Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 347–366 | Cite as

Using Educative Assessments to Support Science Teaching for Middle School English-language Learners

  • Cory A. Buxton
  • Martha Allexsaht-Snider
  • Regina Suriel
  • Shakhnoza Kayumova
  • Youn-jeng Choi
  • Bobette Bouton
  • Melissa Baker


Grounded in Hallidayan perspectives on academic language, we report on our development of an educative science assessment as one component of the language-rich inquiry science for English-language learners teacher professional learning project for middle school science teachers. The project emphasizes the role of content-area writing to support teachers in diagnosing their students’ emergent understandings of science inquiry practices, science content knowledge, and the academic language of science, with a particular focus on the needs of English-language learners. In our current school policy context, writing for meaningful purposes has received decreased attention as teachers struggle to cover large numbers of discrete content standards. Additionally, high-stakes assessments presented in multiple-choice format have become the definitive measure of student science learning, further de-emphasizing the value of academic writing for developing and expressing understanding. To counter these trends, we examine the implementation of educative assessment materials—writing-rich assessments designed to support teachers’ instructional decision making. We report on the qualities of our educative assessment that supported teachers in diagnosing their students’ emergent understandings, and how teacher–researcher collaborative scoring sessions and interpretation of assessment results led to changes in teachers’ instructional decision making to better support students in expressing their scientific understandings. We conclude with implications of this work for theory, research, and practice.


Assessment English-language learners Middle school 



This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1019236.

Supplementary material

10972_2012_9329_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (3.5 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 3597 kb)
10972_2012_9329_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (499 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 499 kb)
10972_2012_9329_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (99 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (PDF 100 kb)
10972_2012_9329_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (4.1 mb)
Supplementary material 4 (PDF 4163 kb)


  1. Alberts, B. (2009). Redefining science education. Science, 323(5913), 437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. August, D., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  3. Buxton, C., & Provenzo, E. (2011). “Natural philosophy” as a foundation for science education in an age of high-stakes accountability. School Science and Mathematics, 111(2), 49–56.Google Scholar
  4. Buxton, C., Allexsaht-Snider, M., & Rivera, C. (2012). Science, language and families: Constructing a model of language-rich science inquiry. In J.Bianchini, V. Atkerson, A. Calebrese Barton, O. Lee, & A. Rodriguez (Eds.), Moving the equity agenda forward: Equity research, practice and policy in science education (pp. 241-259). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting argumentation through students’ questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 230–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coxhead, A. J. (1998). An Academic Word List. English Language Institute Occasional Publication Number 18. Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington.Google Scholar
  7. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davis, E., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M. (2008). Reading in secondary content areas: A language-based pedagogy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  10. Gee, J. P. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. Critical perspectives on literacy and education. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  11. Gunel, M., Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2007). Writing for learning in science: A secondary analysis of six studies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(4), 615–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Halliday, M. A. K. (2002). On grammar in the collected works of M.A.K. Halliday, Vol. 1. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  13. Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London and Washington, DC: Falmer.Google Scholar
  14. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  15. Hand, B., Wallace, C., & Yang, E. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131–149.Google Scholar
  16. Hayes, J. R., & Hatch, J. A. (1999). Issues in measuring reliability. Written Communication, 16(3), 354–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hohenshell, L., & Hand, B. (2006). Writing-to-learn strategies in secondary school cell biology: A mixed method study. International Journal of Science Education. (28)2–3, 261–289.Google Scholar
  18. International Reading Association, & National Middle School Association. (2001). Supporting young adolescents’ literacy learning: A joint position statement of the International Reading Association and the National Middle School Association. Newark, DE: Authors.Google Scholar
  19. Krashen, S. (2004). The power of reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  20. Lee, O., & Buxton, C. (2010). Diversity and equity in science education: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  22. Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 296–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. National Research Council. (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting themes, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  24. Noble, T., Suarez, C., Rosebery, A., O’Connor, M., Warren, B., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2012). “I never thought of it as freezing”: How students answer questions on large-scale science test and what they know about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(6), 778–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Perie, M., Grigg, W., & Dion, G. (2005). The nation’s report card: Mathematics 2005 (NCES 2006-4453). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  26. Schleppegrell, M. J. (2006). The challenges of academic language in school subjects. In I. Lindberg & K. Sandwall (Eds.), Språket och kunskapen: att lära på sitt andraspråk i skola och högskola (pp. 47–69). Göteborg, Sweden: Göteborgs Universitet Institutet.Google Scholar
  27. Short, D., & Fitzsimmons, S. (2007). Double the work: Challenges and solutions to acquiring language and academic literacy for adolescent English language learners. New York: Carnegie Corporation.Google Scholar
  28. Snow, C. E., Lawrence, J., & White, C. (2009). Generating knowledge of academic language among urban middle school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(4), 325–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Solano-Flores, G., & Trumbull, E. (2003). Examining language in context: The need for new research and practice paradigms in the testing of English language learners. Educational Researcher, 32(2), 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zeng, L., Kolen, M. J., Hanson, B. A., Cui, Z., & Chien, Y. (2005). RAGE-RGEQUATE [Computer program]. Iowa City: University of Iowa. Program available at

Copyright information

© The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cory A. Buxton
    • 1
  • Martha Allexsaht-Snider
    • 1
  • Regina Suriel
    • 2
  • Shakhnoza Kayumova
    • 1
  • Youn-jeng Choi
    • 1
  • Bobette Bouton
    • 3
  • Melissa Baker
    • 1
  1. 1.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.University of ConnecticutMansfieldUSA
  3. 3.Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations