Teachers wear many hats in the classroom. We are doctors, therapists, IT technicians, politicians, and entertainers, but the one hat we wear that is essential for student learning is the detective’s hat. As detectives, we gather and analyze evidence to help us understand what our students know and don’t know and what misconceptions they may have. Instead of this “detective work,” though, teachers often consider student work as an end product to assess learning rather than a tool to investigate student learning.

My young students did not come to me as a blank slate. They brought a bouquet of preconceptions about science, and those preconceptions either worked for or against their ability to understand the core ideas in science. I quickly learned that I could “teach my heart out” and do fun activities, and my students could regurgitate what I taught them. However, they did not comprehend the new concepts as well as I thought they had, and they certainly could not apply that knowledge to other concepts in science. What was I doing wrong? 

What did I learn from student work?

After careful reflection and collaboration with colleagues, I decided I needed to stop focusing on the end product and start focusing on the entire process of student learning. I needed to use my students’ work to my advantage. So I put on my detective’s hat. My job was to dig deep and investigate my students’ work more effectively so I could uncover what my students knew; what they didn’t know; and what they thought they knew, but had some misunderstandings about.

Based on students’ performance tasks and formative assessments, I could learn more about their preconceptions about core ideas and their ability to solve problems. Then I could capitalize on this information to help guide my instruction. I could also use that information to give my students quality academic feedback as they learned the core ideas and crosscutting concepts, rather than waiting until after they completed a performance task or took the summative assessment.

As my focus on how I analyzed students’ work and used that information to enhance instruction changed, I had to change what I was asking my students to do so I could gather the information I needed to help them learn as they solved real-world problems. I began to ask better, more intentional questions, and I made my performance tasks three- dimensional. Talk Moves was a strategy I began using to improve my students’ academic discourse. Having students argue about ideas in science in a productive way gave me powerful insight into their thinking and helped me gather the evidence I needed to inform my classroom instruction.

The most powerful change I made was to use formative assessment more effectively. Previously, my formative assessment toolbox consisted of quick checks that did not actually provide much information about how my students were thinking about science. A colleague told me about Page Keeley and her work with formative assessments. Using probes from Keeley’s Uncovering Student Ideas in Science book series and her Science Formative Assessment Classroom Techniques (FACTS), I was better able to gather the evidence I needed about how my students were thinking.

I used the information I gleaned from science probes, FACTS strategies, and other formative assessments to provide quality academic feedback to my students. These formative assessments allowed me to work smarter and use my instructional time more wisely. I enhanced classroom activities so I could better address my students’ needs, help them explore science phenomena, deepen their understanding of the core ideas as they engaged in the practices, and apply their knowledge to other disciplines in science.

“With formative assessments, there usually is no need to assign scores to individual students. Instead of scoring rubrics, you might use more informal criteria that will help you quickly see what you need to know in order to make instructional decisions and better support your students.” —Seeing Students Learn Science (NAS 2017)

What can students learn from student work?

Learning is a journey, a journey that students can and should be part of. Unfortunately, students are often excluded from that journey altogether. Teaching and learning are things that are done to them rather than things they actively participate in. Teachers should encourage students to take part in their own learning journey by empowering them to analyze their own thinking. The best way to accomplish that is by allowing them to interpret their work.

When students are involved in understanding the purpose of their work and how to analyze it, both teachers and students experience a common vision of what students are expected to know and do. This is critical in improving student learning.

I used to think that showing students the scoring rubric before they completed a task helped them understand my expectations. Unfortunately, just as focusing on the end product didn’t help me understand their thinking or learning needs, having students examine a rubric didn’t help them comprehend what I expected them to do and the knowledge I needed them to apply. They, too, needed to become detectives.

To help students investigate what I was expecting of them, I had them critique examples of completed student work. I wanted them to better understand what effective and ineffective work looked like. These examples included both exemplars and non-exemplars, examples of work that demonstrated gaps in understanding. (Note: I always wrote the non-exemplar samples using common misconceptions and inaccurate understandings my students traditionally held. I never used the work of students currently in my classroom.)

Giving students an opportunity to see what they should do and the connections they should make helped them better understand what I expected them to know and do. Giving them a chance to identify the areas of refinement in the work samples that demonstrated weaker understanding helped them understand what mistakes they needed to avoid. Students also could see what different levels of performance looked like.

Furthermore, students often saw their own misunderstandings in the non-exemplars. Analyzing these samples gave them a safe space to identify their own misconceptions, then engage in the practices of scientists and engineers to better understand the core ideas and crosscutting concepts. They refined their knowledge through investigations, explorations, and research.

Analyzing samples of student work made them think critically and deepen their own knowledge, and gave them the tools needed to really analyze their own thinking. It created a safer, more engaging learning culture in my classroom. Indeed, the changes I implemented yielded exciting results.

I observed that my students began to ask better questions and made less careless mistakes while completing performance tasks. They were more confident as they designed solutions to problems and more open to the academic feedback I gave them on their own work and formative assessments. Their ability to reason and engage in academic discourse improved, and they were much more willing to reconsider their previously held misconceptions. Their detective work paid off. The quality of my fourth graders’ work soared, and my students became more responsible, critical thinkers. 

As teachers encourage students to explore their natural curiosity and understand the natural world surrounding them, it is essential that teachers analyze students’ work on formative assessments and performance tasks to identify students’ preconceptions and make sound decisions in the classroom. When teachers and students work together as detectives to gather evidence about how students are thinking about their thinking, meaningful learning can take place.

K. Renae Pullen

K. Renae Pullen is the K–6 science curriculum-instructional specialist for Caddo Parish Public Schools in Louisiana. Pullen currently serves on the Teacher Advisory Council of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. She received a Presidential Award for Excellence in Science Teaching in 2008. Read her blog, and follow her on Twitter: @KrenaeP.

This article was featured in the August issue of Next Gen Navigator, a monthly e-newsletter from NSTA delivering information, insights, resources, and professional learning opportunities for science educators by science educators on the Next Generation Science Standards and three-dimensional instruction. Click here to access other articles from the August issue on assessing three-dimensional learning. Click here to sign up to receive the Navigator every month.

The mission of NSTA is to promote excellence and innovation in science teaching and learning for all.

Future NSTA Conferences

2017 Fall Conferences

• Baltimore: Oct. 5–7, 2017
• Milwaukee: Nov. 9–11, 2017
• New Orleans: Nov. 30–Dec. 2, 2017

National Conference

• Atlanta: March 15–18, 2018

Follow NSTA

It is truly an exciting time in science education. Science educators across the country are adapting to a new vision of how students learn science guided by the Framework for K–12 Science Education (Framework). As a result, science instruction is changing to better tap into students’ natural curiosity and deepen their understanding of the world around them.

As instruction changes, assessments need to change as well. Many science educators recognize that traditional assessments are not appropriate for capturing three-dimensional science learning. But they may not know what assessments of three-dimensional learning should look like, nor how they can be used effectively in science classrooms.

The Board on Science Education (BOSE) at the National Academy of Sciences has a new resource that can help. BOSE is the group responsible for developing the Framework, and we have been working hard to continue to offer guidance to educators as they strive to make the new vision a reality in classrooms. In March 2017, BOSE released a new book on formative assessment for science, Seeing Students Learn Science. The book draws on research-based recommendations for assessment to explore how classroom teachers can use assessments as part of instruction to advance students’ three-dimensional learning.

Traditional science assessments do not allow teachers to fully understand students’ mastery of science and engineering practices, nor do they provide insight into students’ learning trajectories. In contrast, effective classroom assessments of 3-D science learning can help teachers collect information about students’ understanding of core ideas and crosscutting concepts, as well as students’ ability to engage in the scientific and engineering practices. Good assessments of 3-D science learning can help teachers make decisions about next steps for learning and identify the supports that individual students or groups of students may need. They can also help students take control of their own learning by helping them understand what they have mastered and where they may need more practice. A major goal is for assessment to become an integral part of science instruction, rather than an interruption

The new book is designed to help teachers create and implement classroom assessments that capture three-dimensional learning. While transitioning to a new assessment system will be a gradual process, change begins at the classroom level, and individual educators can begin to implement new approaches immediately. Seeing Students Learn Science is filled with examples of innovative assessment formats, strategies to embed assessments in classroom activities, and ideas for interpreting and using information from these assessments. It also provides ideas and questions educators can use to reflect on what they can adapt right away—and what they can work toward over time—to ensure that instruction drives assessment, not the other way around.

The book is organized around key questions educators may have about the new types of assessments.

What’s really different? Gives a quick overview of how ideas about science learning and instruction have changed and why different kinds of assessments are needed. 

What does this kind of assessment look like? Highlights a few examples to see how these ideas and principles work in practice. 

What can I learn from my students’ work? Examines more deeply the information educators can obtain from a variety of assessments—and how they provide evidence of students’ thinking. 

How can I build new kinds of assessments into the flow of my instruction? Describes ways to adapt assessments already in use and to design new assessments that support the changes science teachers are making in instruction. 

How can I work with others in my school, district, and state? Focuses on how teachers can connect with developments outside of the classroom, and explores assessment systems, ways of reporting assessment results, and assessment for monitoring purposes.                                      

A key message of the book is that educators can lead the way in transforming science assessment. We all know that new state and district assessments will be needed. The transition to new large-scale assessments may be a complicated one for states and districts, and will likely pose challenges that will take time to solve. Individual educators, though, can lead the way in adapting assessment practices to new approaches to science instruction. With adequate professional development support, and the resources provided in Seeing Students Learn Science, educators can begin to redesign assessments in their own classrooms and champion new approaches in their schools and districts.

Heidi Schweingruber is director of the Board on Science Education at the National Research Council (NRC). She co-directed the study that resulted in the report A Framework for K–12 Science Education (2011). She served as study director for a review of NASA’s pre-college education programs completed in 2008 and co-directed the study that produced the 2007 report Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K–8. Before joining the NRC, Schweingruber worked as a senior research associate at the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences . Schweingruber holds a Ph.D. in psychology and anthropology and a certificate in culture and cognition from the University of Michigan.

This article was featured in the August issue of Next Gen Navigator, a monthly e-newsletter from NSTA delivering information, insights, resources, and professional learning opportunities for science educators by science educators on the Next Generation Science Standards and three-dimensional instruction. Click here to access other articles from the August issue on assessing three-dimensional learning. Click here to sign up to receive the Navigator every month.

The mission of NSTA is to promote excellence and innovation in science teaching and learning for all.

