1. NEXT GENERATION SCIENCE STANDARDS HIGH SCHOOL COURSE MODELS UPDATE
Tuesday, January 17, 2017
Lodi Unified School District
Charalee Cunningham, Jud Atwater, Michael Heberle, Sarah Morais

2. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Isabel Cuerpo* Bear Creek Michael Heberle
Melissa Turner
Lodi High
Jud Atwater*
Todd Degrnadmont
David Pires*
McNair
Sarah Morais
McNair
Aleathea Langone
Middle College
Lisa Stewart*
Tokay
Savina Thompson
Sylvia Klein
Jennifer Robinson-Buck

3. COMMITTEE MEETINGS Meeting Date School Year 1 Tuesday, April 12, 2016 2
Tuesday, April 25, 2016 3
Tuesday, May 17, 2016 4
Thursday, October 27, 2016 5
TBA

4. Overview of the Standards 1998 Science Content Standards
Conservation of Matter and Stoichiometry
The conservation of atoms in chemical reactions leads to the principle of conservation of matter and the ability to calculate the mass of products and reactants. As a basis for understanding this concept:
Students know how to describe chemical reactions by writing balanced equations.
Students know the quantity one mole is set by defining one mole of carbon 12 atoms to have a mass of exactly 12 grams.
Students know one mole equals 6.02x1023particles (atoms or molecules).
Students know how to determine the molar mass of a molecule from its chemical formula and a table of atomic masses and how to convert the mass of a molecular substance to moles, number of particles, or volume of gas at standard temperature and pressure.
Students know how to calculate the masses of reactants and products in a chemical reaction from the mass of one of the reactants or products and the relevant atomic masses.
* Students know how to calculate percent yield in a chemical reaction.
* Students know how to identify reactions that involve oxidation and reduction and how to balance oxidation-reduction reactions.

5. Overview of the Standards Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)

6. Structure of the NGSS - Architecture
Title and Code
Performance Expectation (with clarification statement and assessment boundary)
Science and Engineering Practices
Disciplinary Core Ideas
Crosscutting Concepts
Asking questions and defining problems
Developing and using models
Planning adn carrying out investigations
Analyzing and interpreting data
Using mathematics and computational thinking
Constructing explanations and designing soultions
Engaging in argument from evidence
Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information
Life Sciences
Earth and Space Sciences
Physical Sciences (physics and chemistry)
Engineering, technology, and the application of science
Patterns
Cause and effect
Scale , proportion, and quantity
Systems and system models
Energy and matter
Structure and function
Stability and change

7. Shifts in the NGSS - 3 Dimensional Learning

8. Factors to Consider - TIMELINE
Date
Event
Pilot Test – NO CST, now called CAST (California Science Test)
January CDE to release practice items for Pilot Assessment
January Pre Publication of Science Framework released
July Publication version of Science Framework available electronically
Field Testing
Spring Field assessment for CAST
Spring Pilot Test for California Alternative Assessment Science (CAAS)
Operational NGSS Science Assessments AND Curriculum Adoption Process
Fall Instructional Materials Adoption per State of CA timeline
Spring Administer Operational CAST /Field Test for CAAS
Operational NGSS Science Assessments AND New Textbooks in the classroom
Spring Administer Operational CAAS

9. Factors to consider - All Standards, All Students
CA Draft Science Framework
“The Performance Expectations (PEs) of the CA NGSS for the high school level are the assessable statements of what all students should know and be able to do by the end of 12th grade. In other words, the PEs represent the minimal assessable standards for which all high school students should be held accountable.”
Appendix D - NGSS Document
“… provided with equitable learning opportunities, students from diverse backgrounds are capable of engaging in scientific practices and meaning making in both science classrooms and informal settings.”

10. Factors to Consider - ASSESSMENT
The CAST Assessment will be integrated, students in high school will be assessed in all domains within the same assessment

11. Factors to consider - CREDENTIALINGx

12. Factors to consider - a-g REQUIREMENTS
Integrated science fulfills a laboratory science (“d”) requirement
“...coverage of these foundational subjects in suitable breadth and depth can potentially be found in a wide range of science courses, including those with an interdisciplinary, engineering or a career technical education focus, provided the courses conform to the criteria described in the Course Criteria & Guidance section below.”
“All courses approved in the laboratory science subject area should be designed with the explicit intention of developing and encouraging scientific habits of mind important for university-level studies, and aligned with the eight practices of science and engineering identified by the National Research Council Framework and detailed within the Next Generation Science Standards …”

13. Factors to Consider - Choosing a Course Map
CA Science Framework Chapter 6A
Before schools and districts can implement the CA NGSS, they must organize the high school grade-banded performance expectations (PEs) into courses.
NGSS Appendix K Model Course Maps
Model courses are starting points, not finished products; organization is built from the science framework.

