A Research Proposal Studying Literacy Strategies Embedded Within the Science Curriculum

by

Barbara Giallombardo

A Research ProposalSubmitted to

Dr. Nancy Mansberger

Western Michigan UniversityKalamazoo, Michigan

April 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4

METHODOLOGY 16

BIBLIOGRAPHY 18

APPENDICES 19

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Purpose

The proposed study will examine if embedding the use of specific literacy strategies in

the science curriculum will increase the ability of students to demonstrate an understanding of

science concepts.

Problem Statement:

At Springfield Middle School, students have demonstrated difficulty understanding and

retaining general science concepts. Grade eight is a transition year for students and after

administering the MEAP test in October, science teachers have the opportunity to educate

students in general Earth science concepts through the use of specific literacy strategies.

As juniors in high school, these eighth graders will take the ACT and the MME test.

These tests evaluate the student’s general knowledge in all content areas. The ACT and MME

are timed tests using multiple choice answers. Students are expected to read a short passage

containing information about a science concept or a scientific problem and answer several

multiple choice questions that follow.

A year ago, several secondary science teachers from Calhoun county area middle and

high schools, participated in a professional development (PD) looking at the new State of

Michigan High School Science Content Expectations. Part of the PD was to take the science

portion of the ACT test and the Michigan Merit Exam (MME). After taking the tests, the

teachers discussed issues with the Content Expectations and the two tests. The educators came to

the conclusion that in order for students to be successful on the science portion of the ACT and

the MME, they must have

basic understanding of general science concepts,

the ability to read a short passage quickly with understanding,

the ability to understand a question,

the ability to find answer within the reading or solve the problem using scientific reasoning.

The literacy strategies proposed in this research will focus specifically on addressing the mentioned needs.

Significance:

Studies show that reading and writing in content areas helps build critical thinking skills,

thoughtful consideration of ideas, and better concept learning. Writing allows students to self-

assess their understanding of complex concepts while it “makes thinking visible” (Miller &

Calfee, 2004). In order for writing to serve this function, the instruction must be focused and

purposeful and include certain strategies which will gain the biggest bang for the buck.

So why integrate science and literacy? David Pearson, dean of the Graduate School of

Education at the University of California, Berkeley explains “Science provides an authentic and

engaging context for literacy instruction and literacy learning can support students in learning

science”. Pearson suggests starting the integration of literacy and science in the early elementary

years will help science take a better stance in the elementary school curriculum. “Reading and

writing are better when they are tools, not goals,” Pearson asserts (Shapiro, 2006).

The proposed study will focus on specific literacy strategies and use these strategies as

tools to learn science content. The intended outcome will be better understanding of science

concepts overall, and the ability to be able to comfortably read and write non-fiction, something

students have not yet been exposed to.

Delimitations

This study is limited to the eighth grade students at Springfield Middle School.

Summary:

After implementation, educators should see a significant increase in scores on the ACT

and MME for students who participated in the study. In the interim, data will be collected from

student’s grades, reading and writing assessments given over the course of the school year. This

study will also provide educators with a frame work for teaching content through the use of

literacy strategies. The specific lessons and strategies used will become part of the 8th grade

science curriculum for the Battle Creek Public Schools.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

INTRODUCTION

This literature review looks at studies and articles from both professional journals

and secondary sources and organizes the findings into three categories. The first part

looks at content area literacy, while the second part explains what it is to be scientifically

literate and the benefits of integrating literacy skills into science curriculum. The final

part looks at the implementation of specific literacy strategies in the science classroom.

Content Area Literacy

The emergence of content area reading instruction began as early as the 1920’s.

The belief that content area reading contributes directly to the development of reading

competency was acknowledged by the U.S. Bureau of Education in 1925. The Bureau

proposed that every teacher, including those in specific content areas, should be a teacher

of reading. Recently, the focus has changed from all teachers being teachers of reading,

to all teachers being teachers of literacy. The focus changed to include listening,

speaking, thinking, reading and writing (Clinard, 1999).

In 1997, California passed the California Assembly Bill 1086 which identified

specific skills which upper grade teachers are required to understand and be ready to

apply. These skills are:

Word attack skills

Spelling and vocabulary skills

Comprehension skills

Research on how reading skills are acquired

Strategic reading strategies across curriculum

Independent , self selected reading

Integration of listening, speaking, reading and writing

Intervention for, and integration of, low performing readers

Effective ELL (English Language Learner) reading instruction

Planning and delivery of appropriate reading instruction based on assessment and evaluation.

The bill also provides a list of skills which each student should attain while attending

California Schools. These skills include word analysis, vocabulary, literacy response and

analysis, reading comprehension, writing, listening, speaking and other related literacy

skills (Clinard, 1999). The listed skills are important for all grade level teachers across

the nation; as all teachers must be teachers of reading and writing.

Learning across content areas (e.g., social studies, science) requires middle-grade

students to acquire and apply reading and writing strategies to construct knowledge.

Constructing knowledge, a meaning-making process, goes beyond just acquiring

information (LiteracyMatters.org, 2002 – 2008). Constructing knowledge is to acquire

information, make meaning of the information and communicate the information in a

way that makes sense to the intended audience.

In content area classes, such as social studies and science, writing is an integral

part of the knowledge construction process. To gather information, students take notes,

make outlines, and create graphic organizers. To process or synthesize information, they

write summaries of key ideas, write lab reports, and keep journals. To represent their

knowledge, they produce final reports, web sites, multimedia presentations, and projects.

The development and application of writing skills is a necessary component of making

meaning in content areas (LiteracyMatters.org, 2002 – 2008).

Scientifically Literate

Science literacy is the scientific knowledge needed to understand public issues.

The average person does not need to know how to perform the tasks of a scientist, but

instead be able to understand enough science to know how it impacts their lives.

Historically, Americans have not been exposed to science sufficiently, or in a way that

communicates the knowledge they need to cope with life in the 21st century (Hazen &

Trefil, 1991).

In 1989, teachers and administrators from various schools districts took on the

task of shaping the future of science education. This future would demonstrate students

who are literate in science when they graduate from high school. Project 2061,

Benchmarks for Science Literacy, provides a tool for districts to use when developing

their own curricula. The benchmarks are statements of what all students should know or

be able to do in science by the end of grade 2, 5, 8, and 12 (AAAS, 1993).

In order for an individual to know something, they must be told what it is they

need to know. While this may seem like a very simplistic principle, it is rarely followed

in the world of science. For example, if it is necessary to understand stem cell research

and be able to make decisions with regards to it, then it is necessary to be informed

enough to make those decisions. The general public does not need to know how to

perform the actual stem cell research. Rather, they need to be able to read with

understanding information about the issue from many perspectives and form an opinion

or discuss the topic intelligently. Based on this perspective, science teachers need to

become teachers of literacy with a scientific theme.

David Pearson from U of C, Berkeley, sees an important connection between

learning science and learning literacy. “Both require investigation and learning through

multiple modalities: doing, talking, reading, and writing.” Pearson also points out that

literacy and science share many of the same cognitive activities such as summarizing,

posing questions, communicating findings, and drawing inferences and conclusions

(Shapiro, 2006).

Teachers working to integrate science with reading must remember that scientific

literacy means teaching students how to comprehend science by reading informational

text, not just engaging them in non-reading activities. Time in science class should be

spent reading in the context of learning science. Students tend to have difficulty reading

science textbooks and news articles because no one is teaching students how to read

“complex text in the science classroom”, said Holliday. If a student cannot comprehend

scientific material, “they are going to be at a huge disadvantage” (Holliday, 2003).

