May/June 2017 – Vol. 29 No. 7

A Focus on Practices in the NGSS: What Does It Mean for Your Teaching?

Posted: Tuesday, May 1st, 2012

by Cynthia Passmore

There is a buzz about the Next Generation Science Standards. Many science teachers I speak to look forward with a mix of anticipation and anxiety to the release of new standards. Change can be hard, but for most of us in the science education community, we see that it is necessary to keep our field moving forward. So, what will the future hold and how will the new vision for science education articulated in the Framework and the NGSS play out in real classrooms? For this article I’d like to put forward some thoughts on one strand of the new standards, the “Practices.” Last month in this venue, Peter A’Hearn explained how the new focus on practices is different from the current California investigation and experimentation strand and why this approach is productive (see also Osborne, 2011). My purpose here is not to re-hash that account, but to put forward some ideas about how the focus on practices could actually look in a science classroom.

The new framework lists eight practices that are central to science. These are:

1. Asking questions (for science) and defining problems (for engineering)

2. Developing and using models

3. Planning and carrying out investigations

4. Analyzing and interpreting data

5. Using mathematics and computational thinking

6. Constructing explanations (for science) and designing solutions (for engineering)

7. Engaging in argument from evidence

8. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information

But how might a teacher go from a list like this to a dynamic set of lessons that teach important science content through these practices. What might it look like for students to actually engage in these practices, seamlessly woven together, while learning the big ideas (core ideas and crosscutting concepts in the Framework) in their science classrooms? I suggest that to conceive of the eight practices as a list of discrete things is not a productive way to get from the framework to a coherent vision that can actually guide instruction. So, I propose that we begin a careful consideration of how the practices are inter-related, how they feed and support one another so that we do not fall into the trap of using them like a checklist where one day kids are using data… check; and the next they are developing arguments…check, and on yet another they are using math in science class…check. Rather, I propose that we consider the web of interconnections between and among the different practices.

To get the conversation started I posit that a productive centerpiece is what is identified second in the list, “developing and using models.” In the remainder of this article, I will describe an organizational structure for how the other seven practices relate both to modeling and to each other. In the next installment, I will illustrate the affordances of that view by describing a classroom science context and how the practices play out in the student experience, and in the third installment I will explain the teacher knowledge that will be important to carry this view to fruition.

Over the past 15 years, our team has been working on a view of science as fundamentally about making sense of the world through the practice of modeling. Thus, as I consider the eight practices laid out in the Framework, I see modeling as a central hub around which the other practices can be organized. First an important clarification: The practice of developing and using models (also known as model-based reasoning or model-based inquiry) is about developing sets of ideas that can be used to explain phenomena in the natural world. In science, models take on a particular form depending on the field of study; sometimes they are represented with diagrams or three-dimensional structures and other times they consist of a list of statements and in still other cases the model is represented as a mathematical expression. The form the model takes is less important for our discussion here than the role it plays. It is the set of underlying ideas that is useful for making sense of natural phenomena that constitutes the core of any model.

Given this view of models, then, we can begin to see how the practices of science center on models and modeling. Asking questions in science (practice #1) begins not with some observation of the world that is completely divorced from our prior experiences and understandings, rather, all that we see and notice about the world is filtered through our existing ideas (models) about how the world operates. It is these models that allow us to find anomalies worthy of our attention and that help guide us in exploring, bounding and defining what it is we want to explore and investigate (practice #3) about the world and how we interpret and analyze the data we collect (practice #4). Ultimately the goal of science is to make sense of the world by developing explanations for the phenomena we see and since models mediate how we think and investigate those phenomena, so, too do they provide a basis for the development of explanations (practice #6). Figuring out how the world works is not straightforward and along the way there may be many different lines of reasoning to consider. Attending to these different ideas and determining the fruitful paths to follow requires a careful consideration of different options which is at the heart of argumentation in science (practice #7). Thus, argumentation can occur when we use models to filter phenomena, to craft investigations, to interpret data, and to develop explanations. And finally, mathematics and other information are important tools in the development of models and the communication process is key to the social nature of science (practices 5 & 8).