Future NSTA Conferences

2017 Fall Conferences

• Baltimore: Oct. 5–7, 2017
• Milwaukee: Nov. 9–11, 2017
• New Orleans: Nov. 30–Dec. 2, 2017

National Conference

• Atlanta: March 15–18, 2018

Follow NSTA

I will start teaching in an elementary school this year. When I looked in what will be my future my classroom, but I didn’t see supplies or equipment for teaching science. What can I do now? –  —G., Michigan

Describe the situation to your principal before you panic. There may be a central storeroom or she may ask other teachers to share materials. She may also guide you through the purchasing process.

Fortunately, science teaching at the elementary level does not necessarily require a lot of expensive equipment. I’ve attended many NSTA conference sessions in which we investigated science concepts with marbles, balloons, straws, paper clips, plastic cups, hand lenses, rubber bands, craft sticks, blocks, and small plastic cars.

Browse through the archives of Science & Children, and you’ll see students investigating plant growth, examining rock samples or insects, studying mechanics and motion, or collecting weather data with simple, inexpensive materials. (However without safety equipment such as goggles, there may be activities that you cannot do until you get them.) Check the science curriculum for activities that your students will do and make a list of materials.

As a last resort you may have to purchase things yourself, as many teachers do. Discount stores have low-cost items that can be repurposed for science. Take a prioritized wish list everywhere you go—you’ll never know what you’ll find at a flea market or yard sale. And save the receipts—the principal may have discretionary funds to reimburse your purchases.

In an ideal world, all schools would be fully funded and teachers and students would be provided with the materials they need. Until that happens, many teachers will continue to be generous toward their students and provide supplies. Welcome to the profession!

(For more science-on-a-shoestring ideas, refer to The Frugal Science Teacher, PreK-5 from NSTA Press.)

Photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/tormol/5013204447

During July 2001, I along with 24 science educators from 15 states attended the NASA Educator Workshop (NEW) at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. The two-week program was a NASA Headquarters initiative managed by NSTA, and coordinated by Marshall’s Education Programs Department. The NEW program has been a catalyst in my career as a teacher of science. As a result of my participation, thousands of students have enjoyed unparalleled NASA experiences.    

Throughout the NEW workshop, I interacted with NASA scientists, engineers, technicians, and educational specialists learning about state of the art research and development occurring at the Center. The educational materials and activities presented during the workshop were related to aerospace technology, biological science and physical research, earth science, human exploration and development of space, space science, and rocket propulsion.  These opportunities gave me a broader perspective on how NASA could support my work in the classroom. Below are three programs I learned about during NEW and was able to bring to my students and community.

As a result of my experience at Marshall, I was able to raise several thousand dollars and arranged for a week-long visit of the NASA Mobile Aerospace Educational Laboratory (MAEL) to the Williamsville Central School District in April 2003.  The MAEL was a mobile 53 foot trailer which housed an electronically enhanced computerized classroom operated by the NASA Glenn Research Center.  During the week-long visit to Western New York, over 800 students from our district were engaged in aerospace lessons that modeled real-world challenges in aviation.  

In March 2004, I was the program coordinator for a live video downlink with crew members aboard the International Space Station.  During the downlink event, twelve students spoke with United States astronaut C. Michael Foale and Russian cosmonaut, Alexander Kaleri as they orbited 250 miles above earth. The program impressed on our districts 1200 middle school students and the estimated 6,000,000 people world-wide that read about or viewed the downlink how science and technology transcend national borders and in doing so enrich the lives of humankind.

During the NEW program, I received NASA lunar and meteorite certification.  This certification has enabled me to provide instruction to over 4500 students, and teachers using these tangible legacies of our nation’s Apollo space program.  Curricular activities I have incorporated since receiving certification include activities related to geologic history of the moon, lessons involving planetary processes such as impacting, and activities focused on the effects of earth’s atmosphere as they relate to the samples. For the past 15 years, I have coordinated a March Moon Madness event with our district planetarium director. The event is well attended by local Boy and Girl Scout programs. Approximately 1000 members of the community have gained knowledge of past, present, and the future of space exploration at this annual program.

The NASA NEW program has enabled me to bring the real world of aerospace to the classroom, my colleagues, and the community.  These aerospace educational activities I have implemented have made science, discovery, and exploration exciting for thousands of students.  By nurturing and challenging young minds, together we inspire our next generation of explorers.

I encourage teachers to subscribe to NASA Education Express to receive weekly announcements about opportunities available to them and their students. There is a journey waiting for you. Only as far as we seek, can we go. Only as much as we dream, can we be!

Kenneth L. Huff is a science teacher at Mill Middle School in Williamsville, New York and a member of the NSTA Board of Directors. 

If you have any questions please email me. 

Science has been a central component of American democracy from the very beginning. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.”

What do we need to be informed about in today’s modern times? Consider this daunting short list of topics—climate change, GMO food, vaccination, energy, artificial intelligence, ‘designer babies,’ and pharmaceuticals—and you can see how important science is in keeping us well informed.  All of these topics require a basic level of knowledge about what science is and about the role of scientific evidence so we can understand phenomena and make verifiable predictions.

