• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 4 – February 2023
    • Volume 27
      • Volume 27, Number 1 – May 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 2 – August 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 3 – November 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 4 – February 2024
    • Volume 28
      • Volume 28, Number 1 – May 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 2 – August 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 3 – November 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 4 – February 2025
    • Volume 29
      • Volume 29, Number 1 – May 2025
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Info
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • APA Style Guide
  • Editorial Board
  • Support

Reading Science: Practical Strategies for Integrating Instruction

February 2017 – Volume 20, Number 4

Reading Science: Practical Strategies for Integrating Instruction

Author: Jennifer L. Altieri (2016)
Publisher: Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann
Pages ISBN-13 Price
xiv + 130 pages 978-0-325-06258-7 (paper) $24.37 USD

When I think of science, I think of inquiry-based instruction, such as doing investigations and writing lab reports. This tendency is not surprising considering that I have taught science at the secondary level for a decade now. In Reading Science, Jennifer Altieri brings into focus this content area through literacy while recognizing science as lexically dense. Thus, science demands specific skills necessary to understand the content and assess its accuracy. This is a connection that I have long recognized but have not conceptually applied. “Whether you are just beginning your teaching journey or have many years of teaching experience,” Altieri’s goal for her book is “to serve as the foundation upon which you can create important connections between science and literacy” (p. xi). Elementary school and science teachers will find a useful resource to contextualize the English Language Arts Common Core Standards (ELA CCSS) and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) within the teaching of science in the United States.

A first read echoes that “every teacher is a teacher of reading”; however, in reading this book more closely, I realized that this is not an accurate expectation. Instead, Altieri suggests that the disciplinary specificity of science prompts us to recognize that all learning is based in language. Throughout the pages, multiple ideas are offered for teachers to provide opportunities in using language as part of science instruction to significantly improve students’ achievement. While acknowledging that reading strategies can become more important than the content itself, Altieri contends that scientific literacy skills model the work of scientists in communicating and understanding the nature of science. Thus, Altieri offers various “think about it” and “take action” short sections prompting us to reflect on our teaching methods and how to apply new concepts.

Book Organization

Reading Science is organized into five chapters. Chapter one describes the connection between science and literacy, identifying eight challenges and how they are really opportunities for integrating both areas. While Altieri recognizes the importance of hands-on activities, she points out that students need to not only be able to assess a scientific text, but also identify with or contest the author’s biases. This presents the opportunity for students to become critical consumers of information. There is very little attention dedicated to science in elementary schools across the United States (Blank, 2012); considering the scientific background of a student is a foundational opportunity to build upon. Today, our increasingly culturally diverse population of students presents a challenge. Having students express and develop their knowledge through multiple ways is difficult. Some opportunities to consider are students’ prior reading experiences, motivation through student-centered instruction, science textbooks, vocabulary demands, and the use of images, graphics, and technology tools. These opportunities are variously explained throughout the book via the common thread of literacy.

Chapter two considers the science textbook, but it makes a case for including other forms of texts such as trade books. These trade books are classified by format as picture books and chapter books and by content as faction, texts blending facts and fiction, poetry, and informational texts. The strength of this chapter, however, is in the description on how to select texts for use in the classroom and in the discussion of new literacies. The evaluation for texts provides a checklist consisting of four areas of focus: science content, images, writing, informational text features, and overall design. A similar checklist is offered when evaluating new literacies such as blogs, articles on websites, and videos.

Chapter three focuses on vocabulary, where specific principles used to help vocabulary instruction are explained. These principles are morphemic knowledge, word relationships, creating and maintaining scientific interest, and getting students to read widely. Altieri proposes several strategies to acquire scientific vocabulary; one of them involves using morphemes (e.g., osis, bio, meter, and hydro, among others. Inspired by comedian Rich Hall, having students create singlets consists of combining up to five morphemes and assigning it a definition. The meaning is a combination of each of the morphemes. Another strategy list-group-label asks students to brainstorm roughly two dozen words related to a scientific topic. The teacher writes each word on the whiteboard, and then students work in small groups to classify word clusters into categories. There are many other vocabulary strategies; however, none makes reference to cognates when there are over 20,000 Spanish-English cognates (Montelongo, 2002). For English language learners (ELLs), particularly Spanish speaking students, drawing from cognates is an effective teaching strategy.

Chapter four elaborates on Altieri’s notion of text flexibility as a way to strengthen text comprehension and decipher text features. Reading informational text, particularly scientific text, demands a shift of purpose from that of reading narrative and fictional texts to which most students are accustomed. In reading science content, the purpose is to gain an understanding and relating the information to the real world. Text flexibility refers to the ability to vary the approach to texts depending on the purpose for reading. Altieri’s notion assists reading comprehension through five principles: understanding text features, questioning author’s purpose, focusing on specific content, engaging with multiple texts on a scientific topic, and learning to support opinions with textual evidence. Several strategies are offered addressing each principle. For instance, in addressing the content, Altieri includes text-dependent questions as promoted by achieve.org. Among the types of text-dependent questions, there is vocabulary and text structure, to focus on tier II terms, but text structure is confused with text features. Understanding features such as the table of contents, index, headings, and captions, among others, can make scientific texts more accessible. However, text structure understood as types of informational text structure such as comparison, cause and effect, problem-solution, is not addressed in Reading Science.

Chapter five addresses images, their types, and their role in science literacy. This, I believe, is the most important chapter. Images have often been underestimated as having a distracting effect by portraying “seductive details” (Harp & Mayer, 1998). However, Altieri acknowledges the challenges of using images but asserts that diagrams, tables, charts, and graphs are an integral part of scientific literacy and must be addressed to enhance students’ comprehension. Three principles guide this chapter, including understanding the purpose of images, recognizing their types, and comprehending information in them. Comprehension strategies used for the written word can be identified to see whether they work with images. For instance, reading is rarely quick and easy, often difficult text requires re-reading. Similarly, interpreting images requires time to view and review them and assessing how text relates to the image. Another strategy is that of “think-aloud,” which assists students in metacognitively processing information. As others are discussed, readers can come to fully appreciate Altieri’s effort in helping them to view images through critical eyes.

Conclusion

Even though the book is missing an important text feature, the index, the inclusion of appendices that include worksheets corresponding to strategies discussed throughout the book compensates for that absence. Although there is an abundance of content-area and science literacy books, Altieri’s Reading Science proves to be a valuable resource for elementary and science teachers. The strategies or activities, as Altieri uses both terms interchangeably, are grounded in best practices and are easy to implement. What is important to appreciate is that not all activities have to be applied; a few can be adopted by the elementary school or science department and implemented consistently over time.

References

Blank, R. K. (2012). What is the impact of decline in science instructional time in elementary school? Paper prepared for the Noyce Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.csss-science.org/downloads/NAEPElemScienceData.pdf

Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 414-434.

Montelongo, J. (2002) Learning and memory for Spanish English cognates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University

Reviewed by
Paulo A. Oemig
New Mexico State University
Curriculum & Instruction
<poemigatmarknmsu.edu>

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.
Editor’s Note: The HTML version contains no page numbers. Please use the PDF version of this article for citations.

© 1994–2025 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.