Focusing on content or strategies? Enactment of reading strategies in discussions about science texts

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
R. Walldén
{"title":"Focusing on content or strategies? Enactment of reading strategies in discussions about science texts","authors":"R. Walldén","doi":"10.1080/19463014.2021.2023598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article concerns the relationship between general literacy skills and engagement with subject-specific content in classroom practice. The aim is to contribute knowledge about how enactment of reading strategies impacts classroom discussions about science texts. For 10 weeks, the researcher conducted observations and audio recordings of strategy-focused text discussions in Grade 4 physics and biology. The strategies employed were as follows: text knowledge, looking at text features and using prior knowledge. The analysis of the transcribed recordings and relevant parts of the textbook material was informed by Bernstein’s sociology of education and a social semiotic view of disciplinary literacy practices. The result shows that reading strategies were foregrounded in discussions about texts in ways which created and upheld boundaries to related content, activities and texts. Notably, the teacher and the students discussed single pages of science textbook material without considering how meaning conveyed by images and writing relates to other pages by, for example, bringing technical knowledge closer to everyday experience or by condensing meanings in a technical way. The study shows the potential of adhering to the information flow between given and new on textbook spreads to understand shifts between concrete and technical meaning.","PeriodicalId":45350,"journal":{"name":"Classroom Discourse","volume":"310 1","pages":"407 - 424"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Classroom Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2021.2023598","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article concerns the relationship between general literacy skills and engagement with subject-specific content in classroom practice. The aim is to contribute knowledge about how enactment of reading strategies impacts classroom discussions about science texts. For 10 weeks, the researcher conducted observations and audio recordings of strategy-focused text discussions in Grade 4 physics and biology. The strategies employed were as follows: text knowledge, looking at text features and using prior knowledge. The analysis of the transcribed recordings and relevant parts of the textbook material was informed by Bernstein’s sociology of education and a social semiotic view of disciplinary literacy practices. The result shows that reading strategies were foregrounded in discussions about texts in ways which created and upheld boundaries to related content, activities and texts. Notably, the teacher and the students discussed single pages of science textbook material without considering how meaning conveyed by images and writing relates to other pages by, for example, bringing technical knowledge closer to everyday experience or by condensing meanings in a technical way. The study shows the potential of adhering to the information flow between given and new on textbook spreads to understand shifts between concrete and technical meaning.
关注内容还是策略?科学文本讨论中阅读策略的制定
摘要:本文关注的是课堂实践中一般读写能力与特定科目内容参与之间的关系。目的是提供关于阅读策略的制定如何影响科学文本课堂讨论的知识。在10周的时间里,研究人员对四年级物理和生物中以策略为中心的课文讨论进行了观察和录音。采用的策略有:文本知识、观察文本特征和使用先验知识。伯恩斯坦的教育社会学和学科扫盲实践的社会符号学观点为对抄录录音和教科书材料相关部分的分析提供了信息。结果表明,阅读策略在文本讨论中占有重要地位,它为相关内容、活动和文本创造并维护了边界。值得注意的是,老师和学生讨论了单页的科学教科书材料,而没有考虑图像和文字所传达的意义如何与其他页面相关联,例如,通过使技术知识更接近日常经验或通过以技术方式浓缩意义。该研究表明,坚持教科书传播中新旧信息之间的流动,可以理解具体意义和技术意义之间的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Classroom Discourse
Classroom Discourse EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
14.30%
发文量
28
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信