Jefferson also understood the intersection between government and science and acted to assert the government’s role in science by establishing the first U.S. science agency, The Survey of the Coast. This predecessor of NOAA (National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration) measured and published water depth data to inform mariners’ safe passage. Jefferson also launched the Lewis and Clark expedition that excited and educated the public and led to dramatic economic expansion. Realizing that education was essential for national security, he connected the education and science endeavors by establishing a “Corps of Engineers” to be “stationed at West Point in the state of New York,” the U.S. Military Academy.

In the years since Jefferson, government agencies have observed the world, recorded data, and helped the public benefit by publishing results and supporting the educators who enable children and future citizens to be well-informed. We may have turned our attention from the survey of the coast to the survey of the heavens but our need for education remains. Fortunately, federal agencies like NOAA, NASA, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Interior have maintained their mission to educate us and have developed programs that facilitate teachers’ access to and use of their science. We strongly believe this must continue.

Science instruction today is motivated by exposing students to phenomena, encouraging their questions, and guiding their practices to build and defend explanations supported by evidence. Students learn to use observations, build models, and make predictions, just like the scientists in federal agencies. They also explore the consequences of science in the world they live in, learning to be well-informed citizens.

Recognizing the traditional connection between science, education, and federal agencies, we invite science teachers who have benefited from federal agency programs to share your experiences and the impact these programs have had on your students. These reflections will appear on the NSTA blog and inspire other teachers to seek out and use similar resources and programs to support science teaching. Read our first blog by middle level teacher Ken Huff who shares his experience with the NASA Educator Workshop (NEW) at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. 

Dr. David L. Evans is the Executive Director of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). Reach him via e-mail at devans@nsta.org or via Twitter @devans_NSTA. 

The mission of NSTA is to promote excellence and innovation in science teaching and learning for all.

Follow NSTA

This week in education news, a majority of Americans are familiar with the opt-out movement according to a new survey; the country’s teaching force is still predominantly white and female; only 39 percent of high school students in Illinois passed the new state science exam in 2016; former Michigan Congressman Vern Ehlers died; fears that students might damage their eyes viewing the solar eclipse have prompted schools to cancel classes; how science standards avoided the backlash of common core; and collaboration among teachers encourages creativity, professionalism, and student achievement.

Fewer Than 1 In 3 Americans Support Kids Opting Out Of Tests; About Half Confused On What ‘Opt Out’ Means

A majority of Americans are familiar with the opt-out movement — parents withdrawing their children from standardized tests — and nearly half of them oppose the practice, according to a new survey from Columbia University’s Teachers College. But even among the one-third who support opting out, many have misconceptions about the true goals behind it. Click here to read the article featured on The 74.

Peer Interest In Science Leads Students To STEM Jobs

A new report published in the journal Science Advances says more Mississippi students may want jobs in science, technology, engineering or math if they learn their friends are also interested in those subjects. Click here to listen to the segment featured on MPBonline.org.

The Nation’s Teaching Force Is Still Mostly White And Female

Teachers tend to be white, female, and have nearly a decade and a half of experience in the classroom, according to new data released Monday by the federal government. But there are signs that the nation’s teaching force is gradually growing more diverse. It is also more heterogeneous: The nation’s charter school teachers look significantly different from teachers in traditional public schools. Click here to read the article featured in Education Week.

New State Science Test Raises The Bar But Proficiency Drops

More than a year after students took a new state science exam but never got their scores, Illinois is providing at least a glimpse of how well kids did — and it’s sobering. Only about 39 percent of high school students passed the new science exam in 2016, meaning those kids were considered “proficient.” Close to 60 percent of grade school students passed, according to an analysis by the Illinois State Board of Education. Click here to read the article featured in the Chicago Tribune.

Crossing Boundaries: The Future of Science Education

The science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) industries are booming. In the U.S. the STEM industries account for more than half of the sustained economic expansion, while in the U.K., the tech industry grew 32 percent faster than any other industry. In a time when young people face an increasingly hostile and competitive job market, doesn’t it make sense to teach them the skills for the industries that have an excess of job opportunities? Unfortunately, science education is struggling to keep up with the fast developments happening in the world. Click here to read the article featured in Scientific American.

Former Michigan Congressman Vern Ehlers Dies At 83

Vern Ehlers, who championed the Great Lakes and scientific research and education while representing west Michigan during 17 years in Congress, died Tuesday night in Grand Rapids at age 83. Click here to read the article featured in The Detroit News.

Teachers: Schools’ Eclipse Fears Drive Kids Inside

Fears that children might permanently damage their eyes viewing Monday’s solar eclipse have prompted school districts in or near its path to cancel classes and, in some cases, prohibit students from venturing outside during Monday’s once-in-a-lifetime celestial event. Such fears are driving science teachers nuts. Click here to read the article featured in USA Today.

How New Science Standards Avoided The Backlash Of Common Core

After the Common Core standards in reading and math ran into backlash from critics claiming federal overreach, the supporters of new science standards decided to take a different tack. They explicitly asked the Obama administration to sit out the promotion of the science guidelines. They also encouraged states to take time to get local buy-in. The strategy appears to have paid off. Click here to read the article featured in The Wall Street Journal.

Op-Ed: Is The Investment In STEM Education Paying Off?

For more than two decades there has been a hefty investment in science, technology, engineering and mathematics education in the United States. There is no question that this investment has, at the very least, brought the positives derived from better STEM education practices into the national conversation. Click here to read the article featured in U.S. News & World Report.

