Trends in Language,
Reading, and Writing Research
in Science Education
Larry D. Yore
University of Victoria
Kaohsiung, Taiwan
February 21, 2005
Educational Reforms in
North America: Canada & USA
2
Cross-Curricular View
of Current Reforms








Standards for the English Language Arts (NCTE/IRA)
Principles and Standards for School Mathematics
(NCTM)
Science for All Americans (AAAS)
National Science Education Standards (NRC)
Curriculum Standards for Social Studies (NCSS)
Technology for All Americans (ITEA)
Western Canadian Protocol for Mathematics (Alberta,
British Columbia, other western provinces)
Pan-Canadian Framework for Science (CMEC)
3
Common Features Across
the Disciplines (Ford, Yore, & Anthony, 1997)

Target Goals
All Students
 Contemporary Literacy


Pedagogical Intentions
Constructivism
 Authentic Assessment

4
Contemporary Literacy
(Yore, 2000)
Abilities, Thinking, and Habits of Mind to
Construct Disciplinary Understanding
 Communications to Inform and
Persuade
 Big Ideas/Unifying Concepts

5
Interacting Senses of Science
Literacy: Cognitive Symbiosis
(Norris & Phillips, 2003)
Fundamental Sense
 Cognitive and
Metacognitive Abilities
 Critical Thinking
 Habits of Mind
 Scientific Language Arts
 Information and
Communication
Technologies
Derived Sense
 Understanding of the
Big Ideas and Unifying
Concepts
 Nature of Science



People’s attempt to
search, describe, and
explain patterns of
events in nature
Scientific Inquiry
Technological Design
6
Cognitive and Metacognitive
Abilities






Building knowledge claims and making sense of the
world
Critical analysis of claims, procedures, measurement
errors, data, etc.
Justifying data as evidence for/against a claim based
on the theoretical backings/warrants
Analytical reasoning, problem solving and
troubleshooting
Science processes: Observing, measuring, etc.
Planning and evaluating inquiries and designs
7
Critical Thinking: Deciding What
to Believe or Do About a Challenge





Worthwhile challenge, issue, or problem
deserving consideration (Ford, 1998)
Deliberations of evidence, criteria, opinions
Judgment about what to do/believe
Justification of the claim/judgment
Thinking about your thinking as you are
thinking to improve the quality of your thinking
(Paul & Elder, 2003, Foundation for Critical Thinking)
8
Habits of Mind:
Emotional
Dispositions Toward Science Inquiry and
Technological Design (AAAS, 1993)

Values and Attitudes




Willingness to seek solutions and solve problems
Keep records and offer reasons for findings
Consider other interpretations and reasons
Critical-Response Skills






Express skepticism; ask: “How do you know that?”
Buttress claims with evidence and information
Compare and consider trade-offs
View science and technology with critical stance
Evaluate and validate information, data, reasons, and
arguments
Understand the roles of chance and errors in relationships
9
Scientific Language Arts
(Yore, Hand, & Florence, 2004)






Orally present, write, read and follow directions, state
purpose for the stepwise procedures, and produce a
compelling argument, sound explanation, or clear
description
Construct, view, and interpret sketches, diagrams,
models, tables, charts, maps, pictures, and graphs
Use visual and textual displays to reveal relationships
Locate and evaluate information from various textual
and digital sources
Choose and use appropriate vocabulary, spatial
displays, numerical operations, and statistics
Etcetera
10
Information and
Communication Technologies
(21st Century ICT Literacy Map for Science)







Use and read calculators, analog/digital meters and digital
records, cameras, and videos (AAAS, 1993)
Troubleshoot common problems and determine potential causes
of malfunctions (AAAS, 1993)
Use 21st Century tools for accessing, processing, managing,
interpreting, and communicating information
Understand, manage, and create effective oral, written, and
multi-media communications
Exercise sound reasoning, make complex choices, and
understand interconnections among systems
Ability to frame, analyze, and solve problems
Etcetera (http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/matrices/default.asp)
11
Big Ideas or Unifying
Concepts (NRC, 1996)





