Assessing multimodal literacies in science: semiotic and practical insights from pre-service teacher education

References

• Adams Becker, S., M. Brown, E. Dahlstrom, A. Davis, K. DePaul, V. Diaz, and J. Pomerantz. 2018. NMC Horizon Report: 2018 Higher Education Edition. Louisville, CO: Educause.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). 2015. The Australian Curriculum: Science V 8.1. Canberra: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority.
   Google Scholar
• Bateman, J. 2008. Multimodality and Genre: A Foundation for the Systematic Analysis of Multimodal Documents. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Bateman, J. 2017. “Triangulating Transmediality: A Multimodal Semiotic Framework Relating Media, Modes and Genres.” Discourse, Context & Media 20: 160–174. doi:10.1016/j.dcm.2017.06.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bateman, J., J. Wildfeuer, and T. Hiippala. 2017. Multimodality: Foundations, Research and Analysis, a Problem-Oriented Introduction. Berlin: De Gruyer Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• Bearne, E. 2009. “Assessing Multimodal Texts.” In Assessing New Literacies: Perspectives from the Classroom, edited by A. Burke and R. F. Hammett, 15–34. New York: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Burnett, C., and G. Merchant. 2015. “The Challenge of 21st Century Literacies.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 59 (3): 271–274. doi:10.1002/jaal.482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callow, J. 2013. The Shape of Things to Come. Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association.
   Google Scholar
• Chandler, P. 2017. “To What Extent Are Teachers Well Prepared to Teach Multimodal Authoring?” Cogent Education 4 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1080/2331186X.2016.1266820.
   Google Scholar
• Coll, R. K., B. France, and I. Taylor. 2005. “The Role of Models/and Analogies in Science Education: Implications from Research.” International Journal of Science Education 27 (2): 183–198. doi: 10.1080/0950069042000276712.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derewianka, B., and P. T. Jones. 2016. Teaching Language in Context. 2nd ed. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eilam, B., and J. K. Gilbert, eds. 2014. Science Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher, T. L., and J. Rowsell. 2018. “Untangling Binaries: Where Canada Sits in the “21st Century Debate.” McGill Journal of Education 52 (2): 383–407. doi:10.7202/1044472ar.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldman, S., M. A. Britt, W. Brown, G. Cribb, M. George, C. Greenleaf, C. Lee, and C. Shanahan, & READI Project. 2016. “Disciplinary Literacies and Learning to Read for Understanding: A Conceptual Framework for Disciplinary Literacy.” Educational Psychologist 51 (2): 219–246. doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1168741.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as a Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. Spoken and Written Language. Waurn Ponds: Deakin University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K. 1991. “The Notion of “Context” in Language Education.” In Text and Context in Functional Linguistics, edited by M. Gladessy, 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hammond, J., and P. Gibbons. 2005. “Putting Scaffolding to Work: The Contribution of Scaffolding in Articulating ESL Education.” Prospect 20 (1): 7–30.
   Google Scholar
• Hoban, G., W. Nielsen, and C. Hyland. 2016. “Blended Media: Student-Generated Mash-Ups to Promote Engagement with Science Content.” International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning 8 (3): 35–48. doi:10.4018/IJMBL.2016070103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoban, G., W. Nielsen, and A. Shepherd, eds. 2016. Student-Generated Digital Media in Science Education: Learning, Explaining and Communicating Content. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kimber, K., and C. Wyatt-Smith. 2009. “Valued Knowledges and Core Capacities for Digital Learners: Claiming Spaces for Quality Assessment.” In Assessing New Literacies: Perspectives from the Classroom, edited by A. Burke and R. F. Hammett, 133–156. New York: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G., and T. van Leeuwen. 2006. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. 1998. “Multimedia Demands of the Scientific Curriculum.” Linguistics and Education 10 (3): 247–271. doi:10.1016/S0898-5898(99)00009-1.
   Google Scholar
• Li, G. 2017. “From Absence to Affordances: Integrating Old and New Literacies in School-Based Instruction for English Learners.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 61 (3): 241–246. doi:10.1002/jaal.662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, X. 2009. “Beyond Science Literacy: Science and the Public.” International Journal of Environment & Science Education 4 (3): 300–311.
