As the often-used proverb states, “Life is a journey, not a destination.” The truth of this statement has important application for science education as we move deeper into the world of test-based accountability.
With the recent release of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), science education is seeking to follow the example of the Common Core State Standards which has developed learning standards in Mathematics and Language Arts for students in kindergarten through high school.Forty-five states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity have adopted the Common Core State Standards. The laudable mission of the Common Core is to “provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them.”
Setting clear expectations about student learning and holding school administrators and teachers accountable for meeting these expectations is a powerful force in education. Education cannot be the only industry immune from accountability and competitive influences prompting improved quality for all students. However, as someone who has supported programs in science education at the Center for Excellence in Education for thirty years, I am also aware of the unique challenges associated with science education.
Although still difficult, it is easier to draw black or white lines in language arts or mathematics education. A child can either read at grade level or he cannot. A child can either multiply fractions or she cannot. This is not intended to minimize the complexity of theoretical mathematics or profound literary questions, but that is not what the Common Core is designed to measure.
Assessing science education adds an element of ambiguity because at its heart it is about asking questions and the process of discovery. Sometimes there are no “right” answers in science – especially answers that fit into a convenient multiple-choice format - and that is a concept we should be teaching our students. How do you evaluate the scientific method? How do you access nine unsuccessful trials that might lead to a unique discovery on the tenth attempt?
The Next Generation Science Standardsfor K-12 education, developed by the National Research Council (NRC), the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAA), and Achieve, in collaboration with twenty-six lead state partners, acknowledged this difficulty by developing an elaborate framework of “Disciplinary Core Ideas” that students should master by grade in four key topic areas – Life Science, Earth and Space Science, Physical Science, and Engineering & Technology. The Disciplinary Core Ideas provide a valuable guide for determining if a student is on track in her educational achievement. For example, a Disciplinary Core Idea for 4th grade Physical Science concerns the definition of energy – “the faster a given object is moving, the more energy it possesses.” (A neutral concept was selected to avoid the political implications of some scientific concepts such as global warming or evolution which would be an additional challenge.)
This concept of energy is undoubtedly important and it is appropriate for a 4th grade student to master it. Higher-level Physics builds upon this foundation. The difficulty though is not just to identify what students should learn, but best practices for helping them to learn it. In science, this is where hands-on experimentation plays a critical role. A student reading about energy and velocity will not be affected the same way a student dropping an egg from a window will be affected. In my personal experience, promoting laboratory experimentation has been key to retaining alumni of CEE programs in STEM.
The NGSS attempts to provide Science and Engineering Practices for each Disciplinary Core area, but they are deliberately vague to avoid the appearance of a national science curriculum. This is an area where more local examples of hands on classroom experimentation could compliment the NGSS and spur teacher creativity. If local school systems do not pair the NGSS Disciplinary Core Areas with hands-on experimentation, the standards will be severely undermined.