Cueing Scientific Explanations: A Social Semiotic Perspective on Framing during Science Instruction in the Elementary School Classroom

References

• Baldry, A., & Thibault, P. J. (2006). Multimodal transcription and text analysis: A multimedia toolkit and coursebook. Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Bang, M., Warren, B., Rosebery, A. S., & Medin, D. (2012). Desettling expectations in science education. Human Development, 55(5-6), 302–318. https://doi.org/10.1159/000345322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Malzahn, K. A., Plumley, C. L., Gordon, E. M., Hayes, M. L. (2018). Report of the 2018 NSSME+. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc. Retrieved from https://www.horizon-research.com/report-of-the-2018-nssme
   Google Scholar
• Bateson, G. (2000). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20446
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bezemer, J. (2008). Displaying orientation in the classroom: Students’ multimodal responses to teacher instructions. Linguistics and Education, 19(2), 166–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2008.05.005
   Google Scholar
• Bezemer, J. (2015). Multimodal transcription: A case study. In S. Norris & C. D. Maier (Eds.). Interactions, images and text: A reader in multimodality (pp. 155–169). Walter de Gruyter, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2015). Multimodality, learning and communication: A social semiotic frame. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bourne, J., & Jewitt, C. (2003). Orchestrating debate: A multimodal analysis of classroom interaction. Reading, 37(2), 64–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9345.3702004
   Google Scholar
• Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2011). Working toward a stronger conceptualization of scientific explanation for science education. Science Education, 95(4), 639–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20449
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse. Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Cazden, C. B., & Beck, S. (2003). Classroom discourse. In A. C. Graesser, M. A. Gernsbacher, & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), Handbook of discourse processes (pp. 170–202). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cazden, C. B. (2017). Communicative competence, classroom interaction, and educational equity: The selected works of Courtney B. Cazden. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y. C., Hand, B., & Norton-Meier, L. (2017). Teacher roles of questioning in early elementary science classrooms: A framework promoting student cognitive complexities in argumentation. Research in Science Education, 47(2), 373–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9506-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Danielsson, K. (2016). Modes and meaning in the classroom–the role of different semiotic resources to convey meaning in science classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 35, 88–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2016.07.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, E. A., & Stephens, A. (Eds.). (2022). Science and engineering in preschool through elementary grades: The brilliance of children and the strengths of educators. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26215
   Google Scholar
• Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.). (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11625
   Google Scholar
• Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399–483. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enyedy, N., & Goldberg, J. (2004). Inquiry in interaction: How local adaptations of curricula shape classroom communities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(9), 905–935. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernst-Slavit, G., & Pratt, K. L. (2017). Teacher questions: Learning the discourse of science in a linguistically diverse elementary classroom. Linguistics and Education, 40, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulk, J., & Evanshen, P. (2013). Primary grades: Linking the primary classroom environment to learning. Young Children, 68(4), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.2307/ycyoungchildren.68.4.40
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, T. (2017). Architecting the ‘third teacher’: Solid foundations for the participatory and principled design of schools and (built) learning environments. European Journal of Education, 52(3), 318–326. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. University Park Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Deakin University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herrenkohl, L. R., & Guerra, M. R. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 431–473. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1604_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodge, B., & Kress, G. R. (1988). Social semiotics. Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jaber, L. Z., & Hammer, D. (2016). Learning to feel like a scientist. Science Education, 100(2), 189–220. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jewitt, C., (Ed.). (2014). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis (2nd ed.). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jewitt, C., & Bezemer, J. (2010). Multimodal analysis: Key issues. In L. Litosseliti (Ed.), Research methods in linguistics (pp. 180–197). Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., & O'Halloran, K. (2016). Introducing multimodality. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jewitt, C., Kress, G., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Exploring learning through visual, actional and linguistic communication: The multimodal environment of a science classroom. Educational Review, 53(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910123753
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knain, E., Fredlund, T., Furberg, A., Mathiassen, K., Remmen, K. B., & Ødegaard, M. (2017). Representing to learn in science education: Theoretical framework and analytical approaches. Acta Didactica Norge, 11(3), 11. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.4722
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (1993). Against arbitrariness: The social production of the sign as a foundational issue in critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002003
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (2009). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., Guba, E. G., & Pilotta, J. J. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 9(4), 438–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
   Google Scholar
• Mantzicopoulos, P., Samarapungavan, A., & Patrick, H. (2009). We learn how to predict and be a scientist”: Early science experiences and kindergarten children’s social meanings about science. Cognition and Instruction, 27(4), 312–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000903221726
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920410001689689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaels, S., O’Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27(4), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-007-9071-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290
   Google Scholar
• Next Generation Science Storylines (2016). How does light help me see things and communicate with others [v1.1]. https://www.nextgenstorylines.org/how-does-light-help-me-see-and-communicate
   Google Scholar
• Norris, S. (2004). Analyzing multimodal interaction: A methodological framework. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Odden, T. O. B., & Russ, R. S. (2019). Defining sensemaking: Bringing clarity to a fragmented theoretical construct. Science Education, 103(1), 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21452
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliveira, A. W. (2010). Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 422–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20345
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parks, A. N., & Schmeichel, M. (2014). Children, mathematics, and videotape: Using multimodal analysis to bring bodies into early childhood assessment interviews. American Educational Research Journal, 51(3), 505–537. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214534311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Pinnow, R. J. (2011). I’ve got an idea”: A social semiotic perspective on agency in the second language classroom. Linguistics and Education, 22(4), 383–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2011.09.002
   Google Scholar
• Pinnow, R. J., & Chval, K. B. (2015). How much you wanna bet?”: Examining the role of positioning in the development of L2 learner interactional competencies in the mathematics classroom. Linguistics and Education, 30, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plowman, L., & Stephen, C. (2008). The big picture? Video and the representation of interaction. British Educational Research Journal, 34(4), 541–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701609422
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiser, B. J., Novak, M., McGill, T. A. W. (2017). Coherence from the students’ perspective: Why the vision of the framework for K-12 science requires more than simply “combining” three dimensions of science learning. Paper commissioned for the board on science education workshop “Instructional Materials for the Next Generation Science Standards”. Retrieved from https://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_180270.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Russ, R. S., & Luna, M. J. (2013). Inferring teacher epistemological framing from local patterns in teacher noticing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 284–314. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samarapungavan, A., Patrick, H., & Mantzicopoulos, P. (2011). What kindergarten students learn in inquiry-based science classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 29(4), 416–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2011.608027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherr, R. E., & Hammer, D. (2009). Student behavior and epistemological framing: Examples from collaborative active-learning activities in physics. Cognition and Instruction, 27(2), 147–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000902797379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, C. V., Braaten, M., Haverly, C., & de los Santos, E. X. (2021). Using sense-making moments to understand how elementary teachers’ interactions expand, maintain, or shut down sense-making in science. Cognition and Instruction, 39(2), 113–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2020.1763349
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Studhalter, U. T., Leuchter, M., Tettenborn, A., Elmer, A., Edelsbrunner, P. A., & Saalbach, H. (2021). Early science learning: The effects of teacher talk. Learning and Instruction, 71, 101371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannen, D. (Ed.). (1993). Framing in discourse. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Transana (2021). Transana 4.00 [Computer software]. Madison, WI: Spurgeon Woods LLC. https://www.transana.com
   Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introducing social semiotics. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen, T. (2009). Space in discourse. In L. Unsworth (Ed.), Multimodal semiotics: Functional analysis in contexts of education (pp. 34–49). Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen, T. (2011). The language of colour: An introduction. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vannini, P. (2007). Social Semiotics and fieldwork: Method and analysis. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(1), 113–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406295625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. (1996). Thought and language. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (Original work published 1986)
   Google Scholar
• Wright, T. S., & Gotwals, A. W. (2017). Supporting kindergartners’ science talk in the context of an integrated science and disciplinary literacy curriculum. The Elementary School Journal, 117(3), 513–537. https://doi.org/10.1086/690273
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and application: Design and methods. (6th ed.). SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Yunkaporta, T. (2020). Sand talk: How indigenous thinking can save the world. HarperOne.
   Google Scholar
• Zangori, L., & Cole, L. (2019). Assessing the contributions of green building practices to ecological literacy in the elementary classroom: An exploratory study. Environmental Education Research, 25(11), 1674–1696. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2019.1662372
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zangori, L., & Pinnow, R. J. (2020). Positioning participation in the NGSS era: What counts as success? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(4), 623–648. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21607
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zembal‐Saul, C., Krajcik, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (2002). Elementary student teachers’ science content representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 443–463. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zembal-Saul, C., McNeill, K. L., & Hershberger, K. (2013). What’s your evidence? Engaging K-5 children in constructing explanations in science. Pearson Higher Ed.
   Google Scholar