By considering how the practices in the new framework can be woven together to make the whole cloth of scientific practice, our field can then move to the next step of figuring out how to engage students in these practices in meaningful ways in the classroom. Further, I hope that by suggesting how they come together around modeling, the effort to incorporate explicit experiences with these practices in science classrooms will seem less daunting. Stay tuned for more information about the NGSS and to this column for more thoughts about the practice strand and how a focus on modeling can bring a sense of order to the list.

Cynthia Passmore is associate professor at the UC Davis School of Education.

Written by California Science Teachers Association

California Science Teachers Association

CSTA represents science educators statewide—in every science discipline at every grade level, Kindergarten through University.

3 Responses

  1. In the early 1990’s we had standards that concentrated on the “Big Ideas”. It was a wonderful time to teach science. Then test intensive, factoid memorization standards were developed. The defense of the factoid piles was that the teachers got to deside which piles were essential, relative to the mandated tests.
    If the heart of the new standards is these “eight practices”, unencumbered by fact piles, we could be turning back to a much more enjoyable time to teach science. We will all be able to lend our own strengths to the process.
    If there is still a fact pile, we will have truly gained nothing.

  2. The way that you’ve laid out the interwoven nature of the 8 practices makes me excited for the future of science. I am a linear learner who enjoys a framework on which to learn, as many students are. Yet I love the idea of thinking outside the box and abandoning the “checklist” mentality of the current standards. This will give the students and I the structure we crave, while allowing the freedom to explore and learning in a meaningful way through this exploration. Using the 8 processes to interweave a true understanding of science will be so much more enjoyable than forcing facts onto students.

  3. Well, from my read of the framework, there is still a “fact pile”, but it is a smaller and better pile in my view. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. The focus on integrating the “facts” with practices is potentially powerful, I think.

Leave a Reply


Participate in Chemistry Education Research Study, Earn $500-800 Dollars!

Posted: Tuesday, May 9th, 2017

WestEd, a non-profit educational research agency, has been funded by the US Department of Education to test a new molecular modeling kit, Happy Atoms. Happy Atoms is an interactive chemistry learning experience that consists of a set of physical atoms that connect magnetically to form molecules, and an app that uses image recognition to identify the molecules that you create with the set. WestEd is conducting a study around the effectiveness of using Happy Atoms in the classroom, and we are looking for high school chemistry teachers in California to participate.

As part of the study, teachers will be randomly assigned to either the treatment group (who uses Happy Atoms) or the control group (who uses Happy Atoms at a later date). Teachers in the treatment group will be asked to use the Happy Atoms set in their classrooms for 5 lessons over the course of the fall 2017 semester. Students will complete pre- and post-assessments and surveys around their chemistry content knowledge and beliefs about learning chemistry. WestEd will provide access to all teacher materials, teacher training, and student materials needed to participate.

Participating teachers will receive a stipend of $500-800. You can read more information about the study here:

Please contact Rosanne Luu at or 650.381.6432 if you are interested in participating in this opportunity, or if you have any questions!

Written by California Science Teachers Association

California Science Teachers Association

CSTA represents science educators statewide—in every science discipline at every grade level, Kindergarten through University.

2018 Science Instructional Materials Adoption Reviewer Application

Posted: Monday, May 8th, 2017

The California Department of Education and State Board of Education are now accepting applications for reviewers for the 2018 Science Instructional Materials Adoption. The application deadline is 3:00 pm, July 21, 2017. The application is comprehensive, so don’t wait until the last minute to apply.

On Tuesday, May 9, 2017, State Superintendent Tom Torlakson forwarded this recruitment letter to county and district superintendents and charter school administrators.

Review panel members will evaluate instructional materials for use in kindergarten through grade eight, inclusive, that are aligned with the California Next Generation Science Content Standards for California Public Schools (CA NGSS). Learn More…

Written by California Science Teachers Association

California Science Teachers Association

CSTA represents science educators statewide—in every science discipline at every grade level, Kindergarten through University.

Lessons Learned from the NGSS Early Implementer Districts

Posted: Monday, May 8th, 2017

On March 31, 2017, Achieve released two documents examining some lessons learned from the California K-8 Early Implementation Initiative. The initiative began in August 2014 and was developed by the K-12 Alliance at WestEd, with close collaborative input on its design and objectives from the State Board of Education, the California Department of Education, and Achieve.

Eight (8) traditional school districts and two (2) charter management organizations were selected to participate in the initiative, becoming the first districts in California to implement the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). Those districts included Galt Joint Union Elementary, Kings Canyon Joint Unified, Lakeside Union, Oakland Unified, Palm Springs Unified, San Diego Unified, Tracy Joint Unified, Vista Unified, Aspire, and High Tech High.

To more closely examine some of the early successes and challenges experienced by the Early Implementer LEAs, Achieve interviewed nine of the ten participating districts and compiled that information into two resources, focusing primarily on professional learning and instructional materials. Learn More…

Written by California Science Teachers Association

California Science Teachers Association

CSTA represents science educators statewide—in every science discipline at every grade level, Kindergarten through University.

Using Online Simulations to Support the NGSS in Middle School Classrooms

Posted: Monday, May 8th, 2017

by Lesley Gates, Loren Nikkel, and Kambria Eastham

Middle school teachers in Kings Canyon Unified School District (KCUSD), a CA NGSS K-8 Early Implementation Initiative district, have been diligently working on transitioning to the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) integrated model for middle school. This year, the teachers focused on building their own knowledge of the Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs). They have been gathering and sharing ideas at monthly collaborative meetings as to how to make sure their students are not just learning about science but that they are actually doing science in their classrooms. Students should be planning and carrying out investigations to gather data for analysis in order to construct explanations. This is best done through hands-on lab experiments. Experimental work is such an important part of the learning of science and education research shows that students learn better and retain more when they are active through inquiry, investigation, and application. A Framework for K-12 Science Education (2011) notes, “…learning about science and engineering involves integration of the knowledge of scientific explanations (i.e., content knowledge) and the practices needed to engage in scientific inquiry and engineering design. Thus the framework seeks to illustrate how knowledge and practice must be intertwined in designing learning experiences in K-12 Science Education” (pg. 11).

Many middle school teachers in KCUSD are facing challenges as they begin implementing these student-driven, inquiry-based NGSS science experiences in their classrooms. First, many of the middle school classrooms at our K-8 school sites are not designed as science labs. Learn More…

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by NGSS Early Implementer

NGSS Early Implementer

In 2015 CSTA began to publish a series of articles written by teachers participating in the NGSS Early Implementation Initiative. This article was written by an educator(s) participating in the initiative. CSTA thanks them for their contributions and for sharing their experience with the science teaching community.

Celestial Highlights: May – July 2017

Posted: Monday, May 8th, 2017

May Through July 2017 with Web Resources for the Solar Eclipse of August 21, 2017

by Robert C. Victor. Twilight sky maps by Robert D. Miller. Graphs of planet rising and setting times by Jeffrey L. Hunt.

In spring and summer 2017, Jupiter is the most prominent “star” in the evening sky, and Venus, even brighter, rules the morning. By mid-June, Saturn rises at a convenient evening hour, allowing both giant planets to be viewed well in early evening until Jupiter sinks low in late September. The Moon is always a crescent in its monthly encounters with Venus, but is full whenever it appears near Jupiter or Saturn in the eastern evening sky opposite the Sun. (In 2017, Full Moon is near Jupiter in April, Saturn in June.) At intervals of 27-28 days thereafter, the Moon appears at a progressively earlier phase at each pairing with the outer planet until its final conjunction, with Moon a thin crescent, low in the west at dusk. You’ll see many beautiful events by just following the Moon’s wanderings at dusk and dawn in the three months leading up to the solar eclipse. Learn More…

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by Robert Victor

Robert Victor

Robert C. Victor was Staff Astronomer at Abrams Planetarium, Michigan State University. He is now retired and enjoys providing skywatching opportunities for school children in and around Palm Springs, CA. Robert is a member of CSTA.