‘Proof of concept’: Beginning to use Design-Based Research to improve science literacies for middle years learners

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 36 - Trang 3-16 - 2013
Anne-Marie Morgan1
1University of South Australia, Australia

Tóm tắt

Middle school learners are increasingly required to engage with curriculum-specific literacies as they transition from primary to secondary school. Teachers of middle school learners are correspondingly required to provide for learners’ needs in identifying and making explicit the various literacy requirements of specific disciplines; and in utilising pedagogical models to assist learners to cope with these new demands. This paper describes a small-scale ’proof of concept’ Design-Based Research (DBR) experiment conducted by a Year 5 teacher as part of a wider Australian Research Council project addressing new literacy demands for middle years’ learners. The teacher investigated the benefits of explicit teaching of technical language in a science unit, aimed at increasing learners’ facility, understanding of and confidence with scientific language in writing descriptions. She experimented with a DBR approach to allow for the gathering of multiple point sources of evidence to support her expectations and initial theoretical investigations, and for refinement and extension of her intervention as it occurred, based on analysis of data collected during the intervention phases. Positive outcomes of the experiment included increased learner confidence and facility in using scientific language, affirmation of the benefits of explicit subject-specific vocabulary teaching, and engagement by the teacher with a research approach that shows promise as a way forward in documenting classroom-based literacy research.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Alvermann, D.E. (2002). Effective literacy instruction for adolescents. Journal of Literacy Research 34(2), 189–208.

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2011). Shape of the Australian Curriculum: Science. Retrieved from, http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Australian_Curriculum_-_Science.pdf

Baum, F., MacDougall, C. and Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of Epidemiological Community Health, 60, 854–857.

Bell, P. (2004). On the theoretical breadth of design-based research in eucation. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 243–253.

Blachowicz, C.L.Z., Fisher, P.J.L., Ogle, D. and Watts-Taffe, S. (2006). Theory and Research into Practice: Vocabulary: Questions from the Classroom. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(4), 524–539.

Carrington, V. (2006). Rethinking middle years: early adolescents, schooling and digital culture Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R. and Schauble, L. (2003). Design Experiments in Educational Research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.

Comber, B., Nixon, H. and Reid, J. (Eds.). (2007). Literacies in place: teaching environmental communication. Newtown, Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association.

Draper, R.J. (Ed.). (2010). (Rejimagining content-area literacy instruction New York: Teachers College Press.

Engestrom, Y. (2011). From design experiments to formative experiments. Theory psychology, 21(5), 598–627.

Erasmusbrug Bridge. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erasmusbrug/wiki/Erasmusbrug

Green, B. (1988). Subject-specific literacy and school learning: a focus on writing. Australian Journal of Education, 32(2), 156–179.

Heselden, R. and Staples, R. (2002). Science teaching and literacy, part 2: reading. School Science Review, 83(304), 51–62.

Kelly, A.E. (2003). Theme Issue: The Role of Design in Educational Research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 3–4.

Kelly, A.E., Lesh, R. and Baek, J. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of design research methods in education: innovations in science, technology, engineering and mathematics teaching and learning New York: Routledge.

Korner, H. (2007). Science literacy. Surry Hills, N.S.W: NSW Adult Migrant Education Service.

Korner, H., McInnes, D. and Rose, D. (2007). Science literacy. Surry Hills, N.S.W: NSW Adult Migrant Education Service.

Lambeck, K. (2008). Primary Connections. Canberra: Australian Academy of Science.

Lee, A. (1996). Gender, literacy, curriculum: re-writing school geography. London: Taylor & Francis.

Lobato, J. (2003). How design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 17–20.

Luke, A., Elkins, J., Weir, K., Land, R., Carrington, V., Dole, S., Pendergast, D., Kapitzke, C., van Kraayenoord, C., Moni, K., Mcintosh, A., Mayer, D., Bahr, M., Hunter, L., Chadbourne, R., Bean, T, Alvermann, D., and Stevens, L. (2003). Beyond the middle: A report about literacy and numeracy development of target group students in the middle years of schooling. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.

May, S. and Wright, N. (2007). Secondary literacy across the curriciulum: challenges and possibilities Languages and Education: An International Journal, 21(5), 370–376.

Moje, E.B., Ciechanowski, K.M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R. and Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward Third Space in content area literacy: an examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38–70.

O’Brien, D. and Stewart, R. (1990). Why content difficulty is difficult to infuse into the secondary school. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(3), 442–464.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework: mathematics, reading, science and problem-soving knowledge and skills. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/data-oecd/46/14/33694881.pdf

Reinking, D. and Bradley, B.A. (2008). Formative and design experiments. New York: Teachers College Press.

Shaddock, A. and Freebody, P. (2005). Expanding repertoires of practice in literacy education: special needs Four Roles model. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training

Shanahan, T. and Shanahan, C. (2008). Teahcing disicplinary literacy to adolescents: rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational review, 78(1), 40–59.

Shanahan, T, Shanahan, C. and Misischa, C. (2011). Analysis of expert readers in three disciplines: history, mathematics and chemistry. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4), 393–429.

Smyth, J. and Hattam, R. (2001). ‘Voiced’ research as a sociology for understanding’ dropping out’ of school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22(3), 401–415.

Smyth, J. and Hattam, R. (2002). Early school leaving and the cultural geography of high schools. British Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 376–397.

Smyth, J., Mclnerney, P. and Hattam, R. (2003). Tackling school leaving at its source: a case of reform in the middle years of schooling. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(2), 177–193.

South Australian Department of Education Services (2010). SA TfEL: South Australian teaching for effective learning framework guide. Adelaide: Curriculum Services.

Staples, R. and Heselden, R. (2001). Science teaching and literacy, part 1: writing. School Science Review, 83(303), 35–46.

Washington State Department of Transport (WSDT) (2010). Glossary of bridge terms Retrieved from http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/sr24/i82tokeysrd/bridgeglossary.htm

Unsworth, L. (1999). Developing critical understanding of the specialised language of school science and history texts: a functional grammatical perspective. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42(7), 508–521.

Yore, L., Bisanz, G.L. and 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(6), 689–725.

Young, E. (2005). The language of science, the language of students: Bridging the Gap with Engaged Learning Vocabulary Strategies (Vol. 42, pp. 12–17): Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Tập 36

3-16

Thông tin tác giả