Rationale for Aligning High School Science Courses
Compelling reasons to align science curriculum in Seattle Public Schools
There are many compelling reasons to align science curriculum in Seattle Public Schools.
There is some research to support the district’s decision to align and Education First’s
involvement in helping to implement that decision.
1. There is a need for strong, standards-based, researched-based science instruction in all
schools.
The science a student receives in their high school career should not be an accident of zip
code with students from one area of town getting a broader or deeper experience than
those at another end. There is a moral imperative for SPS to offer career- and collegeready curriculum at all of its campuses.
Also, the science courses a student receives in his/her high school career should also not be
an accident because a particular school has chosen to provide a stronger sequence of
courses or because another school has less strength. Every student deserves a pathway
and sequence of the foundational courses that is most effective, and therefore, that decision
needs to be agreed upon by key stakeholders across the district and broader science
community (teachers, district science education leaders, high level district leaders, science
education PhD university staff, national science education leaders).
2. Research show that many high school graduates are not ready for college or career.
WA Higher Education Coordinating Board January 2007 report
“Helping Students Transition to College English and Science College Readiness”
“Among the 2004 public high school graduates attending Washington’s state universities or
community and technical colleges in their first year after graduation, 42 percent enrolled in
at least one remedial course (English or math, or both). Data is not kept for remedial
courses in science, however, success in university and college level science courses requires
high level high school mathematics achievement.
3. There is research that supports the alignment of standard based curriculum and
increased student achievement.
Research Brief -Aligned Curriculum and Student Achievement -Appalachia
Educational Laboratory (AEL) December 2005
“Research on aligning curriculum with standards and assessments shows a strong
relationship to student achievement (Price-Baugh, 1997; Mitchell, 1998; Wishnick, 1989).
This research digest summarizes the research literature, specifically addressing textbook
alignment, instructional alignment, alignment between state standards and enacted
curriculum, curriculum alignment through professional development, and findings from
international alignment studies.”The studies reported in this review provide strong evidence
from scientifically based research that aligning the various components can have positive
and significant effects.”
4. The College Board recommends that high schools teach fewer and aligned courses and
teach them well rather than having many electives. 2007
1
5. The US in not staying competitive with other countries in science and math. TIMSS Report
Special Analysis 2009 – “In the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2006,
U.S. 15-year-old students' average science literacy score of 489 was lower than the
Organization for Economic Professional Development (OECD) average of 500, and placed
U.S. 15-year-olds in the bottom third of participating OECD nations. Fifteen-year-old
students in 16 of the 29 other participating OECD-member countries outperformed their
U.S. peers in terms of average scores.” See specific research data below.*
6. Resource Allocation - If courses are aligned teachers can use common resources and
there is an economy of scale here. However this advantage of aligned curriculum goes
beyond textbooks and money. However, using resources at a level that maximizes learning
is vital if we are serious about ALL students reaching college and workforce readiness.
Teachers can attend professional development together when they teach to the same
standards and use the same instructional materials. There are no high school science
teachers who do not need professional development. To change student achievement at all
levels and at the high school level, ALL teachers need on-going professional development.
See #6
7. Professional learning communities, the sharing best practices and peer observation and
review all become richer and more valuable with aligned curriculum. Professional learning
communities and other forms of professional development are not effective when teachers
are teaching different lessons and content. The discussion becomes too general and is not
supportive. Teachers can share not only resources, but assessments, labs, equipment,
student work samples.
“Truly aligned curriculum is one of the rare things that can actually make a teacher’s job
easier. I know this from my own experience. Right now I am teaching the same chemistry
course with 2 other teachers. We have different styles and personalities, but we are
stretching ourselves. We share lab prep, getting our homework online, keeping up online
course content for students, assessment creation and our trails and triumphs as we teach a
new curriculum in a whole new way. I enjoy my job more because I have colleagues that I
work with closely.” Kate Kennedy, Education First Consultant, 2010-2011
=========================================================
*The research on the 2006 PISA science assessments, which focused on science, indicate a
need for change in instructional practices in the United States which includes alignment.