14. CA Science Framework Course Models
Three course model
Earth/Space science is integrated into the science domains of Physics, Chemistry, and Biology
Four course model
Biology, Physics, Chemistry, and Earth/Space Science are taught as separate science domains
Three year model
Biology, Physics, Chemistry, and Earth/Space science domains are taught together

15. ADDITIONAL COURSE MODEL OPTIONS
Three Course - PS, LS, ESS Integrated w/Electives
Designed to deliver the majority of performance expectations in years 1 and 2, year 3 with the least amount of PE’s to allow for elective classes to be taken concurrently.
Created by professors at CSU Northridge
Accelerated NGSS Model Course Maps (ANMCM)
Specifically the 2 year high school Schedule Model
Created by AP educators and coordinated by Achieve

16. FOUR COURSE MODEL – DOMAIN SPECIFIC
One course is assigned to each domain with physical science subdivided into chemistry and physics
Twenty-four possible arrangements of course sequence; the one chosen should be based on district needs, district demographics, and conceptual progressions within the NGSS
Course
Subject
Units/PE’s 1
Physics
4/15 2
Biology
12/27 3
Chemistry
5/12 4
Earth and Space
8/29
*Course number does not indicate the order that courses are taken

17. THREE COURSE MODEL – ESS INTEGRATED
To highlight the nature of earth and space sciences as an interdisciplinary pursuit in California, the three courses present an integration of ESS into the other high school disciplines
Six possible arrangements of course sequence; the one chosen should be based on district needs, district demographics, and conceptual progressions within the NGSS
Course
Title
Units/PE’s 1
Living Earth
6/36 2
Chemistry in the Earth System
6/28 3
Physics of the Universe
6/27
*Course number does not indicate the order that courses are taken

18. THREE YEAR MODEL – INTEGRATED
Each course includes content from each domain (life science, physical science, earth and space science)
Employs the crosscutting concepts as the organizing principle
There are no other arrangements for this model- the courses are intended to be taken in the order presented due to fundamental and transferable progressions
Course
Subject
PE’s 1
PS/LS/ESS 23 2 25 3
*Course number indicates the order that courses are taken

19. THREE COURSE MODEL – INTEGRATED W/ELECTIVES
Subject
# of PE’s 1
PS/LS/ESS 30 2 33 3 16
Each course includes content from each domain (life science, physical science, earth and space science)
The documents provided do not explicitly state the PE’s assigned to each course
The model is driven by essential questions
*Course number does not indicate the order that courses are taken

20. TWO COURSE MODEL – ACCELERATED
The three or *four required foundational NGSS science courses could potentially be scheduled in sequence and still allow students to have completed the full span of NGSS by middle or end (in the case of the four year model).
Permutations of this approach are limited by staff, space, and flexibility within scheduling.
Block or Trimester
Year
Courses 1
Course 1 & 2 2
Course 3 & *4
Year
Courses 1
Course 1 2
Course 2 & 3

21. TWO COURSE MODEL – ACCELERATED
Concurrent
In this approach students would be enrolled in two course concurrently.
More cognitively demanding than other approaches.
Intended to implement a 3 course model
Year
Courses 1
Course 1 2
Course 2 & 3

22. SURVEY 2 year 3 year ESS Int NAMING?? 3 year Int 3 year Int/Elec
Pros
Acceleration ONLY
Not a stand alone, supplemental
Block schedule
Earth science
AP possible
Least change/subject
Subject expertise
Staffing
Credentialing
Assessment (11)
More exposure to phys./chem
Balanced
Less to more complex
Most PE’s by year 2
Scheduling flexible (science starts 2nd year)
Elective flexibility
All PE’s Covered
In subject area
Assessment 12
Cons
Not realistic
Traditional Schedule
2 year sci req.
Only 1-2 possible AP/sci elec
11 Assessment
AP readiness
A LOT for 9th
Skip more??
Double up
Staffing (phys/chem)
2 year req.
Decreased elec/AP
Other HS courses
Order of subjects

