Rejecting Semiotic Homogeneity: Reimagining Justice in Elementary Science Classrooms

• In Event: Critical Orientations to Language in STEM Education: Praxis Beyond Replacement of Labels

Abstract

Objectives and Theoretical Framing

Science education Emergent Multilingual Learners (EMLs) (Author 3, 2021) has been contested since the 1990s, and complicated further with the “practice turn” (Manz, 2015). Some suggest that EMLs must be apprenticed into scientific academic language, claiming that these are the most appropriate tools for making meaning of natural phenomena, as well as developing pathways for racialized students into STEM-field careers (e.g., Brown & Ryoo, 2008; Lee & Fradd, 1998). Ultimately, these congruence-based arguments can further the white supremacist logics of assimilating EMLs into dominant forms of knowledge, knowing, and communicating (Rosebery et al., 2010). I build on Translanguaging (García & Li, 2014) as a theoretical and pedagogical lens for understanding how EMLs leverage their full semiotics repertoires for engaging in epistemic practices, like developing explanatory models (Author, 2020). In this study, I use these constructs to reimagine what counts as equitable science classroom discourse, focusing on how PK-5 EMLs problematized natural phenomena (Engle & Conant, 2002).

Methods

This study draws from two broader research practice partnerships: (1) an urban K-5 school with students who were classified by the district as beginner/intermediate English Language Learners; and (2) an out-of-school time science at a local library where EMLs investigated the transmission and transformation of electrical energy. For both studies, I collected data from two main streams: video recordings of investigations and discussions, and student-produced artifacts. Using qualitative methods, I focused the analyses on translanguaging events (Author, 2020), situated in local learning activities where students leverage linguistic resources associated with two or more named languages (e.g., English, Spanish), and/or non-linguistic resources (e.g., gesturing) for collaboratively problematizing physical phenomena.

Results

The analyses show that students resorted to a wide range of semiotic resources and translanguaging practices to share their observations and reasoning. Analyzing a first-grade engineering unit, Ellie – a Chinese-origin student – constructed a detailed explanation for why another students’ boat had capsized. Through laminating gestures and speech, Ellie argued that the boat was top-heavy (“lots of feathers”), which made it unstable due to an uneven distribution of weight along the vertical dimension. Finally, in the OST program, Yesenia – a Mexican-origin student – investigated how a conductor’s thickness affected electric flow and a lamp’s brightness. Specifically, Yesenia proposed a mechanistic model for how the conductor’s thickness regulated how much and how quickly electricity could flow, which she shared while using linguistic resources associated with Spanish.

Significance

Through the use of gestures, onomatopoeias, and linguistic resources from various named languages, students co-constructed evidence-based, explanatory models for the physical phenomena they observed and wondered about – exactly what the practice-based vision of science education aims for and expects students to do in order to figure out the natural world. These results suggest that science education researchers and practitioners must broaden our definitions of what counts as productive science classroom discourse by recognizing the strengths inherent in the communicative practices of students and their communities, rather than deficient and/or dichotomous to the goal of understanding the natural world.

Author

• Enrique (Henry) Suárez, University of Massachusetts - Amherst