January/February 2018 – Vol. 31 No. 2

Science-Related Legislation Introduced As New Session Gets Underway

Posted: Tuesday, March 1st, 2011

by Christine Bertrand

The legislative session has just gotten underway, but a few bills of real interest to us have been introduced.  Most salient:

SB 300 (Hancock) is a CSTA-sponsored bill that requires the review and revision of the science (and history-social science) content standards.  The bill would establish an Academic Content Standards Commission for Science and History-Social Science to develop internationally benchmarked standards, to present the standards to the State Board of Education by January 1, 2013, and for the board to either adopt or reject them by June 30, 2013.

CSTA had been approached by Senator Hancock’s office to suggest legislation that we would find most helpful, and she agreed to introduce this on our behalf.  We have supported many efforts in years past to require the science standards to be reviewed and revised, but they had been vetoed by then-Governor Schwarzenegger.  We are hopeful that, with a new governor and a new state schools superintendent (who is a former science teacher), we may actually get this attempt signed into law.

In a perfect world, we probably would not want another standards commission to be charged with developing the new standards—memories of the first commission’s work 13 years ago are still vivid and still painful—but, in the hope of getting this bill passed and signed, we thought we should conform to the language and process that was used when the English language arts and math standards were revised last year.

SB 282 (Wyland) would require the Sate Superintendent of Public Instruction and State Board of Education to consider ways to increase the number of students who go to college and graduate with degrees in scientific and engineering fields and would require the superintendent and state board to direct the “appropriate entity” to revise the science frameworks and standards and to include in the science curriculum applied mathematics, reading comprehension, expository writing, analytical, intellectual, and creative skills, and engineering elements.

SB 140 (Lowenthal) would require the Dept. of Education to develop a list before July 1, 2012 of supplemental instructional materials aligned with the common core standards in language arts and math, but also permits local district governing boards to adopt instructional materials other than those adopted by the state board if the local board determines that other materials are aligned with the common core standards and meet the needs of the students in the district (emphasis added). This last provision would be a tremendous assist to districts that feel constrained by the small number and narrow focus of materials on the state adoption lists.

AB 250 (Brownley) is titled “The Curriculum Support and Reform Act of 2011″ and contains a number of elements meant to, well, reform the standards/frameworks/instructional materials processes.  The bill would require that 1) instructional materials for math be submitted for adoption in 2014 and for English language arts in 2016; 2) the state board adopt curriculum frameworks and evaluation criteria aligned to the common core standards for math by December 31, 2012 and for language arts by March 1, 2013; 3) the state board ensure that curriculum frameworks for K-12 and instructional materials for K-8 include the English language development standards and strategies to address the needs of students with disabilities in the four core subjects, including science; 4) the curriculum commission no longer be required to evaluate and recommend instructional materials; 5) the intent of the legislature be stated to provide to local districts a process by which they may identify, evaluate, and recommend standards-aligned instructional materials for adoption by the state board.

For our purposes, items 4 and 5 are of interest, as they, first, eliminate the curriculum commission from the adoption process, and, second, suggest a process for local districts to recommend the instructional materials that will be adopted by the state. This is somewhat similar to the provision in the Lowenthal bill (SB 140) above.

Of course, the Brownley and Lowenthal bills will only be effective if or when the governor reinstates the textbook adoption process.

Christine Bertrand is executive director of CSTA.

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. If it was required that students DO science- not read and fill in the blank at the end of the chapter, more students would see that science is not difficult. We need to get them involved in the elem grades. Currently “hands-on” has been designated as minimum amt of time to be spent on science studies. Also content at various levels needs to be age appropiate not astronomy at 3rd grade. Teacher training is a must as most of the elem teachers I work with have no basic knowledge of different concepts, are unable to make connections between the real world, integrate the curriculum so science becomes not important. Elem teachers during pre service develop one lesson to share w/ a group but there are no science content classes required.
    I have had many former students contacting me that have gone into science related fields because of what we did in elementary school. To quote an university professor when I asked why science content was not part of student teaching she replied “We hope they bring it with them.”

  2. I think it would make more cost-saving and pedagogical sense if California simply dispensed with all this state committee work and instead adopted the US Common Core Standards AND got rid of the textbook adoption process altogether. With all the new media out there, textbooks are an anachronism. There should be science tests at all grade levels, as in some other states. Let it be up to districts to figure out what materials they need to achieve good scores. This is hard for small districts, but they can band together to do the research.

  3. The two previous comments make good points. Students must do science as in asking questions, collecting real-world data themselves, organizing/presenting data, analyzing data, and making conclusions related to the original predictions.

    Hands-on labs can be good (or bad) for this purpose but are not required as alternatives exist that do allow the above.

    What should not count are demonstrations, paper hand-outs with data to analyze, and simulations with their predetermined, precise-to-theory data.

    Hands-on labs that verify a result already told to students do not count. Neither to equipment training labs that have no investigative purpose.

    With the National Science Standards due any day, it makes sense to base California standards on them. Textbooks are fading away but we absolutely must have valid and less expensive substitute that works for all of our children, not just those who have access to computers at home. I don’t see that we’re there yet.

    What really makes lots of sense is changing the outdated science lab requirement of the UCOP a-g requirements. Replace this “how to” standard with one that focuses on the goals not how to reach them. America’s Lab Report has a good goal list to begin with. Some editing of this nearly decade-old report may be required along with some elaboration. It’s good enough to start with and create a science lab standard for California that will be a model for the nation instead of having the ridiculous 100% hands-on requirement.

    Too many hands-on labs are just time-wasting make-work activities. Many are simulations. Many are useless verification labs. You could comply completely with the current standard without ever doing any science. This situation must change.

Leave a Reply

LATEST POST

Accelerating into NGSS – A Statewide Rollout Series Now Accepting Registrations

Posted: Friday, January 19th, 2018

Are you feeling behind on the implementation of NGSS? Then Accelerating into NGSS – the Statewide Rollout event – is right for you!

WHO SHOULD ATTEND
If you have not experienced Phases 1-4 of the Statewide Rollout, or are feeling behind with the implementation of NGSS, the Accelerating Into NGSS Statewide Rollout will provide you with the greatest hits from Phases 1-4!

OVERVIEW
Accelerating Into NGSS Statewide Rollout is a two-day training geared toward grade K-12 academic coaches, administrators, curriculum leads, and teacher leaders. Check-in for the two-day rollout begins at 7:30 a.m., followed by a continental breakfast. Sessions run from 8:00 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Day One and from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. on Day Two.

Cost of training is $250 per attendee. Fee includes all materials, continental breakfast, and lunch on both days. It is recommended that districts send teams of four to six, which include at least one administrator. Payment can be made by check or credit card. If paying by check, registration is NOT complete until payment has been received. All payments must be received prior to the Rollout location date you are attending. Paying by credit card secures your seat at time of registration. No purchase orders accepted. No participant cancellation refunds.

For questions or more information, please contact Amy Kennedy at akennedy@sjcoe.net or (209) 468-9027.

REGISTER

http://bit.ly/ACCELERATINGINTONGSS

DATES & LOCATIONS
MARCH 28-29, 2018
Host: San Mateo County Office of Education
Location: San Mateo County Office of Education, Redwood City

APRIL 10-11, 2018
Host: Orange County Office of Education
Location: Brandman University, Irvine

MAY 1-2, 2018
Host: Tulare County Office of Education
Location: Tulare County Office of Education, Visalia

MAY 3-4, 2018
Host: San Bernardino Superintendent of Schools
Location: West End Educational Service Center, Rancho Cucamonga

MAY 7-8, 2018
Host: Sacramento County Office of Education
Location: Sacramento County Office of Education Conference Center and David P. Meaney Education Center, Mather

JUNE 14-15, 2018
Host: Imperial County Office of Education
Location: Imperial Valley College, Imperial

Presented by the California Department of Education, California County Superintendents Educational Services Association/County Offices of Education, K-12 Alliance @WestEd, California Science Project, and the California Science Teachers Association.

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.

The Teaching and Learning Collaborative, Reflections from an Administrator

Posted: Friday, January 19th, 2018

by Kelly Patchen

My name is Mrs. Kelly Patchen, and I am proud to be an elementary assistant principal working in the Tracy Unified School District (TUSD) at Louis Bohn and McKinley Elementary Schools. Each of the schools I support are Title I K-5 schools with about 450 students, a diverse student population, a high percentage of English Language Learners, and students living in poverty. We’re also lucky to be part of the CA NGSS K-8 Early Implementation Initiative with the K-12 Alliance. 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 California NGSS k-8 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.

2018 CSTA Conference Call for Proposals

Posted: Wednesday, January 17th, 2018

CSTA is pleased to announce that we are now accepting proposals for 90-minute workshops and three- and six-hour short courses for the 2018 California Science Education Conference. Workshops and short courses make up the bulk of the content and professional learning opportunities available at the conference. In recognition of their contribution, members who present a workshop or short course receive 50% off of their registration fees. Click for more information regarding proposals, or submit one today by following the links below.

Short Course Proposal

Workshop Proposal 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.

CSTA’s New Administrator Facebook Group Page

Posted: Monday, January 15th, 2018

by Holly Steele

The California Science Teachers Association’s mission is to promote high-quality science education, and one of the best practice’s we use to fulfill that mission is through the use of our Facebook group pages. CSTA hosts several closed and moderated Facebook group pages for specific grade levels, (Elementary, Middle, and High School), pages for district coaches and science education faculty, and the official CSTA Facebook page. These pages serve as an online resource for teachers and coaches to exchange teaching methods, materials, staying update on science events in California and asking questions. CSTA is happy to announce the creation of a 6th group page called, California Administrators Supporting Science. 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.

Find Your Reason to Engage

Posted: Monday, January 15th, 2018

by Jill Grace

I was recently reflecting on events in the news and remembered that several years ago, National Public Radio had a story about a man named Stéphane Hessel, a World War II French resistance fighter, Nazi concentration camp survivor, and contributor to the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The story focused on a book he had published, Time for Outrage (2010).

In it, Hessel makes the argument that the worst attitude is indifference:

“Who is in charge; who are the decision makers? It’s not always easy to discern. We’re not dealing with a small elite anymore, whose actions we can clearly identify. We are dealing with a vast, interdependent world that is interconnected in unprecedented ways. But there are unbearable things all around us. You have to look for them; search carefully. Open your eyes and you will see. This is what I tell young people: If you spend a little time searching, you will find your reasons to engage. The worst attitude is indifference. ‘There’s nothing I can do; I get by’ – adopting this mindset will deprive you of one of the fundamental qualities of being human: outrage.  Our capacity for protest is indispensable, as is our freedom to engage.”

His words make me take pause when I think of the status of science in the United States. A general “mistrust” of science is increasingly pervasive, as outlined in a New Yorker article from the summer of 2016. Learn More…

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by Jill Grace

Jill Grace

Jill Grace is a Regional Director for the K-12 Alliance and is President of CSTA.