Nature of Science
History of Science
Science as Inquiry
Personal and Social Perspectives
Content for Biological, Earth, and Physical
Sciences





System, order, and organization
Evidence, models, and explanations
Change, constancy, and measurement
Evolution and equilibrium
Form and function
12
Myths about Science (McComas, 1998)










Science evolves — hypotheses, theories, laws.
Hypotheses are educated guesses.
The scientific method is general and universal.
Evidence accumulates to produce truths.
Science and inquiry result in absolute proof.
Science is procedural — not creative.
Science can address all questions.
Scientists are objective.
Experimentation is the primary route to claims.
All science is reviewed to ensure honesty.
13
Modern View of Science
“There is a reality that we may know some day,
and claims about nature must be tested.”
(Yore, Hand, & Florence, 2004)
14
Modern View of Science




Science knowledge is a temporary explanation that
best fits the existing evidence, established
knowledge, and current thinking.
Science knowledge claims develop with the aid of a
hypothesis and data that are collected and that
support or refute the hypothesis.
Science knowledge claims are open to repeated
public evaluation.
The scientific method is not bound by a single set of
steps — problem, hypothesis, design experiment,
collect data, analyze data, and draw conclusion.
15
Science is like Doing a
Crossword Puzzle
“Picture a scientist as working on part of an enormous
crossword puzzle: making an informed guess about
some entry, checking and double-checking its fit with
the clue and already-completed intersecting entries.
... Much of the crossword is blank, but many entries
are already completed, some in almost-indelible ink,
some in regular ink, some in pencil, some heavily,
some faintly. Some are in English, some in Swahili,
some in Flemish, some in Esperanto, etc. … Now
and then a long entry, intersecting with numerous
others.”
(Haack, 2003, pp. 93-94)
16
Constructivism (Yore, 2001)





Theory about learning — not teaching — that assumes
learners construct understanding from prior knowledge,
sensory experiences, and social interactions.
Prior knowledge may contain misconceptions that are
difficult to change.
Conceptual change approaches must challenge
misconceptions and allow learners to construct a more
understandable and powerful replacement concept.
Numerous interpretations of constructivism
Select an interpretation that matches the discipline and
goals — Learning Cycle
17
Constructivist Approach:
Science Co-op Learning Cycle
(Shymansky, Yore, & Anderson, 2004)




Engage — access, assess, and challenge
learners’ prior knowledge
Explore — allow opportunities for learners to
investigate the target concepts with hands-on,
visual, and language experiences
Consolidate — scaffold the learners’
interpretations of the experiences and connect to
the established understandings
Assess — document learners’ ideas in all parts
of the cycle to facilitate and evaluate learning
18
Authentic Assessment
(Yore, Williams, Shymansky, Chidsey, Henriques, & Craig, 1995)





Assess in the same context as teaching and
learning
Document the construction of understanding
as well as the recall of ideas
Assess throughout instruction
Use assessment techniques that match the
target outcomes and processes
Assess to empower learning and to inform
instruction
19
Language is both an end and
a means to Science Literacy.
Communications to Inform and
Persuade
 Language to Construct Science
Knowledge Claims

Argument and Debate
 Discuss Alternatives and Promote Learning
 Reveal Relationships among Experiences
 Consolidate and Integrate Learning

20
Symbiosis Between Fundamental
and Derived Senses
Learning how impacts using language
to learn
 Learning to talk/argue and
talking/arguing to learn science
 Learning to read science and reading to
learn science
 Learning to write and writing to learn
science

21
Enhancing Science Literacy
with Embedded Oral
Interactions, Argument,
Reading, and Writing
Instruction in Science Inquiry
(Yore, 2000; Yore, Bisanz, & Hand, 2003; Saul, 2004)
22
Talking Science: Oral Discourse
and Concrete Experiences
(Wellington & Osborne, 2001)



Student talk must be associated with sensory experiences to
ensure vocabulary development.
Rich oral discussions within and between student groups
encourage consideration of alternative interpretations and causality.
Teacher questioning needs to reflect the phase and purpose of
inquiry.




