Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Beyond the talking groundhogs: Trends in science trade books

  • Published:
Journal of Elementary Science Education

Abstract

Resources for selecting high-quality elementary science trade books include lists exclusively for science and those that contain a broad spectrum of content foci such as the IRA’sTeachers’ Choices list. In this study, the genres and content areas of science-basedTeachers’ Choices books from the list’s inception in 1988 through 2004 were analyzed for trends. Based on our analysis, the storybook genre has decreased while informational books, particularly those classified as non-narrative informational books (Donovan & Smolkin, 2002), showed marked increases. Life science was the most prevalent content area. The implications of this increase in informational books are discussed in terms of integrating science and literacy.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Akerson, V. L. (2001). Teaching science when your principal says, “Teach language arts.”Science & Children, 38(7), 42–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Flick, L. B., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of primary children’s ideas in science on teaching practice.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 363–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Institute of Physics. (2007).Science Writing Award winners: Children. Retrieved March 17, 2008, from www.aip.org/aip/writing/winchild.html.

  • Bamford, R. A., Kristo, J. V., & Lyon, A. (2002). Facing facts: Nonfiction in the primary classroom.The New England Reading Association Journal, 38(2), 8–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bash, B. (1990).Urban roosts: Where birds nest in the city. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broemmel, A. D., & Rearden, K. T. (2006). Should teachers use theTeachers’ Choices books in science classes?The Reading Teacher, 60, 254–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butzow, C. M., & Butzow, J. W. (2000). Science through children’s literature: An integrated approach (2nd ed.). Englewood, CO: Teacher Ideas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carle, E. (1987).A house for hermit crab. New York: Simon and Schuster Books for Young Readers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casteel, C. P., & Isom, B. A. (1994). Reciprocal processes in science and literacy learning.The Reading Teacher, 47, 538–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherry, L. (1990).The great kapok tree: A tale of the Amazon rain forest. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherry, L. (1992).A river ran wild: An environmental history. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherry, L. (2003).How groundhog’s garden grew. New York: Blue Sky Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie, F. (1987). Genres as choice. In I. Reid (Ed.),The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp. 22–34). Geelong, Australia: Deekin University, Centre for Studies in Literacy Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, J. (1989).The magic school bus: Inside the human body. New York: Scholastic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cone, M. (1992).Come back, salmon: How a group of dedicated kids adopted Pigeon Creek and brought it back to life. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books for Children.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowther, D. T., Venable, C., & Barman, C. (2005). Making “the list”.Science & Children, 42(6), 43–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, C. A., & Smolkin, L. B. (2002). Considering genre, content, and visual features in the selection of trade books for science instruction.The Reading Teacher, 55, 502–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douville, P., Pugalee, D. K., & Wallace, J. D. (2003). Examining instructional practices of elementary science teachers for mathematics and literacy integration.School Science and Mathematics, 103, 388–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K. (2000). 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. (2004). The case for informational text.Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, N. K., Bennett-Armistead, S., & Roberts, E. M. (2003). Filling the great void: Why we should bring nonfiction into the early-grade classroom.American Educator, 27(1), 30–34, 46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elley, W. B. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories.Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 174–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. J. (2004). Scaffolding preservice teachers’ evaluation of children’s science literature: Attention to science-focused genres and use.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15, 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. J. (2006). Representations of science within children’s trade books.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 214–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galda, L., Ash, G. E., & Cullinan, B. E. (2001, April) Research on children’s literature.Reading Online,4(9). Retrieved March 17, 2008, from www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp? HREF=/articles/handbook/galda/ index.html.

  • Hand, B., & Yore, L. D. (1999). A writing in science framework designed to enhance science literacy.International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1021–1035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, E. H., & Fisher, C. W. (1990). Whole language: Three themes for the future.Educational Leadership, 47(6), 62–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Reading Association (IRA). (2003).Teachers’ Choices for 2003.The Reading Teacher, 57, 271–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • IRA. (2005). Teachers’ Choicesfact sheet. Retrieved March 17, 2008, from www.reading.org/resources/tools/choices_teachers.html.

  • Jordan, M., & Jordan, T. (1996).Amazon alphabet. Helena, MT: Kingfisher Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasten, W. C., Kristo, J. V., & McClure, A. A. (2005).Living literature: Using children’s literature to support reading and language arts. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G. (1994).Learning to write (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lake, J. (1993).Imagine: A literature-based approach to science. Bothell, WA: Wright Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leal, D. J. (1992). The nature of talk about three types of text during peer group discussions.Journal of Reading Behavior, 24, 313–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (1994, November).Genre as a strategic resource. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council of Teachers of English, Orlando, FL.

  • Lundstrum, M. (2005). Link science and literacy.Instructor, 114(6), 25–26, 28, 60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, D. A. (1995). How can we best use children’s literature in teaching science concepts?Science & Children, 32(6), 16–19, 43.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClure, A. A., & Zitlow, C. S. (1991). Not just the facts: Aesthetic response in elementary content area studies.Language Arts, 68, 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, L. M., Pressley, M., Smith, J. K., & Smith, M. (1997). The effect of a literature-based program integrated into literacy and science instruction with children from diverse backgrounds.Reading Research Quarterly, 32, 54–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (1996).National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2007).Outstanding science trade books for students K-12. Retrieved March 17, 2008, from www.nsta.org/ostbc.

  • Ouzts, D. T., Taylor, M. K., & Taylor, L. A. (2003). A learner-centered curriculum based on award-winning literature.Education, 124(1), 76–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pappas, C. C. (1991). Fostering full access to literacy by including information books.Language Arts, 68, 449–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pappas, C. C. (2006). The information book genre: Its role in integrated science literacy research and practice.Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 226–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascoe, E. (1999).Slime, molds, and fungi. Woodbridge, CT: Blackbirch Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polacco, P. (1990).Thunder cake. New York: Philomel Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pottle, J. L. (1996). Using trade books to make connections across the curriculum.Clearing House, 70(1), 52–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prelutsky, J. (1997).The beauty of the beast: Poems from the animal kingdom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, D. C. (2002). Using trade books in teaching elementary science: Fact and fallacies.The Reading Teacher, 55, 552–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, D. C., Dudley, A. P., & Williams, C. S. (2001). How do you choose science trade books?Science & Children, 38(6), 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saul, E. W. (Ed.). (2004).Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schanzer, R. (2003).How Ben Franklin stole the lightning. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, S. (1993).Autumn across America. New York: Hyperion Books for Children.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. H., & Trexler, C. J. (2006). A university-school partnership model: Providing stakeholders with benefits to enhance science literacy.Action in Teacher Education, 27(4), 23–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudol, P., & King, C. M. (1996). A checklist for choosing non-fiction trade books.The Reading Teacher, 49, 422–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkmann, M. J., Abell, S. K., & Zgagacz, M. (2005). Physics to preservice teachers: Orientations of the professor, teaching assistant, and students.Science Education, 89, 847–869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001).Language and literacy in science education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wick, W. (1997).A drop of water. New York: Scholastic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yerrick, R. K., & Roth, W. M. (Eds.). (2005).Establishing scientific classroom discourse communities: Multiple voices of teaching and learning research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L., & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research.International Journal of Science Education, 25, 689–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Tennessee, 512 Bailey Education Complex, 37996-3442, Knoxville, TN

    Kristin T. Rearden & Amy D. Broemmel

Authors
  1. Kristin T. Rearden
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amy D. Broemmel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristin T. Rearden.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rearden, K.T., Broemmel, A.D. Beyond the talking groundhogs: Trends in science trade books. J Elem Sci Edu 20, 39–49 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173669

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173669

Keywords