BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE FOR STUDY
4.3 Science Discourse
115
The discipline itself is like a sub-culture and its discourse is made up of: codes (linguistic, intuitive, creative, etc.), conventions (essay structure, research, referencing, reporting, etc.), concepts (main ideas and debates in the discipline, etc.), values (what qualifies as knowledge or evidence, and caring, etc.), canons (primary texts and theories/authorities), and skills (both cognitive and linguistic) (87).
To succeed at university, novice students, especially, need to “acquire both ‘cognitive competence’ (modes of analysis, key concepts) and ‘linguistic competence’ (terminology, style, convention, codes)” (Rule, 1994: 100). Being initiated into the academic culture of the university and the sub-cultures of the various disciplines is what Ballard and Clanchy (1988: 19) view as “acculturation, learning to read and write the culture”. In addition to this, as stated by Langer (1987), is the need to develop the structure of values, attitudes and way of thinking and doing necessary for success within the discipline. In terms of science, according to Lee and Fradd (1998), this means “acquiring scientific knowledge of the world and scientific habits of the mind, especially where the latter means acquiring scientific values, attitudes and a scientific world view” (15). The way in which students in the FP become acculturated into the ‘sciences’ is revealed via the responses from the DSs to critical research question 3.
116
(Lemke 1990: 1). For Lee and Fradd (1998), the development of scientific knowledge involves “knowing” science, “doing” and “talking” science (15). In isolating what is meant by ‘knowing science’, Driver et al. (1994) explain this as making meaning of scientific knowledge and vocabulary. This, in essence, is gaining the epistemology of a discourse.
Students enter university with knowledge and experiences that can contribute to their acquisition and learning of new knowledge. ‘Doing science’ involves manipulating materials, making observations, proposing explanations, interpreting and verifying evidence, and constructing ideas to make sense of the world (National Research Council, 1996). “Talking science involves formal and informal discussion around science discourse.
Oral discourse offers insight into ways that students relate to science and share their understanding with others” (Lee and Fradd, 1998: 17). The multi-faceted nature of science outlined here is important for this study. The ways in which students are apprenticed into science in the FP are indicated by responses to critical research question 3.
4.3.1 Scientific Literacy
The study of science at higher education level involves reading, writing, conversing, computing and practising science. There is explicit use of visual representations (e.g.
figures, diagrams, symbols, formulae, tables and pictures), exposure to academic language in the form of scientific readings (e.g. journal articles and text books) and writing (e.g.
laboratory reports, scientific abstracts, scientific essays and posters). Each of these academic practices in science is used to immerse students in scientific discourse; to gain and apply scientific knowledge. Therefore, understanding and practice require literacies specific to disciplines.
The definition of scientific literacy quoted below stresses the gain of intellectual capabilities in science through the learning and application of scientific knowledge and the understanding of science concepts, principles and phenomena. At school level, South Africa’s Curriculum 2005 (C2005) (1997) policy document states that scientific literacy involves:
the ability to apply scientific concepts and principles to everyday life and being able to recognise their use or non-use in a variety of contexts … and scientific literacy is enhanced when [science knowledge] is accessible to learners.
Therefore language development is crucial for both science education and scientific literacy (2).
117
Implicit in this definition is the reference to ‘knowing, doing, and talking’ science. The reference to the importance of language is particularly significant for this study as science education can hardly be divorced from scientific literacy. Another vital point raised in the definition is the fact that science content knowledge has significance beyond the formal learning environment.
Scientific literacy involves more than just text (Zwiers, 2008). It extends to “understanding multimedia genres and making meanings by integrating the semiotic resources of language, mathematics and a variety of visual-graphical presentations” (Lemke, 2002 cited in Schleppegrell and Colombi, 2002: 21). Scientific literacy enables individuals to develop a sound understanding of scientific facts and the scientific inquiry process, and an awareness of the relationships among science, technology, and society (Bauer, 1992).
The definitions of scientific literacy also portray science as a social practice of relevance to the world, beyond the classroom, as outlined in the C2005 (1997) definition. This is the ability of controlling the discourse of science for sociocultural purposes (Gee, 1999). The conception of scientific literacy as a sociocultural enterprise is to see literate practices associated with science as the literate practices of a scientific community. Thus, to become scientifically literate, one has to first become scientific, and then appropriate the literate practices involved in doing science (Reveles and Brown, 2008). As students in the FP are learning to participate in the discourse practices of a scientific community, they are simultaneously learning to participate in the culture of science while taking on the identities of those who do science within a community of practice. This is important in the way in which it relates to NLS (Street, 1984, Gee, 1990).
4.3.2 The Scientifically Literate Individual
Scientifically literate persons are those that have scientific knowledge, scientific inquiry skills, and the abilities to make thoughtful decisions about socio-scientific issues (Jenkins, 1990; Laugksch, 2000). Norris and Phillips (2003) note that science literacy involves being fluent in the language, discourse patterns, and communication systems of science, and in the derived sense being knowledgeable, learned, and educated in science.
118
Showalter’s (1974 cited in Rubba and Anderson, 1978: 450) definition of a scientifically literate person comprises seven dimensions. Contained in this definition are references to the cognitive, ideological and social implications of being scientifically literate:
i. understands the nature of scientific knowledge;
ii. accurately applies appropriate science concepts, principles, laws, and theories interacting with his universe;
iii. uses processes of science in solving problems, making decisions, and furthering his own understanding of the universe;
iv. interacts with the various aspects of his universe in a way that is consistent with the values that underlie science;
v. understands and appreciates the joint enterprises of science and technology and the interrelationship of these with each and with other aspects of society;
vi. has developed a richer, more satisfying, more exciting view of the universe as a result of his science education and continues to extend this education throughout his life and;
vii. has developed numerous manipulative skills associated with science and technology (450).
To be scientifically literate means participating in, learning, using and applying the language of science which not only differs from the language used in social conversations, but also the language used across various other academic disciplines. This study aims to gauge answers in respect of moulding the scientifically literate FP student via critical research question 1.