Node 2 - Overview (continuation)

This research node will explore the relationship between literacies, the development of the fundamental sense and the traditional sense of science and technology. The particular focus is on the outcomes of explicit instructional attention to the role of language, ICT, cognitive abilities and habits of mind in science and technology for improvement to the fundamental sense of science literacy and technology literacy which will allow Canadians to more fully comprehend and participate in the public debates about STSE issues, as well as improved understanding of the big ideas of science and technology, the traditional sense of science literacy and technology. These research foci have been identified as pressing issues and promising areas for inquiry by both the science/technology education and language research communities.
Contemporary views of thinking, learning, reading, writing, inquiry, and constructing knowledge suggest that the person performing these cognitive operations must coordinate and orchestrate their cognitive resources in both the public, sociocultural context of the learning and in their private, intellectual meaning making. The process of constructing new knowledge relies on prior domain and topical knowledge, discourse knowledge, strategic knowledge, and concurrent experiences which are coordinated through some form of oversight operation, metacognition. Metacognition consists of two distinct clusters. The first is self-appraisal or metacognitive awareness that is composed of declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge about the operation. The second is self-management or executive control composed of the planning, monitoring, and regulation of the actions involved in the operation. Research over the last 25 years has revealed a convergence of metacognition as 'cognition about cognition', critical thinking as 'reasoned and reflective thinking focused upon deciding what to do or believe', and reflective practice as 'reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action to improve performance'. Therefore, research conducted in this node will be designed from a hybrid perspective on cognition involving cognitive psychology, linguistics, ontological and epistemological nature of science and technology, and sociocultural context.
Learning about science and technology for most students involves crossing borders between their home/everyday language (L1), language of instruction (L2), and the language of science and technology (L3). This transition is made more complex for some students who's home language/discourse (L1) does not match the language/discourse of instruction (L2) like families that speak a non-standard form of English at home or in their community, or English language learners (ELL) and French language learners (FLL) working in an immersion context. These students frequently have rich informal experiences with and prior knowledge about the target science and technology concepts under consideration that cannot be access with the language of instruction (L2). The language problems or discourse border-crossings are made more difficult by the fact that science/technology language/discourse (L3) is not well understood by many literacy specialists and classroom teachers. Many of these educators do not have the pedagogical-content knowledge for anchoring science learning in the students' everyday or home language/discourse (L1) and for transitioning these students from their home and everyday languages/discourses, school/instructional language/discourse to scientific language/discourse (L1 to L2 to L3). These pedagogical limitations make science un-accessible to some students, make the target science complex or irrelevant to the students, or strand students with partial understanding and the inability to express their understanding in discipline-specific language. Furthermore, these language barriers not only restrict access to science content learning, but also keep the students from participating in the public debate about STSE issues, accessing information about personal science-related problems, or seeking vocational opportunities in science-related professions.
Some of the misunderstandings involved in crossing border are that:

• language is confined to words, grammar, punctuation and style;
• oral and written discourse are reciprocals of one another;
• bottom-up models of argument, reading and writing are accurate depictions of the language processes;
• trade books about science do not contain the same problems identified in science textbooks; and
• Language strategies developed in narrative-based instructional programs are directly applicable in science discourse and text.

Reviews of research indicate that most students do not naturally develop the language, mathematics and information technology proficiencies to be considered science literate in the fundamental sense. Recently, researchers have been able to develop argumentation with middle school students using professional development with teachers and explicit instruction embedded into science inquiry programs, but have not demonstrated the link to improved science understanding-the derive sense of science literacy. Others have demonstrated that science reading comprehension can be improved with explicit metacognitive-based strategy instruction and that metacognition is related to science achievement. Recent research results have demonstrated that writing in science can improve learning if the writing tasks are sequenced and require the student to transform experiences, data and measurements and construct knowledge claims. Unfortunately, few of these evidence-based results have broad use in classrooms and their robustness has not been demonstrated across a variety of content disciplines, sociocultural contexts, grade levels, teachers, and classroom climates. Therefore, this research node will explore several inquiries focused on enhanced understanding of science literacy and classroom instruction that leads to improved students' fundamental and derived senses of science literacy.