Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2011.32.1.84

Linguistic Characteristics of Middle School Students' Writing on Earth Science Themes Through Analysis of Its Genre and Register  

Cha, Hyun-Jung (Department of Earth Science Education, Seoul National University)
Kim, Chan-Jong (Department of Earth Science Education, Seoul National University)
Maeng, Seung-Ho (Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Pennsylvania State University)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean earth science society / v.32, no.1, 2011 , pp. 84-98 More about this Journal
Abstract
The study investigated the linguistic characteristics of middle school students' writing on the themes of earth science through analysis of its genre and register. Data for analysis included $7^{th}$ grade and $9^{th}$ grade students' writings about 'global warming' and 'classification of rocks'. The results of this study include: First, many students were not accustomed to writing in genre, especially exposition genre. Second, in terms of ideational meaning, the material verbs representing action or doing were more dominant than relational verbs that are related to the attribute or definition of things, and additional logical relations were predominant. Third, regarding interpersonal meaning, agents, emotions, subjective opinions appeared in the writings and students did not express their ideas conclusively and revealed feelings of doubt and uncertainty about their knowledge. Fourth, as for textual meaning, most students listed fragments of information using additional conjunctions in simple structures and were not accustomed to writing texts with organizing structures, logical patterns, cohesion, and coherence. From these results, we argued that the scientific writings should be emphasized in science learning that aims to foster scientific literacy. In addition, we discussed the necessity of improving science teachers' perceptions on scientific writing as well as setting up a specific plan in the national curriculum.
Keywords
students' scientific writing; linguistic characteristics; genre; register;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 9  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Unsworth, L., 1999, Developing critical understanding of the specialised language of school science and history text: A functional grammatical perspective. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 508-521.
2 Veel, R., 1997, Learning how to mean scientifically speaking: Apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. In Christie, F. and Martin, J.R. (eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. Continuum, NY, USA, 161-195.
3 Vygotsky, L.S., 1981, The instrumental method in psychology. In Wertsch, J.V. (ed.), The concept of activity in soviet psychology. M.E. Sharpe, NY, USA, 134-143.
4 Wellington, J. and Ireson, R., 2008, Science learning, science teaching. Routledge, London, UK, 351 p.
5 Wellington, J. and Osborne, J., 2001, Language and literacy in science education. Open University Press, Buckingham, UK, 152 p.
6 Wells, C.G., 1999, Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge University Press, NY, USA, 392 p.
7 Westby, C. and Torres-Valasquez, D., 2000, Developing scientific literacy: A sociocultural approach. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 101-110.   DOI
8 Young, R.F. and Nguyen, H.T., 2002, Modes of meaning in high school science. Applied Linguistics, 23, 348-372.   DOI
9 Martin, J.R. and Rose, D., 2003, Working with discourse:Meaning beyond the clause. Continuum, London, UK, 293 p.
10 Moje, E.B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., and Marx, R.W., 2001, “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”: Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 469-498.   DOI
11 Newton, P., Driver, R., and Osborne, J., 1999, The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553-576.   DOI
12 Norris, S.P. and Phillips, L.M., 2003, How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224-240.   DOI
13 Osborne, J., Erduron, S., and Simon, S., 2004, Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020.   DOI
14 Peker, D. and Wallace, C.S., 2011, Characterizing high school students’ written explanations in biology laboratories. Research in Science Education, 41, 169-191.   DOI
15 Rivard, L.P., 1994, A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 969-983.   DOI
16 Roth, W.M. and Barton, A.C., 2004, Rethinking scientific literacy. RoutledgeFalmer, NY, USA, 227 p.
17 Schleppegrell, M.J., 2004, The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ, USA, 190 p.
18 Shin, H.J., Ham, S.J., Cha, H.J., Maeng, S.H., Shin, M.H., and Kim, C.J., 2009, Genre analysis of texts in science textbooks and science treatises as a starting point of teaching scientific writing. International Conference of East-Asian Science Education, p. 151.
19 Halliday, M.A.K. and Martin, J.R., 1993, Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, USA, 283 p.
20 The Ministry of Education, 2007, The New Zealand curriculum: Achievement objectives by learning area. Learning Media Limited, Wellington, New Zealand, 30 p.
21 Holliday, W.G., Yore, L.D., and Alvermann, D.E., 1994, The reading-science learning-writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promise. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 877-893.   DOI
22 Kearsey, J. and Turner S., 1999, The value of bilingualism in pupils' understanding of scientific language. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1037-1050.   DOI
23 Kelly, G.J. and Bazerman, C., 2003, How students argue scientific claims: A rhetorical-semantic analysis. Applied Linguistics, 24, 28-55.   DOI
24 Kelly, G.J., Chen, C., and Prothero, W., 2000, The epistemological framing of a discipline: Writing science in university oceanography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 691-718.   DOI
25 Keys, C.W., 1994, The development of scientific reasoning skills in conjunction with collaborative writing assignments: An interpretive study of six ninth-grade students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1003-1022.   DOI
26 Keys, C.W., 1999, Language as an indicator of meaning generation: An analysis of middle school students' written discourse about scientific investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1044-1061.   DOI
27 Lemke, J.L., 1990, Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing Corporation, NJ, USA, 261 p.
28 Airasian, P.W. and Walsh, M.E., 1997, Constructivist cautious. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 444-449.
