1. THE STANDARDS WE TEACH Curriculum

ACTIONTIMELINE Phase 1: Review panel meetings (develop broad recommendations for changes; direction setting) Completed October 2009 Phase 1: Regional focus groups on progress reportCompleted December 2009 Phase 1: Progress report presented to the BoardCompleted January 2011 Phase 2-4: Review panel meetings (revising and reviewing draft standards) March 2010 – ongoing Phase 3: Interface with other states, Achieve and other science education organizations to develop NGSS March ~March 2013 Phase 3: Coordinate and solicit public input to NGSS drafts May 2012 & January 2013 What’s been accomplished

ACTIONTIMELINE Phase 4: Review panel meetings (revising and finalizing BESE recommendation based on NGSS and state draft) May Summer 2013 Phase 4: Review panel makes recommendation for revised Early Fall 2013 Phase 4: Public comment draft of revised standards presented to the BESE Fall 2013 Phase 4: Public comment and editing of the draft revised standards Fall Winter 2013 Final draft of standards presented to BESEWinter 2013 – 2014 Dissemination of standards; district curriculum adjustment and implementation; MCAS updated Winter 2014 through School year What has yet to be done

Stay focused on the current standards (October 2006) Build fluency with the new language of NGSS  Eight practices  Seven crosscutting concepts  44 disciplinary core ideas Begin to work on incorporating what is “ common ” What are we supposed to do while we wait ?

Science and Engineering Practices 1.Ask questions (for science) and define problems (for engineering) 2.Develop and use models 3.Plan and carry out investigations 4.Analyze and interpret data 5.Use mathematics and computational thinking 6.Construct explanations (for science) and design solutions (for engineering) 7.Engage in argument from evidence 8.Obtain, evaluate, and communicate information

Cross-Cutting Concepts 1. Patterns 2. Cause and effect 3. Scale, proportion, and quantity 4. Systems and system models 5. Energy and matter 6. Structure and function 7. Stability and change

What’s common? ALL the standards — math, ELA and science — require that teachers focus more attention on disciplinary “practices.”

An Examination of Practices 1.Ask questions (for science) and define problems (for engineering) 2.Develop and use models 3.Plan and carry out investigations 4.Analyze and interpret data 5.Use mathematics and computational thinking 6.Construct explanations (for science) and design solutions (for engineering) 7.Engage in argument from evidence 8.Obtain, evaluate, and communicate information Science and Engineering Practices

An Examination of Practices 1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. 2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively. 3. Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others. 4. Model with mathematics. 5. Use appropriate tools strategically. 6. Attend to precision. 7. Look for and make use of structure. 8. Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning. Mathematical Practices

An Examination of Practices They demonstrate independence. They build strong content knowledge. They respond to the varying demands of audience, task, purpose, and discipline. They comprehend as well as critique. They value evidence. They use technology and digital media strategically and capably. They come to understanding other perspectives and cultures. ELA “Capacities” of Literate Individuals instead of Practices

Let’s look in detail at shared elements in the Standards documents…. Math Practice #3: Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others Science and Engineering Practice #7: Engaging in argument from evidence

Where do we see “sense-making” in the math CCSS 1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. 2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively. 3. Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others. 4. Model with mathematics. 5. Use appropriate tools strategically. 6. Attend to precision. 7. Look for and make use of structure. 8. Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.

Where do we see “sense-making” in the science Frameworks 1. Asking questions and defining problems 2. Developing and using models 3. Planning and carrying out investigations 4. Analyzing and interpreting data 5. Using mathematics, information and computer technology, and computational thinking 6. Constructing explanations and designing solutions 7. Engaging in argument from evidence 8. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information

Where do we see “sense-making” in the ELA Frameworks “construct effective arguments,” “request clarification,” “ask relevant questions,” “build on others’ ideas,” “articulate their own ideas,” “question assumptions and premises,” “assess the veracity of claims,” “assess the soundness of reasoning,” “cite specific evidence,” “make their reasoning clear,” “constructively evaluate others’ use of evidence,” “evaluate other points of view critically and constructively,” “express and listen carefully to ideas,” “cite specific textual evidence to support conclusions,” “delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence,” “participate effectively in a range of conversations and collaborations with diverse partners, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.”