23. NGSS APPENDIX K - Course Maps & Implementation
are not end products, they are models and starting points
are concrete examples to start conversations about the direction of science education at the district level
will have benefits and challenges that depend on one’s perspective
should be chosen with the student's best interest in mind

24. SURVEY - Information distribution
Committee members discussed what information should be presented to science teachers - all 5 course maps
Department chairs were provided a presentation and pathway packets to present to science teachers
Science teachers took a survey based on the information provided
Survey questions were taken from the NGSS document - appendix K, teachers were not limited to choosing one answer, they were asked to choose all that apply

25. SURVEY QUESTIONS Choose ALL that Apply
The performance expectations are organized in a way to maximize student learning
The performance expectations are organized in a way that increases efficiency in instruction
The performance expectations are organized in a way that represents the interconnectedness of science
Which course map(s) would be the best fit for Lodi Unified School District students?

26. SURVEY QUESTIONS Free response
What are the implications for teaching positions?
How do these course maps affect the focus of professional learning opportunities?
How do the course maps impact resource availability?

27. SURVEY RESPONSES - Sites and Teachers
Bear Creek High School science teachers
Independence High School science teacher
Liberty Continuation science teachers
Lodi High School science teachers
McNair High School science teachers
Middle College science teacher
Plaza Robles Continuation science teachers
Tokay High School science teachers
TOTAL 44 science teachers
31 or 69% of the teachers responded to the survey questions

28. SURVEY RESPONSES - QUESTION 1
The performance expectations are organized in a way to maximize student learning.
Course Model
Number
Percent
2 course accelerated 1
3.2%
3 course earth and space science integrated 17
54.8%
3 course ESS, PS, LS integrated 10
32.3%
3 course integrated (ESS, LS, PS) w/electives 5
16.1%
4 course domain specific 7
22.6%

29. SURVEY RESPONSES - QUESTION 2
The performance expectations are organized in a way that increases efficiency in instruction.
Course Model
Number
Percent
2 course accelerated 1
3.2%
3 course earth and space science integrated 19
61.3%
3 course ESS, PS, LS integrated 10
32.3%
3 course integrated (ESS, LS, PS) w/electives 5
16.1%
4 course domain specific

30. SURVEY RESPONSES - QUESTION 3
The performance expectations are organized in a way that represents the interconnectedness of science.
Course Model
Number
Percent
2 course accelerated 3
9.7%
3 course earth and space science integrated 17
54.8%
3 course ESS, PS, LS integrated 16
51.6%
3 course integrated (ESS, LS, PS) w/electives 8
25.8%
4 course domain specific 1
3.2%

31. SURVEY RESPONSES - QUESTION 4
Which course map(s) would be the best fit for Lodi Unified School District students?
Course Model
Number
Percent
2 course accelerated 0%
3 course earth and space science integrated 17
54.8%
3 course ESS, PS, LS integrated 10
32.3%
3 course integrated (ESS, LS, PS) w/electives 4
12.9%
4 course domain specific 5
16.1%

32. SURVEY RESPONSES - QUESTION 5
What are the implications for teaching positions?
We will need more teachers/staffing/facilities (if there is a 3 year science requirement)
More training/PD for teachers with lack of background knowledge/expertise/teacher comfort level
Teacher credentialing is not aligned with NGSS integrated models

33. SURVEY RESPONSES - QUESTION 6
How do these course maps affect the focus of professional learning opportunities?
More training/professional learning for teachers on Earth Science content and how to integrate sciences
More collaboration time to develop lessons and assessments

34. SURVEY RESPONSES - QUESTION 7
How do the course maps impact resource availability?
New Textbooks will be needed, multiple textbooks may be needed
More and new supplies/lab equipment will be needed

35. NGSS APPENDIX K - Conclusion
It may seem a forgone conclusion that the course map specifically designed to coherently build student conceptual understanding over time, maximize efficient use of class time, and prepare students for the cross-disciplinary reality of science research will be the one that everyone selects, but there may be good reasons for choosing a different model (including “none of the above”).

36. NEXT STEPS - More Information Needed
Committee members have requested more information on Textbooks and Assessments
Pilot Assessment Spring 2017
NSTA (National Science Teacher Association) conference in LA from March 30 -April 2, 2017
SJCOE Rollout #4 May 3-4, 2017
Anticipated recommendation by December 2017

37. Thank you for your time!
Questions