Balancing Teacher Autonomy and Collaboration

Good teachers are growing practitioners. They know their students, their content, and their standards—but they are not satisfied with the status quo. Like all successful professionals, good teachers strive to grow their knowledge and adapt to changes in the landscape of their work. Good teachers know their own expertise is critical in the classroom; they also know the input of colleagues strengthens that expertise. While it can be difficult to find the right balance between personal skill and combined efforts in the classroom, it is worth the effort. Click here to read the article featured in Education Week TEACHER.

Stay tuned for next week’s top education news stories.

The Communication, Legislative & Public Affairs (CLPA) team strives to keep NSTA members, teachers, science education leaders, and the general public informed about NSTA programs, products, and services and key science education issues and legislation. In the association’s role as the national voice for science education, its CLPA team actively promotes NSTA’s positions on science education issues and communicates key NSTA messages to essential audiences.

The mission of NSTA is to promote excellence and innovation in science teaching and learning for all.

Follow NSTA

Last month, the Royal Society decided to celebrate 30 years of its Science Books Prize by, in part, polling its readership on this question: What is the most inspiring science book of all time? The 1,309 responders didn’t overwhelmingly converge on any one book, but the winner, capturing 18 percent of the vote, was The Selfish Gene, the 1976 book by Richard Dawkins that, with its gene-centered view of evolution, startled and awed not just a lay audience, but scientists, too.

Dawkins invited readers to see evolution through, as it were, the eyes of genes, which produce beings like us as their vehicles, or “survival machines,” to reshuffle and ferry themselves into the next generation. The genes don’t create us for our sake but, in a sense, for their own. We are here, reproducing and struggling to survive, so that they might live on—potentially forever (Dawkins also entertained The Immortal Gene as a title). When I finished it nearly a decade ago—the book was required reading in my intro to human evolution course—I acquired a new perspective: I don’t have genes; genes have me. The book was, in other words, an exemplar of the “very best science writing,” according to the Royal Society: It inspires, moves, and compels readers as much as the writing in any other genre and, what’s more, it promotes the public’s science literacy—an understanding of how important science is to our everyday lives.

In a nutshell that is our aim at Nautilus—to showcase the very best science writing. Nautilus has built an audience numbering in the millions by re-connecting science to our lives, and telling its stories with style, substance, and imagination. Our society needs them. The value of science literacy in the modern world will only increase. That’s because new technologies, birthed by scientific progress, are changing our world—and our view of ourselves—faster than almost any other force. The best time to learn about science is at a young age, when the mind is labile, open to new ideas and ways of thinking.

But science classrooms, especially in the United States, are undergoing change. The Next Generation Science Standards that have been already adopted by 19 states, are being used as a model for science standards in many more. Their goals and methods mirror Nautilus’: science literacy and an increased interest in the science and technology that are so important to our lives. This means replacing the stand-alone silos of biology, chemistry, and physics with what the new standards call “crosscutting concepts” that link disciplines.  Just as Nautilus uses its multidisciplinary exploration across the sciences, math, culture, art, and society. 

Rather than just have students memorize, the new standards seek to teach them how to observe and ask questions. By having students understand scientific inquiry, the standards can instill ways of thinking that, as Nautilus would say, connects science to people’s everyday lives and the world of ideas. The standards’ focus on disciplinary core ideas, like natural selection in biology and plate tectonics in geology, and reinforces the rigors of science without compromising accessibility, one of the key ingredients to Nautilus’ success with its audience.

But perhaps the most important connection between Nautilus and the Next Gen Standards is the importance placed on narrative. Nothing communicates like stories. The demonstrated ability to narrate observation, experimentation, and discovery—the stories of science—is why so many teachers want to use Nautilus in the classroom. 

A new Nautilus Education Program will answer that desire, providing a year-long print subscription to a school library or science classroom. We’ll also give access to Nautilus Prime, our digital subscription service, to every student and teacher in the school. Nautilus is partnering with Rune to install their content annotation and sharing software within Nautilus; it’ll be adapted for teachers and students to share notes, comments, and highlighted content on Nautilus within a monitored, closed social network that can contain regional, state, and even district nodes. This will create a multifaceted, closed educational social network around Nautilus content that will be instrumental in integrating Nautilus into school curriculum. We plan to have the network(s) live by the start of the fall school year.

Nautilus Education will help students rediscover the magic of science and story. At a time when our scientific and educational institutions are being tested, it’s more important than ever to get today’s best science writing directly into the hands of our students.

We’ve recently heard discussions from colleagues about the need to “unpack” the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and how to do it. The term unpacking means a lot of things to lots of people so we thought we’d share our ideas about what it means and, specifically, what it means for science standards.

Q.1 What is meant by the term unpacking?

When standards are developed, there is an effort to carefully describe what students are expected to learn. But describing these outcomes is easier said than done. A great deal of care is taken to choose just the right words, but if educators aren’t careful, they can miss some subtleties in what the authors meant when they read the standards. Since so much of what happens in education is influenced by standards, it is very important to make sure that educators really understand the intent of the authors. Unpacking is the process of interpreting or clarifying what the standards really mean. Ideally, engaging in a well-designed process of unpacking should lead educators to a consensus on what the standards mean that is consistent with the intent of the authors.

Q.2 Why do I need to unpack the standards?

The standards, written as performance expectations, are statements of what students should be able to do at the end of instruction to demonstrate what they have learned.  It is guidance for assessment developers in designing an end-of-year assessment task and is not intended to drive instruction.

More importantly, the information in the foundation boxes is really the description of what is to be learned and is much more informative and useful for planning instruction.  However, there is a lot of meaning packed into the foundation boxes. The bullets, which we call elements, can be better interpreted by carefully thinking about them, examining support documents such as the Framework, and discussing them with colleagues. In my experience, two educators will initially have different interpretations of what a given element means but through careful study and discussion, they will both gain insights into the goals and reach a consensus.

Q.3 Instead of unpacking, why don’t I just teach students to do what the performance expectation says?

While the way the performance expectations are phrased sounds like they describe what students should do in class to learn the standard, but that is not the intent. To prepare students to successfully achieve what is described in the performance expectation requires thoughtful learning of everything described in the foundation boxes. Mastery of the practice described in the foundation box requires that it be used to learn many different core ideas, not just the one that appears in the performance expectation.  And, mastery of the core idea and crosscutting concepts requires engaging in multiple practices. So, rather than being limited to teaching just what is in one performance expectation, teachers need to mix and match the three dimensions in a coherent effort to explain phenomena or to solve problems.

Furthermore, if teachers limit instruction only to those ideas described in a performance expectation, it is unlikely that students will be successful in an assessment task that targets the performance expectation. This may seem counterintuitive at first, but keep in mind that there are many different contexts in which a given performance expectation can be assessed. Rehearsing a performance expectation can lead to rote performance in a particular context rather than true achievement of the performance expectation. 

Q4. If I know students will be doing a specific practice, why is it important to look at the elements of the practice in the matrix?

The title of the individual practices give a general sense of what students do when they engage in the practice, but there is a lot that can be open to interpretation. Just as a disciplinary core idea, such as matter and its interactions or energy, is made clearer by many more specific elements (the bulleted statements in the foundation box) a practice is made clearer by providing more specific descriptions of what we want students to be able to do in a given grade range.

Q5. Is it best to use only the single practice that is listed in the performance expectation?

No. It’s better to use multiple practices. 

The research described in the Framework indicates that the most effective way for students to develop understanding of science ideas is to study phenomena by engaging in multiple practices. While it is not necessary to engage in every practice in every learning sequence, the majority should be used within a unit. Engaging in just one practice would not give students the experience of constructing knowledge the way that scientists do it.

Furthermore, practices are not designed to be used in isolation, but tend to flow together. For example, asking questions can lead to planning and carrying out investigations, which can lead to analyzing data, developing models, and/or constructing explanations. Throughout the process, opportunities pop up to use mathematics; engage in argument from evidence, and obtain, evaluate, and communicate information. And, the results of any investigation can also be a place for asking new questions and planning new investigations. The process is far from linear and in some cases students can engage in two or more practices nearly simultaneously.

Q6. What if I think another crosscutting concept is a better fit for my lesson?

Just as there is no mandate to use a single practice (as noted above), there is no mandate to use a particular crosscutting concept. Instead, teachers are encouraged to target whatever crosscutting concept seems most relevant to the phenomena being investigated. Applying all of the crosscutting concepts multiple times as students study different disciplines is the best way to help them appreciate the universality of the crosscutting concepts and the special role they have in science.

Q7. I didn’t see ____ in the standard.  I don’t think you can teach ____ without an understanding of that concept. How do we account for this?

This is a very tricky question to answer because it is often very context dependent. It emphasizes why it is so important to carefully unpack the standards and understand what is truly expected. The unpacking process is a great opportunity to reevaluate what is important about a given concept. At the same time, the standards aren’t so explicit that they detail each concept that students need to understand. If your unpacking leads you to conclude that students do in fact need a particular concept, it is perfectly reasonable and appropriate to include it in the progression of understanding. My caution is to make sure that you are adding it because you need to, not because you want to.  All teachers have their favorite topics, so we need to be aware of our personal biases. Time is a tremendously valuable instructional resource, and we have very little to waste.

Q8. How will I have enough time to teach all of this?

It’s important that we not let the ambitiousness of NGSS overwhelm us. I think teachers should keep several things in mind as they begin implementing the standards.

1. NGSS is new. Anytime teachers try a new curriculum, each topic takes longer to teach the first time it is taught than it does once the teacher is experienced with the curriculum.
2. The students in our classrooms today haven’t had NGSS instruction throughout their K-12 career. They, most likely, do not have the prerequisite knowledge of the core ideas that students should now have at a given grade. Additional instructional time will be needed to address this missing knowledge.
3. An even greater challenge that students (and teachers) face is the lack of experience students have in engaging in the science and engineering practices. Not only are elementary students unfamiliar with practices, but middle and high school students are too. Their lack of proficiency will require more time and support. On a positive note, imagine what a 9^th– or 10^th-grade student will be capable of once he or she has engaged in science and engineering practices from the first day of kindergarten!

Everyone in the education system needs to acknowledge these three factors and accept that when NGSS is first implemented, teachers will not be able to “cover” the entire curriculum they are expected to address. But, what everyone also needs to keep in mind is that if educators commit fully to the vision of three-dimensional instruction, students will be capable of much more in the years to come. The shift to three-dimensional standards is a process that will take a number of years. We therefore need to give teachers the freedom to struggle as they begin to implement the standards and encourage them to take risks and improve each year.

