How can we decide if materials align with the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)? How can we revise existing materials to better match the shifts in teaching and learning called for by A Framework for K-12 Science Education – Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas (National Research Council) and the NGSS? The Educators Evaluating the Quality of Instructional Products (EQuIP) Rubric, developed jointly by NSTA and Achieve, is designed as a tool to give you support in this effort. It will also serve as a guide for you, should you wish to revise your materials to more closely align with the NGSS.

Many developers and publishers of science materials claim that their materials align with the NGSS and feature the NGSS performance expectations. And while some publishers will make legitimate attempts at modifying their materials to do an appropriate alignment, you will need to have the appropriate tool to judge which materials better represent the intent of the NGSS and which materials just really don’t match up. From the positive side, there are many groups and individuals who are designing and building materials to align with the NGSS, but even with the best of intentions many of these materials don’t match up. Why? Because it is just really hard to design materials that have disciplinary core ideas (DCIs), scientific and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts (CCCS) blended and working together for learners to make sense of phenomena and design solutions. It is even harder yet to use DCIs, practices, and CCCs blended together over time to help students attain the level of understanding needed to meet the proficiency in a targeted set of performance expectations (also commonly known as a bundle of performance expectations).

The EQuIP rubric provides us with a set of criteria to help us judge whether materials align with the NGSS. The EQuIP Rubric is still evolving. The criteria have been identified, and we are working to associate values with the criteria to indicate the extent to which they are met. Over time we will continue to enrich the EQuIP rubric with levels and examples.

Getting Started

To use the EQuIP rubric, you first need a solid understanding of the disciplinary core ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts, each of which is described in detail in the Framework. Understanding each of these dimensions is essential, but real transformation comes with understanding how these dimensions blend and work together; this is the critical and perhaps most important shift in the NGSS. The EQuIP rubric refers to this blending of DCIs, practices and CCCS as three-dimensional learning.

As you assess the three-dimensional aspect of a resource, you’ll notice that the EQuIP rubric is divided into three columns. The first column focuses on alignment with the NGSS. The first criteria in the alignment category points to the blending of the three dimensions mentioned earlier:

Elements of the science and engineering practice(s), disciplinary core idea(s), and crosscutting concept(s), blend and work together to support students in three-dimensional learning to make sense of phenomena or to design solutions.

If the lesson or unit you are judging don’t meet this criteria, there is no need to go on with an evaluation to discern if the materials align with NGSS or not. As such, you really need to understand the concept of three-dimensional learning. It represents an entirely new way of thinking about and enacting science teaching. It’s not as simple as using the practices and crosscutting concepts to help students understand the disciplinary core ideas. Rather, the three work together to help students make sense of phenomena or design solutions. Making sense of phenomena and designing solutions drives the teaching and learning process.

I like to apply the analogy of preparing a really great meal to three-dimensional learning. I originally got this idea from Ted Willard from NSTA. I love to cook, so I’ve tried to expand on this analogy. Think of knowing how to do various techniques in the kitchen like kneading bread, cutting tomatoes, beating an egg, frying or roasting, and so forth as the practices. You could know how to do all of these things and still not be able to prepare a really good meal. Now think of picking out really good ingredients for the meal. You want to pick out a high-quality piece of fish or poultry or excellent pasta for the meal. These are your core ideas. A disciplinary core idea is essential to explaining a number of phenomena. Your main ingredient is essential to the meal. But just as the DCI works with practices to make sense of phenomena and design solutions, you need to know how to cook that main ingredient. But something is still missing. The meal tastes bland. What is missing? To make a really good meal, we need to use spices and herbs to enhance the flavor of the main ingredients. Similarly, to really make sense of phenomena and to design solutions all three dimensions are necessary. To make a really wonderful meal, good main ingredients are necessary, but you need to know how to use various techniques to prepare them, and you must have the species and herbs to enhance the flavors. All three work and blend together to make a great meal. Similarly, to foster three-dimensional learning where all learners can make sense of phenomena and design solutions, all three dimensions need to work and blend together.

I hope this analogy helps you see how all three dimensions work together because it is the essential aspect of the EQuIP rubric. If this first major criterion isn’t met, there just isn’t any reason to proceed further. If the cooking analogy doesn’t make much sense to you, I would love to hear your analogy for three-dimensional learning. If you want to read more about three-dimensional learning, read or reread the Framework, the NGSS, and the Developing Assessments for the Next Generations of Science Standards (NRC, 2014) and focus on the idea of three-dimensional learning. One caveat that I will mention regarding three-dimensional learning is that crosscutting concepts might be more implicit than explicit in current materials that have really tried to align with NGSS. Why? Because it is difficult to include this dimension, and we still don’t have many really good examples of materials that blend all three dimensions together.

Instructional Supports

Of course, with respect to NGSS, what is also critical is that lessons are designed for three-dimensional learning and fit together coherently to help students build proficiency of a target set of performance expectations (more commonly known as a bundle of performance expectations). This is the second major criterion in column one. Developing a coherent storyline in which lessons fit together to support students in building proficiency of a targeted set of performance expectations is indeed a challenge. Remember that one lesson will never reach the level of proficiency necessary in a performance expectation. Building a coherent storyline in which you build toward meeting proficiency of a bundle of PEs that will support students in making sense of phenomena and design solutions is a critical aspect of aligning with NGSS. In so doing you will blend various practices with elements of core ideas and various crosscutting concepts.

If you think a resource is thus far aligned with the NGSS, you can use the other criteria in column 1 and the other two columns to further inspect the materials. Notice how the second column, Instructional Supports, focuses on instructional supports for all students. The writers of the NGSS designed the standards for all students in our country. Reaching all learners was an important focal point in developing the NGSS. All learners need to develop the conceptual tools to use knowledge to solve problems, innovate, make decisions, and learn and apply new information. All students need to develop proficiencies expressed in the performance expectations. To achieve this, we need to make sure that instructional materials and learning environments contain the instructional supports that will allow all children to grasp three-dimensional learning and build proficiency of the performance expectations.

All of the criteria listed in the EQuIP rubric are important, but I would like to elaborate on the criterion in column 2. Highlighting these criteria does not diminish the importance of the others. When the team of writers developed the rubric, we wrestled with each of the listed criteria. The ones that stand out for me are the following:

• Engages students in authentic and meaningful scenarios that reflect the practice of science and engineering as experienced in the real world and that provide students with a purpose.

This criterion encourages students to see purpose in learning and using science. The meaningful scenarios often involve students in experiencing a phenomenon they need to explain or defining a problem that needs to be solved.

• Develops deeper understanding of the practices, disciplinary core ideas, and crosscutting concepts by identifying and building on students’ prior knowledge.

Linking new ideas to prior knowledge is critical in building understanding that students can use, and building a coherent storyline will not only develop understanding but will also foster engagement. Materials need to provide suggestions on how to support linking to and building on students’ prior ideas, experiences, and world views.

• Provides opportunities for students to express, clarify, justify, interpret, and represent their ideas and respond to peer and teacher feedback orally and/or in written form as appropriate to support student’s three-dimensional learning.

Literature on student learning presents strong evidence that when individuals express their ideas, they build their understanding (National Research Council 2007). Think back to the first year of your teaching and how much you learned as you struggled to clearly explain your ideas to students. By expressing your ideas, you were making links in your understanding. Materials need to provide suggestions on how to support learners in communicating their ideas.

• Provides guidance for teachers to support differentiated instruction in the classroom so that every student’s needs are addressed.

Knowing how to support the learning of a wide range of learners is essential if we hope to prepare students who can use and apply science ideas. Students come to our classrooms with different backgrounds and cultural experiences. Making science meaningful for this wide range of learners is a difficult charge. Instructional materials need to contain educative supports that provide a variety of approaches about how to work with learners from various backgrounds.

