Language, Literacy, and STEM (LA-STEM) Framework: Academic Literacy and Core Competencies
The theory of change we present begins with the notion that faculty in STEM fields, experts in their respective disciplines, are rarely prepared to teach courses in ways that explicitly take into consideration the range of background knowledge and experiences diverse university student populations bring to the classroom, or the ways in which academic literacy practices are connected to disciplinary knowledge. This project proposes a shift in orientation to teaching courses that integrate a focus on student knowledge and experiences related to STEM literacy using a lesson study approach. Extensive research has been conducted on conceptualizing academic literacy, typically defined as the language of schooling (and more explicitly defined as the set of language practices, both oral and written) required to develop and display proficiency or expertise in a particular discipline (Gee, 2012; Langman & Thomas, 2017; Schleppegrell, 2004). In the case of STEM, academic literacy involves not only words but also the complex multimodal language of graphs, charts, formulas, and diagrams, as well as the language used to talk about these conceptual tools. The transition from basic or introductory courses to more advanced courses at the university level in the STEM fields can be viewed, in part, in terms of shifts in academic literacy expectations.
The shift to more complex academic literacy is not transparent or apparent and it must be integrated into courses needed for completion of degree requirements, especially for U.S. language minority students (Bunch & Kibler, 2015). Research in the area of teaching and learning is reaching a consensus that faculty should develop an orientation to teaching that includes explicit attention to:
- The connection between background knowledge of an increasingly diverse college student population, and the faculty member expected knowledge (Perin, 2011)
- The connection between knowledge being acquired and the application of that knowledge to future degree-specific coursework and by extension to future career contexts
- The connection between academic literacy and the conceptual content that is expressed through that language
- The development of professional identities among university students as a lens through which to imagine a future STEM career.
These four points provide a framework for proposing systemic curricular change beginning with faculty development of an academic literacy-infused approach to STEM teaching.
Teaching academic literacy explicitly as a component of teaching content can help university students struggling with STEM content to make connections with previously learned materials and real-world applications (Schleppegrell, 2010; Wolf et. al, 2016). Schleppegrell (2016) provides a model for thinking about academic language based on the theories of systemic functional linguistics (SFL). Her approach recognizes the social context of language and provides a “linguistic description of the language of schooling” (p. 4) that allows for a careful understanding of how disciplinary-specific language is used in the service of building and sharing content knowledge. Understanding that academic literacy is not singular, but is rather richly contextual in terms of its use across settings is a key insight drawn from the field of functional linguistics. Literacy tasks and functions are therefore critical aspects of scientific and engineering practices that are modeled and used by both instructors and students making sense of disciplinary content (Lee, Quinn, and Valdés, 2013; Téllez, Moschkovich, and Civil, 2011). For example, the language of physics in the textbook, the classroom lecture, the study group problem-solving session, the class presentation, and the service-learning experience vary in predictable and discernable ways. Further, an academic literacy approach highlights the functions for which language is used in the classroom and beyond. A component of developing proficiency in a STEM field is the ability to engage in the functions of defining, describing, explaining, and analyzing complex content in the STEM areas, through the interpretation and use of appropriate language (Lee and Krajcik, 2012 ). This is an area that STEM councils engaged in K-12 education have focused on in recent years. Such insights are now beginning to be explored in university-level STEM contexts as well (Marrero, Riccio, Ben-Jacob, Canger & Maliti, 2017).
Teachers with an understanding of how academic literacy varies across these settings can provide support for students struggling to internalize new and increasingly complex STEM concepts in the university setting. Bailey and Butler (2003) proposed a model of academic language proficiency at the K-12 level, which identified areas of academic literacy use, three of which are relevant to the current proposal: language demands of the classroom; language prerequisites of national content-area standards; and teacher expectations for language use and abilities.