   Google Scholar
• Macken-Horarik, M. 2016. “Building a Metalanguage for Interpreting Multimodal Literature: Insights from Systemic Functional Semiotics in Two Case Study Classrooms.” English in Australia 51 (2): 85–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macken-Horarik, M., and M. Adoniou. 2008. “Genre and Register in Multiliteracies.” In Handbook of Educational Linguistics, edited by B. Spolsky and F. M. Hult, 367–382. London: Cassell.
   Google Scholar
• Manderino, M., and J. Castek. 2016. “Digital Literacies for Disciplinary Learning: A Call to Action.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 60 (1): 79–81. doi:10.1002/jaal.565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Matruglio, E. 2019. “Beating the Bamboozle: Literacy Pedagogy Design and the Technicality of SFL.” Australian Journal of Teacher Education 44 (4): 1–13. doi:10.14221/ajte.2018v44n4.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, T., M. Schleppegrell, and A. S. Palincsar. 2018. “Discovering Disciplinary Linguistic Knowledge with English Learners and Their Teachers: Applying Systemic Functional Linguistics Concepts through Design-Based Research.” TESOL Quarterly 52 (4): 1022–1049. doi:10.1002/tesq.472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, A. 2013. “Proof of Concept’: Beginning to Use Design-Based Research to Improve Science Literacies for Middle Years Learners.” Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 36 (1): 3–16.
   Google Scholar
• Myhill, D., H. Lines, and A. Watson. 2012. “Making Meaning with Grammar: A Repertoire of Possibilities.” English in Australia 47 (3): 29–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nielsen, W., H. Georgiou, P. T. Jones, and A. Turney. 2018. “Digital Explanation as Assessment in University Science.” Research in Science Education: 1–28. doi:10.1007/s11165-018-9785-9.
   Google Scholar
• O’Halloran, K. 2005. Mathematical Discourse: Language, Symbolism and Visual Images. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• O’Halloran, K. 2009. “Historical Changes in the Semiotic Landscape: From Calculation to Computation.” In The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis, edited by C. Jewitt, 98–113. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• O’Toole, M. 1990. “A Systemic-Functional Semiotics of Art.” Semiotica 82 (2–4): 185–209. doi:10.1515/semi.1990.82.3-4.185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinking, D., and B. A. Bradley. 2008. Formative and Design Experiments. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, D., and J. R. Martin. 2012. Learning to Write, Reading to Learn: Genre, Knowledge & Pedagogy in the Sydney School. Sheffield: Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Rothery, J. 1989. “Learning about Language.” In Language development: Learning language, learning culture, edited by R. Hasan, and J. R. Martin. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Tan, L., and K. Zammit, eds. 2018. Teaching Writing and Representing in the Primary School Years . 2nd ed.Melbourne: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Tang, K., and K. Danielsson, eds. 2018. Global Development in Literacy Research. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Treagust, D., R. Duit, and H. E. Fischer, eds. 2017. Multiple Representations in Physics Education. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Tytler, R., and P. Hubber. 2016. “Constructing Representations to Learn Science.” In Using Multimodal Representations to Support Learning in the Science Classroom, edited by B. Hand, M. McDermott, and V. Prain, 159–181. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Unsworth, L. 2006. “Towards a Metalanguage for Multiliteracies Education: Describing the Meaning-Making Resources of Language-Image Interaction.” English Teaching: Practice and Critique 5 (1): 55–76.
   Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen, T. 1999. Speech, Music, Sound. London: Macmillan Education.
   Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen, T. 2005. Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Zammit, K. 2019. “Pedagogy, Curriculum and Assessment: Multimodal Practices That Engage Students with and in Learning.” In Multimodality across Classrooms, edited by H. de Silva Joyce and S. Feez, 49–65. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, S., E. Djonov, and T. van Leeuwen. 2014. “Semiotic Technology and Practice: A Multimodal Social Semiotic Approach to Powerpoint.” Text and Talk 34 (3): 349–375.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar