Teaching Curriculum To The Next Generation Science Standards

Do you understand a sense of what NDSS (National Down Syndrome Society) will mean to teachers as this gets rolled out in classrooms? NDSS updating new teaching curriculum to the next generation science standards with number of different changes.

They are using different interrogation techniques to understand the level of students, their prior knowledge and then looking at various and laboratory experience activities. Experiments which we were able to gain evidence and have students draw upon their conclusions.

I saw it being much more personal for students. Then kind of arbitrary memorization of definitions if the other areas where it was significantly different was holding myself back from telling students if they were correct or incorrect in their initial ideas or in patterns that they observed from their observations.

It was hard for me to kind of shift from telling students yes, you’re right or no you’re wrong to him I understand what you’re saying okay now let’s go a little bit further.

The pacing of the learning with this curriculum was a little bit different. It was slower than I’m typically used to of going through lessons and activities in the classroom.

But the flip side to that and what I see as a benefit is that the student understanding is much greater their depth of knowledge has increased and their retention of that knowledge throughout the semester is greatly improved from what I’ve seen in past years.

Something that I also liked about the curriculum and teaching it towards the end yes, I standards is that we’re out for performance-based objectives of this curriculum that we used was wonderful in that every unit every activity. Every investigation had a driving question. So, we’re always seeking knowledge to answer a question not just Hey kids today are going to learn about Adams and boom deliver that information.

It was always striving to find evidence to test theories to gain more understanding so that we could then answer those driving questions. what was also different was that the curriculum itself was very cyclic in nature in that we kept coming back to the same ideas over. And over again but applying them in different situations and, I see that is a huge benefit as students move forward in their science career at the high school level. They’re going to be able to use this information in their depth of understanding and apply it to other situations. Whether it’s in biology or chemistry or physics or any other science class that they happen to take in the classroom discussion was much more of a focus Dan.

I’ve used in the past there was a lot of group work and class why discussions where we as a class gathered up our data and were able to collaborate collaboratively come to some conclusions based on that evidence.

So, using class why data we were then able to formulate specific solutions to questions that we had or come to it a group understanding of a topic. So, it sounds like you see your own role is shifting from like knowing the answers to guiding and lot more questions.

There’s also a lot more interactions with the students and even though it’s at a slower pace the students are getting a deeper understanding by keep going to come back to the same ideas over and over so you’ve talked a little bit about how it impacted like the students understanding of the ideas that they’re developing what other differences do you think that this had for the students in the classroom how is it different for the kids.

I think it first out one of the main differences are challenges I saw from the student perspective is that the at the beginning. They became easily frustrated with this idea of not knowing whether what they were saying, or their idea was correct or incorrect.

They’re very used to that in their science class this is the right answer this is the wrong answer by not giving them that immediate conclusive feedback it.

It forced them to continue their thinking and not just stop with the memorization of a term for example they had to keep thinking through and questioning an observation they made or comment another student had in trying to think based on what we’ve studied so far can I prove or disprove this idea and what evidence I can use to support that claim.

So that was a struggle for students at first. But the more and more we practiced that in they saw that I wasn’t going to give them yes, you’re right no you’re wrong a conclusive answer. Then there’s I think they started to really enjoy that their ability to think for themselves and to share their thoughts and ideas without being judged and developing that understanding and those concepts on their own it made.

It much more meaningful to the students which then in turn. I believe is going to help them retain that knowledge much longer, so it sounds like at first it’s kind of scary and difficult for the kids because they’re not getting that immediate feedback of yes or no.

But then they eventually figured out and that they could figure it out themselves using the evidence that they’re gathering. I’m curious about how that played out for like kids who typically struggle in science versus kids that typically excel in science.

It was harder for one or the other different from the other group. I think it was different, but I don’t believe it was harder. I think it was much more comfortable for many of the students.

Once they got used to the way that things were going to play out in class. I think it really did benefit both my lower level students who typically struggled in science and my more kind of academically strong students as far as science is concerned.

The lower level students were able to participate and contribute without that fear of whether their answer was right or wrong. They were able to participate in class descriptive based on what they thought, what they observed, what they think could have been a reason behind a observation or result that they encountered in an activity.

And then also on the flip side the students that typically find science a little bit easier, or those students that have maybe some more advanced science knowledge.

They were able to bring some of that to the table they were able to share some of their own experiences or a trip that they had taken somewhere to a science museum or an experiment that they had done on their own I’m at home and then share that out with the class.

So, I really think it benefit all students hasn’t even though it may have been at first scary and difficult not hat know if what I’m saying is right or wrong.

once that classroom develops that classroom culture developed where you must be worried about being judged for your answer.

Then all students were able to participate in those discussions correct it went for more of an individual learning experience to a collaborative learning experience. So everyone it was essential that we all work together to reach that goal.

It was rare that someone was left behind in the process like we tackled the problem together. We move forward we question do we experimented we gathered evidence, we observed data, we made conclusions look for patterns and then as a whole we were able to come up with an answer to kind of a guiding question.

So how bout just in general what do you see as like the big changes teachers are going to have to face as these next generation science standards are rolled out.

What’s different for teachers that I see when rolling out the next generation science standards is that emphasis is not so much on the body of knowledge it’s less memorization and more understanding of the processes of what science scientists go through.

So, teachers are going to have to learn how to teach differently. I think professional development for teachers is essential because it’s very different than the way many science teachers were taught to teach science.

So, there is going to be some learning in a learning curve for teachers as well to teach to these standards because the depth of knowledge is much greater compared to the breadth of topics.

Disciplinary core ideas crosscutting concepts and scientific and engineering practices to really explain observations. It’s not just memorize ideas this is a significant shift in what it looks like in the science classroom.

This article was written by the Education Unbound Team. For resources, and free curriculum support and lesson inspiration, visit http://www.educationunbound.org/