A semiotics discourse analysis framework: Understanding meaning making in science education contexts

Semiotics: Theory and Applications

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 191-208

  Jamani, Kamini Jaipal ^a  

^a BROCK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874304866     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (32)

1. Airey, J., and Linder, C. (2009b). A disciplinary discourse perspective on university science learning: achieving fluency in a critical constellation of modes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 27-49.
2. Cutnell, J.D., and Johnson, K.W. (2001). Physics (5th Edition). New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
3. Danesi, M. (2007). The quest for meaning: A guide to semiotic theory and practice. Toronto: Toronto University Press.
4. Danesi, M., and Santerno, D. (1999). What is semiotics? In M. Danesi, and D. Santerno (Eds.), The sign in theory and practice: An introductory reader in semiotics (pp. 3-22). Toronto: Canadian Scholar's Press.
5. Eco, U. (1976). A theory of semiotics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
6. Eco, U. (1984). Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
7. Gee, (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (2nd edition). New York, NY: Routledge.
8. Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). London: Edward Arnold.
9. Halliday, M.A.K. (1998). Things and relations: Regrammaticing experience as technical knowledge. In J.R. Martin, and R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: critical and functional perspectives on discourses in science (pp.185-235). London: Routledge.
10. Jaipal, K. (2010b). Meaning making through multiple modalities in a biology classroom: A Multimodal semiotics discourse. Science Education, 94(1), 48-72.
11. Jewitt, C., and Kress, G. (Eds.) (2003). Multimodal literacy. New York: Peter Lang.
12. Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., and Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.
13. Kozma, R., Chin, C., Russell, J., and Marx, N. (2000b). The role of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 102-143.
14. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd edition). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
15. Kuhn, T.S. (2000). The road since structure: Philosophical essays, 1970-1993 with an autobiographical interview. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
16. Lederman, N.G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell, and N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831-879). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Lemke, J. L. (1998). Multiplying meaning: Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J.R. Martin, and R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses in science (pp.87-113). London: Routledge.
18. Lemke, J. L. (2002). Multimedia semiotics: Genres for science education and scientific literacy. In M. J. Schleppegrell, and M.C. Colombi (Eds.), Developing advanced literacy in first and second languages: Meaning with power (pp. 21-44). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Marquez, C., Izquierdo, M., and Espinet, M. (2006). Multimodal science teachers' discourse in modeling the water cycle. Science Education, 90, 202-226.
20. Martin, J.R., (1993). Technicality and abstraction: Language for the creation of specialized texts. In M.A.K. Halliday, and J.R. Martin (Eds.). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
21. McComas, W.F. (2008). Seeking historical examples to illustrate key aspects of the nature of science. Science and Education, 17, 249-263.
22. McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P., Almazroa, H. (1998). A review of the role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: rationales and strategies (pp. 3-39). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
23. Ogborn, J., Kress, G., Martins, I., and McGillicuddy, K. (1996). Explaining science in the classroom. Buckingham: Open University Press.
24. Pierce, C.S. (1999). Logic as semiotic: The theory of signs. In M. Danesi, and D. Santerno (Eds.), The sign in theory and practice: An introductory reader in semiotics (pp. 71-93). Toronto: Canadian Scholar's Press.
25. Prain, V., and Waldrip, B., (2006). An exploratory study of teachers' and students' use of multi-modal representations of concepts in primary science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(16), 1843-1866.
26. Roberts, D., and Ostman, L. (1998). Problems of meaning in science curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press.
27. Roth, W.M., and Bowen, G.M. (2000b). Decalages in talk and gesture. Linguistics and Education, 10(3), 335-358.
28. Roth, W.M., Bowen, M.G., and McGinn, M. (1999b). Differences in graph-related practices between high school biology textbooks and scientific ecology journals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 977-1019.
29. Roth, W.M., and Lawless, D. (2002b). Scientific investigations, metaphorical gestures, and the emergence of abstract scientific concepts. Learning and Instruction, 12(3), 285-304.
30. Saussure, F. (1999). The linguistic sign. In M. Danesi, and D. Santerno (Eds.), The sign in theory and practice: An introductory reader in semiotics (pp. 95-117). Toronto: Canadian Scholar's Press.
31. Shulman, L.S. (1998). The dangers of dichotomous thinking in education. In P.P. Grimmett, and G.L. Erickson (Eds.), Reflection in teacher education, (pp. 31-37). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
32. Wirth, U. (1998). What is abductive inference? In P. Bouissac (Ed.), Encyclopedia of semiotics (pp. 1-3). New York: Oxford University Press.