Engage: Accessing and assessing prior knowledge, challenging
students’ ideas, and setting purpose
Explore: Productive questions should encourage students to attentionfocusing, measuring and counting, comparisons, actions, problemposing, and reasoning
Consolidate: Questions should encourage sharing, organizing,
generalizing, evaluating, and applying
Assess: Questions should document student understanding and
concerns to empower future learning and inform future instruction
23
Scientific Arguments
(Osborne, Erduran, & Simon, 2004)

Logical Pattern
Claims
 Evidence
 Warrants
 Backings
 Counter-claims
 Qualifications
 Rebuttals

24
Classic Pattern of
Argumentation (Toulmin, 1958)
Evidence
Claims
Warrants
Backings
25
Example of a Classic Argument
(Yore, et al., 2004)
Examination of
SARS patients
and healthy people
SARS
Caused by
a virus
Warrant 1: A unique virus (corona) was isolated by UVic and
UBC scientists.
Warrant 2: SARS patients’ blood and body fluids contain the
virus.
Backing 1: Established knowledge about respiratory diseases.
Backing 2: Influenza is caused by a virus, not bacteria.
26
Extended Pattern of
Argumentation (Toulmin, 1958)
Evidence
Qualifiers and
Counter-claims
Warrants
Claims
Rebuttal
Backings
27
Example of an Extended
Argument (Yore, et al., 2004)
Examination of:
AIDS and
healthy
patients
HIV in
some
people
HIV was found
in all AIDS
patients and some
healthy patients
HIV
causes
AIDS
People
with weak
immune
systems
28
Reading in Science:
Interactive and Constructive
(Yore, 2000)
Text-driven Strategies
 Prior Knowledge about Science and
Topic
 Metacognition

29
Prior Domain and
Topic Knowledge
Metacognitive Awareness
and Executive Control
Science Reading
Strategies
Interactive-Constructive Model of Science Reading:
Requisite Knowledge, Metacognition, and Strategies
Explicit Science Reading
Instruction: Strategies That
Respond to Instruction






Assessing
Generating
Questions
Summarizing
Inferring
Monitoring
Utilizing Text
Structure




Reading and
Reasoning
Improving Memory
Self-regulating
Skimming,
Elaborating,
Sequencing
31
Metacognition
Self-appraisal
of Cognition
Self-management of
Cognition
Declarative
Knowledge
Planning
Procedural
Knowledge
Evaluation
Conditional
Knowledge
Regulation
Metacognition

Metacognitive
Awareness/Selfappraisal of Task



Declarative: What
Procedural: How
Conditional: When &
Why

Executive Control/
Self-management of
Task



Planning: Setting
purpose, etc.
Evaluation:
Monitoring progress
Regulation: Adjusting
effort and action
33
Expert Science Reader
(Yore, Craig, & Maguire, 1998)
Science Reading
 Science Text
 Science Reading Strategies

34
Science Reading
Reading is interactive-constructive.
 Meaning Making, not Meaning Taking
 Self-confidence and Self-efficacy
 Shift Reading to Textual Demands

35
Science Text



Words are labels for ideas and experience.
Text is somebody’s interpretation.
Text represents the nature of science




Tentative claims about reality
May not actually represent reality
Contains a degree of uncertainty
Evaluates plausibility, accuracy, and
connectedness of text
36
Science Reading Strategies






Identify purpose, access prior knowledge,
plan heuristic, and select strategies
Use knowledge-retrieval techniques
Use input techniques to access text-based
information
Use knowledge-constructing techniques
Apply critical thinking
Monitor and regulate reading
37
Writing in Science (Yore, 2000)



Knowledge Telling
Knowledge Building
Genre (form &
function)





