Relationship between "Form" and "Content" in science writing among english language learners

Teachers College Record

Volumn 113, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 1401-1434

  Lee, Okhee ^a   Penfield, Randall D ^a   Buxton, Cory A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80054045833     PISSN: 01614681     EISSN: 14679620     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Amaral, O. M., Garrison, L., & Klentschy, M. (2002). Helping English learners increase achievement through inquiry-based science instruction. Bilingual Research Journal, 26(2), 213-239.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Amsel, E., & Brock, S. (1996). The development of evidence evaluation skills. Cognitive Development, 11, 523-550. (Pubitemid 126175089)
4. Anderson, J. R. (1993). Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist, 48, 35-44.
5. Au, K. H., & Kawakami, A. J. (1994). Cultural congruence in instruction. In E. Hollins, J. E. King, & W. C. Hayman (Eds.), Teaching diverse populations: Formulating a knowledge base (pp. 5-23). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
6. Brown, B. A., & Spang, E. (2008). Double talk: Synthesizing everyday and science language in the classroom. Science Education, 92, 708-732.
7. Bruna, K. R., & Gomez, K. (Eds.). (2008). Talking science, writing science: The work of language in multicultural classrooms. Mahweh, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
8. Bruna, K., Vann, R., & Escudero, M. (2007). What's language got to do widi it? A case study of academic language instruction in a high school. Journal ofEnglish for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 36-54.
9. Buxton, C. (1998). Improving science education of English language learners: Capitalizing on educational reform. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 4(4), 341-369.
10. Carr.J., Sexton, U-, & Lagunoff, R. (2006). Making science accessible to English learners: A guidebook for teachers. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
11. Casteel, C. P., & Isom, B. A. (1994). Reciprocal processes in science and literacy learning. The Reading Teacher, 47, 538-545.
12. 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, & W. Binder (Eds.), Linking science and literacy in the K-8 classroom (pp. 221-244). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
13. Chamot, A. U., & O'Malley, J. M. (1987). The cognitive academic language learning approach: A bridge to the mainstream. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 227-249.
14. Chamot, A. U., & O'Malley, J. M. (1996). The cognitive academic language learning approach (CALLA): A model for linguistically diverse classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 259-273.
15. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175-218. (Pubitemid 37230332)
16. Crandall,J. A. (1993). Content-centered learning in the United States. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 111-126.
17. Cuevas, P., Lee, O., Hart, J., & Deaktor, R. (2005). Improving science inquiry with elementary students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 42, 337-357. (Pubitemid 40449846)
18. Cummins, J. (1994). Primary language instruction and the education of language minority students. In C. Leyba (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students, 2nd ed. (pp. 3-46). Los Angeles: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center.
19. Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
20. Douglas, R., Klentschy, M. P., Worth, K., & Binder, W. (Eds.). (2006). Linking science and literacy in the K-8 classroom. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
21. Echevarria, J., Short, D., & Powers, K. (2006). School reform and standards-based education: A model for English-language learners. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(A), 195-211.
22. Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. (2000). Making content comprehensible for English language learners: The SIOP model. Newton, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
23. Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading in middle school. International Journal of Science Education, 25(5), 491-520. (Pubitemid 43435982)
24. Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M. (2008). Reading in secondary content areas: A language-based pedagogy. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Press.
25. Fathman, A. K., & Crowther, D. T. (Eds.). (2006). Science for English language learners: K-12 classroom strategies. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
26. Fradd, S. H., Lee, O., Sutman, F. X., & Saxton, M. K. (2002). Materials development promoting science inquiry with English language learners: A case study. Bilingual Research Journal, 25(4), 479-501.
27. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C, Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(A), 915-945. (Pubitemid 33590046)
28. Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106-116.
29. Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis. New York: Routledge.
30. Gibbons, P. (2006). Bridging discourses in the ESL classroom. New York: Continuum.
31. Goldenberg, C. (2008). Teaching English language learners: What the research does-and does not-say. American Educator, 32(2), 42-44.
32. González, N., Moll, L. C, & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
33. Guthrie.J. T, Anderson, E., Alao, S., & Rinehart, J. (1999). Influences of concept-oriented reading instruction on strategy use and conceptual learning from text. The Elementary School Journal, 99, 343-366.
34. Gutiérrez, K. D., Asato, J., Pacheco, M., Moll, L. C., Olson, K., Horng, E. L., Ruiz, R., Garcia, E., & McCarty, T. (2002). "Sounding American": The consequences of new reforms on English language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(3), 328-343.
35. Hammond, J., & Macken-Horarik, M. (1999). Critical literacy: Challenges and questions for ESL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 528-543.
36. Hampton, E., & Rodriguez, R. (2001). Inquiry science in bilingual classrooms. Bilingual Research Journal, 25(A), 461-478.
37. Hand, B. G, Wallace, G, & Yang, E. (2004). Using the science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 131-149. (Pubitemid 38237490)
38. Hart, J., & Lee, O. (2003). Teacher professional development to improve science and literacy achievement of English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal 27(3), 475-501.
39. Holliday, W., Yore, L., & Alverman, D. (1994). The reading-science learning-writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 31, 877-894.
40. Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2003). The use of argumentation in Haitian Creole science classrooms. Harvard Educational Review, 75(10), 73-93. (Pubitemid 36470997)
41. Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English language learners in the content areas. Review of Educational Research, 78(A), 1010-1038.
42. Kelly, G. J., & Breton, T. (2001). Framing science as disciplinary inquiry in bilingual classrooms. Electronic Journal of Science and Literacy, 1(1).
43. Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Education reform and subject matter knowledge. Journal of Research and Science Teaching, 35(3), 249-263. (Pubitemid 128459014)
44. Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. London: Pergamon.
45. Ku, Y, Yoo, M. S., & Garcia, E. E. (2008). Developing expository writing skills in science through the integration of inquiry-based science and literacy instruction. In K. R. Bruna & K. Gomez (Eds.), Talking science, writing science: Thework oflanguagein multicultural classrooms (pp. 49-68). Mahweh, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
46. Lee, O. (2002). Science inquiry for elementary students from diverse backgrounds. In W. G. Secada (Ed.), Review of research in education, Vol. 26 (pp. 23-69). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
47. Lee, O. (2004). Teacher change in beliefs and practices in science and literacy instruction with English language learners, Journalof Research in Science Teaching, 41(1), 65-93.
48. Lee, O. (2005). Science education and English language learners: Synthesis and research agenda. Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 491-530. (Pubitemid 41818879)
49. Lee, O., Deaktor, R. A., Hart,J. E., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2005). An instructional intervention's impact on the science and literacy achievement of culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 42(8), 857-887. (Pubitemid 41659277)
50. Lee, O., & Fradd, S. H. (1998). Science for all, including students from non-English language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 27(3), 12-21.
51. Lee, O., Maerten-Rivera.J., Penfield, R., LeRoy, K., & Secada, W. G. (2008). Science achievement of English language learners in urban elementary schools: Results of a first-year professional development intervention, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 31-52. (Pubitemid 351189811)
52. Lee, O., Mahotiere, M., Salinas, A., Penfield, R. D., & Maerten-Rivera, J. (in press). Science writing achievement among English language learners: Results of three-year intervention in urban elementary schools. Bilingual Research Journal.
53. Lock, G. (1996). Functional English grammar: An introduction for second language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54. Loeb, S., Darling-Hammond, L., & Luczak, J. (2005). How teaching conditions predict teacher turnover in California schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(S), 44-70. (Pubitemid 41294960)
55. McKeon, D. (1994). Language, culture and schooling. In F. Genessee (Ed.), Educating second language children: The whole child, the whole curriculum, the whole community (pp. 15-32) New York: Cambridge University Press.
56. Merino, B., & Hammond, L. (2001). How do teachers facilitate writing for bilingual learners in "sheltered constructivist" science? Electronic Journal in Science and Literacy,1 (1).
57. Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K. E., Ellis, L. M., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 38-71.
58. Moje, E., Collazo, X, Carillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). "Maestro, what is quality?": Examining competing discourses in project-based science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(A), 469-495.
59. Moll, L. C. (1992). Bilingual classroom studies and community analysis: Some recent trends. Educational Researcher, 21(2), 20-24.
60. National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). Teacher preparation and professional development: 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
61. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
62. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
63. O'Donnell, C. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 33-84.
64. Palincsar, A. S., & Magnusson, S.J. (2001). The interplay of firsthand and text-based investigations to model and support the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning. In S. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 152-193). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
65. Raudenbush, S.W., Bryk, A.S., Cheong, Y.& Congdon R.T.,(2000). HLM5: Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling. Chicago: Scientific Software International
66. Richard-Amato, P. A. (2003). Making it happen: From interactive to participatory language teaching. New York: Pearson Longman.
67. Rodriguez, A. J., & Berryman, C. (2002). Using sociotransformative constructivism to teach for understanding in diverse classrooms: A beginning teacher's journey. American Educational ResearchJournal, 39(4), 1017-1045. (Pubitemid 36263744)
68. Romance, N. R., & Vatale, 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, 545-554.
69. Rosebery, A. S., & Warren, B. (Eds.). (2008). Teaching science to English language learners: Building on students' strengths. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
70. Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Conant, F. R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 61-94.
71. Schleppegrell, M. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
72. Schleppegrell, M. J., Achugar, M., & Oteiza, T. (2004). The grammar of history: Enhancing content-based instruction through a functional focus on language. TESOL Quarterly, 38(1), 67-93.
73. Schleppegrell, M., & Colombi, C. (2002). Developing advanced literacy in first and second languages. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
74. Short, D. (2002). Language learning in sheltered social studies classes. TESOL Quarterly, 77(1), 18-24.
75. Solano-Flores, G., & Nelson-Barber, S. (2001). On the cultural validity of science assessments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 553-573. (Pubitemid 33655580)
76. Stoddart, T, Pinal, A., Latzke, M., & Canaday, D. (2002). Integrating inquiry science and language development for English language learners, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39(8), 664-687.
77. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. (1997). ESL standards for pre-K-12 students. Alexandria, VA: Author.
78. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. (2006). Pre-K-12 English language proficiency standards. Alexandria, VA: Author.
79. United States Census Bureau. (2008). Census 2000 urban and rural classification. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
80. Valeras, M., Pappas, C. C, & the ISLE Team. (2006). Young children's own illustrated information books: Making sense in science through words and pictures. In R. Douglas, M. P. Klentschy, K. Worth, & W. Binder (Eds.), Linking science and literacy in the K-8 classroom (pp. 95-116). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
81. Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T (2002). Preparing culturally responsive teachers: Rethinking the curriculum, Journal ofTeacher Education, 53(1), 20-32.
82. Warren, B., Ballenger, C, Ogonowski, M., Rosebery, A., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2001).Rethinking diversity in learning science: The logic of everyday language. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(b), 529-552. (Pubitemid 33655579)
83. Wiley, T. G., & Wright, W. E. (2004). Against the undertow: Language-minority education policy and politics in the "age of accountability." Educational Policy, 18{1), 142-168. (Pubitemid 38157512)
84. Wong-Fillmore, L., & Snow, C. (2002). What teachers need to know about language. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.