Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Second International Handbook of Science Education pp 1351–1373Cite as

Interdisciplinary Perspectives Linking Science and Literacy in Grades K–5: Implications for Policy and Practice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Springer International Handbooks of Education ((SIHE,volume 24))

Abstract

This chapter presents a combination of theoretical perspectives and empirical findings as a foundation for establishing the relevance of elementary science instruction in which reading comprehension and writing are integrated as a major curricular strategy with the potential of providing a curricular solution to systemic problems presently associated with school reform. The evidence-based argument advanced in the chapter is based on a combination of (a) specific interdisciplinary approaches to meaningful school learning drawn from the complementary areas of cognitive science, cognitive psychology, applied learning, instructional design/development and educational research and (b) research that has demonstrated the acceleration of achievement in both science and reading comprehension resulting from different models of in-depth science instruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   429.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amaral, O., Garrison, L., & Klentschy, M. (2002). Helping English learners increase achievement through inquiry-based science instruction. Bilingual Research Journal, 26, 213–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89, 369–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1987). Skill acquisition: Compilation of weak-method problem solutions. Psychological Review, 94, 192–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1992). Automaticity and the ACT theory. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 15–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1993). Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist, 48, 35–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1996). ACT: A simple theory of complex cognition. American Psychologist, 51, 335–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R., & Fincham, J. M. (1994). Acquisition of procedural skills from examples. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 1322–1340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armga, C., Dillon, S., Jamsek, M., Morgan, E. L., Peyton, D., & Speranza, H. (2002). Tips for helping children do science. Texas Child Care, 26, 2–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artzen, E., & Holth, P. (1997). Probability of stimulus equivalence as a function of training decision. Psychological Record, 47, 309–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asoko, H. (2002). Developing conceptual understanding in primary science. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bredderman, T. (1983). Effects of activity-based elementary science on student outcomes: A quantitative synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 53, 499–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnine, D. (1991). Curricular interventions for teaching higher order thinking to all students: Introduction to a special series. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 261–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavanagh, S. (2004). NCLB could alter science teaching. Education Week, 24, 1 & 12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervetti, G., & Pearson, P. D. (2006). Reading and writing in the service of inquiry-based science. In R. Douglas, M. Klentschy, & K. Worth (Eds.), Linking science and literacy in the K–8 classroom (pp. 221–244). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chall, J. S., & Jacobs, V. A. (2003). The classic study on poor children’s fourth grade slump. American Educator, 27, 14–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colker, L. J. (2002). Teaching and learning about science. Young Children. 57, 10–11, 47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conezio, K. & French, L. (2002). Science in the preschool classroom: Capitalizing on children’s fascination with the everyday world to foster language and literacy development. Young Children, 57, 12–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, S. (2006). Schools cut back subjects to push reading and math. Retrieved March 26, 2006, from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/education/26child.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

  • Dolan, M. F. (2005). Assessment success today or learning success tomorrow? How a longitudinal perspective helps standards-based accountability systems eliminate the persistent gap between nominal and actual achievement for high school graduates. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66, 567.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougher, M. J., & Markham, M. R. (1994). Stimulus equivalence, functional equivalence and the transfer of function. In S. C. Hays, L. J. Hays, M. Santo, & O. Koichi (Eds.), Behavior analysis of language and cognition (pp. 71–90). Reno, NV: Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K. (2000a). 3.6 minutes per day. The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K. (2000b). For the rich it’s richer: Print experiences and environments offered to children in very low- and very high-socioeconomic status first grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 441–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K. (2007). Let’s look in a book: Using nonfiction reference materials with young children. Young Children, 62, 12–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K., Bennett-Armistead, V. S., & Roberts, E. M. (2003). Filling the nonfiction void. American Educator, 27, 30–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 205–242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farstrup, A. E., & Samuels, S. J. (Eds.). (2002). What research has to say about reading instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, L. (2004). Science as the center of a coherent, integrated early childhood curriculum. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 138–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamse, B. C., Bloom, H. S., Kemple, J. J., & Jacob, R. T. (2008). Reading First impact study: Interim report (NCEE 2008–4016). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U. S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, R., & Brenneman, K. (2004). Science learning pathways for young children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 150–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg, H. P., & Golbeck, S. L. (2004). Thoughts on the future of research on mathematics and science learning and education. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 190–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzales, P., Williams, T., Jocelyn, L., Roey, S., Kastberg, D., & Brenwald, S. (2008). Highlights from TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context (NCES 2009–001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J., Weeks, V., & Evans, S. (2003). Science starts early. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 26, 38–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., & Ozgungor, S. (2002). Instructional contexts for reading engagement. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 275–288). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Davis, M. H., et al. (2004a). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 403–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (Eds.). (2004b). Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hand, B., Hohenshell, L., & Prain, V. (2004). Exploring students’ responses to conceptual questions when engaged with planned writing experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 186–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hapgood, S., Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (2004). Teacher, text, and experience: A case of young children’s scientific inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 455–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hapgood, S., & Palincsar, A. S. (2007). Where literacy and science intersect. Educational Leadership, 64, 56–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, E. D. (1996). The schools we need. And why we don’t have them. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, E. D. (2001). Seeking breadth and depth in the curriculum. Educational Leadership, 59, 21–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, E. D. (2003). Reading comprehension requires knowledge of words and the world: Scientific insights into the fourth-grade slump and stagnant reading comprehension. American Educator, 27, 10–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, E. D. (2006). The knowledge deficit. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holliday, W. G. (2004). Choosing science textbooks: Connecting science research to common sense. In W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction (pp. 383–394). Newark, DE: International Reading Association and NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J., & Courtney, R. (2002). Documenting early science learning. Young Children, 57, 34–38, 40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G., Jones, B. D., Hardin, B., Chapman, L., Yarbrough, T., & Davis, M. (1999). The impact of high-stakes testing on teachers and students in North Carolina. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 199–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgenson, O., & Vanosdall, R. (2002). The death of science? What are we risking in our rush toward standardized testing and the three r’s. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 601–605.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearsley, G. P. (Ed.). (1987). Artificial intelligence and instruction: Applications and methods. New York: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1994). Text comprehension, memory, and learning. American Psychologist, 49, 294–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (2004). The construction-integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.) (pp. 1270–1328). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klentschy, M. P. (2003). The science literacy connection. California Curriculum News Report, 28, 1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klentschy, M. P. (2006). Connecting science and literacy through student science notebooks. California Journal of Science Education, 6, 51–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klentschy, M. P., & Molina-De La Torre, E. (2004). Students’ science notebooks and the inquiry process. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice (pp. 340–354). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klentschy, M. P., & Thompson, L. (2008). Scaffolding science inquiry through lesson design. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L. (1997). Educational implications of analogy: A view from case-based reasoning. American Psychologist, 82, 57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., Grigg, W. S., & Donahue, P. L. (2007). The nation’s report card: Reading 2007 (NCES 2007496). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M., Lostoski, M., & Williams, K. (2000). Diving into a school wide science theme. Science and Children, 38, 31–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luger, G. F. (2008). Artificial intelligence: Structures and strategies for complex problem-solving. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutkus, A. D., Lauko, M. A., & Brockway, D. M. (2006). The nation’s report card: Science 2005 trial urban school district assessment (NCES 2007453). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (2003). Learning from text designed to model scientific thinking in inquiry-based instruction. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and scientific instruction (pp. 316–339). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maniates, H., & Pearson, P. D. (2008). The curricularization of comprehension strategies instruction: A conspiracy of good intentions. In Y. Kim, V. J. Risco, et al. (Eds.), The fifty-seventh yearbook of the national reading conference (pp. 271–284). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., de Vega, M., & O’Reilly, T. (2007). Comprehension skill, inference making, and the role of knowledge. In F. Schmalhofer & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes (pp. 233–253). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from text: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences. (1997). Science for all children: A guide for improving elementary science education in your school district. Washington, DC: National Sciences Resources Center, Smithsonian Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards (National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, L. D. (2001). Teaching for understanding in primary science. Evaluation and Research in Education, 15, 143–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niedelman, M. (1992). Problem solving and transfer. In D. Carnine & E. J. Kameenui (Eds.), Higher order thinking (pp. 137–156). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton-Meier, L., Hand, B., Hockenberry, L., & Wise, K. (2008). Questions, claims, and evidence: The important place of argument in children’s science writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogle, D., & Blachowicz, C. L. Z. (2002). Beyond literature circles: Helping students comprehend informational texts. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction (pp. 247–258). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A. S., & Magnusson, S. J. (2001). The interplay of first-hand and second-hand investigations to model and support the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 151–195). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, R. G., & Stewart, R. (2003). Nonfiction trade book use in primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 57, 38–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P. D., & Duke, N. (2002). Comprehension instruction in the primary grades. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction (pp. 247–258). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P. D., & Fielding, L. (1995). Comprehension instruction. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol II, pp. 815–860). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., Rankin, J., & Yokoi, L. (1996). A survey of instructional practices of primary teachers nominated as effective in promoting literacy. Elementary School Journal, 96, 363–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Revelle, G., Druin, A., Platner, M., Bederson, B., Hourcade, J. P., & Sherman, L. (2002). A visual search tool for early elementary science students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11, 49–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivet, A. E., & Krajcik, J. S. (2008). Contextualizing instruction: Leveraging students’ prior knowledge and experiences to foster understanding of middle school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 79–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (1992). A curriculum strategy that expands time for in-depth elementary science instruction by using science-based reading strategies: Effects of a year-long study in grade 4. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 545–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (2001). Implementing an in-depth expanded science model in elementary schools: Multi-year findings, research issues, and policy implications. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 373–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (2006). Making the case for elementary science as a key element in school reform: Implications for changing curricular policy. In R. Douglas, M. Klentschy, & K. Worth (Eds.), Linking science and literacy in the K–8 classroom (pp. 391–405). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (2007, April). Elements for bringing a research-validated intervention to scale: Implications for leadership in educational reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (2008, April). Science IDEAS: A knowledge-based model for accelerating reading/literacy through in-depth science learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandall, B. R. (2003). Elementary science: Where are we now? Journal of Elementary Science Education, 15, 13–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saul, W. (Ed.). (2004). Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association and NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C., Cogan, L. S., Jakwerth, P. M., & Houang, R. T. (1999). Facing the consequences: Using TIMSS for a closer look at U.S. mathematics and science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H. C., Wiley, D. E., Cogan, L. S., et al. (2001). Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C., & Raizen, S. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shymansky, J. A., Hedges, L. V., & Woodworth, G. (1990). A reassessment of the effects of inquiry-based science curricula of the 60’s on student performance. Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 27, 127–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidman, M. (1994). Stimulus equivalence. Boston: Author’s Cooperative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegler, R. S. (2000). The rebirth of children’s learning. Child Development, 71, 26–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (2001). Early childhood – A wonderful time for science learning. Investigating: Australian Primary & Junior Science Journal, 17, 18–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Reading Study Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowa, J. F. (2000). Knowledge representation: Logical, philosophical, and computational foundations. New York: Brooks Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, E., & Guthrie, J. T. (1999, April). Influences of science observation and science trade books on reading comprehension and motivation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2001). Deconstructing learning in science – Young children’s responses to a classroom sequence on evaporation. Research in Science Education, 30, 339–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitale, M. R., & Romance, N. R. (2000). Portfolios in science assessment: A knowledge-based model for classroom practice. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 168–197). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitale, M. R., & Romance, N. R. (2005, April). A model for scaling up a research-validated instructional intervention: Implications for leadership in educational reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitale, M. R., & Romance, N. R. (2006a). A knowledge-based framework for the classroom assessment of student science understanding. In M. McMahon, P. Simmons, R. Sommers, D. DeBaets, & F. Crawley (Eds.), Assessment in science: Practical experiences and education research (pp. 1–14). Arlington, VA: NSTA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitale, M. R., & Romance, N. R. (2006b, April). Effects of embedding knowledge-focused reading comprehension strategies in content-area vs. narrative instruction in grade 5: Findings and research implications. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitale, M. R, & Romance, N. R. (2007a, April). Adaptation of a knowledge-based instructional intervention to accelerate student learning in science and early literacy in grades 1–2. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitale, M. R., & Romance, N. R. (2007b). A knowledge-based framework for unifying content-area reading comprehension and reading comprehension strategies. In D. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies (pp. 73–104). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitale, M. R., Romance, N. R., & Klentschy, M. (2006, April). Improving school reform by changing curriculum policy toward content-area instruction in elementary schools: A research-based model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, K. (2003). Lost opportunity. American Educator, 27(1), 24–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, C. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Expository text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Volume II (pp. 230–245). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Preparation of this paper was supported by IES Project R305G04089 and NSF/IERI Project REC 0228353.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, 33435, USA

    Nancy R. Romance

  2. College of Education, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, 25828, USA

    Michael R. Vitale

Authors
  1. Nancy R. Romance
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael R. Vitale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy R. Romance .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Science & Mathematics Education Centre, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, West Australia, Australia

    Barry J. Fraser

  2. The Graduate Centre, City University of New York, New York, 10016-4309, New York, USA

    Kenneth Tobin

  3. Ctr. Mathematics & Science Education, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Rd., Kelvin Grove, 4059, Queensland, Australia

    Campbell J. McRobbie

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Romance, N.R., Vitale, M.R. (2012). Interdisciplinary Perspectives Linking Science and Literacy in Grades K–5: Implications for Policy and Practice. In: Fraser, B., Tobin, K., McRobbie, C. (eds) Second International Handbook of Science Education. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 24. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_87

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation