Article published In:
Pedagogical Linguistics: Online-First ArticlesIdentifying language requirements of pre‑scientific writing for learners in science education using a task‑based needs analysis
In science, subject-specific languages have a communicative and epistemic function. Thus, in science education learners
need to both learn the language of science and learn through this specific language. Based on the assumption that learning subject-specific
languages can be compared to second language acquisition, the study transfers Task-based Language Teaching to science education and explores
the language needs of Austrian upper secondary school learners in science education when writing a Pre-Scientific Paper (PSP), using
multiple methods (semi-structured interviews, online questionnaires) and data sources (curriculum, learners, teachers). The study reveals
pre-scientific writing as a relevant overall task, identifies over 30 target tasks, describes subject-specific linguistic challenges
students face when performing these tasks and shows how they are supported in their pre-scientific writing skills. Altogether, the paper
shows the importance of having a more regular and systematic implementation of subject-specific language tasks in upper secondary science
education.
Article outline
- 1.Background
- 2.The study
- 2.1Preliminary curriculum analysis
- 2.2Analysing the subject-specific language needs for the target task from the learners’ and teachers’ perspective: A task as unit of analysis
- 2.3Method
- 2.3.1Qualitative approach
- 2.3.2Quantitative approach
- 2.4Research questions
- 2.5Participants
- 3.Findings
- 3.1RQ1: Which TTs do students perform?
- 3.2RQ2: Which subject-specific linguistic challenges do students face when performing the TTs?
- 3.2.1Finding a Topic
- 3.2.2Literature review
- 3.2.3Writing
- 3.2.4Revision
- 3.3RQ3: Which preparatory measures (e.g., PTs) are currently put in place to support students’ pre-scientific writing skills?
- 4.Discussion
- 5.Limitations
- 6.Conclusion and future research
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (71)
Beerenwinkel, A., Lindauer, T., & Schmellentin, C. (2016). Schreiben
im naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht. In C. Maurer (Chair), Gesellschaft
für Didaktik der Chemie und Physik Jahrestagung, Zürich.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bettoni, C., Di Biase, B. (2015). Grammatical
development in second languages: Exploring the boundaries of Processability Theory. Eurosla Monograph Series,
3. Amsterdam: The European Second Language Association.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
BMB. (2016). Die kompetenzorientierte
Reifeprüfung: Vorwissenschaftliche Arbeit: Unverbindliche Beurteilungshilfe für das Prüfungsgebiet “vorwissenschaftliche Arbeit”
(VWA). Retrieved from [URL]
Bundesgesetzblatt II. Änderung der Verordnung über die
Lehrpläne der allgemeinbildenden höheren Schulen; Änderung der Bekanntmachung der Lehrpläne für den Religionsunterricht sowie
Bekanntmachung der Lehrpläne für den Religionsunterricht (216/2018).
. Prüfungsordnung AHS
(174/2012).
Bühner, M. (2011). Einführung
in die Test- und Fragebogenkonstruktion (3rd
ed.). Hallbergmoos: Pearson.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bushati, B., Ebner, C., Niederdorfer, L., & Schmölzer-Eibinger, S. (2018). Wissenschaftlich
schreiben lernen in der Schule. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren GmbH.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bygate, M. (2016). Sources,
developments and directions of task-based language teaching. The Language Learning
Journal,
44
(4), 381–400. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Byrnes, H., & Manchón, R. M. (2014). Task-Based
Language Learning – Insights form and for L2 Writing. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cho, S., & McDonnough, J. T. (2009). Meeting
the Needs of High School Science Teachers in English Language Learner Instruction. Journal of Science
Teacher
Education,
20
(4), 385–402. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research
design: Qualitative, quantitative and Mixed-Methods approaches (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/Academic
Language Proficiency, Linguistic Interdependence, the Optimum Age Question and Some Other Matters. Working
Papers on Bilingualism. (19), 197–205.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A
construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual
education. European Journal of Applied
Linguistics,
1
(2), 216–253. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Döring, N., & Bortz, J. (2016). Forschungsmethoden
und Evaluation: Für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler (5th ed.). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Drennan, J. (2003). Cognitive
interviewing: verbal data in the design and pretesting of questionnaires. Journal of Advanced
Nursing,
42
(1), 57–63. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dresing, T., & Pehl, T. (2015). Manual
(on) Transcription: Transcription Conventions, Software Guides and Practical Hints for Qualitative
Researchers (3rd ed.). Marburg. Retrieved
from [URL]
East, M. (2017). Research
into practice: The task-based approach to instructed second language acquisition. Language
Teaching,
50
(3), 412–424. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
(2021). Foundational
Principles of Task-Based Language Teaching. New York, London: Taylor and Francis. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ellis, R. (2017). Task-Based
Language Teaching. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.) The
Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language
Acquisition (pp. 108–125). Abingdon: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Evnitskaya, N., & Dalton-Puffer, C. (2020). Cognitive
discourse functions in CLIL classrooms: eliciting and analysing students’ oral categorizations in science and
history. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism, 1–20. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fang, Z. (2004). Scientific
Literacy: A Systemic Functional Linguistics Perspective. Science
Education,
89
(2), 335–347. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fang, Z., & Coatoam, S. (2013). Disciplinary