The research focused on college science teaching suggests that “engaging students in undergraduate research and improving students’ science identities will increase minority students’ chances of completing their degrees and pursuing graduate studies” (Marrero, Riccio, Ben-Jacob, Canger & Maliti, 2017). A science identity, allows students to imagine themselves as successful learners, and more importantly, as future workers in a range of STEM careers. Our proposed program also addresses the need for students to participate in research, discussed in more detail in section 3. Further, advances in university teaching suggest that connections between previously acquired knowledge and new knowledge, as well as facility in articulating those connections, is key to student success in early math and engineering courses. The Wright State Model for engineering students (Klingbeil & Bourne, 2015) recognizes that student success relies not only on understanding mathematics but also “perhaps more importantly, on the ability to connect the math to the engineering,” and finds that “first-year students typically arrive at the university with virtually no understanding of how their pre-college math background relates to their chosen degree programs, let alone their future careers” (Bourne, Klinbeil, Ciarallo, 2014). Several models designed to transform university-level STEM education focus on a shift to problem-based learning, just-in-time mathematics, and connection to application, all of which align with the LA-STEM framework (Cukrova, Bennett & Abrahams, 2018; Klinbeil & Bourne, 2015). The teaching Excellence Framework in the UK (Cukrova, Bennett & Abrahams, 2018) promotes a focus on scaffolding students to independent learning activities through a project-based learning approach that entails careful attention to the academic literacy components associated with developing knowledge and displaying knowledge (Bunch & Kibler, 2015).
These points are also true for Hispanic students attending HSIs. The lack of fit between the type of preparation of students, the expectations of faculty, and the connection of coursework to past mathematics experience and future workplace experience, leads to high failure and dropout rates.
Our proposal combines a redesign of the curriculum, in particular with respect to pedagogical approaches taken in the classroom that connect past experiences, current content, and future applications related to STEM literacy, with a strong wrap-around model of mentoring and advising for undergraduates. The components of the proposed changes include:
- Create a link between lower and upper-level courses and the course’s lecture, lab, and recitation to enhance and relevance of lecture materials to real-world application for the following courses:
i. Lower division: PHY 1943 Physics for Scientists & Engrs I with lab and EGR 2323 Engineering Analysis (differential equations)
ii. Upper Division: ME 3113 Measurements and Instrumentation, PHY 3203 Classical Mechanics and BME 3303 Bioinstrumentation. The lower-division courses are prerequisites for the upper-division courses. - Mandatory inclusion of near-peer mentoring through required recitation; and
- Consideration of how a focus on academic literacy can be integrated into the development of content competencies (proficiencies).
Our aim at institutional change begins with the development of a series of interlocking professional learning communities that engage in joint lesson study. Each professional learning community will consist of two faculty in physics and engineering, 4 teaching assistants, and academic literacy and pedagogical development coaches from the College of Education and Human Development.
1.1 Restructuring of Undergraduate Courses
Our proposal combines a redesign of the curriculum, in particular with respect to pedagogical approaches taken in the classroom that connect past experiences, current content, and future applications related to STEM literacy, with a strong wrap-around model of mentoring and advising for undergraduates. The components of the proposed changes for the engineering and physics courses include:
- Create a link between lower and upper-level courses and the course’s lecture, lab, and recitation to ensure integration of conceptual learning and applied learning;
- Mandatory inclusion of near-peer mentoring through requiring recitation for all students, rather than those identified as needing extra help; and
- Integration of project-based learning activities that culminate in presentations as a component of coursework as a way of explicitly connecting theory to practice.
For example, a physics course designed to introduce undergraduates to the traditional topics of classical mechanics at an intermediate level (e.g., Mechanical tools, Newtonian Mechanics, Gravitation) might approach a lesson study cycle by attempting to address how students can more fully engage in the use of digital technologies during recitation and for academic presentations. Students in this course grapple with drawing out nuanced meanings represented in physics texts, including graphic and visual representations of scientific information and models. To address this concern, the lesson study team may decide to adapt and extend the recitation assignment so that students have an opportunity to address varied audiences, such as children and families at the local children’s science museum (San Antonio DoSeum)
1.2 Faculty Pedagogical Coaching through Lesson Study
The LA-STEM framework will drive how new pedagogical practices focused on STEM literacy will be examined and integrated into courses using a validated professional development model for improving instruction. Research on the lesson study model of professional development meets the U.S. Department of Education’s What Works Clearinghouse evidence standards (Perry and Lewis, 2011). Professional development lesson study groups will engage in a situated and rigorous form of professional development as they review course syllabi and redesign courses using the LA-STEM framework. More specifically, professional development lesson study groups will form teams and adapt the familiar Lesson Study Cycle (see Figure 1) (Lewis and Perry, 2014). Lesson Study members will consist of core faculty in selected Engineering and Science courses, graduate teaching assistants from selected lab and recitation sections, and faculty pedagogical coaches from the College of Education and Human Development.
While the lesson study model has been used widely for improving K-12 education, particularly in STEM education, the use of lesson study is emerging as a promising pedagogical reform model within the growing scholarship on teaching and learning in higher education (Becker, Ghenciu, Horak, and Schroeder, 2008; Cerbin and Kopp, 2006; Christiansen, Klinke, and Nielsen, 2007; Dotger, 2011; Kamen, Junk, Marble, Cooper, Eddy, Wilkerson, and Sawyer, 2011; Mokhele, 2017; Stombaugh, Sperstad, VanWormer, Jennings, Kishel, and Vogh, 2013; Tight, 2017; Wood and Cajkler, 2017). The importance of modeling collaborative learning communities in higher education is a challenging, yet valuable aspect of promoting learning communities with students in higher education contexts, especially struggling students. The lesson study model used in this project focuses on the importance of understanding how students learn disciplinary knowledge in higher education contexts rather than what students learn (Cerbin, 2013; Cerbin and Kopp, 2006); that is, the focus is on guiding instructors in grappling with how students learn in STEM courses by studying the learning context of students, from the perspective of students. There is some evidence also that STEM graduate teaching assistants similarly benefit from this model as they become familiar with pedagogical challenges and strategies for supporting student learning (Dotger, 2011).
The project will draw from an adapted higher education version of the lesson study model, which emphasizes the use of student interviews related to a lesson to gain insight into student learning experiences (Wood and Cajkler, 2017). In this higher education lesson study version, critical attention is given to student perspectives and ways of sustaining changes in target courses often noted as a major challenge in higher education teaching and learning reforms (Tight, 2017).
Table 2. The proposed lesson study cycle for UTSA STEM Undergraduate courses
| Stage | Focus | Activities |
| 1 | Identify a learning challenge related to STEM literacy | The team discusses and agrees on a student learning issue related to academic literacy that will be the focus of their lessons. Instructors share experiences, materials, and assignments from earlier versions of a related target lesson. |
| 2 | Plan a target lesson | Instructors create new assignments, materials, activities and/or routines for a lesson. Changes are shared within the team and refined. |
| 3 | Teach a focal lesson and collect student data | Instructors teach a revised lesson while other team members observe students in the course. |
| 4 | Complete student interviews | Members of the team complete interviews of selected students to gain insight into changes made to the lesson. |
| 5 | Evaluate student data | The lesson study team evaluates student interviews and observations to consider how the lesson addresses the student learning issue. |
| 6 | Consolidate and connect knowledge to new practices | Team members consider if new teaching practices are supported by the data collected. |
First, teams will study existing undergraduate curricular materials and goals, including how to adapt and use new LA-STEM tools and practices (i.e., video-recorded lessons and revised assignments). Second, instructors will plan together a specific focal lesson that incorporates LASTEM practices while doing research on possible challenges and opportunities for student learning. Part of this step includes designing lesson templates and classroom interactional routines that model the intervention. Third, instructors will implement their target lessons and collect student work samples from each lesson. This phase includes video-recording each lesson. Lastly, instructors will reflect on the target lesson and student data collected. This reflection will focus on three aspects of the lesson study cycle including the development and implementation of instructional practices, student comprehension and learning, and efficacy/use of tools and materials. Research on video-based professional development in STEM teaching shows promise for improving learning for underrepresented communities (Santagata, 2009; Sherin and Van Es, 2005), see Table 2
In terms of sustaining changes to courses over time, the lesson study process will guide the instructors (professors and graduate Teaching Assistants) as to how each course will be restructured over one semester and academic year. Each course will be adapting course activities and assignments that will be carried forward to ensuing semesters (Stage 6 of each cycle, see Table 2). Two cycles of the lesson study will be completed each semester, see Table 3.
