The Communication in Science Inquiry Project (CISIP): A project to enhance scientific literacy through the creation of science classroom discourse communities

International Journal of Environmental and Science Education

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 259-274

  Baker, Dale R ^a   Lewis, Elizabeth B ^b   Purzer, Senay ^c   Watts, Nievita Bueno ^a   Perkins, Gita ^a   Uysal, Sibel ^a   Wong, Sissy ^a   Beard, Rachelle ^a   Lang, Michael ^d  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^c PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d National Center for Teacher Education   (United States)

Author keywords

Discourse community; Nature of science communication; Scientific argument

Indexed keywords

EID: 70349986415     PISSN: None     EISSN: 13063065     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review. International journal of Science Education, 22, 665-701.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans: A project 2061 report on literacy goals in science, mathematics, and technology. Washing-ton, DC: Author.
3. Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction modes in pairs and fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 1099-1114.
4. Baker, D., Bueno-Watts, N., Lewis, E.B., Ozdemir, G., Perkins, G., Uysal, S., Wong, S., & Yasar-Purzer, S. (2008). Discourse in Inquiry Science Classrooms (DiISC): Reference Manual (Tech. Rep. No. 001). Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University, The Communication in Science Inquiry Project (CISIP).
5. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
7. Callaghan, M., Knapp, P., & Noble, G. (1999). Genre in practice. I. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing (pp. 179-202). London: Falmer.
8. Carrasquillo, A., & Rodriquez, V. (1996). Language minority students in the mainstream classroom. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters.
9. Chamot, A., & O'Malley, J. (1987). The cognitive academic language learning approach: A bridge to the mainstream. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 227-249.
10. Chinn, C., & Brown, D. (2000). Learning in science: A comparison of deep and surface approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 109-138.
11. Fradd, S., & Lee, O. (1999).Teachers' roles in promoting science inquiry with students from diverse language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 28, 14-42.
12. Herrel, A. & Jorden, M. (2007). Fifty strategies for teaching English language learners. Upper Saddlr River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13. Halliday, M., & Martin, J. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
14. Kelly, G. (2007). Discourse in science classrooms. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science teaching (pp.443-470). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Kelly, G., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 883-915.
16. Kelly, G., & Crawford, T. (1997). An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science. Science Education, 81, 533-559.
17. Kelly, G., & Green, J. (1998). The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction. In B. Guzzetti & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 145-182). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Keys, C. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83,115-130.
19. Klein, P. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing to learn. Educational Psycholo-gy Review, 11, 203-270.
20. Kittleson, J., & Southerland, S. (2004). The role of discourse in group knowledge construction: A case study of engineering students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 267-293.
21. Lave, J., & Wegner, E. (1992). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
22. Lee, O., & Fradd, S.(1996). Literacy skills in science learning among linguistically diverse students. Science Education, 80, 651-671.
23. Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
24. Lieberman, A., & McLaughlin, M., (1992). Networks for educational change: Powerful and problematic. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(9), 673-677.
25. Moje, E.B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. (2001). "Maestro, what is 'quality"? Language, litera-cy and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 469-498.
26. National Research Council. (2005). How students learn: History, mathematics and science in the class-room, A targeted Report for Teachers. M Donovan & J. Branford (Eds.), Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
27. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: The Na-tional Academy Press.
28. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning, Chapters 2 & 6. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553-576.
30. Roberts, D. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.). Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Rivard, L. (1994).A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 969-983.
32. Yasar-Purzer, S., Uysal, S., Baker, D., Lewis, E. & Lang, M. (2008). Teachers' progress towards a modernist view of the nature of science communication. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Baltimore: MD.
33. Wayne, A., Yoon, K., Zhu, Cronen, S., Garet, M. (2008). Experimenting with teacher professional development: Motives and methods. Educational Researcher, 37(8), 469-479.
34. Wegner, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cam-bridge University Press.
35. Woodruff, E., & Meyer, K. (1997). Explanations from intra- and inter-group discourse: Students build-ing knowledge in the science classroom. Research in Science Education, 27, 25-39.
36. Yore, L., Hand, B., & Florence, M. (2004). Scientists' views of science, models of writing, and science writing practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 338-369.
37. Yore, L. Hand, B., & Prain, V. (1999, January). Writing-to-learn science: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Paper presented at the Association for the Education of Teachers of Science, Austin: TX.