Literacy. What You Want to Know About it. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy,
56
(8), 627–632. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haagen-Schützenhöfer, C., & Joham, B. (2018). Professionalising
physics teachers in doing experimental work. Center for Educational Policy Studies
Journal,
8
(1), 9–34. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hasson, E., & Yarden, A. (2012). Separating
the research question from the laboratory techniques: Advancing high-school biology teachers’ ability to ask research
questions. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching,
49
(10). 1211–1344. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible
learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to
achievement. Oxon: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heine, L. (2016). Theoretische
Überlegungen zur Modellierung und Erforschung von integrativem Fach- und
Sprachenlernen. In B. Hinger (Ed.), Innsbrucker
Beiträge zur Fachdidaktik 2, Zweite “Tagung der Fachdidaktik” 2015: Sprachsensibler Sach-Fach-Unterricht – Sprachen im
Sprachunterricht (pp. 75–93). innsbruck university press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huerta, M., & Garza, T. (2019). Writing
in Science: Why, How, and for Whom? A Systematic Literature Review of 20 Years of Intervention Research
(1996–2016). Educational Psychology
Review,
31
1, 533–570. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Iizuka, T. (2019). Task-based
needs analysis: Identifying communicative needs for study abroad students in
Japan. System,
80
1, 134–142. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kaewpet, C. (2009). A
Framework for Investigating Learner Needs: Needs Analysis Extended to Curriculum Development. Electronic
Journal of Foreign Language
Teaching,
6
(2), 209–220.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kafipour, R., Mahmoudi, E., Khojasteh, L., & Khajavi, Y. (2018). The
effect of task-based language teaching on analytic writing in EFL classrooms. Cogent
Education,
5
(1), 1496627. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kohnen, A., Saul, W. E., & Singer, N. R. (2015). Developing
support for teachers and students in secondary science classrooms through writing
criteria. In Crem (Ed.), Recherches Textuelles:
Vol. 13. Recherches en écritures: regards
pluriels (pp. 213–232). Université de Lorraine, Metz.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lambert, C. (2010). A
task-based needs analysis: Putting principles into practice. Language Teaching
Research,
14
(1), 99–112. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, O., Maerten-Rivera, J., Buxton, C., Penfield, R., & Secada, W. G. (2009). Urban
Elementary Teachers’ Perspectives on Teaching Science to English Language Learners. Journal of Science
Teacher
Education,
20
(3), 263–286. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Leisen, J. (2013). Handbuch
Sprachförderung im Fach: Sprachsensibler Fachunterricht in der Praxis: Grundlagenwissen, Anregungen und Beispiele für die Unterstützung
von sprachschwachen Lernern und Lernern mit Zuwanderungsgeschichte beim Sprechen, Lesen, Schreiben und Üben im
Fach. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Sprachen.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, Learning, and Values. Language and educational processes. Ablex Publishing Corporation.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Li, S., Yuqin, Zhao, & Brindley, G. (2013). Needs
analysis. In M. Byram & A. Hu (Eds.), Routledge
encyclopedia of language teaching and learning (2nd
ed., pp. 500–505). London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Llinares, A., & Dalton-Puffer, C. (2015). The
role of different tasks in CLIL students’ use of evaluative
language. In: System,
54
1, 69–79. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2021). Exploring
the relationship between TBLT and
ISLA. TASK,
1
(1), 47–70. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Long, M. H. (2005). Methodological
issues in learner needs analysis. In M. H. Long (Ed.), Second
Language Needs
Analysis (pp. 19–76). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Markic, S. (2015). Chemistry
Teachers’ Attitudes and Needs When Dealing with Linguistic Heterogeneity in the
Classroom. In M. Kahveci & M. Orgill (Eds.), Affective
Dimensions in Chemistry
Education (pp. 279–295). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
(2018). Chemistry
Teachers’ Pedagogical Scientific Language Knowledge. In O. Finlayson, E. McLoughlin, S. Erduran, & P. E. Childs (Eds.), Electronic
Proceedings of the ESERA 2017 Conference: Research, Practice and Collaboration in Science
Education (pp. 178–185). Dublin: Dublin City University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, M. O., & Mullis, I. V. S. (Eds.) (2013). TIMSS
and PIRLS 2011: Relationships Among Reading, Mathematics, and Science Achievement at the Fourth Grade-Implications for Early
Learning. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative
content analysis: theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software
solutions. Klagenfurt. Retrieved from [URL]
McComas, W. F. (2020). Nature
of Science in Science Instruction. Rationales and Strategies. Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Müllner, B., & Möller, A. (2019). Entwicklung
eines Analyseinstruments zur Erfassung der sprachlichen und fachlichen Qualität von
Versuchsprotokollen. In D. Krüger, A. Möller, A. Dittmer, J. Zabel, S. Nitz, & A. Scheersoi (Chairs), Frühjahrsschule
2019 in Bonn.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nikula, T. (2015). Hands-on
tasks in CLIL science classrooms as sites for subject-specific language use and
leraning. System,
54
1, 14–27. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How
literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science
Education,
87
(2), 224–240. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Osborne, J. (2002). Science
Without Literacy: A ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal of
Education,
32
(2), 203–218. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Özcan, N. (2012). Zum
Einfluss der Fachsprache auf die Leistung im Fach Chemie: Eine Förderstudie zur Fachsprache im
Chemieunterricht (Dissertation). Universität Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg-Essen.
