Skip to content
2018
Volume 98, Issue 6
  • ISSN: 0360-9170
  • E-ISSN: 1943-2402
side by side viewer icon HTML

Abstract

Describes the origins and aims of content-area literacy and disciplinary literacy and explains how these traditions can be reconciled in integrated science-literacy instruction.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.58680/la202131333
2021-07-01
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/la/98/6/languagearts31333.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.58680/la202131333&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Alliance for Excellent Education (2010) Policy brief: The federal role in confronting the crisis in adolescent literacy. Alliance for Excellent Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Allington R. L. (1975) Improving content area instruction in the middle school. Journal of Reading, 18(6), 455–461.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Alvermann D. E., Moore D. W. (1991) Secondary school reading. InBarr R., Kamil M. L., Mosenthal P., Pearson P. D.(Eds.)Handbook of reading research, 2, 951–83. Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ariely M., Livnat Z., Yarden A. (2019) Analyzing the language of an adapted primary literature article: Towards a disciplinary approach of science teaching using texts. Science & Education, 28(1–2), 63–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Baram-Tsabari A., Yarden A. (2005) Text genre as a factor in the formation of scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(4), 403–428.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bond G., Bond E. (1941) Developmental reading in high school. Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Carnegie Council on Advancing Adolescent Literacy (2010) Time to act: An agenda for advancing literacy for college and career success. Carnegie Corporation of New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cervetti G. N., Barber J. (2008) Text in hands-on science. InHiebert E. H., Sailors M.(Eds.)Finding the right texts: What works for beginning and struggling readers. 89–108. Guilford.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cervetti G. N., Barber J., Dorph R., Pearson P. D., Goldschmidt P. (2012) The impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 631–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cervetti G. N., DiPardo A. L., Staley S. J. (2014) Entering the conversation: Exploratory talk in middle school science. The Elementary School Journal, 114(4), 547–72.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cervetti G. N., Pearson P. D., Bravo M. A., Barber J. (2006) Reading and writing in the service of inquiry-based science. InDouglas R., Klentschy M., Worth K.(Eds.)Linking science and literacy in the K–8 classroom. 221–44. NSTA.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cooper J. D. (1986) Improving reading comprehension. Houghton Mifflin.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Craig M. T., Yore L. D. (1995) Middle school students’ metacognitive knowledge about science reading and science text: An interview study. Reading Psychology, 16(2), 169–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Davis S. J. (1990) Applying content study skills in co-listed reading classrooms. Journal of Reading, 33(4), 277–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Drew S. V., Thomas J. (2018) Secondary science teachers’ implementation of CCSS and NGSS literacy practices: A survey study. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 31(2), 267–91.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fang Z. (2012) Language correlates of disciplinary literacy. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 19–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Fang Z., Coatoam S. (2013) Disciplinary literacy: What you want to know about it. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(8), 627–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Ford D. J. (2009) Promises and challenges for the use of adapted primary literature in science curricula: Commentary. Research in Science Education, 39(3), 385–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Girod M., Twyman T. (2009) Comparing the added value of blended science and literacy curricula to inquiry-based science curricula in two 2nd-grade classrooms. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(3), 13–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Grysko R. A., Zygouris-Coe V. (2020) Supporting disciplinary literacy and science learning in grades 3–5. The Reading Teacher, 73(4), 485–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Guthrie J. T., Van Meter P., McCann A. D., Wigfield A., Bemeit L., Poundstone C. C., Rice M. E., Faibisch F. M., Hunt B., Mitchell A. M. (1996) Growth of literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(3), 306–332.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hapgood S., Magnusson S. J., Sullivan Palincsar A. (2004) Teacher, text, and experience: A case of young children’s scientific inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(4), 455–505.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Heller R. (2010) In praise of amateurism: A friendly critique of Moje’s “call for change” in secondary literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(4), 267–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Heller R., Greenleaf C. L. (2007) Literacy instruction in the content areas: Getting to the core of middle and high school improvement. Alliance for Excellent Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Herber H. (1978) Teaching reading in content areas. Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Holliday W. (2004) Choosing science textbooks: Connecting research to common sense. InSaul E. W.(Ed.) Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory into practice. 383–94. IRA & NSTA Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Holliday W. G., Yore L. D., Alvermann D. E. (1994) The reading-science learning writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 877–93.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hynd-Shanahan C. (2013) What does it take? The challenge of disciplinary literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(2), 93–98.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Krajcik J. S., Sutherland L. M. (2010) Supporting students in developing literacy in science. Science, 328, 456–59.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Lee C. D., Spratley A. (2006) Reading in the disciplines and the challenges of adolescent literacy. Carnegie Corporation of New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Litman C., Marple S., Greenleaf C., Charney-Sirott I., Bolz M. J., Richardson L. K., Goldman S. R. (2017) Text-based argumentation with multiple sources: A descriptive study of opportunity to learn in secondary English language arts, history, and science. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(1), 79–130.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Magnusson S., Palincsar A. S. (2004) Learning from text designed to model scientific thinking in inquiry-based instruction. InSaul W.(Ed.) Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory into practice. 383–94. IRA & NSTA Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Mallow J. V. (1991) Reading science. Journal of Reading, 34(5), 324–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Memory D. M., Uhlhorn K. W. (1991) Multiple textbooks at different readability levels in the science classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 91(2), 64–72.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Moje E. B. (2008) Foregrounding the disciplines in secondary literacy teaching and learning: A call for change. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 52(2), 96–107.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Moore D. W., Readence J. E. (1984) A quantitative and qualitative review of graphic organizer research. Journal of Educational Research, 78(1), 11–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Moore D. W., Readence J. E., Rickelman R. J. (1983) An historical exploration of content area reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 18(4), 419–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers (2010) Common core state standards for English language arts and literacy. http://corestandards.org/.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. National Research Council (2012) A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. National Research Council (2013) Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Osborne J. (2002) Science without literacy: A ship without a sail?. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 203–218.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Palincsar A. S., Magnusson S. J. (2001) The interplay of first-hand and second-hand investigations to model and support the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning. InCarver S. M., Klahr D.(Eds.)Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress. 151–93. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Pearson P. D., Cervetti G. N., Tilson J. L. (2008) Reading for understanding and successful literacy development. InDarling-Hammond L., Barron B.(Eds.)Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding. 71–112. Jossey-Bass.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Peskin J. (1998) Constructing meaning when reading poetry: An expert-novice study. Cognition and Instruction, 16(3), 235–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Purcell-Gates V., Duke N. K., Martineau J. A. (2007) Learning to read and write genre-specific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 8–45.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Robinson H. A. (1975) Teaching reading and study strategies. Allyn & Bacon.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Romance N. R., Vitale M. R. (1992) A curriculum strategy that expands time for in-depth elementary science instruction by using science-based reading strategies: Effects of a year-long study in grade four. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 545–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Rupley W. H. (1975) Content reading in the elementary grades. Language Arts, 52(6), 802–807.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Shanahan C., Shanahan T., Misischia C. (2011) Analysis of expert readers in three disciplines: History, mathematics, and chemistry. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4), 393–429.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Shanahan T., Shanahan C. (2008) Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–59.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Shuman B. R. (1975) Four strategies for teaching reading in content areas. Reading Horizons, 16(1), 23–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Singer H., Donlan D. (1980) Reading and learning from text. Little, Brown, & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Vacca R. T. (1975) Reading reinforcement through Magic Squares. Journal of Reading, 18(8), 587–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Wallace C. S., Tsoi M. Y., Calkin J., Darley W. M. (2003) Learning from inquiry-based laboratories in nonmajor biology: An interpretive study of the relationships among inquiry experience, epistemologies, and conceptual growth. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 986–1024.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Wijekumar K. K., Meyer B. J. F., Lei P. (2012) Large-scale randomized controlled trial with 4th graders using intelligent tutoring of the structure strategy to improve nonfiction reading comprehension. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 987–1013.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Wineburg S. S. (1991) On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 495–519.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Wright T. S., Gotwals A. W. (2017) Supporting kindergartners’ science talk in the context of an integrated science and disciplinary literacy curriculum. Elementary School Journal, 117(3), 513–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Yager R. E. (2004) Science is not written, but it can be written about. InSaul W.E.(Ed.) Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory into practice. 383–94. IRA & NSTA Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 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(6), 689–725.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.58680/la202131333
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error