Abstract Summary
The aim of this paper is to investigate ways that a group of teachers interpret and explain their role in relation to establish continuity between communicative registers in grade 4-9 science classrooms. Five themes were discerned: no recognition, dichotomy, complementary relations, continuum and establishment of a third space.
Abstract :
The communication in science classrooms are often depicted as an arena where every-day and scientific registers meet, compete and influence the possibilities for students learning (Lemke, 1990; Schleppegrell, 2016; Treagust, Won & Duit, 2014). Although there is consensus that these registers are part of the discourse in both teaching and research practice the consensus stop when it comes to how to deal with bridging or establishing continuity between the different ways of communicating the content.
The aim of this paper is to investigate ways that a group of teachers interpret and explain their role in relation to establish continuity between communicative registers in grade 4-9 science classrooms.
Data was generated through fourteen videotaped teacher meetings held approximately every second week during one school year. The participants were thirteen science teachers, with students 10 – 12 years old respectively 13-16 years old and two (language) facilitators. The aim of the meetings was to highlight “content-based language teaching” (Dalton-Puffer, 2011), both current practices and develop strategies for more awareness of the role of language in science learning.
The analytical approach included selection of instances where the teachers articulated their views of the different registers and their role in establishing continuity between them or not. Below is a summary with references:
a) no recognition of the different languages, often only one language is considered and supposed appropriate, namely the scientific language (cf. Anderson, 2007)
b) dichotomous relations leading to conceptual change model; recognition of the languages and the role of teaching is to change/exchange/replace the everyday expressions to scientific ones (cf. Vosniadou, 2009)
c) complementary; recognition of the languages but treated as separate registers well suited for different purposes (cf. Vygotskij, 1986)
d) continuum via hybrid languages (cf. Bakhtin, 1981)
e) establishment of a third space via negotiation (cf. Moje et al, 2004).
