uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Developing Students’ Disciplinary Literacy?: The Case of University Physics
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. (Physics Education Research)ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3244-2586
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6265-0004
2018 (English)In: Global Developments in Literacy Research for Science Education / [ed] Kok-Sing Tang, Kristina Danielsson, Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018, p. 357-376Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The main data set used in this chapter comes from a comparative study of physics

lecturers in Sweden and South Africa. (Airey 2012; 2013: Linder et al 2014). Semistructured

interviews were carried out using a disciplinary literacy discussion matrix

(Airey 2011b), which enabled us to probe the lecturers’ disciplinary literacy goals in the

various semiotic resource systems used in undergraduate physics (i.e. graphs, diagrams,

mathematics, language, etc.).

The findings suggest that whilst physics lecturers have strikingly similar

disciplinary literacy goals for their students, regardless of setting; they have very different

ideas about whether they themselves should teach students to handle these disciplinaryspecific

semiotic resources. It is suggested that the similarity in physics

lecturers’disciplinary literacy goals across highly disparate settings may be related to the

hierarchical, singular nature of the discipline of physics (Bernstein 1999; 2000).

In the final section of the chapter some preliminary evidence about the disciplinary

literacy goals of those involved in physics teacher training is presented. Using Bernstein’s

constructs, a potential conflict between the hierarchical singular of physics and the

horizontal region of teacher training is noticeable.

Going forward it would be interesting to apply the concept of disciplinary literacy

to the analysis of other disciplines—particularly those with different combinations of

Bernstein’s classifications of hierarchical/horizontal and singular/region.

References

Airey, J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala  Retrieved 2009-04-27, from http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

Airey, J. (2011a). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education. Across the disciplines, 8(3).

Airey, J. (2011b). Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education: Disciplinary Literacy and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Dynamic content and language collaboration in higher education: theory, research, and reflections (pp. 57-65). Cape Town, South Africa: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(2012), 64–79.

Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58): Gleerups.

Airey, J. (2015). Social Semiotics in Higher Education: Examples from teaching and learning in undergraduate physics In: SACF Singapore-Sweden Excellence Seminars, Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research in Higher Education (STINT), 2015 (pp. 103). urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-266049.

Airey, J., & Larsson, J. (2014). What Knowledge Do Trainee Physics Teachers Need to Learn? Differences in the Views of Training Staff. International Science Education Conference ISEC 2014, National Institute of Education, Singapore. 25-27 November 2014.

Airey, J., Lauridsen, K., Raisanen, A., Salö, L., & Schwach, V. (2016). The Expansion of English medium Instruction in the Nordic Countries. Can Top-down University Language Policies Encourage Bottom-up Disciplinary Literacy Goals? Higher Education. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-015-9950-2

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2008). Bilingual Scientific Literacy? The use of English in Swedish university science programmes. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7(3), 145-161.

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2011). Bilingual scientific literacy. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Ericksen & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 106-124). London: Routledge.

Airey, J. & Linder, C. (in press) Social Semiotics in University Physics Education. In D. Treagust, R. Duit, R. & H. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple Representations in Physics Education Springer.

American Association of Physics Teachers. (1996). Physics at the crossroads   Retrieved from http://www.aapt.org/Events/crossroads.cfm

Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (1989). Academic Tribes and Territories. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Bennett, K. (2010). Academic discourse in Portugal: A whole different ballgame? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 21-32.

Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology Education, 20(2), 157-173.

Bernstein, B. (2000). pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research and critique. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

Björk, L., & Räisänen, C. A. (2003). Academic Writing: A university writing course (3 ed.). Lund: studentlitteratur.

Bogdan, R. C., and Biklen, S. R. 1992. Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

CHE-SAIP. (2013).  Review of undergraduate physics education in public higher education institutions. http://www.saip.org.za/images/stories/documents/documents/Undergrad_Physics_Report_Final.pdf

Duff, P. (2010). Language socialization into academic discourse communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30(March 2010), 169-192.

European Commission Expert Group. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

Forsman, J. (2015). Complexity Theory and Physics Education Research: The Case of Student Retention in Physics and Related Degree Programmes. Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Retrieved from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A846064&dswid=-4668

Fortanet-Gomez, I. (2013). CLIL in Higher Education. Towards a Multilingual Language Policy. Bristol UK: Multilingual Matters.

Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2012). Exploring the role of physics representations: an illustrative example from students sharing knowledge about refraction. European Journal of Physics, 33, 657-666.

Fredlund, T., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Linder, A. (2014). Unpacking physics representations: Towards an appreciation of disciplinary affordance. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 10(020128 (2014)).

Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2015). Enhancing the possibilities for learning: Variation of disciplinary-relevant aspects in physics representations. European Journal of Physics, 36(5), 055001.

Gee, J. P. (1991). What is literacy? In C. Mitchell & K. Weiler (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 3-11). New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 127-143). Boston: Houghton Miffin.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). The analysis of scientific texts in English and Chinese. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 124-132). London: Falmer Press.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.

Hurd, P. d. H. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational Leadership, 16, 13-16.

Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.

Johannsen, B. F. (2013). Attrition and retention in university physics: A longitudinal qualitative study of the interaction between first year students and the study of physics (Doctoral dissertation, University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Science, Department of Science Education).

Josephson, O. (2005). Parallellspråkighet [parallel language use]. Språkvård, 2005(1), 3.

Korpan, C. A., Bisanz, G. L., Bisanz, J., & Henderson, J. M. (1997). Assessing literacy in science: Evaluation of scientific news briefs. Science Education. Science Education, 81, 515-532.

Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.

Kuteeva, M., & Airey, J. (2014). Disciplinary Differences in the Use of English in Higher Education: Reflections on Recent Policy Developments  Higher Education 67(5), 533-549.

Larsson, J., & Airey, J. (2014). Searching for stories: The training environment as a constituting factor in the professional identity work of future physics teachers. British Educational Research Association Conference BERA 2014, London, September 2014.

Larsson, J., & Airey, J. (2015). The "physics expert" discourse model – counterproductive for trainee physics teachers' professional identity building? Paper presented at the 11th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA) Helsinki, August 31 to September 4, 2015.

Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84:, 71–94.

Lea, M. R., & Street, B.V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157-172.

Lemke, J. L. (1998). Teaching all the languages of science: Words, symbols, images, and actions  Retrieved September 16, 2005, from http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/education/jlemke/papers/barcelon.htm

Lillis, T., & Scott, M. (2007). Defining academic literacies research: issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(4), 5–32.

Linder, A., Airey, J., Mayaba, N., & Webb, P. (2014). Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Educational Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(3), 242-252. doi:10.1080/10288457.2014.953294

Martin, J. R. (2011). Bridging troubled waters: Interdisciplinarity and what makes it stick. In F. Christie & K. Maton (Eds.), Disciplinarity (pp. 35-61). London: Continuum International Publishing.

Moje, E. B. (2007). Developing Socially Just Subject-Matter Instruction: A Review of the Literature on Disciplinary Literacy Teaching. Review of Research in Education 31(March 2007), 1–44.

McDermott, L. (1990). A view from physics. In M. Gardner, J. G. Greeno, F. Reif, A. H. Schoenfeld, A. A. diSessa, & E. Stage (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

National Research Council. (2013). Adapting to a Changing World --- Challenges and Opportunities in Undergraduate Physics Education. Committee on Undergraduate Physics Education Research and Implementation. Board on Physics and Astronomy Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

Nordic Educational Research Association. (2009). Literacy as worldmaking. Congress of the Nordic Educational Research Association: Available from http://www.neracongress2009.com.

Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240.

Northedge, A. (2002). Organizing excursions into specialist discourse communities: A sociocultural account of university teaching. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century. Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 252-264). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Parodi, G. (2012) University Genres and Multisemiotic Features: Accessing Specialized Knowledge Through Disciplinarity. Fórum Linguístico. 9:4, 259-282.

Phillipson, R. (2006). English, a cuckoo in the European higher education nest of languages. European Journal of English Studies, 10(1), 13–32.

Roberts, D. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy: Threats and opportunities. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter?. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7-18.

Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J., & Feak, C. (2004). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Tang, K. S. K., Ho, C., & Putra, G. B. S. (2016). Developing Multimodal Communication Competencies: A Case of Disciplinary Literacy Focus in Singapore. In Using Multimodal Representations to Support Learning in the Science Classroom (pp. 135-158). Springer International Publishing.

UNESCO. (2004). The Plurality of Literacy and its Implications for Policies and Programmes. Paris: UNESCO.

Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86(5), 601-623. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018. p. 357-376
Keywords [en]
Disciplinary Literacy, Undergraduate physics, Higher education, Physics teacher education, knowledge structures, singulars, regions
National Category
Other Physics Topics Educational Sciences
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-340015DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-69197-8_21ISBN: 978-3-319-69197-8 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-340015DiVA, id: diva2:1177593
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2015-01891Available from: 2018-01-25 Created: 2018-01-25 Last updated: 2018-02-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Airey, JohnLarsson, Johanna
By organisation
Physics DidacticsDepartment of Physics and Astronomy
Other Physics TopicsEducational Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 104 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf