Advertisement

The Content-Language Tension for English Language Learners in Two Secondary Science Classrooms

  • Jason S. WuEmail author
  • Felicia Moore Mensah
  • Kok-Sing Tang
Chapter

Abstract

Investigating the use of native languages (L1) in secondary science remains an unaddressed need in global scientific literacy. While past research in this area has largely focused on primary school students, more clarity is needed on the role of secondary school students’ L1 use in the classroom as the language of science becomes more specialized at a higher level. This chapter details two studies investigating L1 use in secondary science classrooms in New York and Singapore. The study employs qualitative and quantitative methods, including surveys, interviews, observation, and audio recording of student discourse. We find that the L1 can be used for learning scientific content, but is seen by some students as a hindrance to the acquisition of the majority language. This is seen when comparing in-class native language use and data from surveys and interviews. We propose that this reflects a content-language tension that exists in many linguistically diverse science classrooms. This tension highlights competing goals of content learning and acquisition of the majority language. We conclude with a discussion of implications for addressing scientific literacy on a global scale.

Keywords

English learners English language learners translanguaging content-language tension content-based language instruction sheltered instruction secondary science 

References

  1. Anstrom, K., DiCerbo, P., Butler, F., Katz, A., Millet, J., & Rivera, C. (2010). A review of the literature on academic English: Implications for K-12 English language learners. Arlington: The George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education.Google Scholar
  2. Armour, M., Rivaux, S. L., & Bell, H. (2009). Using context to build rigor application to two hermeneutic phenomenological studies. Qualitative Social Work, 8(1), 101–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. August, D., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington: National Research Council, Institute of Medicine.Google Scholar
  4. Boeije, H. (2010). Analysis in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, B. A., & Ryoo, K. (2008). Teaching science as a language: A “content-first” approach to science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 529–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruna, K. R., Vann, R., & Escudero, M. P. (2007). What’s language got to do with it?: A case study of academic language instruction in a high school ‘English Learner Science’ class. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 36–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Butler, F. A., Stevens, R., & Castellon, M. (2007). ELLs and standardized assessments: The interaction between language proficiency and performance on standardized tests. In A. L. Bailey (Eds.), The language demands of school: Putting academic English to the test (pp. 27–49). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Christian, D. (2001). Language policy issues in the education of immigrant students. In J. Alatis (Ed.), Proceedings of the Georgetown University round table on languages and linguistics (pp. 136–154). Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Collier, V. P. (1987). Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes. TESOL Quarterly, 21(4), 617–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Creese, A., & Blackledge, A. (2010). Translanguaging in the bilingual classroom: A pedagogy for learning and teaching? The Modern Language Journal, 94(1), 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Creswell, J.W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  12. Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121–129.Google Scholar
  13. Cummins, J. (1980). The construct of language proficiency in bilingual education. Current issues in bilingual education, 81–103.Google Scholar
  14. Cummins, J. (1981). Age on arrival and immigrant second language learning in Canada: A reassessment. Applied Linguistics, 2, 132–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Echevarria, J., Short, D., & Powers, K. (2006). School reform and standards-based education: A model for English-language learners. The Journal of Educational, 95, 195–211.Google Scholar
  17. García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging and Education. In Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education (pp. 63–77). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Genesee, F. (Eds.). (1999). Program alternatives for linguistically and culturally diverse students (Educational Practice Report No. 1). Santa Cruz: Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence.Google Scholar
  19. Hakuta, K., Butler, Y. G., & Witt, D. (2000). How long does it take English learners to attain proficiency? Santa Barbara: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.Google Scholar
  20. Hsieh, H. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English language learners in the content areas. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1010–1038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kearsey, J., & Turner, S. (1999). The value of bilingualism in pupils’ understanding of scientific language. International Journal of Science Education, 21(10), 1037–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kieffer, M. J., Lesaux, N. K., Rivera, M., & Francis, D. J. (2009). Accommodations for English language learners taking large-scale assessments: A meta-analysis on effectiveness and validity. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1168–1201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Lee, O. (2005). Science education with English language learners: Synthesis and research agenda. Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 491–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lee, O., & Buxton, C. A. (2013). Integrating science and English proficiency for English language learners. Theory into Practice, 52(1), 3642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lee, O., Penfield, R., & Buxton, C. (2011). Relationship between “form” and ‘content’ in science writing among English language learners. Teachers College Record, 113, 1401–1434.Google Scholar
  28. Lee, O., Quinn, H., & Valdes, G. (2013). Science and language for English language learners in relation to next generation science standards and with implications for common core state standards for English language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42(4), 223–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  30. Lin, A. M. Y., & Wu, Y. (2014). “May I speak Cantonese?” – Co-constructing a scientific proof in an EFL junior secondary science classroom. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(3), 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Maerten-Rivera, J., Myers, N., Lee, O., & Penfield, R. (2010). Student and school predictors of high-stakes assessment in science. Science Education, 94(6), 937–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Met, M. (1991). Learning language through content: Learning content through language. Foreign Language Annals, 24(4), 281–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Moje, E. B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”: Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 469–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moore, F.M. (2007). Language in science education as a gatekeeper to learning, teaching, and professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 319–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Noble, T., Suarez, C., Rosebery, A., O’Connor, M. C., Warren, B., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2012). “I never thought of it as freezing”: How students answer questions on large-scale science tests and what they know about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(6), 778–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reinhard, B. (1996). How does the medium of instruction affect the learning of chemistry?. School Science Review, 78(283), 73–78.Google Scholar
  38. Rollnick, M. (2000). Current issues and perspectives on second language learning of science. Studies in Science Education, 35, 93–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Conant, F. R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 61–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ruiz-de-Velasco, J., & Fix, M. (2000). Overlooked and underserved: Immigrant students in US secondary schools. Washington: The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  41. Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework (Technical Report No. 2003-1, No. 1). Santa Barbara: The University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.Google Scholar
  42. Snow, C. (2008). What is the vocabulary of science? In A. S. Rosebery, & B. Warren (Eds.), Teaching science to English language learners: Building on students’ strengths (pp. 71–83). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.Google Scholar
  43. Snow, C. E. (2010). Academic language and the challenge of reading for learning about science. Science, 328(5977), 450–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tobin, K., & McRobbie, C. J. (1996). Significance of limited English proficiency and cultural capital to the performance in science of Chinese-Australians. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(3), 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Torres, H., & Zeidler, D (2002). The effects of English language proficiency and scientific reasoning skills on the acquisition of science content knowledge by Hispanic English language learners and native English language speaking students. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 6(3).Google Scholar
  46. Wojnar, D. M., & Swanson, K. M. (2007). Phenomenology: An Exploration. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 25(3), 172–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wong Fillmore, L., & Snow, C. (2000). What teachers need to know about language. Washington: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jason S. Wu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Felicia Moore Mensah
    • 1
  • Kok-Sing Tang
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics, Science & TechnologyTeachers College, Columbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.School of EducationCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations