Reading for meaning: The foundational knowledge every teacher of science should have

References

• ACT. (2006). Reading between the lines: What the ACT reveals about college readiness in reading. Retrieved from http://www.act.org/path/policy/pdf/reading_report
   Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, S., & Burcham, S. (2007). The impact of text coherence on learning by self-explanation. Learning and Instruction, 17(3), 286–303. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberts, B. (2010). Prioritizing science education. Science, 328(5977), 405. doi: 10.1126/science.1190788
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 285–310). Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Alvermann, D. E., & Mallozzi, C. A. (2009). Moving beyond the gold standard: Epistemological and ontological considerations of research in science literacy. In M. ShelleyII, L. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education (pp. 63–81). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255–292). New York, NY: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Atay, D., & Kurt, G. (2006). Elementary school EFL learners’ vocabulary learning: The effects of post-reading activities. Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 63(2), 255–273. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.63.2.255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• August, D., Branum-Martin, L., Cardenas-Hagan, E., & Francis, D. J. (2009). The impact of an instructional intervention on the science and language learning of middle grade English language learners. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(4), 345–376. doi: 10.1080/19345740903217623
   Google Scholar
• Barber, J. (2009). Insights about the role of reading and writing in science. Presentation from STANYS ‘09: Science Teachers Association of New York State conference. Rochester, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2006). Improving comprehension with questioning the author: A fresh and expanded view of a powerful approach. New York, NY: Scholastic.
   Google Scholar
• Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. (2004). Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
   Google Scholar
• Blair, D. (2006). Wittgenstein, language and information. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bloome, D., & Green, J. (2015). The social and linguistic turns in studying language and literacy. In J. Rowsell & K. Pahl (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of literacy studies (pp. 19–34). Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Braasch, J. L., Goldman, S. R., & Wiley, J. (2013). The influences of text and reader characteristics on learning from refutations in science texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 561. doi: 10.1037/a0032627
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, A. L., Palincsar, A. S., & Armbruster, B. B. (1984). Instructing comprehension-fostering Activities in Interactive Learning Situations. In H. Mandl, N. L. Stein, & T. Trabasso (Eds.), Learning and Comprehension of Text (pp. 255–286). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Bunch, G. C. (2013). Pedagogical language knowledge: Preparing mainstream teachers for English learners in the new standards era. Review of Educational Research, 37, 298–341. doi: 10.3102/0091732X12461772
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassells, J. R. T., & Johnstone, A. H. (1980). Understanding non-technical words in science. London: The Royal Society of Chemistry.
   Google Scholar
• Cervetti, G. N., Barber, J., Dorph, R., Pearson, P. D., & Goldschmidt, P. G. (2012). The impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 631–658. doi: 10.1002/tea.21015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, P. D., Bravo, M. A., & Barber, J. (2006). Reading and writing in the service of inquiry-based science. In R. Douglas, M. P. Klentschy, & K. Worth (Eds.), Linking science and literacy in the K-8 classroom (pp. 221–244). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies & science. http://www.corestandards.org/
   Google Scholar
• Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E., & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010). Reading comprehension of scientific text: A domain-specific test of the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 687. doi: 10.1037/a0019452
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, F., & Greene, T. (1984). Reading for learning in the sciences. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.
   Google Scholar
• Diakidoy, I. A. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(3), 335–356. doi: 10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00039-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading in middle school. International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), 491–520. doi: 10.1080/09500690500339092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, Z. (2008). Going beyond the fab five: Helping students cope with the unique linguistic challenges of expository reading in intermediate grades. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(6), 476–487. doi: 10.1598/JAAL.51.6.4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, Z. (2016). Text complexity in the U.S. common core state standards: A linguistic critique. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 39(3), 195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, Z., & Wei, Y. (2010). Improving middle school students’ science literacy through reading infusion. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(4), 262–273. doi: 10.1080/00220670903383051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frantz, R. S., Starr, L. E., & Bailey, A. L. (2015). Syntactic complexity as an aspect of text complexity. Educational Researcher, 44(7), 387–393. doi: 10.3102/0013189X15603980
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gee, J. P. (2015). The new literacy studies. In J. Rowsell & K. Pahl (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of literacy studies (pp. 35–48). Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28–42). London: Routledge Press.
   Google Scholar
• Graesser, A., León, J., & Otero, J. (2002). Introduction to the psychology of science text comprehension. In J. Otero, J. León, & A. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 1–18). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Graves, M., & Graves, B. (1995). The scaffolded reading experience: A flexible framework for helping students get the most out of the text. Literacy, 29(1), 29–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9345.1995.tb00135.x
   Google Scholar
• Greenleaf, C., Litman, C., Hanson, T., L., Rosen, R., Boscardin, C. K., Herman, J., Schneider, S., Madden, S., & Jones, B. (2011). Integrating literacy and science in biology: Teaching and learning impacts of reading apprenticeship professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 647–717. doi: 10.3102/0002831210384839
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993a). Meta-analyis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education to promote conceptual change in science. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 116–161. doi: 10.2307/747886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993b). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28(2), 116–159. doi: 10.2307/747886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, C. (2016). Inference instruction for struggling readers: A synthesis of intervention research. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 1–22. doi: 10.1007/s10648-014-9295-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hand, B., Wallace, C. W., & Yang, E. M. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131–149. doi: 10.1080/0950069032000070252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holliday, W., & Cain, S. (2012). Teaching science reading comprehension: A realistic, research-based approach. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1405–1417). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Holtz, M. (2009). Nominalisation in scientific discourse: A corpus-based study of abstract and research articles. In M. Mahlbert, V. González-Díaz, & C. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of corpus linguistics conference (pp. 341–359). Liverpool: University of Liverpool.
   Google Scholar
• Jetton, T. L., & Shanahan, C. (2012). Preface. In T. Jetton, & C. Shanahan (Eds.), Adolescent literacy in the academic disciplines: General principles and practical strategies (pp. ix–xii). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Katzir, T., Lesaux, N. K., & Kim, Y. S. (2009). The role of reading self-concept and home literacy practices in fourth grade reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 22(3), 261–276. doi: 10.1007/s11145-007-9112-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, G. J. (2007). Discourse in science classrooms. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 443–469). Mahwah, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169–204. doi: 10.1080/03057260903142285
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, A. (1992). Comparison of self-questioning, summarising and notetaking-review as strategies for learning from lectures. American Educational Research Journal, 29(2), 303–323. doi: 10.3102/00028312029002303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kress, G. R., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. New York, NY: Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Leach, J., Driver, R., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1997). A study of progression in learning about ‘the nature of science’: Issues of conceptualisation and methodology. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 147–166. doi: 10.1080/0950069970190202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, O., Quinn, H., & Valdés, G. (2013). Science and language for English language learners in relation to next generation science standards and with implications for common core state standards for English language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42(4), 223–233. doi: 10.3102/0013189X13480524
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (1998a). Multiplying meaning. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science (pp. 87–113). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (1998b). Teaching all the languages of science: Words, symbols, images and actions. Retrieved from http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/education/jlemke/papers/barcelon.htm
   Google Scholar
• Llosa, L., Lee, O., Jiang, F., Haas, A., O'Connor, C., Van Booven, C., & Kieffer, M. (2016). Impact of a large-scale science intervention focused on English language learners. American Educational Research Journal, 53, 395–424. doi: 10.3102/0002831216637348
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R., & Veel, R. (1998). Reading Science. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McFarlane, D. A. (2013). Understanding the challenges of science education in the 21st century: New opportunities for scientific literacy. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, 4(1), 35–44. doi: 10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.4.35
   Google Scholar
• McGinn, M. K., & Roth, W. M. (1999). Preparing students for competent scientific practice: Implications of recent research in science and technology studies. Educational Researcher, 28(3), 14–24. doi: 10.3102/0013189X028003014
   Google Scholar
• Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(2), 57–74. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X10000968
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merzyn, G. (1987). The language of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 9(4), 483–489. doi: 10.1080/0950069870090406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224–240. doi: 10.1002/sce.10066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Halloran, K. (2008). Mathematical discourse: Language, symbolism and visual images. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• O’Halloran, K. (2013). Multimodal discourse analysis. In K. Hyland & B. Paltridge (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to discourse analysis (pp. 120–137). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Olson, D. R. (1994). The world on paper: The conceptual and cognitive implications of writing and reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O'Reilly, T., & McNamara, D. (2007). Reversing the reverse cohesion effect: Good texts can be better for strategic, high-knowledge readers. Discourse Processes, 43(2), 121–152. doi: 10.1080/01638530709336895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Toole, M. (2004). What is difficult to read, why might this be so, and what could, or should, be done about it? An overview of section two. In A. Peacock, & A. Cleghorn (Eds.), Missing the meaning (pp. 161–178). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
   Google Scholar
• Peacock, A., & Cleghorn, A. (2004). Missing the meaning: The development and use of print and non-print text materials in diverse school settings. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Peacock, A., & Miller, K. (2004). What changes need to be implemented in teacher education programs so that teachers can use text materials effectively? In A. Peacock, & A. Cleghorn (Eds.), Missing the meaning (pp. 213–222). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, P. D., Hansen, J., & Gordon, C. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young children’s comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Literacy Research, 11(3), 201–209.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, P. D., Moje, E. B., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. Science, 328, 459–463. doi: 10.1126/science.1182595
