Carla Zembal-Saul, Professor of Science Education Kahn Endowed Professor of STEM Education Penn State University Building Capacity for State Science Education.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Common Core State Standards: Opportunities and Challenges for the Mathematical Education of Teachers.
Advertisements

Research on Effective Professional Development Iris Weiss.
The Need To Improve STEM Learning Successful K-12 STEM is essential for scientific discovery, economic growth and functioning democracy Too.
April 6, 2011 DRAFT Educator Evaluation Project. Teacher Education and Licensure DRAFT The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE.
Common Core State Standards OVERVIEW CESA #9 - September 2010 Presented by: CESA #9 School Improvement Services Jayne Werner and Yvonne Vandenberg.
Preparing Teachers to Enact Ambitious Teaching Practices during Secondary Preservice Teacher Education: Challenges and Successes Rebekah Elliott Ron Gray.
Next Generation Science Standards Public Release II.
Leadership for the Common Core in Mathematics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Linking Assessment Targets to Instructional Tasks and DOK This.
1 Why is the Core important? To set high expectations – for all students – for educators To attend to the learning needs of students To break through the.
Southeastern Louisiana University College of Education & Human Development Conceptual Framework: Setting the Standard for Excellence through Best Practice.
Leadership Role in Creating an Effective Mathematics Classroom.
Research in Science Education Richard A. Duschl NSF-EHR & Penn State University BCSSE Denver June
Oregon State Board of Education October 2012
Ensuring Quality and Effective Staff Professional Development to Increase Learning for ALL Students.
Matt Moxham EDUC 290. The Idaho Core Teacher Standards are ten standards set by the State of Idaho that teachers are expected to uphold. This is because.
Seeing the Destination So We Can Direct Others to It
EngageNY.org NYSCEA Presentation Friday, March 1, 2013.
Meeting SB 290 District Evaluation Requirements
Next Generation Science Standards Update Cheryl Kleckner Education Specialist.
Supporting the CCSS in the Science Classroom through the Science and Engineering Practices of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) John Spiegel.
 State Standards Initiative.  The standards are not intended to be a new name for old ways of doing business. They are a call to take the next step.
1. 2 Why is the Core important? To set high expectations –for all students –for educators To attend to the learning needs of students To break through.
Margaret J. Cox King’s College London
Louisiana Math & Science Teacher Institute (LaMSTI) Overview of External Evaluation and Development of Self-Report Measures of Instructional Leadership.
COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE SESSION STEM Education: Communication Tools and Collaboration Opportunities May 20, /20/11Superintendents Community of Practice.
Transforming Teacher Education The Debate on Teacher Education and Teacher Quality “There is little evidence that education school course work leads.
All Standards All Students
Illinois MSP Program Goals  To increase the content expertise of mathematics and science teachers; 4 To increase teaching skills through access to the.
Thomas College Name Major Expected date of graduation address
1. Principles Equity Curriculum Teaching 3 Assessment Technology Principles The principles describe particular features of high-quality mathematics programs.
Implementing Standards in a Complex System Heidi Schweingruber, Director Board on Science Education National Research Council 1.
LIVE INTERACTIVE YOUR DESKTOP 1 Start recording—title slide—1 of 3 Introducing the Next Generation Science Standards Originally presented by:
1Source: Next Generation Science Standards. Thinking Must Be Different 2.
Introducing the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)
K-12 Mathematics in Rapid City Longitudinal Findings from Project PRIME Ben Sayler & Susie Roth November 5, 2009.
Committee on the Assessment of K-12 Science Proficiency Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education National Academy of Sciences.
1 Historical Perspective... Historical Perspective... Science Education Reform Efforts Leading to Standards-based Science Education.
1. Housekeeping Items June 8 th and 9 th put on calendar for 2 nd round of Iowa Core ***Shenandoah participants*** Module 6 training on March 24 th will.
The College Board Standards for College Success CCSSO – SEC State Collaborative Alignment Study CCSSO-SEC Meeting and Content Analysis Workshop San Diego,
Expeditionary Learning Queens Middle School Meeting May 29,2013 Presenters: Maryanne Campagna & Antoinette DiPietro 1.
Chris DeWald Science Instructional Coordinator Montana Office of Public Instruction.
Teaching to the Standard in Science Education By: Jennifer Grzelak & Bonnie Middleton.
Update for TN State Board of Education July 24, 2013 Next Generation Science Standards for Today’s Students and Tomorrow’s Workforce.
ML evi ne CP ED Co nv en in g Ju ne  The Purpose  The People  The Process.
1. Administrators will gain a deeper understanding of the connection between arts, engagement, student success, and college and career readiness. 2. Administrators.
NGSS-Health Science August Connection to the Common Core.
8 1Source: ADP Network Science Framework Call Laura Slover, V.P. Content and Policy Stephen Pruitt, Director of Science.
Next Generation Science Standards “Taking the Steps to Implement NGSS” March 29, 2013 TEEAM Conference.
Unpacking NGSS Laura Kresl Julie Roney. Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) September 4, 2013 C Subject: State Schools Chief.
BISD * Welcome – Introductions * Expectations – Roles & Responsibilities * Group Agreements * Process * Timeline * Building our understanding.
The case for scientific literacy? so pretty i never knew mars had a sun.
Understanding the Common Core State Standards and Literacy Standards.
Five Tools & Processes for NGSS Tool 3: Using the 5E instructional model to develop a conceptual flow.
Copyright © May 2014, Montessori Centre International.
District and school leaders January 22 or March 4, 2016.
Defining 21st Century Skills: A Frameworks for Norfolk Public Schools NORFOLK BOARD OF EDUCATION Fall 2009.
TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction 1 Welcome to the STEM Task Force Funding provided by:
 Continue to develop a common understanding of what STEM education is/could/should be here at Killip.
Equity and Deeper Learning:
School Building Leader and School District Leader exam
Board on Science Education Draft released 15 July 2011
NATIONAL PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT
Board on science education
All Standards All Students
Professor of Education
Chapter 8: Ascending Intellectual Demand in the Parallel Curriculum Model EQ: How does Ascending Intellectual Demand (AID) impact your classroom?
Southern Regional Education Board Annual Leadership Forum
Professor of Education
Science Leadership Network
How well do you know the new science standards?
Presentation transcript:

Carla Zembal-Saul, Professor of Science Education Kahn Endowed Professor of STEM Education Penn State University Building Capacity for State Science Education Council of State Science Supervisors Denver, 2014

Board on Science Education (BOSE) and NRC’s Teacher Advisory Council Committee charge Identify teachers’ learning needs and current opportunities for learning Develop guidance for providing opportunities to support teachers’ learning Funded by the Merck Corporation Foundation

See the website for more information SE/CurrentProjects/ Coming soon!  Expert review in Summer 2014  Anticipated release in Fall 2014

 K-6 teacher learning and development for engaging students in scientific discourse and practices  Across career stages  Commitment to school–university partnerships  Affordances of technology  Science learning  Learning to teach science

 Revisit next generation science education  What do we know?  What are we working on?  What are the persistent questions?  Questions and conversation

 Career stage – preservice, induction, career  System level – elementary, middle, high school LevelLeversLimits Elementary SchoolUnderstanding of children and development Opportunities to integrate across subject area Limited knowledge of science content and practices Generalists Frequent grade level changes Middle SchoolFocus of much attention and funding Ambitious content Preparation varies greatly (K-6, 7-12, other) High SchoolMore depth of content knowledge Often assigned to teach outside of discipline Verification labs v. practices

 Developmental process  Dynamic  Context dependent  Responsive to problems of practice  Attentive to equity and ethics Continuum as essential expertise that teachers and groups of teachers develop across careers to meet the demands of the new vision

New vision for science education revisited Gap with current practices Demands of new vision

 Articulated in the Framework and NGSS  Based on decades of research about how people learn  Expressed as learning performances that weave together practices and crosscutting concepts in the context of content (DCIs)  Coherent building of ideas over time  Integrated across Mathematics and ELA

 Gap between vision and current instruction, curriculum, and assessment  Teachers are responsible for creating learning experiences for their students  However, it is likely that teachers…  Have not experienced this kind of science learning  Have not been prepared to teach in ways that reflect the new vision (SM and PCK)  Teach in districts that focus on and support subjects other than science

 Integration of core ideas, practices and crosscutting concepts  Skillful teaching and assessment practices, with emphasis on classroom discourse  Technology tools aligned with scientific and engineering practices  Support for a range of diverse learners

 Teachers, schools and districts will need considerable support moving forward  True for ALL (or at least most)  Novice and experienced teachers  Teachers at all levels of the system, K-12  Schools/districts where science has been neglected and those known for their excellent science programs  Teacher educators and professional development providers

Science teaching workforce Opportunities for teachers to learn

 Characterized by substantial variability  Background and preparation  Professional learning opportunities  Contexts in which they work  Available data on workforce  Fragmented across surveys  Difficult to track for elementary teachers

 2012 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education  SASS (NCES Schools and Staffing Survey)  Commissioned reports – administrative databases in Florida and New York

 Science background – no science cert  40% of middle level science teachers  14% high school science teachers  Science teaching career  40% middle school and ~50% high school science teachers have >10 years experience  More than half of new science teachers leave before 5 th year

 National trend toward inexperience and undeveloped expertise  Uneven distribution of knowledgeable and experienced teachers  Teachers without science degrees more common in high poverty schools  Greater numbers of less experienced science teachers found in higher poverty schools

 Focus on new science knowledge and teaching practices  Over time, range of dimensions, various contexts, uneven supports and constraints  Profound role of context  Other influences  High stakes testing  Rapidly changing demographics  Nature of workforce

 Driven by individual interest v. building capacity at the school or district level  Episodic and lack coherence  No intentional relationship between opportunities  Not informed by articulated theory of learning

Shared vision for science teaching Features of effective PLOs

 Far less clear than vision of learning  Pockets of innovation  Core sets of instructional practices needed  Practitioners and researchers implement and study over time

 Instructional practices that have a positive influence on students’ science learning  High leverage practices (Ball and colleagues)  Ambitious teaching (Windschitl and Calabrese- Barton)  Categories of characteristics across studies  Ways teachers frame students’ intellectual work  Use of conceptual anchors for collective work  How teachers mediate student reasoning and activity

Consensus view emerging  Based on research across multiple subject areas  Empirical evidence for features is limited and mixed  “Connect the dots” studies rare  Useful as a starting point for providers and researchers

 Active engagement with time for interactions with peers  Analysis of teaching practices and samples of student work  Attention to content intertwined with pedagogy  Connected to curriculum  Coherent with school policies and practice  Sustained over time

 Integrate three dimensions of NGSS – disciplinary ideas, practices, crosscutting concepts  Engage with scientific and engineering practices  Attend to meaningful assessment practices

Experience ≠ expertise. What counts as expertise, where does it reside, and how do we harness it? Context is king. How do we leverage it as an asset while remaining sensitive to it? Who should provide teacher learning opportunities and what are the appropriate qualifications/expertise? How do we leverage the affordances of technology to support teacher learning? How do we build capacity within and across systems and across career stages?

 Cannot ignore teacher learning  Complex and nuanced problem made more challenging by new vision  Constellation of supports  All levels of system and across career spans  Coherent and aligned with vision  Networks of expertise  Focus on capacity building  Sensitive to context