May/June 2017 – Vol. 29 No. 7

The Time to Be Heard Is Now Soon!

Posted: Tuesday, May 1st, 2012

by Peter A’Hearn

The first draft of the Next Generation Science Standards were expected to be released by the end of April. Now that it is May 1 and the draft standards have yet to be released to the public, CSTA has learned that the revised release time frame has been revised to mid-May. The review window will be only three weeks long once the draft is released, so please stay tuned to CSTA for word when the draft is available and take some time to study and give feedback through http://www.nextgenscience.org/. You can choose to provide feedback on only the areas in which you have the most expertise. CSTA will be working with other statewide organizations to alert members to public review sessions as well.  That information will be made available soon after the draft standards are released.

The Next Generation Science Standards will include the three dimensions as outlined in the framework: core content ideas, scientific and engineering practices, and cross-cutting concepts. This month I will focus on the cross-cutting relationships aspect of the framework. This is a new emphasis compared to the current California standards. The current standards have content (Core Ideas), and Investigation and Experimentation (similar to practices) but no analogue to the cross- cutting concepts. I have heard people complain that the “Big Ideas” got left out of the current California standards. The writers of the NGSS framework address this omission:

Although crosscutting concepts are fundamental to an understanding of science and engineering, students have often been expected to build such knowledge without any explicit instructional support. 

The NGSS framework makes them explicit and expects them to be integrated tightly with practices and with core ideas.

These concepts should become common and familiar touchstones across the disciplines and grade levels. Explicit reference to the concepts, as well as their emergence in multiple disciplinary contexts, can help students develop a cumulative, coherent, and usable understanding of science and engineering. 

The cross-cutting concepts chosen by the writers are best considered when fleshed out with an explanation. They are:

1.  Patterns. Observed patterns of forms and events guide organization and classification, and they prompt questions about relationships and the factors that influence them.

2.  Cause and effect: Mechanism and explanation. Events have causes, sometimes simple, sometimes multifaceted. A major activity of science is investigating and explaining causal relationships and the mechanisms by which they are mediated. Such mechanisms can then be tested across given contexts and used to predict and explain events in new contexts.

3.  Scale, proportion, and quantity. In considering phenomena, it is critical to recognize what is relevant at different measures of size, time, and energy and to recognize how changes in scale, proportion, or quantity affect a system’s structure or performance.

4.  Systems and system models. Defining the system under study-specifying its boundaries and making explicit a model of that system-provides tools for understanding and testing ideas that are applicable throughout science and engineering.

5.  Energy and matter: Flows, cycles, and conservation. Tracking fluxes of energy and matter into, out of, and within systems helps one understand the systems’ possibilities and limitations.

6.  Structure and function. The way in which an object or living thing is shaped and its substructure determine many of its properties and functions.

7.  Stability and change. For natural and built systems alike, conditions of stability and determinants of rates of change or evolution of the system are critical elements of study.

This set of crosscutting concepts begins with two concepts that are fundamental to the nature of science: that observed patterns can be explained and that science investigates cause- and-effect relationships by seeking the mechanisms that underlie them. The next concept – scale, proportion, and quantity – concerns the sizes of things and the mathematical relationships among disparate elements. The next four concepts – systems and system models, energy and matter flows, structure and function, and stability and change – are interrelated in that the first is illuminated by the other three. Each concept also stands alone as one that occurs in virtually all areas of science and is an important consideration for engineered systems as well.

Chapter 9 of the NGSS framework gives some insights into how the cross-cutting concepts and practices can be integrated with core ideas in a science unit. For example in K-2 students classify animals by the foods that they eat. In doing this they learn the life science content core idea that animals need food to live and grow. They engage in the scientific practice of arguing from evidence to support their classification and presentation of information. The crosscutting concept for this unit is patterns- that animals can be grouped by what they eat. At the other end of the K-12 continuum, high school students working on the concepts of how atomic structure relates to the periodic table are engaged in the practice of modeling, but are also looking at patterns as the cross-cutting concept.

