Abstract
The work of science is a linguistic act. However, like history and philosophy of science, language has frequently been isolated from science content due to factors such as school departmentalization and narrow definitions of what it means to teach, know, and do science. This conceptual article seeks to recognize and recognize—to understand and yet rethink—science content in light of the vision of science expected by academic standards. Achieving that vision requires new perspectives in science teaching and teacher education that look into the role that science language expectations play in science content. These perspectives reposition attention to language from a hidden, overlooked, or outsourced aspect of science teaching, to one at its core. To help bring teachers and teacher educators into this integrative view of science content, this article offers a mirror, a prism, and a lens as three metaphorical tools to explore the essential roles that language plays for, in, and as science content. The reflection, refraction, and refocusing of science content reveal complex science language expectations that function alongside facts, figures, and formulas of science as gatekeeping mechanisms that, once noticed, cannot be ignored or marginalized in science teaching and science teacher education.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This format is used to denote specific standards within the Common Core State Standards. Citations include references to CCSS, the content area, the curricular focus, grade level, and standard number.
This format is used to denote specific standards within the Next Generation Science Standards. Citations include references to NGSS, discipline, grade level, and standard number.
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of science in science education: toward a coherent framework for synergistic research and development. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (Vol. 2, pp. 1041–1060). Dordrecht: Springer.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436.
Anyon, J. (1980). Social class and the hidden curriculum of work. Journal of Education, 162(1), 67–92.
Apple, M. (1971). The hidden curriculum and the nature of conflict. Interchange, 2(4), 27–40.
Bazerman, C., Little, J., Bethel, L., Chavkin, T., Fouquette, D., & Garufis, J. (2005). Reference guide to writing across the curriculum. West Lafayette: Parlor Press.
Brown, B. A. (2006). “It isn’t no slang that can be said about this stuff”: language, identity, and appropriating science discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(1), 96–126.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2017). About the standards. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/.
Content. (2018). Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper. Retrieved from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=Content.
Ding, D. D. (2002). The passive voice and social values in science. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 32(2), 137–154.
Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. (2013). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science. Science & Education, 22(9), 2109–2139.
Galili, I., & Tseitlin, M. (2003). Newton’s First Law: Text, translations, interpretations and physics education. Science & Education, 12(1), 45–73.
Giroux, H. A., & Purpel, D. E. (1983). The hidden curriculum and moral education: deception or discovery? Berkeley: McCutchan.
Goldsmith, R., & Willey, K. (2016). How can the development of writing practices in the engineering curriculum be enabled? Paper presented at the 27th Annual Conference of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education, Coffs Harbour.
Golinski, J. (2012). Is it time to forget science? Reflections on singular science and its history. Osiris, 27(1), 19–36.
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575.
Hyland, K. (2014). Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles. In C. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: texts, processes and practices (pp. 99–121). New York: Routledge.
Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Rinehart & Winston.
de Jong, E. J., & Harper, C. A. (2005). Preparing mainstream teachers for English-language learners: is being a good teacher good enough? Teacher Education Quarterly, 3(2), 101–124.
Leden, L., Hansson, L., Redfors, A., & Ideland, M. (2015). Teachers’ ways of talking about nature of science and its teaching. Science & Education, 24(9–10), 1141–1172.
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: language, learning, and values. Norwood: Ablex.
Michaels, S., Shouse, A. W., & Schweingruber, H. A. (2008). Ready, set, science!: Putting research to work in K-8 science classrooms. Washington: The National Academies Press.
Mutanen, A. (2014). Questioning and experimentation. Science & Education, 23(8), 1567–1582.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Endothermic / exothermic. Retrieved from www.nextgenscience.org/commonly-searched-terms/endothermic-exothermic.
Peters, E. E. (2012). Developing content knowledge in students through explicit teaching of the nature of science: influences of goal setting and self-monitoring. Science & Education, 21(6), 881–898.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: a functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tarone, E., Dwyer, S., Gillette, S., & Icke, V. (1981). On the use of the passive in two astrophysics journal papers. English for Specific Purposes, 1(2), 123–140.
Zeidler, D., & Lederman, N. G. (1989). The effect of teachers’ language on students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(9), 771–783.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bratkovich, M.O. Shining Light on Language for, in, and as Science Content. Sci & Educ 27, 769–782 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9998-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9998-3