Scientific literacy has been at the forefront of science education reform for the past 20 years, particularly for students from culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) backgrounds (Lee et. al., 2005; Pearson, Moje & Greenleaf, 2010). The ability to extract meaning from text is an important skill. Yet many students struggle with effectively comprehending what they read, particularly in content areas of science, math and history. According to the National Assessment Educational Progress (NAEP, 2013) report, adolescents are not acquiring advanced literacy skills needed to succeed in the workplace and academic setting. Literacy experts have called for the use of disciplinary literacy approaches to engage learners with the content in ways that mirror what scientists, historians and mathematicians do to gain understanding in their disciplines (Moje, 2006; Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008). Although disciplinary literacy instruction is promising, there is limited empirical research on the effectiveness of discipline-specific literacy approaches. The present study examined the effects of a metalinguistic approach on the comprehension of science text among African American 5 and 6th grade students. The focus of the instructional protocol was to explicitly teach adverbial clauses and assist students to unpack adverbial clauses through the use of a graphic organizer. The process of unpacking complex sentences aimed to facilitate comprehension of science text by engaging the participants in analysis and discussion of the meaning obtained from the adverbial clauses. This study employed an experimental single-case multiple-probe across participants design. Visual Analysis (VA) and the Improvement Rate Difference (IRD) were used to analyze the data. The results of VA and IRD indicated that all participants demonstrated progress between baseline and treatment phases. Overall, the results of the investigation suggest that it is possible for 5th and 6th grade African American students to benefit from instruction that closely analyzes language. Clinical implications and future research directions are discussed.

Recent data indicate that less than 50% of American secondary students are able to demonstrate grade-level proficiency in reading, writing, and science (National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES], 2007, 2011, 2012a, 2012b). Secondary students* are expected to develop advanced literacy skills, especially in writing, in order to be ready for college and careers. Students are expected to develop these advanced literacy skills, within all academic subjects. In other words, they are expected to develop disciplinary literacy skills. The statistics are alarming overall, but they are particularly alarming in the area of science. Students need strong literacy skills, including written expression, to be prepared for employment opportunities in science fields, which currently are being filled by graduates of other industrialized nations, who have a more advanced skill set. This loss of occupational opportunity poses a threat for the U.S. to remain globally competitive in science innovation and advancement, which ultimately secures economic prosperity. Despite these staggering concerns, there is little research conducted to evaluate effective instructional methods to develop complex writing skills in academic disciplines such as science. To address this critical issue, the present study examined the effects of a metalinguistic approach to the writing intervention of sentence combining with eighth-grade students who struggle with literacy. The researcher conducted the study in a typical science classroom in an urban American school setting. The focus of the intervention was to increase students* metalinguistic awareness of science text, to improve written sentence complexity in science, as well as the written expression and determination of comparison and contrast of science content. The study employed a quasi-experimental design. The participants consisted of an experimental group (two classes) who received the treatment during typical science instruction and a comparison group (three classes) who did not receive treatment, but participated in their typical science instruction. There were four participating teachers and 84 participating students. The researcher conducted the study over a period of seven weeks within regularly scheduled science classes. Twenty intervention sessions were conducted for a length of 20 minutes each, totaling 400 minutes or 6.6 hours. Hierarchical repeated measures ANOVA and hierarchical repeated measures MANOVA analyses revealed that the experimental group performed significantly better than the comparison group on their ability to determine similarities and differences (compare and contrast) related to science content, with a medium effect. The experimental group achieved a slightly higher marginal mean over the comparison group on their ability to combine sentences, with a small effect. Multiple statistical analyses revealed a trend of higher marginal means in favor of the experimental group over the comparison group on several measures of written sentence complexity on both the science compare and contrast writing prompt (small-medium effect) and the science expository essay (medium to large effect). One experimental class also demonstrated higher scores in their overall sentence correctness on science expository essay as compared to all the other classes. These findings suggest that sentence combining, utilizing a metalinguistic approach, may hold promise as an effective writing intervention in a content area classroom, for secondary students who struggle with literacy. Furthermore, the findings suggest that a metalinguistic approach to sentence combining can be successfully embedded within a content area class, which may result in increased concept knowledge and writing skills in that academic discipline. Implications for practice and future research directions are discussed.