A challenge for many will be that there are not that many instructional materials that have used cross-cutting concepts to connect different area of science. There are some publishers that do use a big idea to connect may ideas together, but most leave the connections for the students to make as noted by the writers of the framework.

Your turn now- what are your thoughts about the cross-cutting concepts? Some guiding questions:

Are these the right concepts to help students to make connections across the sciences?

Do these concepts connect to other disciplines?

What are the challenges of implementing this vision of science education?

How can the use of cross-cutting concepts enrich student learning?

Are some of these more or less important?

Would you have included different cross-cutting concepts?

The purpose of this blog:

We are about to begin the period for public review of the Next Generation Science Standards. The process is being guided by the National Research Council.  Twenty-six states, including California, have signed on to be part of the development of the standards and to adopt them when complete.  The new standards will represent a big change in how science is taught in California, so teachers should be closely following the development and giving the feedback that comes with their experience. But few classroom teachers have the time to digest and respond to the amount of material that makes up the science standards. The purpose of this blog is to break it down into chunks and send it out a little at a time for teachers to respond to, beginning with the Framework.  I will be making comparisons to the current California standards, but science teachers from other states are encouraged to participate. The framework can be downloaded as a PDF from the Next Generation website at http://www.nextgenscience.org/.

Pete A’Hearn is the K-12 science specialist in the Palm Springs Unified School District and is region 4 director for CSTA.

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by Peter AHearn

Peter AHearn

Peter A’Hearn is the Region 4 Director for CSTA.

2 Responses

  1. First, I like (very much) that science content once again is going to be connected by bigger ideas, whatever they are to be called. The term “cross-cutting concepts” is a bit pretentious for my tastes (big ideas, unifying concepts, or … perhaps better, yet … themes would seem to be far more useful), but I am not one to be hung up on the need for change and shiny new labels. The point is that with the use of these cross-cutting concepts, perhaps we can move away from using discrete factoids as the organizing principles behind science instruction, and once again help students begin to see the connections and conceptual underpinnings of scientific thought.

    I am not sure exactly what types of comments you would find most useful in this discussion, so I will use your guiding questions to get me started.

    I am not sure if these are the “right” concepts to help students make connections, but they will certainly help teachers help students make those connections. There are actually many different ways that science instruction can be organized, and many other thematic lines that could be presented. The particular organization or number of big ideas is not crucial; the organization of content along thematic lines is. Technically, these cross-cutting concepts are all correct, and they are all fundamental in helping students understand the nature of science. What bothers me about them is that they are not in kid language … kids are going to have a hard time with big mouthfuls of terms (e.g., “Energy and Matter: Flows, cycles, and conservation”, “Cause & Effect: Mechanism and explanation”, “Scale, proportion, and quantity” come to mind). They do not have to be in kid language, of course, but if they are to become “common and familiar touchstones across the disciplines and grade levels” and are designed to help students develop a “cumulative, coherent, and usable understanding of science and engineering”, then it might behoove someone to get off their high formal-sounding horse and make the terms more accessible to kids. Just a thought. See the 1990 California Science Framework for alternatives.

    These cross-cutting concepts connect across all disciplines of science. The other major discipline with which these cross-cutting concepts are best connected is history. Every single one has a place in the study of people and cultures over time. Some connect to literature and language arts, but perhaps what is most important is that in the study of literature, the fine arts, or any other human endeavor, themes and big ideas are essential to their understanding (even if the big organizing concepts are different than these cross-cutting concepts). And clearly, there are some interdisciplinary connections to mathematics. It will not be easy getting single-subject teachers in other disciplines comfortable or facile with using these concepts … either as organizing principles or as ways to integrate curriculum … but it most certainly can be done. I am sure there are many good examples out there for how this might be done … one that jumps to my mind, almost immediately, are the history and science units available from Cal-EPA and developed under the Environmental Education Initiative (EEI).

