Michelle Salgado
National Research Council. (2014). Literacy for science in English language arts and science standards (Chapter 2). In Literacy for science: Exploring the intersection of the Next Generation Science Standards and Common Core for ELA Standards: A workshop summary. (pp. 7-18). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
The Board on Science Education (BOSE) held a workshop in December of 2013 in response to questions surrounding the “confusion that still exists among teachers and administrators about how to and who should implement the literacy in science standards of CCSS for ELA and how these standards work with the NGSS” (p. 2). Some of the goals of this two-day workshop were to address the nature of literacy in science within both the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for English Language Arts (ELA) and in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) as well as examine the underlying principles within literacy for science and the nature of text and discourse in science (p. 3). In addition to stated goals there were discussions around curriculum design and the role that district and administration have in guiding a successful implementation of the intersections of science and ELA. The workshop had fifty-three participants in attendance and at least seventy-one online viewers who watched for at least thirty minutes (p. 3).
In order to focus our attention and orient the reader, below are the eight science and engineering practices. These practices will now guide science instruction and need to be demonstrated by K-12 students. In thinking about these eight practices one might begin to ask how literacy in science can support the reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language standards found in the CCSS for ELA. Turning to implementation, how will school district personnel and administration work collaboratively and in true partnership with teachers to ensure that teaching and learning is supported during this shift in standards and practice?
NGSS Science and Engineering Practices
- Asking questions (for science) and defining problems (engineering)
- Developing and using models
- Planning and carrying out investigations
- Analyzing and interpreting data
- Using mathematics and computational thinking
- Constructing explanations (for science) and designing solutions (for engineering)
- Engaging in argument from evidence
- Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information
What I appreciate about this workshop was that it was responsive to the questions and concerns that teachers and districts posed about the overlap between NGSS and CCSS. Through this workshop it was stated that teachers in grades K-5 would integrate CCSS ELA into science as they do in other subjects such as social studies. But ELA teachers in grades 6-12 would not be responsible for meeting literacy in the science standards (p. 7).
One important piece that emerged from the workshop was the creation of a table (Figure 2-1) for grades 6-12 outlining how CCSS for ELA in science standards interact with the eight NGSS practices. Thinkabout one of the overlapping standards for math, ELA, and science “construct and engage in viable arguments from evidence and critique the reasoning of others” (p. 17). These types of scientific “arguments” will take time to master for both students and teachers as learning is a process and sometimes a slow process as challenges and obstacles arise for both educators and their pupils. If students only begin to largely receive the type of instruction necessary to engage in these “arguments” after elementary school then what kind of students does that privilege?
One of the presenters of this workshop, Brian Reiser of Northwest University, spoke about the role of literacy in science practices,
"These practices…. emphasize developing and using science, rather than learning about science. In his view, this constitutes a major “evolutionary and revolutionary” shift in science education. The goal is to help students understand why a core idea in science makes sense and how it helps explain phenomena in the world. Reading textbooks about science ideas is insufficient, in Reiser’s view, for helping students understand why scientists know what they know and how core ideas in science help to explain about the world. The typical practices of reading definitions and explanations, summarizing readings, communicating these readings, and occasionally using this knowledge in investigation do not generally support the sense-making process. Rather, he suggested, using the science practices engages students in using cognitive, social, and language skills in doing the work of science. The use of these practices to build understanding is also in service of building a depth of knowledge about core ideas in science. Ideally, coherence should exist within and across the scientific disciplines to help students build a storyline of explanation that builds on their prior knowledge…literacy practices play a critical role in helping students “figure things out.” Scientific discourse and social interaction are critical to this process of making meaning and developing explanations, he said (p. 8)."
In thinking about Reiser’s comments I am reflecting on the shift in practice that teachers will face such as a movement away from memorizing vocabulary or formulas to facilitating sense-making talk so that students understand how to tell a science story and where the meaning-making vocabulary or equations come into play during that explanation. In addition the purposeful integration of literacy in science will allow teachers, especially in the early grades to access science content both to improve their own background content knowledge, plan discussion questions, and respond to student questions about the topic or phenomena they are exploring.
It has been my experience both as an elementary school teacher and a science instructional coach that teaching science and learning science is similar in challenge to learning a new language. In accordance with these new principles of practice for science and engineering I have seen teachers face uphill battles to learn instructional techniques for guiding a science rich discussion and conducting an interactive science read aloud lesson with five and six year old students. I myself struggled to learn how to incorporate the speaking and listening components within a science lesson so that my students would be able to learn through sense-making talk about phenomena such as how a tree can grow out of another tree (nurse log) or the science behind playground slide collisions. When I began to use read aloud books that related to the science topic or phenomenon we were studying, students began to use text examples and observations to create evidenced based explanations. Incorporating literacy in science not only increased engagement for my class of five and six year olds but it provided a resource for students to go back to and utilize during discussions and independent work time for science modeling.
I was genuinely eager to read these dozen or so pages related to literacy in science but I was discouraged to find that that the focus of pages (7-18) was largely geared towards grades 6-12. If we think about learning a new language or skill set, do we want to begin when students are in middle or high school or should we start earlier such as pre-school or K-3 grades?
I feel that by not consistently focusing our efforts and resources in the earlier grades, including pre-school, many students may struggle to demonstrate learning surrounding these eight science and engineering practices because the skills involved in these practices have not been built up and refined over time.
Discussion Points
1. What systemic changes must schools, districts, administration, and teachers undertake in order to support teaching and learning in alignment with these NGSS in support of the eight science and engineering practices? How can we support teachers in this shift in practice? What specific tools do teachers need in order to implement these practices?
2. Why are only “50 percent of students adequately prepared to handle science and other texts as freshmen in college according to recent data (ACT, 2006)” (p. 7), is this result of a weak science foundation in the early grades such as K-5? What other factors may contribute to this data?