(Bybee, Rodger W. and McCrae, Barry J.; PISA SCIENCE 2006: Implictions for Science
Teachers and Teaching, NSTA Press, 2009.) The research is detailed below.
•
Longer and more coherent phases of teaching and learning activities are important
elements of high-quality science teaching. Learning processes and knowledge
construction can lead to a deep understanding of science only when they are given
enough time to do so. Pages 114 - 115
•
Outside of the U.S. in a number of countries, they do fewer types of activities, spend
more time doing less, and do it well and thoroughly. We “cover” many types of
teaching and learning activities, but not in depth. They are covering less in more time
so that the learning is deep.
2
•
Four countries are compared: Canada (534), Czech Republic (513), US (489) and
Slovak Republic (488) Their PISA scores are in parentheses. The OECD average was
500. US is below that average.
The best school systems, though, have created a culture that enables teachers to
learn from each other through collaborative planning, reflection on instruction, and
peer coaching (Barber and Mourshed 2007, p. 28) Page 119 Page 121 – Improving
instructional practice should involve collaborating with one’s colleagues, both to
improve one’s own practice and to complement one another through working as a
team.
•
The most striking observation is that lessons in the US appear to be overloaded with
activities relative to other OECD countries (tested). The information given by students
(on the survey) from the US and the Czech Rep. is consistent with findings of the
TIMSS 1999 Video Study of 8th gr. science lessons. The main feature of a typical Czech
science lesson was “talking about science content” whereas US lessons were
characterized by a “variety of activities.” (Roth et al. 2006)
In addition, the multiple types of activities that occurred in US lessons were found not
to be well connected to the development of science ideas, with at least one-quarter
of the videotaped lessons having little content development.
(Page 120)
•
“high content standards and a core instructional approach” were two common features
of science teaching shared by the higher-achieving countries that participated in the
Video Study. (Roth) (They are using consistent, core instructional approaches as well
as consistent instructional materials and standards. In the US, we have few consistent
instructional strategies but many and not always consistent instructional materials or
standards.)
Windows into High-Achieving Science Classrooms
Students taking the PISA assessment were given a survey. One of the questions asked students what
type of teaching and learning activities (or experiences) they had “in all lessons, in most lessons, in some
lessons, and never or hardly ever.” Page 124
Of the 17 listed, the authors point out 3 that are significantly correlated with high achievement on the
PISA 2006:
a. Students are given opportunities to explain their ideas;
f. Students are asked to draw conclusions from an experiment they have conducted;
g. The teacher explains how a science idea can be applied to a number of different phenomena (e.g.,
the movement of objects, substances with similar properties).
These three key learning experiences can be associated with students becoming, in general, more
scientifically literate, and in particular, more capable of explaining phenomena scientifically:
1. Students are asked to draw conclusions from an experiment they have conducted
2. Students are given opportunities to explain their ideas
3. The teacher explains how a science idea can be applied to a number of different phenomena
3
(Page 128)
Quote from page 129 from How People Learn (points out the Learning Cycle) integrate into a coherent
instructional sequence that can be replicated for optimal student outcomes through the Learning Cycle
The learning cycle provides a systematic way to teach.
Page 129
These studies found that
• Optimum learning of concepts requires all three stages of exploring, explaining, and extending
ideas to new contexts (applying)
• Students learn new concepts better when the explain stage comes after the explore stage; and
• The combination of the explore and the explain stages is more effective for conceptual learning
than using the explore stage alone.
Page 130-131 our recommendation for teachers and educational
authorities is to resist the naïve notion of developing these
sequences from scratch and to seek out comprehensive curriculum
programs that are thoughtfully and intentionally structures by
research-based learning sequences – that is, learning sequences that
encourage students to explore, explain, and apply (in that order).
4