Mythical Academic Texts: An Investigation of Instructional Texts in a Biology Classroom

• In Event: 66.034 - Rethinking and Undoing Academic Language

Abstract

In existing literature, students considered to be long-term English learners (LTELs) are described as struggling with academic English literacy (Olsen, 2010). These “struggles” are frequently attributed to the fact that they are still in the process of learning English. This paper moves beyond the focus on their English abilities and examines the educational context of so-called LTELs. In particular, it examines the instructional texts of Mrs. Orozco’s sophomore biology class in which 45% of the students are LTELs. This research is significant because it moves the focus from the perceived linguistic shortcomings of students to an examination of their experiences with in-school reading.

Iterative coding and analytic memoing (Saldaña, 2011) were used to analyze field notes and written texts collected during an academic year of ethnographic observations. These analyses were guided by two research questions: What written text types comprised Mrs. Orozco’s teacher-organized instruction? How were the most frequent text types structured? As a result of this multi-level analysis, I found that traditional disciplinary texts were infrequent in Mrs. Orozco’s classroom. The predominant texts with which student interacted reflected general text types used for teaching and learning in school. The two most frequent texts, writing prompts and notes, accounted for 51% of the texts that students read during the school year. Additionally, these analyses revealed that Mrs. Orozco was the central author of classroom texts. She authored 81% of the written discourse which comprised the teacher-organized instruction of the course. The predominance of teacher-authored texts meant that students in Mrs. Orozco’s biology class were rarely asked to read more than a paragraph of text. 92% of the texts which Mrs. Orozco authored were less than a paragraph. They were composed of brief sentences/phrases relying graphic devices for coherence.

The language that composed instructional texts in Mrs. Orozco’s classroom did not reflect normative academic linguistic traditions. In this context, the linguistic characteristics that are traditionally considered to be a part of “academic language” are not necessary to engage with the content of biology. The absence of traditional academic texts is significant because it illustrates that “academic language” is not static across all academic contexts. Academic texts in Mrs. Orozco’s class looked very different from those suggested in best practice texts for science teaching (e.g., Lee & Spratley, 2007). Not only does this research challenge the existence of singular construct of academic language, it highlights the possibility of an alternative representation of LTELs that takes into account their in-school experiences with reading. Rather than envisioning LTELs as students who struggle with academic English literacy, this research suggest that they may be adolescents who are inexperienced with constructing meaning from certain linguistic structures.

Lee, C., & Spratley, A. (2007). Reading in the disciplines and the challenges of adolescent
literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation.

Olsen, L. (2010). Reparable harm: Fulfilling the unkept promise of educational opportunity
for California's long term English learners. Long Beach, CA: Californians Together.

Saldaña, J. (2011). Fundamentals of qualitative research. Oxford, UK: OUP.

Author

• Maneka Deanna Brooks, Texas State University