March/April 2017 – Vol. 29 No. 6

Considerations for Equitable NGSS High School Curriculum Implementation

Posted: Monday, February 8th, 2016

by Jenna Porter & Rich Hedman

Over the next few years, school districts throughout California will need to decide which curriculum course model to adopt for high school science.  Unlike middle school, for which there are two relatively straightforward course models (preferred integrated and alternative discipline specific), high schools will have more than 4 distinct course model options (see Table 1).  Which model would be best for high schools in your district?  To assist you in answering that question, we offer some resources and points to consider, and make a recommendation for providing equitable opportunities for all students to access the new science curriculum.

While the draft California Science Framework seems to show preference for high school course models A and B (by fully describing these models in Chapter 7), and to some extent course model C (described in the Appendix), California Ed Code allows local education agencies to make these curricular decisions. Therefore, other options exist, such as model D, described in Appendix K of NGSS, and model E, a customized model based on the NGSS documents.

Table 1.  Summary of High School Course Model Options

Porter_Hedman_Table1

Click table to view larger image.

Notes:

  • All courses in each model embed Engineering, Technology, and Application of Science standards
  • The sequence of courses in each model is not mandated

In order to reach a consensus recommendation as to the best course model for your school district, we suggest that districts gather interested teachers and administrators, facilitated by knowledgeable local science education organizations (CSTA, California Science Project, K-12 Alliance, etc.) to critically analyze these different course models.  This decision-making group should also carefully consider the various implications, benefits, and restrictions of each. Some important factors to consider in choosing a course model are outlined in NGSS Appendix K.

-Advertisement-

-Advertisement-

We feel the most important factor to consider is, “All standards, All students”; one of the explicit goals of NGSS. Each of the course models meets the requirement “All standards.”  However, whether or not any given course model meets the “All students” requirement depends on other district policies, such as the minimum high school graduation requirement for science. If the district has a 2-year science graduation requirement (the minimum mandated by CA ed code), then none of the course models described above would meet the NGSS goal of “All standards, All students.”  Each course model requires a minimum of 3 years of science, while model B requires 4 years of science. Thus, the science course graduation policy limits each of the models in terms of allowing students to opt out (or be tracked out) of third or fourth year courses. This policy misalignment contributes to inequitable opportunities for some students to learn, and perpetuates existing achievement gaps in science for underserved populations. A recently published Policy Brief addresses these issues, and explicitly identifies benefits and limitations for implementing course models A, B, and C (above), as well as highlights the need for consistent curriculum, policy, and practice so that equity in science education can be reached.

To achieve the NGSS goal of “All standards, All students,” we highly recommend that California school districts adopt a 3-year science graduation requirement.  If the NGSS are intended to improve science education and prepare all students for college and career, it cannot be done effectively or equitably if only two years of science are required for high school graduation. The adoption of NGSS has the potential to transform science education. But the effective implementation of NGSS will depend on how well school districts address factors specifically related to providing equitable opportunities for All students to learn science. These must be considered before curriculum decisions for course models can be made. We are hopeful that you become knowledgeable about the implications each of these course models hold for students, and that you actively engage in the development and implementation of equitable course models for your school district.

Rich Hedman is the Director of the Center for Math and Science Education (MASE), CSU Sacramento. Jenna Porter is an Assistant Professor at CSU Sacramento; College of Education: Teaching Credentials.

Written by Guest Contributor

From time to time CSTA receives contributions from guest contributors. The opinions and views expressed by these contributors are not necessarily those of CSTA. By publishing these articles CSTA does not make any endorsements or statements of support of the author or their contribution, either explicit or implicit. All links to outside sources are subject to CSTA’s Disclaimer Policy: http://www.classroomscience.org/disclaimer.

One Response

  1. Thanks for taking the time to writing this. It is quite the topic of conversation on the Facebook page – California High School Science Teachers.

Leave a Reply

LATEST POST

California Science Curriculum Framework Now Available

Posted: Tuesday, March 14th, 2017

The pre-publication version of the new California Science Curriculum Framework is now available for download. This publication incorporates all the edits that were approved by the State Board of Education in November 2016 and was many months in the making. Our sincere thanks to the dozens of CSTA members were involved in its development. Our appreciation is also extended to the California Department of Education, the State Board of Education, the Instructional Quality Commission, and the Science Curriculum Framework and Evaluation Criteria Committee and their staff for their hard work and dedication to produce this document and for their commitment to the public input process. To the many writers and contributors to the Framework CSTA thanks you for your many hours of work to produce a world-class document.

For tips on how to approach this document see our article from December 2016: California Has Adopted a New Science Curriculum Framework – Now What …? If you would like to learn more about the Framework, consider participating in one of the Framework Launch events (a.k.a. Rollout #4) scheduled throughout 2017.

The final publication version (formatted for printing) will be available in July 2017. This document will not be available in printed format, only electronically.

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.

Call for CSTA Awards Nominations

Posted: Monday, March 13th, 2017

The 2017 Award Season is now open! One of the benefits of being a CSTA member is your eligibility for awards as well as your eligibility to nominate someone for an award. CSTA offers several awards and members may nominate individuals and organizations for the Future Science Teacher Award, the prestigious Margaret Nicholson Distinguished Service Award, and the CSTA Distinguished Contributions Award (organizational award). May 9, 2017 is the deadline for nominations for these awards. CSTA believes that the importance of science education cannot be overstated. Given the essential presence of the sciences in understanding the past and planning for the future, science education remains, and will increasingly be one of the most important disciplines in education. CSTA is committed to recognizing and encouraging excellence in science teaching through the presentation of awards to science educators and organizations who have made outstanding contributions in science education in the state and who are poised to continue the momentum of providing high quality, relevant science education into the future. 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.

Call for Volunteers – CSTA Committees

Posted: Monday, March 13th, 2017

Volunteer

CSTA is now accepting applications from regular, preservice, and retired members to serve on our volunteer committees! CSTA’s all-volunteer board of directors invites you to consider maximizing your member experience by volunteering for CSTA. CSTA committee service offers you the opportunity to share your expertise, learn a new skill, or do something you love to do but never have the opportunity to do in your regular day. CSTA committee volunteers do some pretty amazing things: 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.

A Friend in CA Science Education Now at CSTA Region 1 Science Center

Posted: Monday, March 13th, 2017

by Marian Murphy-Shaw

If you attended an NGSS Rollout phase 1-3 or CDE workshops at CSTA’s annual conference you may recall hearing from Chris Breazeale when he was working with the CDE. Chris has relocated professionally, with his passion for science education, and is now the Executive Director at the Explorit Science Center, a hands-on exploration museum featuring interactive STEM exhibits located at the beautiful Mace Ranch, 3141 5th St. in Davis, CA. Visitors can “think it, try it, and explorit” with a variety of displays that allow visitors to “do science.” To preview the museum, or schedule a classroom visit, see www.explorit.org. Learn More…

Written by Marian Murphy-Shaw

Marian Murphy-Shaw

Marian Murphy-Shaw is the student services director at Siskiyou County Office of Education and is CSTA’s Region 1 Director and chair of CSTA’s Policy Committee.

Learning to Teach in 3D

Posted: Monday, March 13th, 2017

by Joseph Calmer

Probably like you, NGSS has been at the forefront of many department meetings, lunch conversations, and solitary lesson planning sessions. Despite reading the original NRC Framework, the Ca Draft Frameworks, and many CSTA writings, I am still left with the question: “what does it actually mean for my classroom?”

I had an eye-opening experience that helped me with that question. It came out of a conversation that I had with a student teacher. It turns out that I’ve found the secret to learning how to teach with NGSS: I need to engage in dialogue about teaching with novice teachers. I’ve had the pleasure of teaching science in some capacity for 12 years. During that time pedagogy and student learning become sort of a “hidden curriculum.” It is difficult to plan a lesson for the hidden curriculum; the best way is to just have two or more professionals talk and see what emerges. I was surprised it took me so long to realize this epiphany. Learn More…

Written by Guest Contributor

From time to time CSTA receives contributions from guest contributors. The opinions and views expressed by these contributors are not necessarily those of CSTA. By publishing these articles CSTA does not make any endorsements or statements of support of the author or their contribution, either explicit or implicit. All links to outside sources are subject to CSTA’s Disclaimer Policy: http://www.classroomscience.org/disclaimer.