    The challenges of implementing conceptually-based science instruction are large, but it’s not like we haven’t met that challenge before. There may be some teachers out there who have entered the profession after about 2000 who may be clueless about how to conceptually organize instruction, activities, investigations, and learning … but my guess is that the hard work of groups like the K-12 Alliance, many of the California Science Projects, and others will prove very fruitful. They have never stopped supporting this type of instruction, and there are a lot of teachers who are just dying to have instructional materials that do it for them, rather than have to create and/or modify everything from scratch. It is not going to be as hard to implement this approach to instruction as it was in say, 1992. We’ve come a long way, baby … and the light is still shining brightly.

    While teachers will find conceptual instruction much more rewarding and meaningful than teaching isolated and discrete facts/phenomena, students will be the overwhelming beneficiaries of this change in direction. We all know that people construct understanding of the world by building stories in their heads, and we know that stories are held together by big ideas and concepts that are threaded through them. Isolated facts and observations may be interesting, but sense-making doesn’t occur until we connect what we learn or see to things we already know and understand. Large ideas connect facts across disciplines, and thisa is very powerful.

    With respect to the relative importance of the different cross-cutting concepts, I do not think one is more important than another.

    The missing cross-cutting concept that jumps out and bites me on the butt is “evolution”. I do not like the fact that it is embedded (and hidden) in a differently named cross-cutting concept. Yes … evolution is a type of change, and it can be subsumed under “stability and change”. But it is also very different than simple change. It is change with a direction (and that direction is time) … life forms have evolved, the earth has evolved, oceans have evolved, galaxies have evolved (interactions between them influenced by relative position, gravitational attractions, and even chemical composition). Evolution embodies history and is an integral part of every discipline that has a historical component. It is the central organizing principle of the biological sciences, and a major principle in the earth sciences. Just as importantly, though a bit more controversially, now is not the time to back away or back down from putting evolution in its rightful place as a major organizing principle of science. In too many states, in too many local districts, and at too many school sites, powerful political and social organizations are stepping up their attacks on science instruction by challenging the principle of evolution (and with attacks on evolution, similar attacks on other “controversial” science topics). This is not the time to knuckle under to reactionaries and aficionados of pseudo-science. If you doubt my word for it, why don’t you drop a line to Eugenie Scott?

    On a smaller scale, I am a little disturbed that “interactions” are not specifically included as an organizing principle. I understand that systems and system models include interactions, but it seems that kids would be much better served if they understood (and said) “systems and interactions” rather than the indirect term “models”. Modeling is, of course, extremely important in science … as well as in other disciplines … but modeling is something that you DO to better understand a thing, and an interaction is thing that a model would help you understand. Probably just a personal preference, and I have no idea what influence my preferences will have on this process at this point in time.

  2. I think these cross cutting concepts are the proverbial nail being hit on the head! I often find that students are woefully underdeveloped in recognizing, following and designing patterns. This cross cutting element will not only benefit them as science students, but across all educational areas. Just as important is recognizing the cause effect relationship in nature, as well as in our daily lives. Again, explicitly teaching this concept will benefit students both scientifically and educationally in general. All the other concepts are wonderfully exciting for me as a Biology teacher, because they apply directly to our entire curriculum. These big ideas should absolutely be taught explicitly, and merely reinforced by all the supporting details (what are called content standards now) throughout the year. For instance, students may forget the individual steps of cell division, but they should never forget that there is a process of cell division that happens in their bodies from birth to death, and that sometimes the increased frequency of cell division is to our benefit (healing a wound) or to our detriment (cancer). This type of science literacy is much more beneficial than learning and regurgitating individual and seemingly unrelated facts. I can’t wait for the new standards to be released. From the looks of it, they may very well transform the way we all teach science!

Leave a Reply

LATEST POST

CSTA Annual Conference Early Bird Rates End July 14

Posted: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017

by Jessica Sawko

Teachers engaged in workshop activity

Teachers engaging in hands-on learning during a workshop at the 2016 CSTA conference.

Don’t miss your chance to register at the early bird rate for the 2017 CSTA Conference – the early-bird rate closes July 14. Need ideas on how to secure funding for your participation? Visit our website for suggestions, a budget planning tool, and downloadable justification letter to share with your admin. Want to take advantage of the early rate – but know your district will pay eventually? Register online today and CSTA will reimburse you when we receive payment from your district/employer. (For more information on how that works contact Zi Stair in the office for details – 916-979-7004 or zi@cascience.org.)

