Presentation on theme: "Science K-7 Content Expectations Web/Public Review May 14 – June 29, 2007 Office of School Improvement."— Presentation transcript:
Science K-7 Content Expectations Web/Public Review May 14 – June 29, 2007 Office of School Improvement
2 Overview of Process Academic Work Group – January, 2007 Liz Niehaus (Niehaus and Associates), Co-Chair Larry Casler (Genesee Math/Science Center), Co-Chair Sub-committees for Physical, Life, Earth Sub-committees for K-2, 3-4, 5-7 First Draft to State Board – May 8, 2007 Public/Web/Legislative Review May 14 – June 29, 2007 National Review – July – August 2007 Final Document Presentation to State Board November 2007, pending approval December 2007
3 Science Development Work Group Academic Work Group Liz Niehaus, Co-Chair, Niehaus and Assoc. Larry Casler, Co-Chair, Genesee M/S Center Barb Armbruster, Forest Hills Hope Beringer, Romeo Herm Boatin, Dearborn Charles Bucienski, Olivet David Bydlowski, Wayne MSC Eileen Byrnes, Grissom Warren Mary Carlson, Grand Ledge Jan Coratti, Plymouth Connie Crittenden, Williamston Geri Elliston, Charlotte Margaret Griffin, Detroit Carol Gutteridge, Fenton Jason Henry, New Branches PSA Nancy Karre, Battle Creek MSC Liz Larwa, Brighton Jane Levy, Ann Arbor Deborah Peek-Brown, Detroit MSC Michele Svoboda, Comstock Park Internal Review Theron Blakeslee, Ingham ISD Gary Cieniuch, Livonia Robby Cramer, Grand Haven Betty Crowder, Rochester Paul Drummond, Macomb MSC LaMoine Motz, Oakland MSC Robert Poel, WMU MDE Science Consultant Kevin Richard, MDE
4 Content Expectations Goal These expectations were developed to provide a description of what students should know and be able to do in Science by the end of seventh grade to prepare them for a successful high school experience
5 Content Expectations Goal The Expectations provide a foundation for curriculum and assessment development that represents rigorous and relevant learning for ALL students.
6 Criteria for Our Work RIGOR: What is the level of intellectual demand in the standards? –challenging enough to equip students to succeed at the next grade level –essential core content of a discipline; its key concepts and how they relate to each other
7 Criteria for Our Work CLARITY: Are the standards clearly written and presented in a logical, easy-to use format? –more than just plain and jargon-free prose –widely understood and accepted by teachers, parents, school boards and others who have a stake in the quality of schooling including university faculties that will prepare teachers to convey the standards and later receive those teachers’ students
8 Criteria for Our Work SPECIFICITY: Are the standards specific enough to convey the level of performance expected of students? –enough detail to help teachers design their courses –address the given teachers’ time for instruction
9 Criteria for Our Work FOCUS: Have tough choices been made about what content is the most important for students to learn? –priorities of facts, concepts and skills that should be emphasized at each grade level
10 Criteria for Our Work PROGRESSION: Do knowledge and skills build clearly and sensibly on previous learning and increase in intellectual demand from year to year? –move from simple to complex, from concrete to abstract –prevent needless repetition from grade to grade
11 Criteria for Our Work COHERENCE: Do the standards convey a unified vision of the discipline, and do they establish connections among the major areas of study? –reflect a coherent structure of the discipline and/or reveal significant relationships among the strands and how the study of one complements the study of another. –States should eventually be able to “back- map” from the high school Academic Standards to a progression of benchmarks that middle and elementary school students would need to reach in order to be “on track” for college and work.
12 Draft Documents State Board of Education Review 5 - 6 months prior to requesting approval Web Review of Draft 30 – 90 days to review, process comments Draft Documents National Review Edited Draft to Achieve or other Final Documents Dissemination 3 Regional 10 Localized Curriculum Protocol Flowchart Draft Documents Work Group Edit draft based on National Review Draft Documents MDE Internal Review Group MDE Management, PR Draft Documents Small Review Group MDE & representative practitioners Document Development Work Group of Scholars Chair and 5 – 8 appointed members OSI Convened Draft Documents Work Group Reconvened Edit based on Reviews Final Documents Superintendent Final Documents State Board Approval Legislative Review MDE
13 What was the Process? NAEP to Content Statements Organize Content Statements (Life, Earth, or Physical and K-4 or 5-7) Content Statements to Content Expectations Content Statements to Grade Level Draft GLCE for review
14 Organizing Structure Discipline 1 Science Processes Discipline 2 Physical Science Discipline 3 Life Science Discipline 4 Earth Science Standards Inquiry and Reflection (IR) Motion of Objects (MO) Energy (EN) Properties of Matter (PM) Changes in Matter (CM) Organization of Living Things (OL) Heredity (HE) Evolution (EV) Ecosystems (EC) Earth Systems (ES) Solid Earth (SE) Fluid Earth (FE) Earth in Space and Time (ST)
15 Next Steps Public/Web Review May 10 – June 29, 2006 National Review July – August 2007 Request to Superintendent Flanagan for State Board Submission November 13, 2007 pending final approval December 11, 2007 Statewide Dissemination January 2008
16 Hierarchy Coding L.OL.04.21 Discipline Standard Grade Level Content Expectation Note: A slightly different coding will be used in the final document.
17 Surveys There are two survey formats in the following slides. Grade Span Survey – Looks at the overall flow and connection between grades. This survey will take much time. It is recommended to print the survey first, then go back into the online survey to input the data. Grade Level Survey – Looks at an individual grade. Much shorter survey. There are links to print out the elementary (K-4) grade span survey, the middle school (5-7) grade span survey, individual grade level surveys, the entire K-7 GLCE document, or the grade specific expectation documents. Note: Once you start the Zoomerang survey, you cannot leave. If you exit the survey, you will have to restart from the beginning.
18 Viewing For the complete Science K-7 Grade Level Content Expectations document, please click on the image below. For all surveys and individual Grade Level Science Content Expectations, please continue to future slides.
19 Viewing We invite you to view the specific grade level expectations and surveys. Click on the Back button in your browser window to return back to Science HSCE PowerPoint. KindergartenKindergarten Fifth GradeFifth Grade First GradeFirst Grade Sixth GradeSixth Grade Second GradeSecond Grade Seventh GradeSeventh Grade Third Grade Fourth Grade For K-4 and 5-7 Grade Span Surveys, please continue to future slides.
20 Viewing and Commenting Elementary Grade Span (K-4): Note: This survey takes considerable time to complete. You can print the survey first, then transfer your answers to the online survey. Once you leave Zoomerang, you must start over. To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper CopyPaper Copy To take the online Elementary Grade Span Content Expectations survey, click here: Elementary Survey
21 Viewing and Commenting Middle School Grade Span(5-7): Note: This survey takes considerable time to complete. You can print the survey first, then transfer your answers to the online survey…once you leave Zoomerang, you must start over. To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper CopyPaper Copy Middle School Survey To take the online Middle School Grade Span Content Expectations survey, click here:
22 Viewing and Commenting Kindergarten : To view a copy of the Kindergarten Expectations, click here: To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper Copy To take the Content Expectations survey for Kindergarten, click here: Kindergarten Survey
23 Viewing and Commenting First Grade : To view a copy of the First Grade Expectations, click here: To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper Copy To take the Content Expectations survey for First Grade, click here: First Grade Survey
24 Viewing and Commenting Second Grade : To view a copy of the Second Grade Expectations, click here: To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper Copy To take the Content Expectations survey for Second Grade, click here: Second Grade Survey
25 Viewing and Commenting Third Grade : To view a copy of the Third Grade Expectations, click here: To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper Copy To take the Content Expectations survey for Third Grade, click here: Second Grade Survey Third Grade Survey
26 Viewing and Commenting Fourth Grade : To view a copy of the Fourth Grade Expectations, click here: To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper Copy To take the Content Expectations survey for Fourth Grade, click here: Fourth Grade Survey
27 Viewing and Commenting Fifth Grade : To view a copy of the Fifth Grade Expectations, click here: To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper Copy To take the Content Expectations survey for Fifth Grade, click here: Fifth Grade Survey
28 Viewing and Commenting Sixth Grade : To view a copy of the Sixth Grade Expectations, click here: To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper Copy To take the Content Expectations survey for Sixth Grade, click here: Sixth Grade Survey
29 Viewing and Commenting Seventh Grade : To view a copy of the Seventh Grade Expectations, click here: To view a paper copy of the Survey, click on this link: Paper Copy To take the Content Expectations survey for Seventh Grade, click here: Seventh Grade Survey
30 Contact Information For additional information, contact: Kevin Richard, Science Consultant Office of School Improvement RichardKe@michigan.gov Betty Underwood, Assistant Director Office of School Improvement UnderwoodB@michigan.gov
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.