Abstract
The purpose of this study was to develop a computer-based measure of elementary students’ science talk and to report students’ benchmarks. The development procedure had three steps: defining the framework of the test, collecting and identifying key reference sets of science talk, and develo** and verifying the science talk instrument. The Science Talk Test (STT), consisting of semi-structured items, was developed for a framework of exemplars from inquiry classrooms representing three inquiry components (i.e. identifying questions, designing methods and presenting evidence, and drawing evidence-based conclusions) for two types of science talk (i.e. factually oriented and evaluative discourses). Grades 4 and 6 students (N = 281) were selected from three levels of urbanization representative of Taiwan to verify the STT and to establish performance benchmarks. The STT’s reliability, validity, and item parameters were found to be reasonable. Students performed better in the factually oriented talk than in the evaluative talk. Designing methods and presenting evidence was more difficult than the other two types of inquiry talk. Students’ science talk ability was predictable with prior scientific knowledge and language ability measures. Practical use of the STT, explicit instruction, and future research are recommended.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Information on the items in the Science Talk Test can be obtained from the authors.
References
Anthony, R. J., Tippett, C. D., & Yore, L. D. (2010). Pacific CRYSTAL project: Explicit literacy instruction embedded in middle school science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 45–64.
Braund, M. & Leigh, J. (2013). Frequency and efficacy of talk-related tasks in primary science. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 457–478.
Buty, C. & Mortimer, E. F. (2008). Dialogic/authoritative discourse and modeling in a high school teaching sequence on optics. International Journal of Science Education, 30(12), 1635–1660.
Carlsen, W. S. (2007). Language and science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 57–74). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chang, H., Chen, C., Guo, G., Cheng, Y., Lin, C., & Jen, T. (2011). The development of a competence scale for learning science: Inquiry and communication. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(5), 1213–1233.
Chen, T. S. (1994). Development of oral expression ability test for children. Journal of Elementary Education of Taipei Teachers College, 25, 151–178.
Department of Education (2013). National curriculum in England: Science programmes of study. London: Government of the United Kingdom.
Furtak, E. M. & Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2005). Questioning cycle: Making students’ thinking explicit during scientific inquiry. Science Scope, 28(4), 22–25.
Kelly, G. J. (2007). Discourse in science classrooms. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 443–469). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, MA: Ablex.
Lin, S. (2014). Science and non-science undergraduate students’ critical thinking and argumentation performance in reading a science news report. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1023–1046.
Lin, S.-W., Liu, Y., Chen, S.-F., Wang, J.-R. & Kao, H.-L. (2014). Development of a computer-based measure of listening comprehension of science talk. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10763-014-9559-4.
Lin, S. & Mintzes, J. J. (2010). Learning argumentation skills through instruction in socioscientific issues: The effect of ability level. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 993–1017.
Love, K. (2009). Literacy pedagogical content knowledge in secondary teacher education: Reflecting on oral language and learning across the disciplines. Language and Education, 10(6), 541–560.
Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing speaking. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Martens, M. L. (1999). Productive questions: Tools for supporting constructivist learning. Science and Children, 36(8), 24–27, 53.
McNeill, K. L. & Pimentel, D. S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203–229.
Ministry of Education (2006). Grades 1–9 curriculum of junior high and primary school: Science and technology. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.
National Research Council (2000). In S. Olson & S. Loucks-Horsley (Eds.), Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Research Council (2012). In H. Quinn, H. A. Schweingruber & T. Keller (Eds.), A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Norris, S. P. & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224–240.
Ogan-Bekiroglu, F. & Eskin, H. (2012). Examination of the relationship between engagement in scientific argumentation and conceptual knowledge. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(6), 1415–1443.
Osterlind, S. J. (2006). Modern measurement: Theory, principles, and applications of mental appraisal. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
Rincke, K. (2011). It’s rather like learning a language: Development of talk and conceptual understanding in mechanics lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 229–258.
Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F. & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605–631.
Spektor-Levy, O., Eylon, B. & Scherz, Z. (2009). Teaching scientific communication skills in science studies: Does it make a difference? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 875–903.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, NJ: Harvard University Press.
Wellington, J. & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Yore, L. D. (2012). Science literacy for all—more than a slogan, logo, or rally flag! In K. C. D. Tan, M. Kim & S. Hwang (Eds.), Issues and challenges in science education research: Moving forward (pp. 5–23). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L. & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 689–725.
Yore, L. D. & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Current realities and future possibilities: Language and science literacy-empowering research and informing instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 291–314.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM 1
(DOCX 205 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lin, SW., Liu, Y., Chen, SF. et al. Elementary School Students’ Science Talk Ability in Inquiry-Oriented Settings in Taiwan: Test Development, Verification, and Performance Benchmarks. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 14, 1199–1214 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9663-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9663-0