There’s a common core in all of the standards documents (ELA, Math, and Science) At the core is: – Reasoning with evidence – Building arguments and critiquing the arguments of others – Participating in reasoning-oriented practices with others.

In order to learn HOW to model, or analyze data, or use appropriate tools, students have to participate in these practices, with others, primarily through talk, joint attention, and shared activity.

Teachers will have to help all students: Externalize their thinking; Listen carefully to one another and take one another seriously; Dig deeper into the data and evidence for their positions; Work with the reasoning of others.

Because these “thinking practices” are inextricably linked to content, and to core ideas, participating in productive talk is not an add-on. It’s fundamental to the learning goals in each set of standards.

What’s common is more than a few key practices: Well-guided talk — scaffolded reasoning talk and discussion — will have to become the new foundation for of all the “practices” in the Common Core and NGSS.

What are examples of science talk that are part of your classroom or lab cultures?

Guided productive talk is foundational. Sounds great. Nevertheless….. There are many obstacles.

We don’t have time! What if no one talks? I don't want to put them on the spot... some of my students are too shy to talk in front of everyone. Or they are ELLs or have language-related problems. “Fear of behavior” What if Spencer just hogs the floor, as usual? What if we get totally off track? What if they bring up content that I don’t know what to do with?

Getting past these obstacles… 1. Basic goals for discussion 3. Classroom norms that support respectful and equitable discussion 2. Basic talk tools to achieve the goals: talk moves and practices

In order to facilitate a productive discussion, a teacher has to think deeply about: the disciplinary content, the learning goals of that lesson and performance expectations, the demands and affordances of the task or problem at hand, and the students as learners, what they know or might think they know, or might need to know.

But wait… science talk is just part of the process towards building science literacy. Argument Writing is just as essential to the process.

The depth of students’ ability to learn science depends making sense of inquiry based investigations through the process of constructing explanations.

Benefits of Scientific Explanations Understanding science concepts Develop 21 st Century skills Use evidence to support claims Reason logically Consider and critique alternative explanations Understand the nature of science

Include in your lessons the practice of Constructing Scientific Arguments

Claim a conclusion about a problem; a statement that answers the question Evidence scientific data that is appropriate and sufficient to support the claim Reasoning a justification that shows why the data counts as evidence to support the claim and includes appropriate scientific principles Rebuttal describes alternative explanations and provides counter evidence and reasoning for why the alternative is not appropriate.

Scaffold this process

Writing a “good” CER question Identifying opportunities for CER: Consider what data the students can use as evidence Consider what scientific principles (e.g. core ideas) the students can apply to make sense of the data Writing the CER question Consider the clarity of the question – is it clear what claims the students could respond with

As you start mapping your lesson this week… Be thoughtful and strategic of where to place science talk and argument writing in your plans. This is not trivial.

Equity Science is fundamentally about the physical world that everyone shares. It is not a matter of how much you have learned at home. No one is a native speaker of physics.

Science is the best place to maximize the likelihood of having a good discussion.

Resources We now have better tools and resources that are accessible, for free, on the web in science — rather than in math or ELA — to support teacher development of thinking practices. If teachers use these talk tools to support evidence-based discussions, the curriculum and kits that they already have will become effective sites for reasoning and learning —for kids and teachers.

II. DESIGNING LEARNING TASKS Curriculum

Designing a Lesson/Unit Identify the topic (Changes to Earth’s Climate) Select the Big Ideas (Human activities are impacting the climate system; Earth is a complex system if interacting rock, air, water and life.) Determine how you will assess learning (formative, summative, models, projects, presentations, etc) Sequence the Learning

THEMES TO CONSIDER ENERGY (sources, flow, transfers, use) SYSTEMS (interactions, positive/negative feedback loops) SCALE (over time and space) HUMAN IMPACT (Anthropogenic influence)

Assessments Common Assessment (GLACIER) – Administer before you start teaching GLACIER related content and at the end of the year – Also administer to a control group Unit/Lesson specific – Plan now to collect samples of student pre/post understanding of science concepts taught. – Share at Mid-year/End-of-year meetings