Negotiation, embeddedness, and non-threatening learning environments as themes of science and language convergence for English language learners

Abstract

In this review, we explore the notion of teaching science to English language learners (ELLs) as a balancing act between simultaneously focusing on language and content development, on the one hand, and between structuring instruction and focusing on student learning processes, on the other hand. This exploration is conducted through the lens of a theoretical framework embedded in the Science Writing Heuristic approach, an approach exemplifying immersive orientation to argument-based inquiry. Three learning processes (learning through the language of science, learning about the language of science and living the language of science) and three classroom structures (collective zone of proximal development, symmetric power and trust relationships and teacher as decision-maker) are explored in relation to learning theories and empirical findings from second language acquisition and science, multicultural and teacher education bodies of work. Three themes – negotiation, embeddedness and non-threatening learning environments – to inform ELL science education emerged from the review.

Keywords:

• English language learners
• integrated science and literacy instruction
• academic language development
• Science Writing Heuristic
• immersive argument-based inquiry

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Yuliya Ardasheva is an assistant professor in ESL/bilingual education at Washington State University Tri-Cities. Her research focuses on contributions of individual differences to second language development and on the interplay between second language and academic development particularly in such academically demanding subject areas as science. Yuliya published her work in these areas in such venues as TESOL Quarterly, Language Learning, Learning and Individual Differences, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, Science Scope and The Science Teacher.

Lori A. Norton-Meier is an associate professor in literacy education at the University of Louisville. She has spent her career studying students’ literate lives in and out of school contexts. Her research interests include early childhood development, integrated science and literacy instruction and the use of writing as a thinking and learning tool. She has multiple publications (e.g., in International Journal of Science Education, Journal of Reading Education, Young Children) including three co-authored books on science and literacy in the K-12 classroom.

Brian Hand is a professor in science education at the University of Iowa. His research has focused on using writing as a learning tool and on the development of scientific argument through the use of the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH). Brian has published widely, including in such venues as Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Science Education, Science & Children and International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education.

Notes

1. The only study not involving English-medium instruction (Brok, Tartwijk, Wubbels, & Veldman, 2010) was included due to its high relevance.

2. Grounding for ‘learning through the language of science’ is discussed in the introduction.

3. While treatment students in this study outperformed controls, the difference was not statistically significant which the authors attributed to some methodological issues.

4. Studies conducted in Africa were excluded from further analyses because the heterogeneity test indicated that these studies significantly differed in some design features to be meaningfully integrated with other studies identified for the meta-analysis.

5. Blended approach refers to vocabulary instruction in which common words related to science are introduced during a lesson opening; such common definitions are then ‘revisited and refined with scientific definitions’ (Tibbs & Crowther, 2011, p. 3) during structured or guided inquiry. Contextualised instruction refers to introducing new vocabulary during content instruction. Frontloading refers to pre-teaching vocabulary prior to content instruction.

6. Gee (1989) defined Discourse with a capital ‘D’ as ‘ways of being’, ‘forms of life which integrate words, acts, values, beliefs, attitudes, and social identities as well as gestures, glances, body positions, and clothes’; in turn, he defined discourse with a little ‘d’ as language used in context or ‘connected stretches of language’ associated with a particular Discourse (pp. 6–7).

7. It is worthwhile to note that what makes input comprehensible is understood differently by Krashen (1985) and Long (2006), respectively, as achieved through input modifications (e.g. short, low syntactic complexity utterances and high frequency vocabulary) vs. through speech modifications (e.g. confirmation/ comprehension checks, clarification requests and repetition).

8. Notably, the effect of interaction on vocabulary learning was strong and immediate, but faded with time; the impact on grammatical features’ learning was delayed, but more durable in nature.

9. Defining the two, Moje (2007) writes, ‘both socially just and social justice pedagogies require that teachers provide all students with equitable opportunities to engage currently valued forms of disciplinary knowledge […]. Social justice pedagogy takes an additional step and demands that youth learn to question and perhaps even offer changes to established knowledge’ (p. 4).