Supporting the Framework’s Vision
for Science Education: Next Steps
Helen Quinn, Chair
Heidi Schweingruber, Deputy Director
Board on Science Education
National Research Council
Implementation
Assessment
s
Curricula
Instruction
Teacher
development
Questions to Think About
• What is new about the Framework and NGSS?
• What will need to change in science education
(nationally, state-level, locally) to support the
vision of the Framework and NGSS?
• What are the biggest challenges to making these
changes?
• Where are the best starting points?
The Framework and NGSS:
Quick Refresher
Three Dimensions Intertwined
What is new?
1. Central role of scientific
practices
2. Organized around
crosscutting concepts &
core explanatory ideas
3. Organized in learning
progressions
What is New?
• Reflects science as practiced in the real world –
practices, concepts and ideas intertwined
• Standards are performance expectations – NOT
curriculum
• Ideas build coherently across K-12
• Focus on deeper understanding and application
• Science and engineering are integrated
• Prepare ALL students for college, career and
citizenship
• Aligned with the common core state standards
Major Decision Issues left open
• Middle School sequence
• High school course options and pathways
• For states that only require 2 years of hs science,
what to include in the “minimal” sequence, what
to ignore?
• What pathways keep some AP options open?
Assessment
Some Assessment Challenges
• Developing rich assessment tasks that evaluate the
blending of practices, core ideas, and crosscutting
concepts
• Having the platforms and resources to administer these
kinds of tasks
• Scoring the tasks
• Developing informative, useful reports of test results
• Creating a system of assessment that satisfies different
purposes
NRC Study on Assessment
• The study is conducted under the guidance of the Board
on Testing and Assessment (BOTA)and the Board on
Science Education (BOSE)
• The committee is not developing actual tests or test
blueprints, but will provide advice about best practices.
• Determine what available techniques might be
appropriate and where additional research and
development is required to create an overall assessment
system for science education in K-12.
• Make recommendations about the steps
needed to develop valid, reliable and fair
assessments
Committee
James W. Pellegrino, University of
Illinois at Chicago (co-chair)
Mark R. Wilson, University of
California, Berkeley (co-chair)
Peter McLaren, Rhode Island
Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education
Knut Neumann, Leibniz Institute for
Science and Mathematics
Education
Kathleen Scalise, University of Oregon
Richard Lehrer, Peabody College of
Vanderbilt University
William Penuel, University of
Colorado at Boulder
Brian Reiser, Northwestern University
Nancy Butler Songer, University of
Michigan
Richard M. Amasino, University of
Wisconsin, Madison (life sciences)
Helen R. Quinn, Stanford University
(physics)
Roberta Tanner, Loveland High
School, CO (engineering)
Edward Haertel, Stanford University
Joan Herman, CRESST
Scott F. Marion, National Center for
the Improvement of Education
Assessment
Jerome M. Shaw, University of
California, Santa Cruz
Catherine J. Welch, University of Iowa
A key aspect of the process is that the
Committee’s deliberations and recommendations
are confidential until the report has gone through
review, is finalized, and is published.
Teacher Development
Challenges for Professional Development
• Practices may be unfamiliar to teachers
• Knowledge of crosscutting concepts and some
core ideas may be incomplete for some teachers
• Thinking about learning progressions within and
across grades
• Some teachers will need to make major changes
in instructional approach
• Making connections across disciplines
and to mathematics and ELA
• Others……
NRC Study on Science Teachers’ Learning
• The committee will identify teachers’ learning needs and
current opportunities for learning
• Considering the demands posed by the NGSS, the
committee will develop guidance for providing
opportunities to support teachers’ learning
• The study is conducted under the
guidance of Board on Science
Education (BOSE) and the NRC’s
Teacher Advisory Council
• The study is funded by the Merck
Corporation Foundation.
Charge to the Committee
• identify learning needs for teachers throughout their
careers and how these needs might differ depending on
school level (elementary, middle and high school).
• characterize the current state of the learning opportunities
and support for learning for teachers.
• consider how school and district contexts shape teachers’
learning opportunities and limit or promote teachers’
efforts to implement new classroom practices.
• develop guidance for schools and districts for how best to
support teachers’ learning and how to implement
successful programs for professional development
• develop a research agenda for future work on professional
development continuums in science.
