Subject Literacies and Knowledge Building Helmut Vollmer Seminar „Subject Literacies and Access to Quality Education“ Council of Europe, Language Policy.

Subject Literacies and Knowledge Building

Helmut VollmerSeminar bdquoSubject Literacies and Access to

Quality EducationldquoCouncil of Europe Language Policy Division

27-28 September 2012

Structure of presentation

1 Relating ContentKnowledge to Language2 Academic Language Demands in Subject

Teaching and Learning (with examples)

3 Concepts of ScientificSubject Literacy

4 Components of Language Base for Literacy

5 Curriculum development and planning Subject-based Models Frames across subjects

bdquoLanguage is a system which relates what is being talked about (content) and the means used to talk about it (expression)

Linguistic content is inseparable from linguistic expression In subject matter learning we overlook the role of language as a medium of learning and in language learning we overlook the fact that contentis being communicatedldquo

Mohan B (1986) Language and contentReading MA Addison Wesley

1 Language constitutes knowledge it gives content a form

Knowledge expresses itself through (written) language Building knowledge means forming concepts through mental-linguistic activities

What is academic languageWhat are the requirement of school language

There are many accounts and descriptions of what the specific features and requirements of academic language are(CALP by Cummins 19791981 Vollmer in CoE 2009 2010 Foumlrmig 2010 2011 Center for Excellence and Equity in Education 2012)

One possible definitionhellipldquoLanguage that stands in contrast to the everyday informal speech that students use outside the classroom environment Academic language is distinguished from English in other settings on at least three key levels1048698 the lexical or academic vocabulary level the grammatical or syntactic level and1048698 the discourse or organizational levelldquo (Bailey 2007)

Some Features of the Formal Academic Language Register in Speaking + Writing

bull Exact ndash genau (use of the appropriate terms collocations)bull Unambiguous ndash eindeutig (explaining defining as much as possible)bull Explicit ndash explizit (stating meanings + relationships clearly)bull Complete ndash vollstaumlndig (as to content and arguments)bull Depersonalised ndash entpersonalisiert (no narrative style)bull Context-reduced - situations- bzw kontextreduziertbull Distanced Objective ndash distanziert objektiv generischbull Complex ndash komplex (no simplifications degree of certainty) bull Structured cohesive ndash strukturiert verknuumlpft bull Coherent ndash zusammenhaumlngend zielfuumlhrend ganzheitlichbull Dispassionate ndash leidenschaftslos emotionsfrei

For examplehellipScience teachers do not typically explain whyand how passive voice is used to expressscientific findings

Mathematics teachers do not typically teach thelanguage students will need to explain howthey solved an algebraic equation or usemathematical models

The academic language demands of secondary-level content standards are not adequately addressed in content-area instruction

2 Academic Language Demands in Subject Teaching and Learning

One of the prevailing scientificopinions is that there is simply notenough evidence to warrant aconclusion on the issue of globalwarming however the scientificcommunity is somewhat dividedsince one prominent scientist isconvinced that the world is in ahuman-induced warming phase

Sample analysis passage LANGUAGE DEMANDS

Academic language features found in the passage

Content-Specific VocabularyExample ldquoglobal warmingrdquo in science

General Academic VocabularyExample bdquoprevailing or ldquowarrantrdquo in language arts science social

studies other content areas+

Grammatical StructuresExample long and complex nounprepositional phrases such as

ldquoa conclusion on the issue of global warmingrdquo+

Academic Language FunctionsDiscourse FunctionsExample comparecontrast (bdquohoweverldquo) persuade

In the classrooms it was found that teachers were increasingly reluctant to take responsibility fornurturing the [English] language as an integral part of their workThey were frequently poorly trained demoralized andreluctant to do anything more than the basics ldquoGot a problem with your language [English] Not my job go and see the language [English] teacherrdquo

David Marsh ldquoEvery Teacher is a Language Teacherrdquo Praacutecticas en Educacioacuten BilinguumlePlurilinguumle Praacutecticas en Educacioacuten 2009

Content teachers are often reluctant to deal with the language of their subject (as part of the subject)

Students who do not learn to read well will find it almost impossible to be successful in school Enhancing reading comprehension skills is one of the most effective interven-tions that teachers can undertake since reading affects every other school activity

The (limited) READING COMPREHENSION approachis NOT enough

3 Concepts of Subject Literacy

Being competent to read and write in a language (even that is NOT enough)

Extended definition in PISA 2006 and eg Canada Scientific literacy is an evolving combination of the

science-related attitudes skills and knowledge students need to develop inquiry problem-solving and decision-making abilities to become lifelong learners and to maintain a sense of wonder about the world around them

(= focus is on use application decision-making lifelong learning readiness reflection evaluation social participation improvement of life)

Six aspects of scientific literacy

1 ComprehendingUnderstanding fully (the meaning of an utterance a passage a text)

2 Communicating + negotiating knowledge

3 Reflecting on the acquisitional process the (learning) outcomes and their use

4 Applying knowledge into other contexts

5 Participating in the socio-scientific world

6 Transfering generalisable knowlskillsattitud

Generalised Subject Literacy

bull = the verbally supported and transported ability to act on all the six levels in all aspects of knowledge construction knowl application transfer and reflection

bull = the ability to make full use of a specific curriculum offered in school

bull = the ability to connect content with academic language use to develop subject-based bdquodiscourse competenceldquo (= Bildung)

Many mental-linguistic processes(involved in subject comprehension+production)

bull Activating prior knowledge (inside-outside)bull Adressing interestfocus+formulating questionsbull Identifying and naming what is (already) understoodbull Searching and inferencing the unknownbull Integrating the new into existing knowledgebull Re-Structuring subject knowledgebull Linking new knowledge to other contexts

Readingldquo and bdquoWritingldquo includes all semiotic meaning-making processes and all types of textsgenres

bull Basic colloquial language (BCL)bull School Navigational Language

(SNL)bull Essential Academic

Language (EAL)bull Curriculum Content

Language (CCL)

Cp Bailey amp Heritage (2008) - (Scarcella (2008)

ScienceScience

4 Components of a language base for subject-specific literacy

What do we have to consider when talking about language in the content classroom

Language use in classrooms is a blend of different varieties

Language dimensions involved in subject literacy

1Subject-specific content subject-matter +subject-specific methods

2 Text types Genres Learning materials3 Academic cognitive-linguistic functions4 Strategies of textualitytext competence

(forms of coherence and cohesion) 5 Language repertoirelinguistic means

(vocabulary grammar spelling pronunciation)

6 Areas of pedagogical classroom actions activities

7 Socio-cultural context + 8 Personal factors

5 Language repertoire linguistic elementsmeans

pronunciation spelling lexis grammar

correctness

4 Strategies of textuality text competence

cohesion ndash coherence ndash references ndash linearity ndash development of ideas - structure hellip

3 cognitive

-linguistic functions

1 subject-specific content

2 Textssemiotic systems Genres

competences

Language dimensions involved in describing subject literacy

SUBJECT LITERACY BASIC LANGUAGE DIMENSIONS

3 Academic cognitive-linguistic functions strategies

Naming defining

Describing portraying

Reporting narrating

Explaining clarifying

Assessing judging Arguing taking (up) a stance Modelling simulating

2 Text types Genres Semiotics systems of meaning

eg DescriptionReportAnalysisSummaryGraphStatisticsExperiment

45 Strategies + Repertoires Textual Sentential Lexical

eg Linking Sentences=Cohesion Compounding Conjuctions etc

Close Relationship between Thinking + Language

Classify Define Compare PredictParaphrase ExplainEvaluate Arguehellip

Express in wordshellip

Thinking skills (Logotron 2010)

See sample thinking skills and language (related to Mohanacutes 1986 Knowledge Framework) in BeckettGonzalezSchwartz 2004 167f (NEXT SLIDE)

analysearguecalculatequoteclassifycomparedescriberepresentdeducedefinediscriminateenumerate explain

illustrateexemplify inferinterpretjudgeevaluateassesscorrelatecontrastmatchnamespecifyproverecountreport a discoursesummarise[]

Ex Basic cognitive operations+their linguistic expression

These bdquoverbsldquo are bdquooperatorsldquo because they tell us what to do mentally+language-wise

Additional components for lesson planning

1Specific subject-mattercontent+methods2 Academic cognitive-linguistic functions

3 Text types Genres Learning materials

4 Strategies of textuality (coherence+cohesion)

5 Language repertoirelinguistic means(vocabulary grammar spelling pronunciation)

6 Areas of pedagogical classroom actions(requiring specific mental-linguistic activities each)

7 Socio-cultural context+8 Personal factors

GOAL Bridging the gap between content standards and implicit academic language requirements

What else do we have to consider when talking about language in the content classroom

Dimension 6 Classroom actions+language use

Science

1Make social bdquonoiseldquoInteractPartici-pate

2Organise procedures- negotiate meaning

3 Retrieve information and acquire knowledge

4 (Re-) Structure mental concepts

5 Present questions or resultslearning outcomes

6Evaluate learning processknowledgebuilding

bull Teacher-learner interaction (monologic ndash dialogic instruction ndash IRF-cycle)

bull learner-learner interaction (various types of bdquotalkldquo)

5 Language repertoire linguistic elementsmeans

pronunciation spelling lexis grammar

6 Areas of pedagogical classroom actions

4 Strategies of textuality text competence

cohesion ndash coherence ndash references ndash linearity ndash development of ideas - structure hellip

3 cognitive

-linguistic functions

1 subject-specific content

2 Textssemiotic systems Genres

TASKS

7 Socio-cultural context + 8 Personal factors

On the level of planning a topical unit or lesson

TASKS

5 Curriculum DevelopmentWays of using this model

bull For the description development of a general language frame for subject literacyliteracies (Norway NRW Dimensions 2 3 4 5 needed)

bull For validating the frame through individ subjects(Dimension 2-5 plus 1 are needed)

bull Starting from subject-domain-specific language demands (Dim 1 in connection with 2-5 are needed)

bull For planning units of teaching or individual lessons (Dim 1 2-5 plus dimension 6 plus7+8 are needed)

Specification of Exit CompetencesSUBJECT LITERACY GENERAL LIST OF EXIT CRITERIA

Curriculum specifies Subject competences in connection with Language competences - knowledge and mastery of different genres- mastery of cognitivelanguage functions - availability of textual strategies+linguistic meansbullthrough sets of descriptors (gt 90)bullwith reference to subject- and language specific indicators

Distinction between different areas of pedagogical action eg classroom interaction information retrieval and processing presenting learning resultshellip

FRAME MODEL is offered to curriculum development groups (eg for primarylowerupper secondary schools) as a structural grid as well as a pool of resources

SUBJECT LITERACIES AND ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATION STRASBOURG 27 ndash 28 SEPTEMBER 2012

The approach to subject literacies and common educational language objectives across the

curriculum can only be managed with the help of a common frame A two-way

approach seems to be viable for conceptualising the architecture of such

frame language

requirements of the indiv content

classroom

Basiccommon educational language objectives

eg

N

orw

ay - N

RW

language requirements of

individual content classrooms

Commoncore educational language objectives

Two options for a framework structure

TO QUALITY EDUCATIONFOR ALL

Subject Literacies Knowledge Building and Participation

MERCI ndash THANKSDANKE