Using a sociocultural framework, the authors describe scientific literacy and the importance of mediated activities for scientific learning. The difference between empirical and theoretical learning is introduced as an important aspect for teachers to understand as they work with students learning scientific concepts. Components of scientific literacy are described, and recommendations for teaching in the zone of proximal development are provided. A conceptual model adapted from ethnomathematics is introduced to demonstrate the effect of theoretical learning on cultural change, using an intergenerational study from Chiapas, Mexico, as an example.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans . New York: Oxford University Press .
2.
Aaas. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
3.
Bar, V., & Marcus, Y. (1994). Natural science instruction for students with learning disabilities. Issues in Special Education and Rehabilitation , 9(2), 57-70.
4.
Bos, C.S., & Fletcher, T.V. (1997). Sociocultural considerations in learning disabilities inclusion research: Knowledge gaps and future directions . Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 12(2), 92-99.
5.
Cheng, L. (1991). Assessing Asian language performance: Guide for evaluating LEP students. Oceanside, CA: Academic Communication Associates.
6.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.). (1993). The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
7.
D'Ambrosia, U. (1991). Ethnomathematics and its place in the history and pedagogy of mathematics. In M. Harris (Ed.), Schools, Mathematics and Work (pp. 15-25). London : Farmer Press.
8.
Donaldson, M.L. (1986). Children's explanations. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Fradd, S.H., & Lee, O. (1995). Science for all: A promise of a pipe dream. Bilingual Research Journal, 19, 261-278.
10.
Fradd, S.H., & McGee, P.L. (1994). Instructional assessment: An integrative approach to evaluating student performance. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
11.
Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (Eds.). (1994). Learning and teaching genre . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
12.
Greenfield, P.M. (1999). Cultural change and human development. New Directions in Child and Adolescent Development, 83, 37-39.
13.
Halliday, M.K., & Martin, J.R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power . Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
14.
Hallman, C.L., Etienne, M.R., & Fradd, S. (1992). Haitian value orientations. Gainesville: University of Florida.
15.
Inagaki, K. (1997). Emerging distinctions between naïve biology and naïve psychology. New Directions in Child Development, 75, 24-44.
16.
Karpov, Y.V., & Bransford, J.D. (1995). L. S. Vygotsky and the doctrine of empirical and theoretical learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(2), 61-66.
17.
Kauffman, J.M., & Hallahan, D.P. (1995). The illusion of full inclusion: A comprehensive critique of a current special education bandwagon . Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
18.
King, A. (1995). Cognitive strategies for learning from direct teaching. In E. Wood, V. E. Woloshyn, & T. Willoughby (Eds.), Cognitive strategy instruction for middle and high schools. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
19.
Lass, M.J. (1988). Suggestions from research for improving mathematics instruction for bilinguals. School Science and Mathematics , 88, 480-486.
20.
Lee, O., & Fradd, S.H. (1998). Science for all, including students from non-English language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 27(4), 12-21.
Lidz, C.S. (1991). Practitioner's guide to dynamic assessment. New York: Guilford.
23.
McGinn, M.K., & Roth, W.-M. (1999). Preparing students for competent scientific practice: Implications of recent research in science and technology studies. Educational Researcher, 28(3), 14-24.
24.
Mintzes, J., Wandersee, J. , & Novak, J. (Eds.). (1997). Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist approach. San Diego: Academic Press .
25.
Montangero, J. (1996). Understanding changes in time. Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
26.
Morris, P.J., & Tchudi, S. (1996). The new literacy: Moving beyond the 3Rs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27.
Nabhan, G.P. (1997). Cultures of habitat: On nature, culture and story . Washington, DC: Counterpoint .
28.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29.
O'Connor, M.C., & Michaels, S. (1996). Shifting participant frameworks: Orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning and schooling. New York: Cambridge University Press.
30.
Ogborn, J., Kress, G., Martins, I., & McGillicuddy, K. (1996). Explaining science in the classroom. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
31.
Panofsky, C.P., John-Steiner, V., & Blackwell, P. (1990). The development of scientific concepts and discourse . In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 251-267). New York: Cambridge University Press.
32.
President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology. (1997). Report to the president on the use of technology to strengthen K-12 education in the United States [On line] . URL: http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OSTN/NSTC/PCAST/k-12ed.html
33.
Rosebery, A.S., Warren, B., & Conant, F.R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 61-94.
34.
Snyder, T.D. (1995). Digest of educational statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
35.
Unsworth, L. (1999). Developing critical understanding of the specialized language of school science and history texts: A functional grammatical approach . Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 508-521.
36.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
37.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). Problems of general psychology. New York: Plenum.
38.
Warren, B., & Rosebery, A.S. (1995). "This question is just too, too easy!" Perspectives from the classroom on accountability in science . Santa Cruz, CA: National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
39.
Weir, S., Storeygard, J., Stephens, L., & Murray, C. (1995). Student literacy through science [Online]. URL: http://www.terc.edu/handson/f95/studentlit.html.
40.
Wellman, H.M., Hickling, A.K., & Schult, C.A. (1997). Young children's psychological, physical, and biological explanations. New Directions in Child Development , 75, 7-25.
41.
Westby, C.E. (1999). Assessing and remediating text comprehension problems . In H. Catts & A. Kamhi (Eds.), Reading disabilities: A language perspective. (2nd ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
42.
Westby, C.E., Dezale, J., Fradd, S.H., & Lee, O. (1999). Learning to do science: Influences of culture and language. Quarterly Journal of Communication Disorders .