Narrative
Description
Instruction
Argumentation
Explanation

Effective
Applications



Involve a series of
tasks
Require
transformation
Encourage revision
without repetition
38
Narrative (Aram & Powell, 2005; Unsworth, 2001)
Process of sequencing people and
events in time and space
 Purpose: Entertain, tell a story, or
recount personal or historical
experiences
 Structure (Story grammar): Setting,
characters, problem, actions, and
resolution

39
Description (Aram & Powell, 2005; Unsworth, 2001)
Process of classifying and describing
things into taxonomies of meaning
 Purpose: Documents the way
something is or was
 Structure: General class, qualities, parts
and functions, and habits

40
Instruction (Aram & Powell, 2005; Unsworth, 2001)
Process of logically ordering a
sequence of actions or behaviors
 Purpose: State procedure of how
something is done through a series of
ordered steps or actions
 Structure: Goal, materials, ordered
steps, and summary statement

41
Argument (Aram & Powell, 2005; Unsworth, 2001)



Process of persuading listeners or readers to
accept a logical ordering of propositions
Purpose: Promote a particular point of view,
claim, or solution
Structure: Thesis/position statement, series of
claims, rebuttals and evidence, and summary
or reiteration of thesis/position statement
42
Explanation (Aram & Powell, 2005; Unsworth, 2001)



Process of sequencing phenomena/events in
temporal or causal patterns
Purpose: Explain how something works, the
processes involved, or the cause-effect
relationship justified by a theoretical model or
canonical knowledge
Structure: General statement, time-series
steps, linked processes, cause-effect, or
problem-solution
43
Prior Domain and
Topic Knowledge
Metacognitive Awareness
and Executive Control
Science Writing
Strategies
Knowledge-Building Model of Science Writing
Writing Genre (Yore, 2000)
Genre
Purpose
Outcome
Audience
Narrative
Attitudes
Self and
others
Instruction
Directions
Basic
knowledge
Cause-effect
relationships
Procedural
knowledge
Patterns
of argument
Other
Explanation
Recording
emotions
and ideas
Documentation
of events
Causality
Description
Argumentation Persuasion
Others
Others
Others
45
Writing in Science
(Yore, Bisanz, & Hand, 2003)
Sequential Writing Tasks — data tables,
graphs, descriptions
 Science Writing Heuristics
 Information and Communication
Technology Strategies
 Explicit Writing Instruction

46
Recommendation 1

Ensure any attempts to enhance your
students’ argumentation, reading, and
writing are based on authentic models
of argument, reading, and writing and
valid assessment of the oral and printbased language demands of science.
47
Recommendation 2

Make your argument, reading, and
writing instruction pay off now and pay
off later (symbiosis). Develop
authentic science communication tasks
that enhance science literacy in the
fundamental sense and result in
better derived sense — science
learning and understanding.
48
Recommendation 3

Make science language arts instruction
an integral part of the science inquiry
teaching and science program and
continue until graduation to elaborate
and reinforce effective science
communication arts — listening,
speaking, debating, reading, viewing,
representing, and writing.
49
Recommendation 4

Provide explicit instruction as a
natural part of authentic science
inquiry, debate, reading, writing, and
science learning activities.
50
Recommendation 5

Explore the use of multimedia to
address the expansion of science
literacy into the information and
communication technological (ICT)
strategies, to provide multiple
representations of abstract concepts,
and to maximize motivation.
51
Promises & Cautions (1)
Integrate listening, speaking, viewing,
reading, writing, representing, and
learning
 Language arts embedded in authentic
inquiry
 Multiple information sources, ICT, and
multiple representations

52
Promises & Cautions (2)
Stress critical stance to reconcile
discrepancies amongst information
sources and evaluate sources
 Require information collected to be
transformed during writing tasks
 Direct instruction supplemented with the
guided practice and transfer of
ownership

53
References





AAAS (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Anthony, R. J., Johnson, T. D., & Yore, L. D. (1996). Write-tolearn science strategies. Catalyst, 39(4), 10-16.
Aram, R., & Powell, D. (2005). Genre in trade books.
Presentation at the AETS meeting, Colorado Springs, CO.
Ford, C. L. (1998). Educating preservice teachers to teach for an
evaluative view of knowledge and critical thinking in elementary
social studies. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation, University of
Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.
Ford, C. L., Yore, L. D., & Anthony, R. J. (1997). Reforms,
visions, and standards: A cross-curricular view from an
elementary school perspective. Resources in Education (ERIC),
ED406168.
54
References (continued)




Haack, S. (2003). Defending science within reason: Between
scientism and cynicism. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Hand, B. M., Prain, V., & Yore, L. D. (2001). Sequential writing
tasks’ influence on science learning. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason & K.
Lonka (Eds.) Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and
practice (pp. 105-129). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1985). Using structured
controversy in science classrooms. In R. W. Bybee (Ed.),
Science technology society: 1985 yearbook of the National
Science Teachers Association (pp. 228-234), Washington, DC:
National Science Teachers Association.
McComas, W. F. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of
science: Dispelling the myths. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The
nature of science in science education: Rationale and
strategies. Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
55
References (continued)






National Research Council. (1996). National science education
standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its
fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science
Education, 87, 224-240.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, B. D. (1984). Learning how to learn.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the
quality of argumentation in school science, Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2003). How to improve student learning:
30 practical ideas. Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical
Thinking.
Saul, E. W. (Ed.) (2004). Crossing borders in literacy and
science instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading
Association/National Science Teachers Association.
56
References (continued)




Shymansky, J. A., Yore, L. D., & Anderson, J. O. (2004). Impact
of a school district’s science reform effort on the achievement
and attitudes of third- and fourth-grade students. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 41, 771-790.
Shymansky, J. A., Yore, L. D., & Hand, B. M. (2000).
Empowering families in hands-on science programs. School
Science and Mathematics, 100(1), 48-56.
Spence, D. J., Yore, L. D., & Williams, R. L. (1999). The effects
of explicit science reading instruction on selected grade 7
students’ metacognition and comprehension of specific science
text. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 11(2), 15-30.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
57
References (continued)





Tucknott, J. M., & Yore, L. D. (1999). The effects of writing
activities on grade 4 children’s understanding of simple
machines, inventions, and inventors. Resources in Education
(ERIC), ED 428 973.
Unsworth, L. (2001). Teaching multiliteracies across the
curriculum. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Wallace, C. S., Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2004) Writing and learning
in the science classroom. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in
science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Yore, L. D. (1996). Write-to-learn science strategies for
preservice elementary teachers. In P. Rubba, P. Keig, & J. Rye
(Ed.), Proceedings of the 1996 Annual International Conference
of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science,
USA, 25-56. (ERIC ED398060)
58
References (continued)



Yore, L. D. (2000). Enhancing science literacy for all students
with embedded reading instruction and writing-to-learn activities.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(1), 105-122.
Yore, L. D. (2001). What is meant by constructivist science
teaching and will the science education community stay the
course for meaningful reform? Electronic Journal of Science
Education, 5(4). Online journal:
http://unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse.
Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L., & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the
literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts
and science research. International Journal of Science
Education, 25, 689-725.
59
References (continued)




Yore, L. D., Craig, M. T., & Maguire, T. O. (1998). Index of
science reading awareness: An interactive-constructive model,
test verification, and grades 4-8 results. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching. 35(1), 27-51.
Yore, L. D., Hand, B. M., & Florence, M. K. (2004). Scientists’
views of science, models of writing, and science writing practice.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 338-369.
Yore, L. D., Hand, B., Goldman, S. R., Hildebrand, G. M.,
Osborne, J. F., Treagust, D. F., & Wallace, C. S. (2004). New
directions in language and science education research. Reading
Research Quarterly, 39, 347-352.
Yore, L. D., Williams, R. L., Shymansky, J. A., Chidsey, J. L.,
Henriques, L., & Craig, M. T. (1995). Refocussing science
assessment: Informing learners, teachers, and other
stakeholders. B.C. Catalyst, 38(4), 3-9.
60