Petersen, I. (2017). Schreiben
im Fachunterricht: mögliche Potenziale für Lernende mit Deutsch als
Zweitsprache. In B. Lütke, I. Petersen, & T. Tajmel (Eds.), DaZ-Forschung:
Vol. 8. Fachintegrierte Sprachbildung: Forschung, Theoriebildung und Konzepte für die
Unterrichtspraxis (pp. 99–125). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language
Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pienemann, M., & Lenzing, A. (2020). Processability
Theory. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating & St. Wulff (Eds.), Theories
in Second Language Acquisition. An
Introduction (pp. 162–191). London, New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Riebling, L. (2013). Sprachbildung
im naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht: Eine Studie im Kontext migrationsbedingter sprachlicher Heterogenität. Interkulturelle
Bildungsforschung: Vol. 20. Münster, New York, München, Berlin: Waxmann.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rous, M. (2016). Fachsprache
im Biologieunterricht. Dissertation. Biologie lernen und lehren: Vol.
16. Berlin: Logos.
Schmölzer-Eibinger, S., & Langer, E. (2010). Sprachförderung
im naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht in mehrsprachigen Klassen: Ein didaktisches Modell für das Fach
Chemie. In B. Ahrenholz (Ed.), Fachunterricht
und Deutsch als
Zweitsprache (pp. 203–217). Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Serafini, E. J., Lake, J. B., & Long, M. H. (2015). Needs
analysis for specialized learner populations: Essential methodological improvements. English for Specific
Purposes,
40
1, 11–26. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Simon, U. K., Steindl, H., Larcher, N., Kulac, H., & Hotter, A. (2016). Young
science journalism: writing popular scientific articles may contribute to an increase of high-school students’ interest in the natural
sciences. International Journal of Science
Education,
38
(5), 814–841. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Suchań, B., & Breit, S. (Eds.) (2016). PISA
2015: Grundkompetenzen am Ende der Pflichtschulzeit im internationalen
Vergleich. Graz: Leykam.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taglieber, J.; Kremmel, B.; Tuna, M. H.; Hoffmann, T. D.; Takim, A.; Schreiner, C.; Kapelari, S. (2022). Fragenkatalog Ethik. Selbstevaluation zur Einhaltung ethischer Rahmenrichtlinien und rechtlicher Vorgaben bei der Durchführung von Forschungsprojekten an der Fakultät für LehrerInnenbildung. Universität Innsbruck. Retrieved from [URL]
Tajmel, T. (2010). DaZ-Förderung
im naturwissenschaftlichen Fachunterricht. In B. Ahrenholz (Ed.), Fachunterricht
und Deutsch als
Zweitsprache (pp. 167–184). Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tang, K., & Danielsson, K. (2018). The
Expanding Development of Literacy Research in Science Education Around the
World. In K. Tang & K. Danielsson (Ed.), Global
Developments in Literacy Research for Science
Education (pp. 1–11). Cham: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tenopir, C., & King, D. W. (2004). Communication
patterns of engineers. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; Wiley Interscience.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van den Branden, K. (2016). Task-based
language teaching. In G. Hall (Ed.), Routledge
handbooks in applied linguistics. The Routledge Handbook of English language
teaching (pp. 238–251). London, New York: Routledge Taylor & FrancisGroup. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Gorp, K., & Van den Branden, K. (2015). Teachers,
pupils and tasks: The genesis of dynamic learning
opportunities. System,
54
1, 28–39. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)