翻 译：
教授科学的教学语言
北伊利诺斯州大学 谢丽尔·韩起澜
伊利诺斯州阅读委员会杂志2012年夏季第3号第40卷
生命科学在许多方面总是与周期有关的。多种动植物的生命周期存在于大而复杂的生态系统中。从了解动植物的组分以及这些组分参与生命过程的方式开始，思考在一个特定的栖息环境中许多有机体之间的相互作用。在凯利老师的二年级教室里,孩子们被支持使用复杂的、科学的方式进行思考。凯利女士明白这种思维方式需要伴随着独特的科学的交流方式来进行。因此,她从各方面十分支持孩子的科学思维和科学语言的培养。科学独特的语言需要以及科学语言和词汇如何在国小低年级中被使用，将在下面几节中进行讨论。最后,将讨论一个通往发现能有效地提高不同幼儿的科学理解和语言的科学方法的语言。
我们所知道的关于学术的科学语言
首先,我们知道学校教育中的学术语言是非常不同于日常语言的。在日常交流中,语言是针对实时的与说话者有同样经历的具体的其他人。在这个背景下,大部分的交流可以通过显式的手势语言表达，话语是不必要的。例如在下面例子中一个早餐的谈话,母亲和孩子讨论孩子渴望用更多黄油来煎饼:
孩子:我需要它(指向黄油)。
母亲:你已经有一些了。
孩子:是这个(指着锅底的煎饼)。
在这个日常交谈中, 因为参与者之间的理解力的限制，语言的需求是有限的。与日常语言相比,故事语言便是一种学术语言。这是因为它是采用了显式命名的对象、人和事件,使听者或读者通过单词本身了解正在发生的事情，与其他内容无关。下面就是一个关于故事语言的例子:
这个小女孩很担心。她害怕她将没有足够的黄油去煎饼,所以她告诉她妈妈,她需要更多的黄油。当她的母亲问她为什么，她解释说需要黄油来煎饼底的饼。
科学语言也是一种学术语言。它是完全独特的故事语言。对于一件事,它并不总是有一个开端或结局。相反,它是通过主题进行组织, 甚至个别主题可以按任意顺序阅读。此外,科学语言做其他学术语言做不了的事情(Gee, 1996; Halliday, 2004; Pappas, 2006)。科学语言描述属性和特征共性的对象事件(“种子植物有叶和茎。”);它比较类别 (“一些叶子有裂片和一些叶子没有裂片。”);它解释现象(“雨滴形成是因为水汽在高处冷却。”)。科学语言中存在许多专业词汇:种子植物、叶子、茎、裂片、雨滴、水蒸气和高度。
思维与语言之间的联系在教育文学界得到了公认。思考科学意味着能够听懂和谈论科学。事实上,在学校的科学教育的成功在很大程度上依赖于孩子在科学方面的阅读、听、写、说的能力。许多理论家和研究者认为,语言可能是影响科学成绩最重要的因素(Lee, 2005; Schleppegrell, 2004; Scott, Asoko, & Leach, 2007; Wellington & Osborn, 2001)。由于大量的孩子来学校时只具备有限的学术语言经验和词汇知识，语言便在学校设置中显得及其重要。词汇的差距存在于在不同社会经济团体的孩子中是证据确凿的(Hart & Risley, 1995)。正因为这么多的孩子需要在学术语言上取得进步, 在小学阶段高质量地提高词汇与语言的教学内容是必需的。
我们所知道的关于儿童如何学习词汇
孩子们学习新单词越来越多(Nagy & Scott, 2000)。这意味着当孩子“知道”一个单词时并不是魔法时刻。相反,一旦引入一个新的单词,孩子对这个词的掌握会随每次出现和每个机会去观察和使用这个词而增加。随着时间的推移,孩子的知识和灵活度将随着对这个词的理解变得越来越深入。第二,孩子对个别单词的理解是与其他单词相联系的。比如,一个孩子的熟悉单词 “松鼠”和“狗”会影响她学习“哺乳动物”的意义。第三,儿童可以从多途径获得语言知识。这意味着,在科学方面孩子需要多种机会通过阅读、写作、说话和做活动来接触词汇。
为了能熟练地掌握关于种子植物生命周期的科学语言和词汇,孩子们需要许多涉及这些词汇的书籍和活动,使他们在不同的和意想不到的情况下遇到这些专业词汇。而不是阅读只一次出现了种子休眠、种子叶、发芽等词汇的二年级教科书上关于萌发和授粉的三页纸,。学习者需要阅读关于这个主题的不同书籍,从多个视觉表示关键词汇,并参与使用这个词汇表达思想。孩子们也需要机会进行组织、排序,使他们将正在学习的单词建立起联系。
贝克、麦基翁和奥曼森(1987)和贝克和麦基翁(2007)推荐一种三管齐下的词汇教学法: (1)对小的词组使用丰富的指令、(2)对大的词组使用狭窄的指令和(3)提供机会使孩子成为自我扩展词汇的学习者。除了这些建议,国家阅读小组(2000)主张通过设置丰富的语言与多重曝光进行词汇教学。在本篇文章中,我将描述一个体现词汇学习的框架, 包括词汇访问(Blachowicz & Obrochta,2005),图形组织者、戏剧、实践活动、合作阅读和写日记(见表1)，来用于科学语言教学。
表格一 理论联系实际
重要的是,在大部分活动中,学生们可以一直交流。这些活动中老师的语言不会成为房间里唯一的声音，这是创造一个丰富语言环境关键。孩子应该有大量的时间用于真实的交流,包括使用科学语言的机会。
所有的孩子来学校时都具备流利的日常语言，然而不是所有的孩子来学校时都具有学术语言的经验。因为儿童只有限的词汇知识,偶然接触到新的科学词汇是不够的。但在科学教学包括明确教学、多接触单词和丰富语言经验的环境下,所有的孩子都能在词汇知识上获得巨大收益。
中学时期的科学成绩是严重依赖理解大量基于教材抽象理论的能力。这个任能力是由过去的丰富的科学经验决定。重要的是要注意,如果不阅读基于基础的分层信息的书，是不很快会掌握一个流利的新学术语言和发展一个丰富的科学模式。相反,孩子们需要在低年级广泛阅读、聊天和写关于动植物的生命周期、天气周期、生态系统、物质的状态等等。在有大量的英语学习者或学生来自社会经济地位低、资源少的社区家庭的学校是十分重要的。因为词汇差距在儿童中作为参加小学的依据(Biemiller, 2006),所以教育工作者在小学课堂中安排丰富语言的教学实践，以支持学术语言的发展。这样改革必然会导致中学科学课程的前进，最终将有更多的人从事科学职业。
原 文
Teaching Science,Teaching Language
Sheryl Honig Northern Illinois University
Illinois Reading Council Journal Vol. 40, No. 3 Summer 2012
In many ways, life science is all about cycles. Multiple, diverse plant and animal life cyclesoccur within the context of larger, complex ecosystems. Thinking about the interaction of many organisms in a particular habitat begin swith an understanding of the components of plants and animals, and the ways that these components are involved in life processes. In Ms. Kelly’s 2nd-grade classroom, children are supported in this complex, scientific way of thinking. Ms. Kelly understands that this way of thinking goes hand in hand with a way of talking that is uniquely scientific. Therefore, she explicitly supports children’s science thinking and science language in an integrated way. In the following sections, the unique language demands of science will be discussed, as will how science language and vocabulary can be supported in early elementary grades. Finally, a language rich approach to science instruction that has been found to be effective in increasing diverse young children’s science understanding and language will be discussed.
What We Know About the Academic Language of Science
First, we know that academic languages of schooling are very different from everyday language. In everyday conversation, language is directed to a specific other person who is physically present, experiencing firsthand, in real time, the same experience as the speaker. In this context, a large portion of the communication is accomplished by gesture—explicit language is unnecessary. For example, in the following example of a breakfast conversation, a mother and child discuss the child’s desire for more butter for her pancakes:
Child: I need it (pointing to butter).
Mother: You have some.
Child: For this (pointing to pancake at the bottom of her stack).
In this everyday conversation, the language demands are limited because of the shared understandings between participants. In contrast to everyday language, story language is an academic language. This is because it is constructed with explicit naming of objects, people, and events to enable a listener or reader to understand what is happening without any other context than the words themselves. The text below is an example of story language:
The little girl was worried. She was afraid she would not have enough butter for the last pancake, so she told her mother that she needed more butter. When her mother asked her why, she explained that she needed the butter for the pancake on the bottom of the stack.
Science language is also an academic language. It is entirely unique from story language. For one thing, it doesn’t always have a beginning or an ending. Rather, it is organized by topic, and individual topics can be read in any order. Moreover, science language does things that other academic language does not do (Gee, 1996; Halliday, 2004; Pappas, 2006). Science language describes attributes and characteristic events of general classes of objects (“Seed plants have leaves and stems.”); it compares categories (“Some leaves have lobes and some leaves areunlobed.”); and it explains phenomena (“Water droplets form because the water vapor is cooled at high altitudes.”). Science language is full of specialized vocabulary: seed plants, leaves, stems, lobes, droplets, water vapor, and altitude.
The link between thought and language is well-recognized in educational literature. To think about science means to be able to listen to and talk about science. In fact, success in school science relies heavily on a child’s ability to read, listen, write, and speak in scientific language.Many theorists and researchers argue that language may be the most significant factor in academic achievement in science (Lee, 2005; Schleppegrell, 2004; Scott, Asoko, & Leach, 2007; Wellington & Osborn, 2001). This is especially important in school settings in which large numbers of children come to school with limited academic language experience and vocabulary knowledge. The vocabulary gap among children of different socioeconomic groups is well-documented (Hart & Risley, 1995). Because so many children need to make large gains in academic language, high-quality instruction to boost content area vocabulary and language is essential in elementary grades.
What We Know About How Children LearnVocabulary
Children learn new words incrementally (Nagy & Scott, 2000). This means that there is no magic moment when a child “knows” a word. Rather, once introduced to a new word, a child’s knowledge of that word increases with each exposure, and with each opportunity to encounter and use that word. Over time, the child’s knowledge and flexibility with that word grows deeper and deeper. Second, children’s knowledge of individual words is related to other words. For example, a child’s familiarity with the words “squirrel” and “dog” will influence her capacity to learn the meaning of “mammal.” Third, children acquire word knowledge multimodally. This means that, in science, children need opportunities to engage with vocabulary in multimodal contexts of reading, writing, talking, and doing activities.
To become fluent in science language and vocabulary about the life cycle of seed plants, children need multiple exposures to books and activities in which they encounter specialized vocabulary in diverse and unexpected ways. Rather than reading a 2nd-grade textbook that includes three pages about germination and pollination, on which the words seed coat, seed leaf, sprout, and germinate appear only once, learners need to read multiple books on the topic, see multiple visual representations of key vocabulary, and engage in expressing ideas using this language. Children also need opportunities to organize, sort, and make connections among the words they are learning.
Beck, McKeown, and Omanson (1987)and Beck and McKeown (2007) recommend a three-prong approach for vocabulary instruction:(1) rich instruction on a small set of words, (2) narrow instruction on a wide set of words, and (3) opportunities for children to be self-extending word-learners. In addition to these recommendations, the National Reading Panel (2000) advocates vocabulary instruction that provides multiple exposures to vocabulary words within language rich settings. In this article, I will describe a framework for science language instruction that reflects principles of vocabulary learning by including Vocabulary Visits (Blachowicz & Obrochta, 2005), graphic organizers, drama, hands-on activities, partner reading, and journal writing (see Table 1).
Importantly, in most of these activities, students are talking. Activities in which the teacher is the lone voice in the room are limited. This is crucial in creating a language-rich setting. Children should have generous amounts of time dedicated to authentic interaction that involves opportunities to use science language.
All children come to school with fluency in everyday languages. While some children come to school with experience in content area academic languages, many do not. For children with limited vocabulary knowledge, incidental exposure to new science words is not adequate. However, in the context of science instruction that includes explicit teaching; multiple encounters with words; and abundant, rich language experiences, all children can make large gains in vocabulary knowledge.
Success in science in intermediate and middle school grades is heavily dependent on the ability to engage with large amounts of abstract, theoretical, often textbook-based content. This task is mediated by rich past experiences in science. It is important to note that fluency in a new academic language and development of a rich science schema does not occur quickly, nor does it occur by reading an occasional leveled informational book that supplements a basal program. Rather, children need to spend the early grades engaging in wide reading, talking, and writing about plant life cycles, animal life cycles, weather cycles, ecosystems, states of matter, and so forth. This is most important in schools with large numbers of children who are English Language Learners or are from low socioeconomic status communities in which content area resources in the home may be limited. Because the vocabulary gap among children only seems to widen as a result of attending elementary school (Biemiller, 2006), it is vital that educators in early elementary classrooms take steps to incorporate language rich instructional practices that support the development of academic languages. Such reform will certainly result in opening the door to advanced high school science courses and eventual careers in science for a more diverse population.
本文来源：https://www.2haoxitong.net/k/doc/50f4590fe2bd960590c6773f.html
文档为doc格式