Implementing Specific Strategies

How then is the need for literacy addressed in the science classroom? There are

many literacy strategies, which if implemented properly and consistently, can be very

effective in shaping a scientifically literate society. For the purpose of this study, three

strategies will be used. The strategies of focus are: summarizing and note taking,

previewing text and generating questions, and vocabulary. All of these strategies will be

embedded into the overall strategy of reading comprehension. These strategies will be

implemented through the following activities:

1. Review by summary of prior knowledge.

2. Reading to understand.

3. Preview text before reading.

4. Generate questions of what they know and what they want to learn.

5. Take notes during reading of written materials.

As juniors in high school taking the MME and ACT tests, students must be able to

read and comprehend short passages and questions. Therefore, teaching reading

comprehension in all classes is an absolute must if children are going to be successful on

these standardized tests. Students can gain understanding of text easily when they have

mastered techniques of reading comprehension such as summarizing and note-taking,

previewing text and generating questions, and developing vocabulary. Experts have

developed various ways in which to teach these techniques such as graphic organizers,

journals, and various guided reading activities.

According to the recommendations from High Schools That Work and ACT’s

“On Course for Success”, students must meet various literacy goals such as:

Read scientific journals and news articles weekly,

Use reading and writing strategies to enhance learning, including marginal notes

and annotations,

Complete short writing assignments weekly,

Routinely take detailed notes,

Keep a science journal,

Participate weekly in laboratory activities with a step-by-step predetermined

procedure emphasizing process,

Design and conduct scientific investigations while analyzing, communicating and

defending findings.

Summarizing and Note Taking

In order to be able to meet the goals stated above, students must become

proficient in navigating technical writing and its elements, and critically read an

informational passage and be able to generalize the information (Michigan Education,

2006).

According to Robert Marzano, summarizing and note taking both require students

to distill information into a concise, synthesized form. Effective learners are able to sift

through a great deal of information, identify what is important and then synthesize and

restate the information (Marzano, 2001). Students also need to be able to understand

scientific vocabulary and think critically about what they read by generating questions as

they read. These skills must be an integral part of note-taking and will help students

summarize accurately.

The question then becomes, how do students gain the skills mentioned above?

How can teachers ensure these skills are being learned and students are proficient in

using them? Modeling is an effective teaching strategy which is generally under-used in

science classrooms at all levels of schooling. Modeling occurs when teachers go through

the motions of slowly acting out the steps needed for students to comprehend an idea,

solve a problem, or engage in mindful, hands-on activities (Holiday, 2001).

Developing rules for the different skills being taught, helps students to be able to

work through a process each time the newly learned skill is applied. Rule-based summary

strategy follows a set of rules or steps to produce a summary. These rules include:

Delete trivial material that is unnecessary to understanding.

Delete redundant material.

Substitute superordinate terms for lists.

Select a topic sentence or invent one if a topic sentence is missing.

Simply directing students to use these tools will not be as effective as showing students

how to use them. Modeling the use of the rules will help the students be better able to

apply them when performing a summarizing task (Marzano, 2001).

Previewing Text and Generating Questions

The ability to identify and take advantage of text structure—the way ideas in a

text are interrelated so as to convey meaning to readers—can contribute to students’

comprehension. The two major text structures, narrative and expository, place different

demands on readers’ comprehension. Expository materials generally use special

organizational features such as text headings and subheadings. Some materials may

include chapter and section previews and summaries, and most contain tables of content,

indices, and glossaries. They also may use extensive graphics, such as tables, charts,

diagrams, figures, photographs and illustrations, and each of these may be accompanied

by explanatory captions (Research-Based Reading Instruction, 2002). When students

understand how a text is structured, they stand a better chance of understanding what they

have read. Students need to learn how to use the organizational features within expository

text to help them comprehend what they are reading. Previewing text by specifically

looking at the features will help students understand as they read.

One previewing technique used in this study will be textmapping which enables

teachers too clearly and explicitly model reading comprehension, and writing and study

skills in the course of regular classroom instruction. Textmapping shines a light on the

pre-reading process. It focuses more attention on the text itself - lingering on the page,

delaying abstraction, forcing readers to engage in a more careful in-context

comprehension of both the big picture and the details, and enabling teachers to explicitly

and systematically model comprehension processes (Middlebrook, 2007).