29 Martin, J.R., 1997, Analyzing genre: Functional parameters. In Christie, F. and Martin, J.R. (eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. Continuum, NY, USA, 161-195.
30 Martin, J.R., 2009, Genre and language learning: A social semiotic perspective. Linguistics and Education, 20, 10-21.   DOI
31 Bazerman, C., 1988, Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI, USA, 356 p.
32 Christie, F., 2002, Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. Continuum, NY, USA, 196 p.
33 Driver, R., Newton, P., and Osborne, J., 2000, Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classroom. Science Education, 84, 287-312.   DOI
34 Eggins, S., 2004, An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. Continuum, London, UK, 384 p.
35 Fang, Z., 2005, Scientific literacy: A systemic functional linguistics perspective. Science Education, 89, 335-347.   DOI
36 Fang, Z., 2006, The language demands of science reading in middle school. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 491-520.   DOI
37 Fellows, N.J., 1994, A window into thinking: Using student writing to understand conceptual change in science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 985-1001.   DOI
38 Gallavan, N.P., Bowles, F.A., and Young, C.T., 2007, Learning to write and writing to learn: Insights from teacher candidates. Action in Teacher Education, 29, 61-69.
39 Glynn, S.M. and Muth, K.D., 1994, Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1057-1073.   DOI
40 Gee, J.P., 2005, An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge, NY, USA, 209 p.
41 Halliday, M.A.K. and Matthiessen, C.M.I.M., 2004, An introduction to Functional Grammar. Arnold, London, UK, 689 p.
42 김희경, 강태욱, 송진웅, 2003, 7차 교육과정에 따른 중학교 과학 교과서 물리단원 실험의 특징. 새물리, 47, 387-394.   과학기술학회마을
43 남경운, 이봉우, 이성묵, 2004, 과학일기쓰기가 과학영재의 과학에 관련된 정의적 특성에 미치는 영향. 한국과학교육학회지, 24, 1272-1282.   과학기술학회마을
44 남정희, 곽경화, 장경화, 2008, 논의를 강조한 탐구적 과학 글쓰기의 중학교 과학 수업에의 적용. 한국과학교육학회지, 28, 922-936.
45 맹승호, 2008, 수업 담화 장르에 기반한 광물과 암석 단원 과학 수업의 양태 변화: 담화 리지스터와 언어 코드적 접근. 서울대학교 박사학위 논문, 308 p.
46 맹승호, 신명환, 차현정, 함석진, 신현정, 김찬종, 2010, 지구과학 논문의 언어 특성 이해: 레지스터 분석. 한국지구과학회지, 31, 785-797.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
47 박지영, 신영준, 2008, 초등학교 학생들의 과학 글쓰기 선호 유형 조사-생명 영역을 중심으로. 한국생물교육학회지, 36, 600-609.
48 박희진, 권난주, 2008, 초등학생의 과학일기 유형 분석 및 일기 쓰기의 효과. 한국과학교육학회지, 28, 519-526.   과학기술학회마을
49 신미영, 최승언, 2008, 8학년 학생들의 탐구 보고서에 나타난 과학방법의 특징. 한국지구과학회지, 29, 341-351.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
50 심재호, 신명경, 이선경, 2010, 2007년 개정 과학과 교육과정의 주요 내용의 실행에 관한 과학 교사의 인식. 한국과학교육학회지, 30, 140-156.   과학기술학회마을
51 이미경, 손원숙, 노언경, 2007, PISA 2006 결과 분석 연구 -과학적 소양, 읽기 소양, 수학적 소양 수준 및 배경 변인 분석-. 한국교육과정평가원, 연구보고 RRE 2007-1, 344 p.
52 이호진, 최경희, 2004, 과학 글쓰기에 나타나는 초등학생들의 선행개념 및 오개념. 교과교육학연구, 8, 421-435.
53 정혁, 정용재, 송진웅, 2004, 빛을 주제로 한 11학년 학생의 과제 유형에 따른 글쓰기 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 24, 1008-1017.
54 교육인적자원부, 2007, 과학과 교육과정. 교육인적자원부고시 제2007-79호, 89 p.
55 곽영순, 김주훈, 2003, 좋은 수업에 대한 질적 연구: 중등과학 수업을 중심으로. 한국과학교육학회지, 23, 144-154.