Q9. Okay, I’m ready to start unpacking, what resources should I look at?

NSTA has developed a set of worksheets that can help with unpacking each of the three dimensions. You can find these tools (and many others) on the NGSS@NSTA Hub. Each worksheet features a set of questions to consider as you unpack the core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and science and engineering practices.

An essential resource is the Framework for K-12 Science Education. The Framework is available in print, as a downloadable pdf and online document. It includes sections on each practice and crosscutting concept and offers descriptions of each of the 12 core ideas (such as PS1: Matter and Its Interactions) as well as the component ideas (such as PS1.A: Structure and Properties of Matter). In addition, there is a list of the grade-band endpoints for each component idea that was used to make the disciplinary core idea elements in NGSS and other three-dimensional standards. I’ve developed a web page that gives you one-click access to the descriptions of each of the sections in the online document.

Another great resource for unpacking the standards are the K-12 Progressions.  Appendix F of the NGSS contains progressions for Practices and Appendix G contains progressions for Crosscutting Concepts. The best resource for progressions for DCIs can be found on the NGSS@NSTA Hub online and as a PDF.  All of the progressions, as well as the descriptions of Practices and Crosscutting Concepts are contained in The NSTA Quick-Reference Guide to the NGSS, which is a very useful tool.

Other useful resources include the following book chapters and journal articles:

Books

• Helping Students Make Sense of the World Using Next Generation Science and Engineering Practices by Christina V. Schwarz, Cynthia Passmore, and Brian J. Reiser
• Disciplinary Core Ideas: Reshaping Teaching and Learning by Ravit Golan Duncan, Joseph Krajcik, and Ann E. Rivet

Articles

• Engaging Students in the Scientific Practices of Explanation and Argumentation by Brian J. Reiser, Leema K. Berland, and Lisa Kenyon
• Engaging Students in Scientific Practices: What does constructing and revising models look like in the science classroom? by Joseph Krajcik and Joi Merritt
• Exploring the Science Framework: Engaging learners in scientific practices related to obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information by Philip Bell, Leah Bricker, Carrie Tzou, Tiffany Lee, and Katie Van Horne

Finally, particularly when considering students’ current level of proficiency, I encourage teachers to make use of their own experience and expertise. Teachers can use that information to help them in their plans for ways to help students become more proficient. The trick is to really focus on what students have said and done, rather than what the curriculum has called for.

Q10. I’m the only _____ teacher in my building.  How can I collaborate with colleagues to unpack standards?

Even if you are the only teacher in your building teaching a given subject, you are not alone! Teachers across the country—in fact, about two-thirds of them—are wrestling with new, three-dimensional standards. If you live in a state that has adopted the NGSS, more than a third of teachers in this country are using the exact same standards.  And for those not in a state that has not formally adopted, there are still lots of other teachers in your state with the exact same standards.

NSTA has listservs for members and discussion forums in the Learning Center devoted specifically to NGSS. There is a Twitter group called #NGSSchat that “meets” on two Thursdays every month and many science teacher associations have Facebook groups. Unpacking standards is similar to swimming; it should always be done with a buddy. Just as we want our students to engage in meaningful discourse during lessons, educators should engage in meaningful discourse when planning them.

Q11. Is there a place for performance expectations in the Unit Storyline? We’ve started unit development by bundling PEs, unpacking DCIs, SEPs, and CCCs, identifying an anchor phenomenon, and developing a storyline with lesson level phenomena.

Use of the performance expectation is tricky because it is a combination of the three dimensions. Teachers need flexibility in planning what students do in class. As I have noted above, focusing too much on the performance expectation can lead to rote learning where students are trained to do a specific task rather than being able to engage in three-dimensional learning. It’s good to keep the performance expectation in mind during instruction, but it’s important to remember that it describes what students should be able to do at the end of the unit. It’s not what they need to be doing during the unit.

The process that I find works best is to focus on the core ideas, and as part of the process of unpacking them, I consider what phenomena are there that require that core idea to understand. Once I have phenomena selected, I think about how students are going to interact with that phenomenon. The nature of that interaction leads me to a practice. With the core idea and practice selected, I look carefully at the list of elements for the crosscutting concepts and select the one that most naturally fits. I also try to articulate what students will figure out during each lesson and what new questions they may ask.

With a great deal of thought, discussion, and reflection, I sequence encounters with phenomena in a way that transforms a group of lessons into a coherent unit. The key is trying to make sure that students’ questions at the end of one lesson provide reasons for students to engage in the next lesson. I also try to identify a phenomenon that can act as the overall anchor for the unit, which is given the clever name of the anchor phenomenon.

Of course, this process assumes that I have a strong understanding of all of the practices and crosscutting concepts in addition to the core ideas I am addressing. I continually work to deepen that understanding by multiple rounds of unpacking and discussing these dimensions with other educators. One thing I love about the teaching profession is that there are always new things to learn.

Final Thought

I have yet to hear anyone describe three-dimensional teaching and learning as easy to do, but I have heard many educators describe it as worth doing. We know that the way we have been teaching for the last century has not led to the successes that we want for all students. NGSS is not a smooth and easy road to travel, but it is heading in the direction that we want to go.

