Disciplinary Literacy in Science
Disciplinary Literacy in middle school science classrooms
Disciplinary literacy goes beyond English classrooms, or the ability to read the texts in classes. It delves into the reading and understanding of texts in a specific field in this case middle school science. For the students at TMS we stress not only ability to read and understand the words that sit in front of them, but the ability to form the explanations for what they are learning. So often we ask students to explain something in science, they find themselves befuddled and unable to express what they are thinking, often saying "I get it but I don't know how to say it:". Disciplinary literacy in science at a 7th grade level is giving the students to tools to "know how to say it." correctly and using the appropriate science terms. Literacy in science gives students the tools to inquire, and use critical thinking to explain and understand.
Our reading at TMS students begin with easier texts and move up as understanding improves, documents that accompany these texts help break the texts up, as well as providing clear key points of understanding. These are just a few of the steps laid out in "What Does It Take" the challenge of disciplinary literacy.
Skills for 7th Grade Science Disciplinary Literacy
Students should be able to explain
The texts used at TMS 7th grade science are composed of handouts and the text book examples of which can be found below. In handouts we often ask students to explain in terms they understand as a "7th grader would say it". This way students can both understand the definitions and understand how to use the terms themselves. Students are also asked to compare misnomers with the correct terms (see adaptation and adapt). This is done to ensure students don't misunderstand future texts and activities.
Disciplinary literacy goes beyond English classrooms, or the ability to read the texts in classes. It delves into the reading and understanding of texts in a specific field in this case middle school science. For the students at TMS we stress not only ability to read and understand the words that sit in front of them, but the ability to form the explanations for what they are learning. So often we ask students to explain something in science, they find themselves befuddled and unable to express what they are thinking, often saying "I get it but I don't know how to say it:". Disciplinary literacy in science at a 7th grade level is giving the students to tools to "know how to say it." correctly and using the appropriate science terms. Literacy in science gives students the tools to inquire, and use critical thinking to explain and understand.
Our reading at TMS students begin with easier texts and move up as understanding improves, documents that accompany these texts help break the texts up, as well as providing clear key points of understanding. These are just a few of the steps laid out in "What Does It Take" the challenge of disciplinary literacy.
Skills for 7th Grade Science Disciplinary Literacy
Students should be able to explain
- In science explaining phenomena is very important, students should be able to explain what they are observing, this shows understanding
Students should be able to communicate
- In science communication is crucial, working in groups is a key part of science work at any level
- Students should be able to communicate with their group mates or lab partners effectively
- This will lead to more understanding and better outcomes for their labs
- Communication should be clear, and use appropriate terms for the subject
Students should be able make observations
- In science it is so important to be able to make observations and articulate their observations
- Science is fundamentally explaining, much of which is done through continued observations
- When students have this skill they can really develop as student scientists
Dear Nikki,
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing your thoughtful response to the first blog post. I really like the way you explained that, "Disciplinary literacy in science at a 7th grade level is giving the students the tools to 'know how to say it' correctly and using the appropriate science terms. Literacy in science gives students the tools to inquire, and use critical thinking to explain and understand." I think you captured the essence of disciplinary literacy in science perfectly!
I also appreciate the list of skills you shared that details what your students need to learn to be successful:
*Students should be able to explain
*Students should be able to communicate
*Students should be able make observations
For each of these goals, you provided helpful and logical reasons that students need to achieve these goals.
Thank you, too, for sharing some of the text you use in science. There are so many alternative texts that students need to understand in your discipline--graphs, charts, maps, timelines, etc. Science is such a fascinating field! I love it!
I appreciate all of your conscientious work, Nikki! I'm so happy I get to continue working with you!
Sincerely, Julie Elvin
Hi Nikki,
ReplyDeleteI really like how you put emphasis on explaining "as a 7th grader would say it." I definitely think that really gets at the core idea of how we're approaching science for middle school students. Not as grandiose crazy ideas but at developing understandings as the students can actually parse and get them. I think you did a really good job at putting emphasis on how these are more basic skills, that we're trying to at some points even just introduce these ideas to the students, build on a simple skill set.
I have one suggestion or critique, which is in the wording of the explaining section. You say that "students should be able to explain what they are observing, this shows understanding." The main critique I have with this is that I think this standard, followed by showing understanding, implicitly holds students to always be able to explain *correctly*. This is pretty unrealistic; after all, no one can look at what they're observing and always have the right answer every time. Instead, I would suggest considering the standard to be that students can always explain a *conclusion* based on observations. Students (and scientists!) come to the wrong conclusions all the time but what I really care about is how they got there, not where they ended up. And I feel like addressing that part of the process is more productive.
Overall though I thought this was really well done, and that critique is honestly reaching a little bit. I had to find something to suggest to improve but you made it difficult! Thanks for writing it and looking forward to working with you more this quarter!
Lily