New Information Now Available On-line:

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.

Goodbye Outgoing and Welcome Incoming CSTA Board Members

Posted: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017

Jill Grace

Jill Grace, CSTA President, 2017-2019

On July 1, 2017 five CSTA members concluded their service and four new board members joined the ranks of the CSTA Board of Directors. CSTA is so grateful for all the volunteer board of directors who contribute hours upon hours of time and energy to advance the work of the association. At the June 3 board meeting, CSTA was able to say goodbye to the outgoing board members and welcome the incoming members.

This new year also brings with it a new president for CSTA. As of July 1, 2017 Jill Grace is the president of the California Science Teachers Association. Jill is a graduate of California State University, Long Beach, a former middle school science teacher, and is currently a Regional Director with the K-12 Alliance @ WestEd where she works with California NGSS K-8 Early Implementation Initiative districts and charter networks in the San Diego area.

Outgoing Board Members

  • Laura Henriques (President-Elect: 2011 – 2013, President: 2013 – 2015, Past President: 2015 – 2017)
  • Valerie Joyner (Region 1 Director: 2009 – 2013, Primary Director: 2013 – 2017)
  • Mary Whaley (Informal Science Education Director: 2013 – 2017)
  • Sue Campbell (Middle School/Jr. High Director: 2015 – 2017)
  • Marcus Tessier (2-Year College Director: 2015 – 2017)

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.

Finding My Student’s Motivation of Learning Through Engineering Tasks

Posted: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017

by Huda Ali Gubary and Susheela Nath

It’s 8:02 and the bell rings. My students’ walk in and pick up an entry ticket based on yesterday’s lesson and homework. My countdown starts for students to begin…3, 2, 1. Ten students are on task and diligently completing the work, twenty are off task with behaviors ranging from talking up a storm with their neighbors to silently staring off into space. This was the start of my classes, more often than not. My students rarely showed the enthusiasm for a class that I had eagerly prepared for. I spent so much time searching for ways to get my students excited about the concepts they were learning. I wanted them to feel a connection to the lessons and come into my class motivated about what they were going to learn next. I would ask myself how I could make my class memorable where the kids were in the driver’s seat of learning. Incorporating engineering made this possible. 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.

State Schools Chief Tom Torlakson Unveils Updated Recommended Literature List

Posted: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017

SACRAMENTO—State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson unveiled an addition of 285 award-winning titles to the Recommended Literature: Prekindergarten Through Grade Twelve list.

“The books our students read help broaden their perspectives, enhance their knowledge, and fire their imaginations,” Torlakson said. “The addition of these award-winning titles represents the state’s continued commitment to the interests and engagement of California’s young readers.”

The Recommended Literature: Prekindergarten Through Grade Twelve list is a collection of more than 8,000 titles of recommended reading for children and adolescents. Reflecting contemporary and classic titles, including California authors, this online list provides an exciting range of literature that students should be reading at school and for pleasure. Works include fiction, nonfiction, poetry, and drama to provide for a variety of tastes, interests, and abilities. 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.

Teaching Science in the Time of Alternative Facts – Why NGSS Can Help (somewhat)

Posted: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017

by Peter A’Hearn

The father of one of my students gave me a book: In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood by Walt Brown, Ph. D. He had heard that I was teaching Plate Tectonics and wanted me to consider another perspective. The book offered the idea that the evidence for plate tectonics could be better understood if we considered the idea that beneath the continent of Pangaea was a huge underground layer of water that suddenly burst forth from a rift between the now continents of Africa and South America. The waters shot up and the continents hydroplaned apart on the water layer to their current positions. The force of the movement pushed up great mountain ranges which are still settling to this day, resulting in earthquakes along the margins of continents. This had happened about 6,000 years ago and created a great worldwide flood. Learn More…

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by Peter AHearn

Peter AHearn

Peter A’Hearn is the Region 4 Director for CSTA.