Editor Note: A similar version of this Q&A also appeared in eObservations, a newsletter published by the Georgia Science Teachers Association. 

Jeremy Peacock

Jeremy Peacock, Ed.D., is Director of 6-12 Science at Northeast Georgia Regional Education Service Agency in Winterville, Georgia, and an NGSS@NSTA Curator.  He is also a past President of the Georgia Science Teachers Association and a former environmental scientist and high school biology teacher. He is currently focused on supporting Georgia teachers in implementing their new state-developed three-dimensional science standards.

Ted Willard

Ted Willard is Director of NGSS@NSTA for the National Science Teachers Association. In this role, he supports implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and three-dimensional learning more broadly by creating resources such as web seminars, conference sessions, workshops, books, and journal articles. In addition, he edited NSTA’s Quick-Reference Guide to the NGSS and oversees the content of the NGSS@NSTA Hub, a website that offers dynamic browsing and searching of the NGSS, tools to support curriculum planning and professional learning, and classroom resources focused on the standards.

The mission of NSTA is to promote excellence and innovation in science teaching and learning for all.

Future NSTA Conferences

2017 Fall Conferences

• Baltimore: Oct. 5–7, 2017
• Milwaukee: Nov. 9–11, 2017
• New Orleans: Nov. 30–Dec. 2, 2017

National Conference

• Atlanta: March 15–18, 2018

Follow NSTA

There are plenty of reasons to wear a lab coat. For instance, lab coats are fire resistant, and they protect your skin from splashes and spills in the laboratory. The following are some helpful hints for selecting the right lab coat for your needs.

Hazard assessment

To identify the type of hazard, conduct a hazard assessment created by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), which includes the following questions:

Does your lab work primarily with chemicals, biological agents, radioisotopes, or a mix of things?

Does your lab work involve animal handling?

Are there large quantities of flammable materials (>4 liters) used in a process or experiment?

Are there water reactive or pyrophoric materials used in the open air (e.g., in a fume hood instead of a glove box)?

Are there open flames or hot processes along with a significant amount of flammables?

How are hazardous chemicals used and what engineering controls are available (e.g. a fume hood or glove box)?

Is there a significant risk of spill, splash, or splatter for the tasks being done?

What is the toxicity of chemicals used and is there concern about inadvertent spread of contamination?

The right barrier

The next step is to make sure the lab coat has the best protection possible. You must understand the hazards and safety standards that apply to your science laboratory. In K–12 classrooms, it’s best to purchase a flame-resistant, chemical-resistant lab coat. Additionally, all fire-retardant clothing must meet the National Fire Protection Association’s NFPA 2112 standard. Fire-retardant lab coats should also be worn where pyrophoric reagents are used, NFPA 45 notes.

Appropriate fit and design

In addition, there needs to be the right combination of fit and comfort. Length of sleeves and coat length are critical in providing the correct barrier. Lab coats that are too long in length can cause trip hazards. Tight coats can restrict movement. Also remember to purchase a coat that has openings on the side that will allow you to access your pants pockets without having to remove the coat, which is a potential safety hazard. Select lab coats with snap-on metal buttons instead of buttons threaded into the coat because they can be taken off quickly in case of an emergency. If the coat caught fire, for example, it can be quickly ripped off without the timely unbuttoning process.

Life span

Always select lab coats made of high-quality fabrics with double-stitched seams that will hold up to multiple washing. Also, unlike nylon and polyester, cotton-based fabrics will not melt.

Submit questions regarding safety in K–12 to Ken Roy at safesci@sbcglobal.net, or leave him a comment below. Follow Ken Roy on Twitter: @drroysafersci.

NSTA resources and safety issue papers
Join NSTA
Follow NSTA

I’m preparing for my first year as a science teacher. I’ve heard I should have a folder for a substitute teacher, but I’m not sure what should be in it besides a lesson plan. —H., Georgia

Good substitutes deserve respect as professional colleagues and can ease your mind when you’re away. Ask your mentor or administrator about what, if anything, is expected to be in this folder. Think about what you would want to know if you’re stepping into someone else’s classroom.

Include a time schedule, class lists and seating charts, a brief description of your expectations and routines, emergency procedures, directions for electronic devices you want him/her to use, the name of a nearby colleague who can answer questions, and a map of the school highlighting the teacher’s room and the office. Supply a form for the sub to leave a status report.

Include several days’ worth of activities or lessons. Be sure that any necessary materials are labeled and available. For unscheduled absences, include some generic lessons that review or extend concepts and could be used any time.

When developing your sub folder, here are a few things to keep in mind:

• Assigned videos should relate to your course goals. Provide suggestions for what students should do or discuss before, during, and after watching it.
• Don’t ask a sub to do an activity with a potential for student injury or that requires chemicals, live specimens, flames, projectiles, or heat sources.
• Word games for vocabulary review are popular with students.
• Catch up on current events with printouts, magazine articles, or websites for students to summarize and share.
• Avoid suggesting students “read silently” or “work on other homework” for the entire period. (This is difficult for them, even when you’re in the classroom!)

If the substitute doesn’t follow your plans or allows students to behave in unacceptable or unsafe ways, share this information with your principal. But if he/she did a good job, a note of thanks would be appropriate.