We shall structure this rejoinder around two main sections. In the first, we address three underlying assumptions of our work that Osborne has identified. We indicate points of agreement, disagreement, and clarification. In the second section, we discuss briefly and add our clarifications to three understandings of his that Osborne introduces into the discussion. It should be noted that Osborne's response is grounded in the same basic assumption as our set of papers, namely, the central role played by reading and writing, and communicative activities in general, both in science and in learning science.