Education Week - May 15, 2013 - 13

EDUCATION WEEK

COAST TO COAST
The 26 lead state
partners in developing
the Next Generation
Science Standards have
agreed to consider
adopting them.

WA
ND

MT
OR

MN
WI

SD
WY

CA
AZ

SOURCE: Achieve

NY
MI

Lead State Partner

PA
OH
WV

VA
NC

CT
NJ
DE
MD
DC

NH
MA
RI

AR
MS AL

LA
FL

AK
HI

most significant change, and challenge, in classrooms.
“That’s the biggest take-away
for my teachers, ... that their instruction will change drastically,”
said Diane E. Sanna, the director
of curriculum and instruction for
the 1,900-student Tiverton district
in Rhode Island, where educators
have been receiving professional
development focused mainly on
the nrc framework. “A lot of it has
to do with the practices.”
Mr. Pruitt of Achieve said the
standards also demand deeper
knowledge of core concepts, even
though they cover less ground.
“There is going to be a much
greater level of content knowledge
needed here from both the teachers and the students,” he said.
“The reason for that is how they
use the knowledge. ... Constructing
an explanation is not just saying
mitosis has four phases.”

Defining ‘Quality’
In the elementary grades, the
task may be especially tough. Most
teachers lack significant background in science and don’t spend
much time teaching the subject.
“The challenge for elementary
schools is probably the most overwhelming because [the federal
No Child Left Behind Act] has
marginalized science and social
studies and everything else that
used to be in the elementary curriculum,” said Suzanne M. Wilson,
a professor of teacher education at
Michigan State University.
Just one-fifth of K-3 educators
teach science every day, a recent
national survey found. And more
than half of elementary teachers
said they did not feel “very well
prepared” to teach the subject.
Writing last month for the journal Science, Ms. Wilson argued
that helping teachers acquire the
“knowledge, skill, and will” to meet
the standards is a “daunting enterprise requiring large-scale professional development.”
The professional-development
landscape is a “smorgasboard of
opportunities” in which quality
varies greatly, she said in an interview. “The average teacher in the
average American school doesn’t
have access to those really highquality learning opportunities.”
Even the best training may come
to naught, she added, if the school
culture doesn’t nurture it.
Designing curriculum and instructional materials that fit the

letter and spirit of the standards,
especially the integration of the
core ideas, practices, and crosscutting concepts, poses another
major challenge.
“What we tell people is, if you
go to any of the vendors who say,
‘This is ngss-ready,’ stay far away
from them, or laugh at them.
There’s no way that could be [true
yet],” said Mr. McLaren from the
science-supervisors council, who
also is a science and technology
specialist at the Rhode Island
education department. “It’s not as
simple as taking a text editor and
just putting in the practices and
handing it back.”
The n s ta and Achieve are
working with states on a tool to
gauge the alignment of instructional units.
“What this rubric was born out
of was the idea of building a better consumer,” said Mr. Pruitt,
with the emphasis on identifying
a common definition of quality.
“It’s very focused on instructional
units. This is not for textbook
evaluation or daily lessons.”
Analysts say one big adjustment for textbook publishers
will be whittling down the huge
amount of material typically covered to reflect the standards’ call
for greater focus on a smaller
number of concepts. Meanwhile,
the science kits popular at the
elementary level will also need
to be redesigned to match the
standards.
Although publishers don’t
necessarily need to start from
scratch, several experts said,
they do need to make substantial changes to their offerings
and not simply tinker around
the edges.
An appendix to the standards
drives home the need for “focus”
on fewer concepts in depth, as
well as “coherence” in the curriculum.
“What this means to teachers
and curriculum developers is the
same ideas or details are not covered each year,” it says. “Rather, a
progression of knowledge occurs
from grade band to grade band
that gives students the opportunity to learn complex material.”
The nrc framework itself has
a chapter on implementation. In
addressing curriculum matters,
it says that “the adoption of [the]
standards by multiple states may
help drive publishers to align
with it. Such alignment may at
first be superficial, but schools,

districts, and states can influence
publishers if enough of them are
asking for serious alignment.”
Assessment is another looming
issue of concern.
A 17-member nrc panel of experts is working on a conceptual
framework for science exams and
recommendations for developing
“valid, reliable, and fair assessments.” It will not, however, develop any test items.
“[M]uch of what is needed to
effectively assess science learning [in line with the ngss], either
at the classroom level, or for purposes of system monitoring, has
yet to be created, ... and the design
and implementation challenges
are substantial,” writes James W.
Pellegrino, the co-chairman of that
nrc panel and a professor of the
learning sciences at the University
of Illinois at Chicago, in an article

MAY 15, 2013

last month in Science.
At the same time, he identifies some “promising cases from
which to learn and build,” including a recently redesigned National Assessment of Educational
Progress in science, the Program
for International Student Assessment, or pisa , and revised
Advanced Placement courses and
exams in biology, chemistry, and
physics.
Mr. Pellegrino cautions against
moving too quickly. When “done
poorly,” assessment “sends the
wrong signals and skews teaching and learning,” he said. “Our
greatest danger may be a rush
to turn the ngss into sets of assessment tasks for use on highstakes state accountability tests.”
As for other capacity issues,
such as whether technology or
science laboratory equipment
is adequate, state officials and
some experts said that while
they are valuable tools in the
service of the standards, special
investments won’t necessarily be
required. Mr. Kracjik of Michigan State said the standards are
“neutral” on such matters. That
said, the standards may raise
questions about uneven access to
such resources.
What could hinder movement,
of course, is the political landscape. The science standards
have been subjected to some
sharp criticism, particularly on
the handling of the politically
sensitive issue of climate change.
And the whole concept of common standards has drawn fire
from some quarters. Supporters
of the common-core standards

www.edweek.org

are defending them against a
backlash in several states. (See
related story, Page 1.)
None of the lead states in developing the standards had
adopted them as of last week,
though all have pledged to seriously consider doing so. Some are
expected to adopt the standards
this year, and a number of nonlead states may well follow suit.

‘Reboot Opportunity’
The message to move slowly
on implementation of the science
standards seems to be resonating
with state officials.
“Some people are still of the
mindset of flipping a light switch,”
said Matt D. Krehbiel, a science
education consultant for the Kansas education department. “I’ve
cautioned, this is an opportunity to
think carefully about your system
of science education in your district
and what needs to be revised, a
three- to four-year implementation
plan to do this slowly and carefully.”
“A new standards adoption,” he
said, “is like a reboot opportunity.”
Mr. McLaren also cites the
light-switch metaphor to explain
how states and districts should
proceed.
“I don’t think of a light switch,”
he said. “I think of a dimmer. The
lights will come up slowly, become
brighter and brighter.”
Coverage of science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics
education is supported by a grant
from the Noyce Foundation, at
www.noycefdn.org.

CROSS-CUTTING
CONCEPTS
PRACTICES
Behaviors that scientists engage in as they
investigate and build models and theories
about the natural world, as well as practices
that engineers use to design and build models
and systems..

Concepts that apply across all
domains of science and are a
way of linking them together. The
seven concepts include energy
and matter; scale, proportion, and
quantity; and cause and effect.

THREE-DIMENSIONAL
The Next Generation Science
Standards are built on three
dimensions of science education
that are woven together in each
standard: science and engineering
practices, cross-cutting concepts, and
disciplinary core ideas.
SOURCE: Next Generation Science Standards

CORE IDEAS
These ideas—such as energy,
biological evolution, and
earth’s systems—cover the
four domains of the physical
sciences; life sciences; earth
and space sciences; and
engineering, technology, and
applications of science.

NEXT ISSUE: Even before the common

science standards were finalized last
month, groups of educators scattered
around the country began engaging in
professional-development activities to
get a leg up on understanding the shifts
envisioned for science education.

http://www.edweek.org http://www.noycefdn.org

Education Week - May 15, 2013

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Education Week - May 15, 2013