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, L. M., Norris, S. P., & Macnab, J. S. (2010). Visualization in mathematics, reading and science education. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Pickersgill, S., & Lock, R. (1991). Students’ understanding of selected non-technical words in science. Research in Science and Technological Education, 9(1), 71–79. doi: 10.1080/0263514910090107
   Google Scholar
• Proctor, C. P., Dalton, B., & Grisham, D. L. (2007). Scaffolding English language learners and struggling readers in a universal literacy environment with embedded strategy instruction and vocabulary support. Journal of Literacy Research, 39(1), 71–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn, H. (2007). Belief and knowledge-a plea about language. Physics Today, 60(1), 8–9. doi: 10.1063/1.2709533
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radcliffe, R., Caverly, D., Hand, J., & Franke, D. (2008). Improving reading in a middle school science classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(5), 398–408. doi: 10.1598/JAAL.51.5.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
   Google Scholar
• Recht, D. R., & Leslie, L. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 16. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.80.1.16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rollnick, M. (2004). Finding the meaning: Sociolinguistic issues in text access. In A. Peacock, & A. Cleghorn (Eds.), Missing the meaning (pp. 105–120). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
   Google Scholar
• Roman, D. X, Briceño, A, Rohde, H, & Hironaka, S. (2006). Linguistic cohesion in middle-school texts: A comparison of logical connectives usage in science and social studies textbooks. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Román, D., & Busch, K. C. (2015). Textbooks of doubt: Using systemic functional analysis to explore the framing of climate change in middle-school science textbooks. Environmental Education Research. 10.1080/13504622.2015.1091878.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Román, D., Donovan, B., Friend, M., Osborne, J., & Patterson, A. (2014). Towards a pedagogical content knowledge for literacy instruction in science. Paper presented at the 87th annual international conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST). Pittsburgh, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Román, D., Jones, F., Basaraba, D., & Hironaka, S. (2016). Helping students bridge inferences in science texts using graphic organizers. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 60, 121–130. doi: 10.1002/jaal.555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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 4. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 545–554. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660290604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181–221. doi: 10.3102/00346543066002181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders, T., Land, J., & Mulder, G. (2007). Linguistics markers of coherence improve text comprehension in functional contexts. Information Design Journal, 15(3), 219–235. doi: 10.1075/idj.15.3.04san
   Google Scholar
• Scammacca, N., Roberts, G. J., Cho, E., Williams, K., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., & Carroll, M. (2016). A century of progress: Reading interventions for students in grades 4-12, 1914-2014. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 756–800. doi: 10.3102/0034654316652942
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schleppegrell, M. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Schleppegrell, M., & Fang, Z. (2008). Reading in secondary content areas: A language-based pedagogy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–59. doi: 10.17763/haer.78.1.v62444321p602101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X015002004
   Google Scholar
• Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Hanley, P., & Thurston, A. (2014). Experimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(7), 870–901. doi: 10.1002/tea.21139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snow, C. (2008). Essay: What is the vocabulary of science? In A. S. Rosebery & B. Warren (Eds.), Teaching science to English language learners: Building on students’ strengths (pp. 71–84). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Snow, C. (2010). Academic language and the challenge of reading for learning about science. Science, 328, 450–452. doi: 10.1126/science.1182597
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spörer, N., Brunstein, J. C., & Kieschke, U. L. F. (2009). Improving students’ reading comprehension skills: Effects of strategy instruction and reciprocal teaching. Learning and Instruction, 19(3), 272–286. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoddart, P. (2016). The new vision for secondary science education: Connecting language and literacy to science learning. In E. Lyon, S. Tolbert, P. Stoddart, J. Solís, & G. Bunch (Eds.), Secondary science teaching for English learners: Developing supportive and responsive learning contexts for sense-making and language development (pp. 3–20). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Tarchi, C. (2010). Reading comprehension of informative texts in secondary school: A focus on direct and indirect effects of reader's prior knowledge. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(5), 415–420. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2010.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tenopir, C., & King, D. W. (2004). Communication patterns of engineers. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Turkan, S., Oliveira, L., Lee, O., & Phelps, G. (2014). Proposing a knowledge base for teaching academic content to English language learners: Disciplinary linguistic knowledge. Teachers College Record, 116, 1–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unsworth, L. (1999). Developing critical understanding of the specialised language of school science and history texts: A functional grammatical perspective. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(7), 508–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2012.668938
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Glasgow: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London: Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yarden, A., Norris, S., & Phillips, L. (2015). Adapted primary literature: The use of authentic scientific texts in secondary schools. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Yore, L. D. (2012). Science literacy for all: More than a slogan, logo, or rally flag!. In K. C. D. Tan & M. Kim (Eds.), Issues and challenges in science education research (pp. 5–23). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, Z. H., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Can generating representations enhance learning with dynamic visualizations? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1177–1198. doi: 10.1002/tea.20443
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar