week+6+presentation

calendar

National Standards Revealed

Week Six

Reading the National Science Standards

We are ending with a document that seems much bigger that the Michigan Science Frameworks and MEGOSE combined. Fortunately, we are not going to read all of the National Science Education Standards, just selected chapters. Those chapters should take us directly to our desired goal of determining the definition of scientific literacy as envisioned by the National Research Council.

Of course, we would be remiss if we did not address what stake the National Research

National Standards (continued)

Council has in determining national science education standards and what weight these standards have in the whole scheme of things.

Also note that these National Standards have a copyright date of 1996, which means they were started and completed long after the MEGOSE/Michigan Science Benchmarks were produced. MEGOSE was based on Science for all Americans, a 1989 document of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

The Nature of Science Literacy

The definition of scientific literacy, according to the Michigan Science Benchmarks was the combined scientific activities of Reflecting, Constructing, and Using the knowledge of science. The National Science Education Standards presents its definition in Chapter 2. On page 22 of that chapter there is a brief section titled, “scientific literacy”. Despite its wordiness, the definition provided is essentially, “the content standards define scientific literacy”.

The Nature of Science (continued)

Without digging into the content standards just yet, it might be useful to examine some of the “abilities” attributed to a scientific literate person in the following paragraphs. These abilities include:

a. “ask, find, and determine answers to questions”

b. “describe, explain, and predict”

c. “read with understanding”

d. “engage in social conversation about validity”

e. “identify scientific issues” and “express positions

that are scientifically…informed”

The Nature of Science (continued)

f. “evaluate the quality of scientific information”

g. “pose and evaluate arguments based on evidence”

Now, do these “abilities” actually get reflected in the content standards and if so, how? It is also useful to ask if this is just another way of stating the Michigan definition of literacy (or if these abilities represent more or less than the Michigan definition). I will leave the answers to these questions for you to answer.

The Nature of Science (continued)

The content standards themselves are laid out in outline form as the focus of Chapter 6. They are organized across eight categories (as opposed to the five strands in the Michigan Science Benchmarks). There is a separate Inquiry category, along with categories called Science and Technology, Science in Personal and Social Perspectives, History and Nature of Science, and Unifying Concepts and Processes.

Look at the Physical Science content standard

The Nature of Science (continued)

example on Page 108. It is for grades K-4, but should serve well as a model of the intended scientific literacy. On the surface the standard is just a list of appropriate level content. Still, the words, “activity” and “understanding” do appear in the standard. These ideas are apparently clarified in a subsequent narrative for teachers on how to assist students to attain each of these and again in another narrative called the Guide to the standard. We will examine this structure

The Nature of Science (continued)

in more detail when we get to the actual standards next week. In the meantime, examine the outline format for those ideas that seem to be missing or are sufficiently different from the Michigan interpretation of this same literacy.

Finally, the table on page 113 is quite revealing. It is an attempt to describe the change in learning and instructional emphasis between traditional science instruction and instruction based on the national standards. This, of course, it another clue to how the National Research Council defines scientific literacy.

History and Authority

Is it even possible to have national science standards?

Yes and no. Yes, in that any national body or organization can produce a set of standards and call then “national”. No, in that the US Department of Education has no authority to do this since education is the domain of the individual states.

Is there just one “national science standard”?

No. In fact there are three sets of national science education standards. The first set was produced by the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) in 1989.

History and Authority(continued)

It was, as such, the product of science teachers. That same year, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) initiated a standards program called Project 2061 by publishing Science for All Americans. The standards that resulted from Project 2061 did not appear until 1994 as the Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Finally, the National Research Council (NRC) produced its “National” standards in 1996.

What is the relationship between the NSTA, the AAAS, and the NRC?

Little, except for the common interest in science. The

History and Authority(continued)

NSTA is a professional organization for teachers of science, the AAAS is a professional organization for scientists, and the NRC is a private, nonprofit institute, chartered by the US Congress to answer the science questions of the US Government. The employees of the NRC are scientists.

How did the NRC come to write the “National” standards?

The NSTA requested that the NRC do so in 1991. Funding was supplied by the National Science Foundation and the US Department of Education.

History and Authority(continued)

How have other national education standards been written?

The other national standards, such as mathematics, English, and social studies were written by the respective professional societies representing those disciplines.

What is the role of the national standards?

The national standards serve primarily as models for the development of state standards. Each state prepares and assesses its own standards.

=quiz=

1. National I Which of the following organizations is responsible for the production of the National Science Education Standards?

Student Response Value Correct Answer Feedback A. American Association for the Advancement of Science B. National Research Council 100% C. National Science Teachers Association D. US Department of Education

Score: 2/2

2. National I Which of the following is not an ability ascribed to scientific literacy according to the National Science Education Standards?

Student Response Value Correct Answer Feedback A. Describe, Explain, and Predict. B. Ask, find, or determine answers to questions. C. Observe aspects of one's environment objectively. 100% D. Pose and evaluate arguments based on evidence.

Score: 2/2

3. National I How many sets of "national" science education standards are there?

Student Response Value Correct Answer Feedback A. One B. Two C. Three 100% D. Four

Score: 2/2

4. National I The MEGOSE/Michigan Science Benchmarks are based on which one of the following national documents?

Student Response Value Correct Answer Feedback A. National Science Education Standards B. Benchmarks for Science Literacy C. Scope, Sequence, and Coordination D. Science for All Americans 100%

Score: 2/2

5. National I What is one way that the National Science Education Standards differ from the Michigan Science Benchmarks with respect to scientific literacy?

Student Response Value Correct Answer Feedback A. The National standards treat inquiry as a separate learning strand rather than incorporating it into all the content strands as done in Michigan. B. The National standards use the historical development of science as an organizing theme, while the Michigan Benchmark have no such organization. C. The definition of scientific literacy proposed by the National standards is based on research done by scientists. The Michigan Benchmarks definition is more orientated towards research done by science teachers. 0% D. The National standards treat literacy as a secondary component of learning the content of science, while the Michigan Benchmarks treat it as a primary component.

Score: 0/2

6. National I The National Science Education Standards view adoption of the standards as creating change where more emphasis will be placed on some things and other things de-emphasized. Which of the following will see more emphasis under these standards:

Student Response Value Correct Answer Feedback A. Separating science knowledge and science fact. B. Science as argument and explanation. 100% C. Providing answers to questions about science content. D. Implementing inquiry as a set of processes.

Score: 2/2

7. National I The National Science Education Standards is organized under the headings of eight major standard themes. Which of the following is NOT one of those themes?

Student Response Value Correct Answer Feedback A. Reflecting and constructing. 100% B. Science as inquiry. C. Science and technology. D. History and nature of science.

Score: 2/2

8. National I How close is the National Science Education Standards definition of science literacy to that of the Michigan Science Benchmarks? Provide a rationale for your answer.

Student Response: not answered

Sample Correct Answer The two definitions are very close. Major differences only exist in the arrangement of ideas, not the intent. All the Michigan reflecting, constructing, using activities are found in the inquiry and nature of science standards. The personal and social perspectives national standard is just another way of expressing the real-world contexts of the Michigan Benchmarks. General Feedback: The two definitions are very close. Major differences only exist in the arrangement of ideas, not the intent. All the Michigan reflecting, constructing, using activities are found in the inquiry and nature of science standards. The personal and social perspectives national standard is just another way of expressing the real-world contexts of the Michigan Benchmarks. Score: 0/6