Reading comprehension is strengthened by reading. In other words, the more

students read, the better their comprehension. If students struggle to understand what they

are reading, then they need to ask questions to help them better understand. Developing

student’s self-questioning skills is critical to reading comprehension. Good readers

monitor their understanding by actively asking questions to check for understanding.

However, these questioning skills do not happen automatically, they need to be taught.

‘Embedded questions—questions placed in a narrative flow of a reading selection—arrest

the reader's attention and demand thoughtful reflection. These type questions model the

type behavior that strong readers "self practice" during reading. Embedded questions

scaffold, or support, a student's self-questioning process’ (justreadnow.com, 2008).

The following list of nonfiction comprehension strategies comes from researchers

like Keene and Zimerman (1997), P. David Pearson, et. Al., and Stephanie Harvey. They

are also based upon a reading project sponsored by Denver’s Public Education and

Business Coalition that focuses on comprehension

1. Activating background knowledge. Readers pay more attention when they relate

to the text–text to self, text to text, and text to world. Knowing something about

an article’s content before reading it gives readers an edge. Part of the meaning

breakdown that can occur when reading expository text comes from a lack of

prior information. Teachers can help readers build background knowledge where

little or none exists.

2. Questioning. If confusion disrupts understanding, nonfiction readers need to stop

and take stock of why and what they don’t understand. Asking questions is at the

heart of nonfiction inquiry and often leads to further research.

3. Determining important ideas. Reading to learn requires readers to identify

essential information. There are many ways to help students do this such as asking

‘what is this paragraph about?’

4. Monitoring and repairing comprehension. Nonfiction text is often packed with

unfamiliar ideas and vocabulary. Cracking these strange words and concepts is

crucial to understanding. Knowing how to adjust when meaning breaks down is

critical.

5. Drawing inferences. Reading between the lines requires inferential thinking.

Inferring is particularly helpful when searching for answers to questions that are

not answered directly in the text.

6. Synthesizing information. Reviewing, sorting, and sifting information are specific

skills students should apply to nonfiction reading. These can lead to new insights

that change the way readers think.

7. Visualizing. Sensory imaging makes reading pleasurable. When readers get

pictures in their mind while reading, they are more likely to hang in with the text

against difficult odds (Stone, 2001).

Developing Vocabulary

Often, both teachers and parents assume that, once children master the basic skills

of reading, they should be able to read anything, including content-area textbooks.

However, each type of reading material, including every content area, has its own

characteristics that must be learned. Each content area has its own vocabulary, sentence

structure, required reading speed, and assumptions about what experience the reader has

already had. Students must develop literacy skills for each content area to meet the

different challenges presented by content-area literature.

Preparing students to tackle content-area materials needs to begin in the primary

grades. Students can learn to crack the written code of a variety of genres, including both

narrative and expository texts, while also learning content. It is important to remember

that students who are studying a subject area such as science are also studying language

(Rees, 2001).

The most recently released study of international reading achievement provides

some strong evidence that the weakness in U.S. student performance is not the result of

decoding problems or inability to comprehend narrative texts. Instead, it seems to be due

to weakness in ability to comprehend informational texts (Progress in International

Reading Literacy Study, 2003).

When students do not understand an author's vocabulary, they cannot fully

understand the text. Good vocabulary instruction emphasizes useful words (words that

students see frequently), important words (key words that help students understand the

text), and difficult words (idiomatic words, words with more than one meaning, etc.). In

providing vocabulary instruction teachers can help students by:

Activating their prior knowledge

Defining words in multiple contexts

Helping them see context clues

Helping them understand the structure of words, e.g., prefixes, roots, and suffixes

Teaching them how to use a dictionary and showing them the range of

information it provides

Encouraging deep processing. Students need to integrate new words into their

working vocabularies.

Giving them multiple exposures

Focusing on a small number of important words. Ideally, the words should be

related so that the depth of concept development can be increased

(http://www.literacymatters.org/content/readandwrite/vocab.htm).

Conclusion:

Content area reading contributes directly to the development of reading

competency. Learning across content areas requires middle school students to acquire and

apply reading and writing strategies to construct knowledge, a meaning-making process,

which goes beyond acquiring information to include all literacy skills.

