (1990). Talking about books: Creating literate communities. Portsmouth:
Heinemann.
Smolkin, L.B. & Donovan, C.A. (2001). The contexts of comprehension: The information book
read aloud, comprehension acquisition, and comprehension instruction in a first-grade
classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 102(2), 97-122.
Varelas, M., & Pappas, C. C. (2006). Intertextuality in read-alouds of integrated science-literacy
units in urban primary classrooms: Opportunities for the development of thought and
language. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 211-259.
Weiner, L. (2000). Research in the 90's: Implications for urban teacher preparation. Review of
Educational Research, 70(3), 369-406.
Wells, G., & Chang-Wells, G. L. (1992). Constructing knowledge together: Classrooms as
centers of inquiry and literacy. Portsmouth: Heinnemann.
Wertsch, J. V., del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (1995). Sociocultural studies: history, action, and
mediation. In J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rio & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural Studis of the
Mind (pp. 1-36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Whitin, P., & Whitin, D. J. (1997). Inquiry at the window: Pursuing the wonders of learners.
Portsmouth: Heinemann.