1Source: Next Generation Science Standards

Thinking Must Be Different 2

Conceptual Framework for Science Development Scientific community through the National Academies of Science provides key leadership in development Feedback from all stakeholders including states, K-12 educators, scientific community, higher education, business community and general public is being considered during development Standards Development States and educators provide key leadership in development Feedback from all stakeholders including states, K-12 educators, scientific community, higher education, business community and general public will be considered during development National Academies’ Committee members will check for fidelity of standards with framework Development of the Conceptual Framework for Science and the Next- Generation Science Standards 3

Conceptual Framework for Science Education The Conceptual Framework draft contains three dimensions: Dimension I – Disciplinary Core Ideas Dimension II – Cross Cutting Concepts Dimension III – Scientific and Engineering Practices 4

After the final Conceptual Framework for Science is released by the NRC in late spring of 2011, Achieve will engage states and other key stakeholders in the development and review of the new college and career ready science standards Writing Teams NSTA CSSS State Members Critical Stakeholder Team Strategic Advisory Team Business Advisory Team NRC Study Committee members to check the fidelity of standards based on framework Process for Development of Next Generation Science Standards 5

The Writing Team is comprised of approximately 30 members who will write the standards based on the NRC’s Conceptual Framework for Science Education. The Writing Team includes members that have expertise in elementary school science, middle school science, and high school science, students with disabilities, English language acquisition, state level standards/assessment and business experience and includes prominent scientists and academics that have working knowledge of science standards. Individuals were selected based on recommendations from various groups including NSTA and the Council of State Science Supervisors as well as interested parties who contacted Achieve. Educators will play a central role in the development since in the end; they will be responsible for implementation. Writing Team 6

Writing Teams will function in grade band teams and disciplinary teams at various points in the process. General order of our work is listed below Architecture and Organization of the Standards (Grade Band Teams) Articulation of Practices/Engineering across grade bands/levels (Grade Band Teams) Articulation of Cross-Cutting Concepts and Core Ideas across grade bands/levels (Grade Band Teams) Articulation of Standards/Standards (Disciplinary Teams) Validation of vertical and horizontal alignment and classroom utility (Grade Band Groups) Writing Team Process 7

Organization  Grade levels versus grade bands  High school standards versus courses  Middle school content  Scientific and Engineering Practice  Cross-cutting concepts Grain size and format Inclusion of examples for content and performance expectations NGSS-Common Core State Standards in ELA and math connection Vocabulary and accessibility Learning progressions Exemplary features identified in int’l benchmarking study Development Considerations for Next Generation Science Standards 8

Overview Standards – Student expectations that combine the three dimensions and boundary statements Core Disciplinary Ideas Cross Cutting Concepts Scientific and Engineering Practices Articulation Across Grade-levels/Grade-bands Connections to Common Core State Standards Possible Components of NGSS 9

Stephen Pruitt, Ph.D. Vice President, Content, Research and Development Contact Information 10