Science literacy is the scientific knowledge needed to understand public issues. In

the past, Americans have been underexposed to science information in a way that

communicates the knowledge they need to cope with life. Therefore gaining the

opportunities to learn the skills necessary to understand and communicate science

information needs to be taught in the classroom.

Specific, purposeful instructional strategies implemented in the science classroom

will assure that all students can comprehend and communicate science information when

they graduate from high school, skills necessary to function in our ever changing world

and to excel in the American work force.

METHODOLOGY

Subjects:

This research study will be limited to 68 eighth grade students at Springfield

Middle School. The students in the study are a combination of general education and

special education students including Cognitively Impaired, Learning Impaired, Hearing

Impaired and Emotionally Impaired. Also included are several ESL (English as a Second

Language) students. Not included in the research are the Gifted and Talented students as

the daily activities and some assessments were different than the general education

students. Also not included are the highly mobile students as continuous data was

difficult to keep for these students.

Procedures:

In order to collect and analyze data for this study, several types of instrumentation

will be used. Overall, data will be collected on student achievement on daily activities

supporting the studied literacy strategies, various assessment types including multiple

choice tests and various writing assessments. (See Appendix A)

Daily Activities

Daily activities are broken down into three focus areas: summarizing and note-taking,

previewing text and generating questions, and vocabulary development.

Marking Period

Number of Summarizing and Note-taking Assignments

Number of Previewing Text and Generating QuestionsAssignments

Number of Vocabulary Development Assignments

Quarter 1 4 3 2

Quarter 2 8 6 5

Quarter 3 5 8 6

Along with the above assignments, there were similar type activities on which data was

not collected, but supported the literacy strategies being studied. (See Appendix B)

Data

Comparison of Summary Assessment Data Over the Course of Three Quarters

Number of StudentsSummary

Assessment 1-2*Summary

Assessment 2-2*Summary

Assessment 3-2*Advanced 20 18 7Proficient 33 39 35Basic 7 6 11Below Basic 2 0 0No Score 6 5 15Total Students 68 68 68

* Numbers after Assessment is the assessment order and then the quarter in which it was given.

Comparison of Process Assessment Data Over the Course of Three Quarters

Number of StudentsProcess

Assessment 1-1*Process

Assessment 2-2*Process

Assessment 3-3*Advanced 4 5 5Proficient 17 27 18Basic 4 13 10Below Basic 29 11 21No Score 14 12 14Total Students 68 68 68

*Numbers after Assessment is the assessment order and then the quarter in which it was given.

Data Analysis:

In the summary assessments given in the second and third quarters, the number of

proficient students increased by approximately 9%, but then dropped to a 3% increase.

Also in the summary assessments given in the second and third quarters, the number of

basic students stayed about the same for the first and second assessment, but increased by

6 – 8% on the third summary assessment. Then number of advanced and below basic

students dropped from the first summary assessment to the second and again from the

second summary assessment to the third. Unfortunately, the number of students who had

no score showed a significant increase of 14% from the first assessment to the third

assessment.

In the process writing pieces given at the end of each quarter, the number of

advanced students increased by 1.5%, and the number of basic students increased by 8.8 -

13.2 %. The number of proficient students increased by 14.7 % from the first to the

second process writing piece, but ended up with an increase of 1.5% from the first to the

third process writing piece. The number of students who were below basic on the process

writing piece had a significant decrease from the first piece to the second by 26.2% but

only showed a decrease of 12.3% from the first process writing piece to the third, an

increase from the second to the third piece. The number of students who had no score on

any process piece writing stayed about the same for all three writing pieces.

The data does not show in a significant manner that summarizing and note-taking,

previewing text and generating questions, or vocabulary development increase the

performance of students to be able to better communicate scientifically. However, there

was an increase in student scores in both the summary assessment pieces and the process

writing pieces.

Conclusion

In retrospect, the length of the study was not adequate to see enough growth in

students scores overall. The process itself was flawed in that the types of daily activities

were not consistent enough for students to master any particular skill. Where many

students showed some growth in certain skills, most likely, too many different skills were

being assessed for any significant growth on a particular skill to be evident.

Had the focus of the study been limited to summarizing and note-taking for

example, and this skill was supported daily, the scores on the summary assessments may

have shown more significant growth. The same could probably be said for the previewing

text and generating questions skill and vocabulary skill.

All of the instructional strategies used were viable and more students passed

eighth grade science this year than have in the past. This difference was also most likely

influenced by a change in the grading structure. There is also a general feeling from both

the students and the instructor that they have learned a great deal of scientific knowledge

and can communicate scientifically through writing better than they could before the

eighth grade.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science

literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Clinard, Linda. (1999). Literacy strategies improve content area learning. Reading

Conference Yearbook: Claremont Graduate University.

Hazen, R. M., and J. S. Trefil. (1991). Science matters: achieving scientific literacy. NY:

Doubleday.

Holiday, William G. (2003). Teaming up for science and reading success. Science and

Children: 40, 8.

Justreadnow.com (2008). Beacon Learning Center: Florida.

Literacymatters.org. (2009). Education Development Center Inc.: Massachusetts.

Marzano, David. (2001). Classroom instruction that works. Association for Supervision

and Curriculum Development: VA.

Michigan Department of Education. (2006).

Middlebrook, David. (2007). The textmapping project. Gateway to Educational Materials

(GEM) Consortium. Syracuse University: New York.

Miller, R.G., & Calfee, R.C. (2004).  Making thinking visible:  A method to encourage

science writing in upper elementary grades.  Science and Children. (42) 3, 20-25.

Progress in International Reading Literacy Study, (2003). Boston College: MA.

Research based content area reading instruction. (2002). Texas Education Society.

Austin: TX.

Rees, Kari. (2001). FOSS science stories: building literacy through science. FOSS

Newsletter # 17.

Stone, Ellen. (2001). Science and literacy. National Energy Foundation. Salt Lake City:

Utah.

APPENDIX A

Qtr 1

Assessments – Universe Test, Sun Multiple Choice Test, Process Writing Piece

on The Sun

Qtr 2

Assessments – Matter Quiz, Restless Earth Retelling, Geosphere Multiple Choice

Test, Process Writing Piece on Plate Tectonics

Qtr 3

Assessments – Ocean Quizzes, Matter Quiz, Water Wells Retelling, Restless Sea

Retelling, Hydrosphere Multiple Choice Test, Process Writing Piece Comparing

and Contrasting Ocean Currents

APPENDIX B

Qtr 1

Summary and Note-taking – Unit Goal, Dark Materials, Universe Paper and Sun

Worksheet

Previewing Text and Generating Questions – Learn to Read Text, Sunspot Lab

and Sunspot Diagram

Vocabulary Development – Universe Four Square and Sunspot Diagram.

Qtr 2

Summary and Note-taking –Notes & Summarizing, Retelling for Sub, Unit Goal,

Convection Picture Journal, Floating Continents Main Idea, Plate Tectonics

Notes, Wegner Main Idea, Earthquake Video Notes

Previewing Text and Generating Questions – Unit Goal, Crustal Plate Movement,

Sea-Floor Model, Drifting Continents, Earth’s Interior, Early Earth

Vocabulary Development - Early Earth, Drifting Continents, Earth’s Interior,

Earth Model, Sea-Floor Spreading Model

Qtr 3

Summary and Note-taking – Hydrogeology Unit Goal, Compare and Contrast

Ocean Characteristics, Coriolis Summary, Global Wind Patterns, Peer Editing

Previewing Text and Generating Questions - Hydrogeology Unit Goal, Currents

and Climates, Land, Air, Water, Temperature Lab, Global Wind Patterns, Global

Winds, Ocean Chemistry, Surface Water, Aquifer Lab

Vocabulary Development - Compare and Contrast Ocean Characteristics, Global

Wind Patterns, Global Winds, Ocean Chemistry, Surface Water, Illustrated

Dictionary of Terms.