Committee Members’ Primary Areas of
Expertise
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Research on professional development and induction
Professional development provider
Science education
Diverse learners and implications for teachers
The context of teachers’ work
School or district leadership, organization, and culture
Education policy as it relates to teachers
Classroom teaching
Committee
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Suzanne Wilson (Chair), Michigan
State University, East Lansing, MI
Betsy Davis, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor Michigan
Zoe Evans, Central Middle School,
Carrollton, GA
Adam Gamoran, University of
Wisconsin, Madison, WI
Kris Gutiérrez, University of
Colorado, Boulder, CO
Paula Hooper, Institute for Inquiry
at the Exploratorium, San
Francisco, CA
Judith Warren Little, University of
California, Berkeley, CA
Julie Luft, University of Georgia,
Athens, GA
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Barbara Miller, Education Development
Center, Waltham, MA
Kathleen Roth, Biological Sciences
Curriculum Study, Colorado Springs, CO
Irwin Shapiro, Harvard-Smithsonian
Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA
Patrick Shields, SRI International, Menlo
Park, CA
Warren Simmons, Brown University,
Providence, RI
Mark Windschitl, University of
Washington, Seattle, WA
James Wyckoff, University of Virginia,
Charlottesville, VA
Carla Zembal-Saul, Pennsylvania State
University
Timeline
• October 30-31, 2012: Committee Meeting, Washington DC
• February 6-8, 2013: Committee Meeting, Washington DC
• May 15-16, 2013: Committee Meeting, Irvine, CA
• September 12-13, 2013: Public Workshop and Committee
Meeting, Washington DC
• January 30-31, 2014: Committee Meeting, Washington DC (no
public sessions)
Again, the committee’s deliberations and
recommendations are confidential until the report
has gone through review, is finalized, and is
published.
So……..
Curriculum & Instruction
Curriculum and Instruction
• Not separate treatment of
“content” and “inquiry”
(No “Chapter 1”)
• Curriculum and instruction
needs to do more than
present and assess
scientific ideas – they need
to involve learners in using
scientific practices to
develop and apply the
scientific ideas.
Standards are not Curriculum
• Need for coherent development of ideas over
time -- not disconnected lessons
• Need for multiple experiences with each practice
Argues for some very thoughtful work to develop
and sequence curriculum units of study
(with embedded formative assessment
opportunities)
Curriculum and Instruction
• Organize curriculum materials around limited number of
core ideas: depth and coherence, not breadth of coverage.
• Core ideas should be revisited in increasing depth, and
sophistication across years. Focus on connections:
– help learners build sophisticated ideas from simpler explanations,
using evidence.
– Use cross-cutting concepts to make connections between scientific
disciplines
• Curriculum materials should involve learners in practices
that develop, use, and refine the scientific ideas, not
“explain” the science for students.
Creating a Scientific Community in the
Classroom
• Students carry out investigations,
interpret data, discuss findings,
create representations and models,
argue based on evidence, present at
monthly conferences….
Some Challenges for Curriculum and
Instruction
• Build coherently in a given grade and across
grades
• Provide time for students to engage in the
practices and explore ideas in depth
• Provide support for students to become
proficient with the practices
• Create opportunities for students to interact with
each other in productive ways
• How to integrate engineering
• How to support and include Language Learners
BOSE Workshop on Literacy and Science
Practices
(coming soon)
Coordinating Common Core “Literacy in Science”
With
NGSS literacy and language requirements
Eg “Obtain, evaluate and communicate
information”
What do science teachers need to know about
language ?
What do language arts teachers need to know
about science communication genres?
Science and Language Learning
ell.stanford.edu
• In the science classroom every student is learning
new language
• Attention to and support for language learning
and language challenges in science benefits all
• Practices are discourse rich
• Inclusive classroom science discourse
a language learning opportunity
a classroom culture shift
Information about BOSE & BOSE projects:
http://nas.edu/BOSE
Access to all NRC publications:
www.nap.edu
Free PDF version of A Framework for K-12
Science Education is available at:
http://tinyurl.com/ScienceFramework
http://tinyurl.com/ScienceBrief (report brief)