Abstract
This chapter provides a broad description of the current state of science education in America, primarily through a sociocultural lens. The chapter begins the process of envisioning what a more equitable future might look like if we are able to remove barriers to science education.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Holdren, J. (2013) America COMPETES: Science and the U.S. Economy, S.HRG. 113–641.
- 2.
Kintisch, E. (2005) U.S. economy. Panel calls for more science funding to preserve U.S. prestige. Science 310(5747): 423.
- 3.
National Academy of Engineering. (2014) Advancing Diversity in the US Industrial Science and Engineering Workforce: Summary of a workshop. National Academies Press, Washington DC.
- 4.
Branch, G. (2015) Views on evolution amongst the public and scientists. http://ncse.com/news/2015/01/views-evolution-among-public-scientists-0016160. Accessed 3/15/2017.
- 5.
Branch, G. (2014) Polling confidence in science. http://ncse.com/news/2014/04/polling-confidence-science-0015543. Accessed 3/15/2017.
- 6.
Gee, J. P. (1990) Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London: Falmer.
- 7.
Hodson, D. (1999) Going beyond cultural pluralism: Science education for sociopolitical action. Science Education 83(6): 775–796.
- 8.
Lewis, C., Enciso, P., & Moje, E. B. (2007) Reframing sociocultural research on literacy: Identity, agency, and power. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- 9.
Schoerning, E., & Hand, B. (2013) The discourse of argumentation. Mevlana International Journal of Education 2(3): 43–54.
- 10.
Tippett, C. (2009) Argumentation: The language of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education 21(1): 17–25.
- 11.
Diaz-Rico, L. T., & Weed, K. Z. (2002) The crosscultural, language, and academic development handbook. London: Allyn & Bacon.
- 12.
Hildebrand, G. M. (2001) Re/writing science from the margins. In A. C. Barton & M. D. Osborne (Eds.), Teaching science in diverse settings: Marginalized discourses and classroom practice: pp. 161–199. New York.
- 13.
Lemke, J. (1990) Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
- 14.
Schoerning, E., et al. (2015) Language, access, and power in the elementary science classroom. Science Education 99(2): 238–259.
- 15.
Richter, E. (2011) The effect of vocabulary on introductory microbiology instruction. Tempe: Arizona State University Press.
- 16.
Schoerning, E. (2014) The effect of plain-English vocabulary on student achievement and classroom culture in college science instruction. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 12: 307–327.
- 17.
Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E., & Smith, E. E. (1997) Culture, category salience, and inductive reasoning. Cognition 65(1): 15–32.
- 18.
Lee, O., & Fradd, S. H. (1996) Literacy skills in science learning among linguistically diverse students. Science Education 80(6): 651–671.
- 19.
Duran, B. J. (1998) Language minority students in high school: The role of language in learning biology concepts. Science Education 82(3): 311–341.
- 20.
Rakow, S. J., & Bermudez, A. B. (1993) Science is “Ciencia”: Meeting the needs of Hispanic American students. Science Education 77(6): 669–683.
- 21.
Delpit, L., & Dowdy, J. K. (2002) The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom. New York: New Press.
- 22.
Purcell-Gates, V. (2007) Cultural practices of literacy: Case studies of language, literacy, social practice, and power. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- 23.
NGSS Lead States. (2013) Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
- 24.
Schoerning, E., & Hand, B. (2012) Language formality, learning environments and student achievement. In: The future of learning: Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS 2012) (Vol. 2, pp. 154–156). Sydney, NSW, Australia: ISLS.
- 25.
Tobin, K., & McRobbie, C. J. (1996) Cultural myths as constraints to the enacted science curriculum. Science Education 80: 223–241.
- 26.
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.
- 27.
Crawford, B. A., Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D., & Friedrichsen, P. (2005) Confronting prospective teachers’ ideas of evolution and scientific inquiry using technology and inquiry-based tasks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 42(6): 613–637.
- 28.
Rosenau, J. (2015) Evolution, the environment, and religion. http://ncse.com/blog/2015/05/evolution-environment-religion-0016359. Accessed 5/13/2017.
- 29.
Akkus, R., Gunel, M., & Hand, B. (2007) Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the Science Writing Heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education 29(14): 1745–1765.
- 30.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schoerning, E. (2018). Where Are We Now? Where Could We Be?. In: Science Culture, Language, and Education in America. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95813-9_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95813-9_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-95812-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-95813-9
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)