Disciplinary Literacies in an Engineering Club

This conceptual article addresses the question: What are the disciplinary literacy practices surrounding the Engineering Design Process (EDP) at the elementary level? Recent attention has focused on developing science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) skills for U.S. students. In the United States, the Next Generation Science Standards and reforms such as Common Core State Standards have drawn increased attention to relationships between language, literacy, and subject matter content often referred to as disciplinary literacy. In this conceptual article, we argue that literacy educators can make a substantial contribution to the study of engineering education, particularly for underrepresented minorities and girls. We first provide a brief overview of disciplinary literacies. Then, using examples from a research-based after-school club, we explore how disciplinary literacies might contribute to the study of engineering and EDP in elementary settings particularly in relation to: (a) productive communication, (b) vocabulary development, and (c) identity.

[1]  C. Pope,et al.  Contemporary Literacies and Technologies in English Language Arts Teacher Education: Shift Happens! , 2015 .

[2]  Cynthia Shanahan,et al.  What Is Disciplinary Literacy and Why Does It Matter? , 2012 .

[3]  L. Shulman.  Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform , 1987 .

[4]  Elfrieda H. Hiebert,et al.  What Differences in Narrative and Informational Texts Mean for the Learning and Instruction of Vocabulary. Reading Research Report #11.01. , 2011 .

[5]  P. David Pearson,et al.  Literacy and Science: Each in the Service of the Other , 2010, Science.

[6]  T. Shanahan,et al.  Does Disciplinary Literacy Have a Place in Elementary School , 2014 .

[7]  R. Collin.  A Bernsteinian Analysis of Content Area Literacy , 2014 .

[8]  P. David Pearson,et al.  Reading, Writing, and Thinking Like a Scientist , 2012 .

[9]  Z. Fang.  Language Correlates of Disciplinary Literacy , 2012 .

[10]  S. Wineburg.  Historical Problem Solving: A Study of the Cognitive Processes Used in the Evaluation of Documentary and Pictorial Evidence , 1991 .

[11]  W. Frawley.  Mind as Action , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[12]  Teaching STEM through Historical Reconstructions: The Future Lies in the Past. , 2015 .

[13]  Mary J. Schleppegrell,et al.  Disciplinary Literacies across Content Areas: Supporting Secondary Reading through Functional Language Analysis. , 2010 .

[14]  A. Wilson-Lopez,et al.  Integrating Literacy and Engineering Instruction for Young Learners , 2015 .

[15]  Antonis Katsiyannis,et al.  Minority Representation in Special Education: 5-Year Trends , 2014 .

[16]  Luis C. Moll,et al.  Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms , 1992 .

[17]  T. Shanahan,et al.  Teaching Disciplinary Literacy to Adolescents: Rethinking Content- Area Literacy , 2008 .

[18]  Rosa Cano,et al.  An attractive engineering option for girls , 2002, 32nd Annual Frontiers in Education.

[19]  A. E. Gottfried,et al.  Continuity of academic intrinsic motivation from childhood through late adolescence: A longitudinal study. , 2001 .

[20]  Nicole DiGironimo,et al.  What is Technology? Investigating Student Conceptions about the Nature of Technology , 2011 .

[21]  David N. Beede,et al.  Women in STEM: A Gender Gap to Innovation , 2011 .

[22]  E. Moje.  Foregrounding the Disciplines in Secondary Literacy Teaching and Learning: A Call for Change , 2008 .

[23]  F. Al-Shamali,et al.  Author Biographies. , 2015, Journal of social work in disability & rehabilitation.

[24]  Sandra Lee McKay,et al.  Agendas for second language literacy , 1993 .

[25]  Recayi Pecen,et al.  Promoting STEM to young students by renewable energy applications , 2010, 2010 Modern Electric Power Systems.

[26]  C. Dweck,et al.  Is Math a Gift? Beliefs That Put Females at Risk. , 2007 .

[27]  David W. Moore,et al.  An Historical Exploration of Content Area Reading Instruction. , 1983 .

[28]  Brenda Capobianco,et al.  Engineering Identity Development Among Pre‐Adolescent Learners , 2012 .

[29]  K. Malone,et al.  Narrations of Race in STEM Research Settings: Identity Formation and Its Discontents. , 2009 .

[30]  Ngss Lead States.  Next generation science standards : for states, by states , 2013 .

[31]  J. Gee.  Identity as an analytic lens for research in education , 2000 .

[32]  Corrine M. Wickens,et al.  Habits of Practice , 2015 .

[33]  Cynthia L. Greenleaf,et al.  Literacy Instruction in the Content Areas: Getting to the Core of Middle and High School Improvement. , 2007 .

[34]  William E. Nagy,et al.  Teaching Vocabulary to Improve Reading Comprehension , 1988 .

[35]  Russell Tytler,et al.  Attitudes, identity, and aspirations toward science , 2014 .

[36]  S. Michaels,et al.  Deliberative Discourse Idealized and Realized: Accountable Talk in the Classroom and in Civic Life , 2008 .

[37]  Douglas R. Barnes.  Exploratory Talk for Learning , 2008 .

[38]  Wendy M. Williams,et al.  Why aren't more women in science?: Top researchers debate the evidence. , 2007 .

[39]  Flávio S. Azevedo.  Personal Excursions: Investigating the Dynamics of Student Engagement , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[40]  Helen R. Quinn,et al.  Science and Language for English Language Learners in Relation to Next Generation Science Standards and with Implications for Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Mathematics , 2013 .

[41]  K. Ann Renninger,et al.  Coding online content-informed scaffolding of mathematical thinking , 2005 .

[42]  Mary B. McVee,et al.  Schema Theory Revisited , 2005 .

[43]  Maureen P. Boyd.  Real Talk in Elementary Classrooms: Effective Oral Language Practice , 2011 .

[44]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[45]  Stephen P. Norris,et al.  How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy , 2003 .