1. Overview and updates September 2013 Instructor notes:
The overview talks about the development timeline and schedule for the NGSS
minutes

2. NGSS Development Process
July A Framework for Science Education is released
May 2012 First Draft of NGSS released
April 2013
Final NGSS document released. States consider adoption
July 2013 Presentation to the State Board of Education
2014
CDE Develops Implementation Plan
2011
2012
2013
2014
•California State Review Team (SRT) of 80 science experts reviewed and commented on five (private and public) drafts of the NGSS (met Nov 2011, Feb 2012, October 2012)
•Second and final public review January 2013
•Thousands of comments submitted to Achieve (The draft received comments from over 10,000 individuals during each of the two public review periods)
•Final copy of NGSS released April 2013
Science Expert Panel (SEP)
27 Science Experts who are representative of the SRT
–K-12 Teachers, COE Science Leaders, IHE Faculty, Business, Industry, and Informal Science Centers
–Noted Scientist Advisors
•Dr. Bruce Alberts
•Dr. Helen Quinn
•Dr. Art Sussman
Review National NGSS to make preliminary recommendations for field comment
•Review feedback from public forums and SRT surveys
•Recommend new California Science Standards based on the NGSS to the Superintendent of Public Instruction
•The SEP met for three times during April, May, and June
California was among the lead states that developed the standards, in a voluntary process conducted in an open and collaborative way over the last 18 months. California teachers, scientists, college professors, business and industry leaders, and educational experts all took part in an 80-member California NGSS review team that thoroughly examined the standards five times.
Next, a Strategic Leadership Team will be appointed by Torlakson to develop a plan to implement the NGSS. This includes a timeline for implementation, adopting a science framework, developing student assessments, and strategies for school districts. Once the team completes its work, their strategic action plan will be presented to the State Board of Education for approval at a future meeting.
Sept 2011
California selected as Lead State
Jan 2013 Second Draft of NGSS released
April – May 2013
CA Public Comment Meetings held throughout the state
Sept 4, 2013
CA SBE adopts NGSS

3. States Adopting NGSS (as of September 2013)
States Adopting NGSS (as of July 2013)
RI, KA, KY, MD, VT
Washington – SBE recommended, waiting for Superintendent to Approve
CA – Superintendent recommend, waiting for SBE to approve – adopted September 4
On September 19, by a vote of 6-0, the Delaware’s state board of education adopted the Next Generation Science Standards–making Delaware the 7th state to adopt the new standards. On September 4, California became the6th state to adopt the NGSS after a unanimous vote by the State Board of Education! Learn more about how the decision demonstrates a fundamental quality of the NGSS: The new standards are state driven.
States Adopting NGSS (as of September 2013)
RI, KS, KY, MD, VT, CA, DE
Map from

4. Crosscutting Concepts Science and Engineering Practices
Disciplinary
Core Ideas
Crosscutting Concepts
Science and Engineering Practices
Goal of NGSS
NGSS will clearly articulate the science standards that are defined as the educational content and practices students will need to learn from kindergarten through high school.
States have previously used the National Science Education Standards from the National Research Council (NRC) and Benchmarks for Science Literacy from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) to guide the development of their current state science standards. While these two documents have proven to be both durable and of high quality, they are around 15 years old. In addition, major advances have since taken place in the world of science and in our understanding of how students learn science effectively. 
California’s current Science Content Standards were adopted in 1998
SB300 requires State Superintendent of Public Instruction to present recommended science content standards to the California State Board of Education by March 20, 2013.
Develop standards that will be rich in content and practice, arranged in a coherent manner across disciplines and grades to provide all students an internationally benchmarked science education. 

5. Moving from Current CA standards to NGSS-CA*
Less emphasis on:
More emphasis on:
Discrete Facts
Conceptual understanding with a focus on depth over breadth
Isolated investigation and experimentation process skills
Integration of science and engineering practices with content
Student acquisition of information
Student understanding and use of scientific knowledge within and across science disciplines, and science and engineering practices
Numerous Standards
Limited number of disciplinary Core Ideas and Cross Cutting Concepts that unify the study of science and engineering
Uneven articulation throughout grade levels
Learning progressions that develop K-12
The standards have not been designed to be “teacher-proof”. In fact the teacher plays a critical role in translating the standards into actionable teaching and learning processes that are best geared for their students.
The Intentional Design Limitations continue with the following:
The Standards do…
define what all students are expected to know and be able to do; they do not define how teachers should teach
focus on what is most essential; they do not describe all that can or should be taught
establish a baseline for advanced learners; they do not define the nature of advanced work
*Presentation to the State Board of Education, July 10, 2013 5

6. Moving from Current CA standards to NGSS-CA*
Less emphasis on:
More emphasis on:
No Engineering
Engineering standards and practices that all students should encounter
Assessing science knowledge
Assessing scientific understanding and reasoning specified by the performance expectations
Limited correlation with other subjects
Correlation with CCSS ELA and Mathematics
Limited integration of science disciplines in middle school
Integration of science disciplines in middle school
The standards have not been designed to be “teacher-proof”. In fact the teacher plays a critical role in translating the standards into actionable teaching and learning processes that are best geared for their students.
The Intentional Design Limitations continue with the following:
The Standards do…
define what all students are expected to know and be able to do; they do not define how teachers should teach
focus on what is most essential; they do not describe all that can or should be taught
establish a baseline for advanced learners; they do not define the nature of advanced work
*Presentation to the State Board of Education, July 10, 2013 6

7. 1998 CA Standards vs. NGSS 1998 CA Kindergarten
Life Science & Earth Science
NGSS Kindergarten
Earth & Space Science
Students know how to observe and describe similarities and differences in the appearance and behavior of plants and animals
Students know characteristics of mountains, rivers, oceans, valleys, deserts, and local landforms.
Use a model to represent the relationship between the needs of different plants or animals (including humans) and the places they live. (K-ESS3-1.)
The standards have not been designed to be “teacher-proof”. In fact the teacher plays a critical role in translating the standards into actionable teaching and learning processes that are best geared for their students.
The Intentional Design Limitations continue with the following:
The Standards do…
define what all students are expected to know and be able to do; they do not define how teachers should teach
focus on what is most essential; they do not describe all that can or should be taught
establish a baseline for advanced learners; they do not define the nature of advanced work 7

8. 1998 CA Standards vs. NGSS 1998 CA 7th Grade Life Science
NGSS Middle School
Students know the function of the Umbilicus and placenta during pregnancy
Students know how bones and muscles work together to provide a structural framework for movement.
Use argument supported by evidence for how the body is a system of interacting subsystems composed of groups of cells. (MS-LS1-3.)
The standards have not been designed to be “teacher-proof”. In fact the teacher plays a critical role in translating the standards into actionable teaching and learning processes that are best geared for their students.
The Intentional Design Limitations continue with the following:
The Standards do…
define what all students are expected to know and be able to do; they do not define how teachers should teach
focus on what is most essential; they do not describe all that can or should be taught
establish a baseline for advanced learners; they do not define the nature of advanced work 8

9. 1998 CA Standards vs. NGSS 1998 CA High School Chemistry
NGSS High School
Physical Science
Students know how reaction rates depend on such factors as concentration, temperature, and pressure.
Apply scientific principles and evidence to provide an explanation about the effects of changing the temperature or concentration of the reacting particles on the rate at which a reaction occurs.(HS-PS1-5.)
The standards have not been designed to be “teacher-proof”. In fact the teacher plays a critical role in translating the standards into actionable teaching and learning processes that are best geared for their students.
The Intentional Design Limitations continue with the following:
The Standards do…
define what all students are expected to know and be able to do; they do not define how teachers should teach
focus on what is most essential; they do not describe all that can or should be taught
establish a baseline for advanced learners; they do not define the nature of advanced work 9

10. Performance Expectations for NGSS
Developed to support 4 Disciplinary Core Ideas
Arranged in
K-5 grade specific
6-8 grade span*
9-12 grade span
Key distinctions from prior standards:
Performance Expectations
Foundations based on the Three Dimensions
Coherence within NGSS and with CCSS
*California modified grade 6-8 to grade specific performance expectations based on integrated topics defined by NGSS
Practices
Content
Crosscutting

11. Middle Grade Learning Progression*
Criteria for Design PEs must :
•Be arranged to provide a transition from elementary to high school
•Align with CCSS ELA and Math
•Build within and across grade levels
•Be balanced in complexity and quantity at each grade
•Integrate engineering appropriately
ACTION 1: Member Williams moved that the SBE adopt the California Next Generation Science Standards, K-12, as proposed by the CDE, and the NGSS Appendices A-M as guidance documents for the local implementation of NGSS and the future development of the California Science Framework. This motion does not include action on the adoption of the middle grades learning progressions. This will be acted upon at the November 2013 SBE meeting.
*Presented to the CA State Board of Education in July 2013; will be acted on in November 11

12. Architecture of a Standard
Performance Expectations
Foundation Boxes
California proposed 7th grade standard
Connection Boxes

13. Performance Expectation
What students should know and be able to do after instruction
Communicates a “big idea”
Includes clarification statements and assessment boundary statements
Clarification statements provide a short description of a nuance of the standard
Assessment boundary provides the depth of understanding all students are expected to demonstrate

14. Foundation Boxes
NGSS are based on Three Major dimensions:
Scientific and engineering practices
Crosscutting concepts
Core ideas in four disciplinary content areas
Science & Engineering Practices for the performance expectation and connections to Nature of Science
Disciplinary Core Ideas for all students to understand
Crosscutting Concepts and connections to Nature of Science provides a big picture for emphasis

15. Scientific and Engineering Practices
Asking questions (for science) and defining problems (for engineering)
Developing and using models
Planning and carrying out investigations
Analyzing and interpreting data
Using mathematics and computational thinking
Constructing explanations (for science) and designing solutions (for engineering)
Engaging in argument from evidence
Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information
Scientists engage in investigative behaviors
Key set of engineering practices
Relevance of STEM in everyday life
Combination of Skill and Knowledge
Dimension 1: Practices
describe behaviors that scientists engage in as they investigate and build models and theories about the natural world and the key set of engineering practices that engineers use as they design and build models and systems.
emphasize that engaging in scientific investigation requires not only skill but also knowledge that is specific to each practice.
better explain and extend what is meant by “inquiry” in science and the range of cognitive, social, and physical practices that it requires.
Although engineering design is similar to scientific inquiry, there are significant differences.
scientific inquiry involves the formulation of a question that can be answered through investigation
engineering design involves the formulation of a problem that can be solved through design.
Strengthening the engineering aspects of the Next Generation Science Standards will clarify for students the relevance of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (the four STEM fields) to everyday life.
1. Scientific and Engineering Practices
Asking questions (for science) and defining problems (for engineering)
Developing and using models
Planning and carrying out investigations
Analyzing and interpreting data
Using mathematics and computational thinking
Constructing explanations (for science) and designing solutions (for engineering)
Engaging in argument from evidence
Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information

16. Disciplinary Core Ideas
Life Science
Physical Science
LS1: From Molecules to Organisms: Structures and Processes
LS2: Ecosystems: Interactions, Energy, and Dynamics
LS3: Heredity: Inheritance and Variation of Traits
LS4: Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity
PS1: Matter and Its Interactions
PS2: Motion and Stability: Forces and Interactions
PS3: Energy
PS4: Waves and Their Applications in Technologies for Information Transfer
Earth & Space Science
Engineering & Technology
ESS1: Earth’s Place in the Universe
ESS2: Earth’s Systems
ESS3: Earth and Human Activity
ETS1: Engineering Design
ETS2: Links Among Engineering, Technology, Science, and Society
Disciplinary ideas are grouped in four domains: the physical sciences; the life sciences; the earth and space sciences; and engineering, technology and applications of science.
four domains – life sciences, physical sciences, earth and space sciences, and engineering and technology – 
Provides an essential question to frame the main concept (e.g. How can one explain the structure, properties, and interactions of matter?)
3. Disciplinary Core Ideas
Physical Sciences
PS 1: Matter and its interactions
PS 2: Motion and stability: Forces and interactions
PS 3: Energy
PS 4: Waves and their applications in technologies for information transfer
Life Sciences
LS 1: From molecules to organisms: Structures and processes
LS 2: Ecosystems: Interactions, energy, and dynamics
LS 3: Heredity: Inheritance and variation of traits
LS 4: Biological evolution: Unity and diversity
Earth and Space Sciences
ESS 1: Earth’s place in the universe
ESS 2: Earth’s systems
ESS 3: Earth and human activity
Engineering, Technology, and the Applications of Science
ETS 1: Engineering design
ETS 2: Links among engineering, technology, science, and society

17. Crosscutting Concepts
Patterns, similarity, and diversity
Cause and effect
Scale, proportion, and quantity
Systems and system models
Energy and matter
Structure and function
Stability and change
Fundamental to understanding Science and Engineering
Connect different domains of science
Apply across all domains
2. Crosscutting Concepts
Patterns
Cause and effect: Mechanism and explanation
Scale, proportion, and quantity
Systems and system models
Energy and matter: Flows, cycles, and conservation
Structure and function
Stability and change
Note Appendix G has full description of CC

18. CCC: Cause and effect relationships may be used to predict phenomena in natural or designed systems.
MS-PS1-4. Develop a model that predicts and describes changes in particle motion, temperature, and state of a pure substance when thermal energy is added or removed.
PRACTICE: Develop a model to predicts and/or describe phenomena
DCI: Gases and liquids are made of molecules or inert atoms that are moving about relative to each other. In a liquid, the molecules are constantly in contact with others; in a gas, they are widely spaced except when they happen to collide. In a solid, atoms are closely spaced and may vibrate in position but do not change relative locations. The changes of state that occur with variations in temperature or pressure can be described and predicted using these models of matter. The term “heat” as used in everyday language refers both to thermal motion (the motion of atoms or molecules within a substance) and radiation (particularly infrared and light). In science, heat is used only for this second meaning: it refers to energy transferred when two objects or systems are at different temperatures. The relationship between the temperature and the total energy of a system depends on the types, states, and amounts of matter present.
On-line color coding
California proposed 7th grade standard
Each stem identifies the DCI, the practice and the crosscutting concept.

19. Connection Boxes
Connections to other Disciplinary Core Ideas (DCI) at the grade level
Articulation of DCIs across grade levels
Connections to Common Core State Standards

20. Prepare for the NGSS
Integrate CCSS ELA and Math with science curriculum
Implement the Scientific and Engineering Practices into the curriculum
Develop Engineering Lessons and Project Based Learning opportunities
Explore the Crosscutting Concepts and incorporate them into your units
Develop hands-on science units with essential questions that incorporate the NGSS Storylines
Read biographies / autobiographies
Science journals and magazines
Peer research

21. Preparation and development
Instruction
CA Framework
Assessments
Teacher
Preparation and development
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
Of the National Academies
July 2011
On June 26, 2013 two important bills were passed through the Senate and Assembly Education Committees. SB 300 (Hancock) which will allow for work on a new science curriculum framework based on the new science standards (anticipated adoption November 30, 2013, or sooner) to be completed by November 30, Without this bill work would not be able to even begin on the curriculum framework until July 1, 2015 – nearly two years after the adoption of new standards. The billed passed the education committee with ease. CSTA thanks Senator Hancock’s office for involving CSTA in the process and we look forward to seeing this bill through to the end.
2014 -

22. Resources Contra Costa County Office of Education
Next Generation Science Standards
CDE updates to the NGSS
NSTA Common Core Resources
Instructor notes:
These are the current URLs for both the California Common Core State Standards and the original Common Core Standards.
© 2011 California County Superintendents Educational Services Association 22