Near Peer Mentoring
A near-peer mentoring program will be established for STEM undergraduate students for their sophomore and junior years. UTSA currently has a peer mentoring program for first-year students only through the First-Year Experience (a program that helps new college students make connections academically and socially on campus). Peer Mentors are dedicated and experienced UTSA students who have been trained to assist sophomore and junior students in adjusting to the rigors of STEM majors by providing support and guidance to students on a variety of challenges. All sophomores and juniors will be provided the opportunity to meet regularly with an assigned peer mentor and participate in a variety of activities and workshops throughout their years at UTSA. Peer mentors will be chosen from students who have already taken the courses outlined in the proposal. We will borrow from the existing experience of other programs on campus through the First-Year Experience and PIVOT. The activities and workshops are specifically designed to empower students with the knowledge and academic skills required to succeed in STEM. The peer mentoring and activities will be coordinated by the Co-PIs and assisted by the COE Student Success Center.
Research and Professional Development
It is well established that undergraduates who actively participate in a research experience and who develop a research identity have a higher likelihood of success than their peers (Kuh 2008 and 2016). The excitement, the knowledge gained, and the near-peer mentoring from graduate students all have a significant positive impact on the student’s success. As such, we will implement an experiential research opportunity for undergraduate students. Students will be selected by way of a competitive application process and designated as “Fellows.” Two application periods will ensure the recruitment of about fourteen students per year. The COE Student Success Center will disseminate the flyers and process the applications. Prospective key dates appear below.
Each student will be immersed in an active lab of their choice and paired with a graduate student. The Fellows will develop research experience through the support of the graduate student in terms of conducting physical and computational experiments, reviewing research papers, and conducting literature reviews, among others. The Fellows will be valued members of the research lab and participate in weekly lab meetings.
This inquiry-learning program is based on John Dewey’s philosophy that education should be centered on the learner (Bloom et. al, 1956). Students at all levels will participate in the learning cycle: they will ask a question, investigate, create, discuss and reflect. Discussion and reflection will generate additional questions and feed their desire to learn. For example, faculty mentors will teach the students how to keep a laboratory journal as they work through the learning cycle. Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom et. al, 1956) places the process of reflection resulting in the evaluation as an educational objective. Journaling will teach the students the benefits of reflection as a self-assessment tool that improves the outcome of the learning cycle and provides instances of academic literacy to consider. Fellows will present research posters in the UTSA’s Undergraduate Research & Creative Inquiry Showcase held each April at UTSA. Faculty will assess the students’ ability to apply their acquired knowledge and share what they have learned with the community.
The research and professional development student activities are categorized into two main groups: research experiences for undergraduates, and development of marketable skills. The detailed implementation objectives that support the overall goal are provided below:
Objective 1. Improve students’ knowledge of the STEM research process, including using computational, mathematical, and engineering/science methods, software, and tools. Two main activities address this objective: (1) research immersion during the academic semesters, and (2) learning how to keep a laboratory journal. Students will learn how to use simulation and computational models and manipulate data sets to conduct research in STEM and create posters to present their research findings. In guiding the interns to perform research projects, the goal is not to produce new research, but rather to give students research experience that includes demonstration in appropriate academic literacy formats. Techniques promoting significant learning (Buxton et.al, 2015; Buxton et. al, 2016) will be used in the development of research exposure activities.
Objective 2. Enable students to develop marketable skills. Throughout the academic year, Fellows will participate in seminars administered by the COE Student Success Center and LASTEM faculty mentors. We plan to offer the following main topics: a) Research Best Practices, b) Reporting Your Research, c) Graduate School Opportunities, d) Communication and Negotiating Skills, and e) Careers in STEM. These seminars will be organized by the faculty and presented to the collective cohort of Fellows. This will encourage discussion and shared experiences among the students.
Objective 3: Foster undergraduates as educators by encouraging them to communicate their knowledge via research posters and service-learning opportunities. The students will be required to develop a poster in consultation with their graduate student mentor that summarizes their research. These posters will be crafted in such a way as to be accessible for non-scientists. This component of nurturing each student’s ability to share their knowledge with others makes this program stand out from other educational programs. In addition to presenting at the Undergraduate Research & Creative Inquiry Showcase, students will have service-learning opportunities at venues such as the DoSeum, San Antonio’s museum for kids, which will focus on facilitating stem literacy among all ages of the general public. These public presentations will greatly contribute to the professional development of the Fellows. This preparation and experience with a live audience will enable public presentation in their homes and communities.