Monitoring Student Progress

I want to mention one criterion in the third column: Monitoring Student Progress. As you read column 3, notice the focus on assessing three-dimensional learning. The first and third bullets make specific reference to three-dimensional learning. In particular, the third bullet focuses on how formative assessments of three-dimensional learning should be embedded throughout instruction. This is a critically important shift in teaching. As teachers, we will be expected to assess three-dimensional learning as a routine part of classroom practice. These formative assessments will provide us with feedback about whether students are developing proficiency in the performance expectations we are building toward.

As the EQuIP rubric evolves, further elaboration and examples of the criteria will be added. But the criteria listed provide the best starting point we have to decide if curricular materials align or do not align with the intention of the NGSS. All publishers will say their materials align with NGSS. Don’t believe them, but rather use the EQuIP Rubric and your understanding of three-dimensional learning, disciplinary core ideas, scientific and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts to make your own informed decisions. Don’t be fooled by resources that have been superficially tagged as addressing performance expectations and being aligned with the NGSS. Rather ask yourself, “Do the lessons engage students using crosscutting concepts, core ideas, and scientific and engineering practices to make sense of phenomena or design solutions, building toward proficiency in a targeted set of performance expectations?” Make sure you can explicitly show others these clear examples of three-dimensional learning. If the materials do this one thing, then even if they are deficient in other areas, there is still the potential to modify or supplement those deficient areas of the materials to make them better aligned with NGSS.

Three-dimensional learning should look and feel different to you. I don’t want to say your current teaching does not resemble three-dimensional learning, but I know from walking into numerous classrooms that I seldom see it. I also know from various national surveys that U.S. students perform poorly in science. My understanding of three-dimensional learning has grown tremendously since I first started working on the Framework and then on the NGSS. The NGSS and three-dimensional learning should not only seem different, but in many respects it should seem revolutionary. The NGSS was informed by new research on how students learn best, so it was written to be different from how we taught in the past and it should shake up what is happening in science classrooms; otherwise there would be no reason to create something new, and the NGSS would not seem so challenging to implement.

This is my first professional blog. I would love to hear from you about this blog, your ideas, questions, and feedback. I would also love to hear from you about the EQuIP Rubric. The work on the EQuIP rubric has just started and there is much more work to be done, but the EQuIP Rubric does provide us with a tool to use to evaluate and design materials. To use it, we need to make sure we understand three-dimensional learning.

References

National Research Council. 2007. Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K–8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council. 2007. Ready, Set, SCIENCE!: Putting Research to Work in K–8 Science Classrooms. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Today’s guest blogger is Joe Krajcik, Professor of Science Education and Director for the CREATE for STEM Institute at Michigan State University. Joe was a physical science writing team leader for the NGSS; he is one of several educators who helped develop the EQuIP Rubric for Science. View and download the rubric and other resources from the NGSS@NSTA Hub, or view it on the official NGSS site.

I had a great conversation with an early-career teacher a few weeks ago. She was a “digital native”—armed with smart phone and ready to tweet. I admit, I’m a “digital immigrant” who re-examines every new device in order to evaluate whether it’s worth the price to buy and the time to use. We talked about polling in class. She uses an APP; students respond to questions during her classes from their seats with their phones. I use post-its—admittedly a bit Luddite, but as I argued, the students have to actually stand up and walk to the front whiteboard, and while they do they usually engage in conversation. Neither of us were sure we had the final answer, but the questions we raised remained with me for a long time.
Thirty years ago NSTA participated in the first major grant initiative to explore how computers could be used in science classrooms. The site was a family-friendly environmental camp; the tools were Apple IIes. Teachers spent long days trying to develop Basic and Logo programs that could help with review, experimentation, data analysis and simulation. The project leaders moved from station to station, with suggestions for problem-solving. So did my 8 year old son. When we encountered problems we couldn’t solve, one of the teachers would say: “My money’s on the kid.”
Using computers as instructional tools was a new idea then. Teachers proved very reluctant to accept their help. One of the underlying factors was the realization that there was a significant difference between the ability of young learners and the ability of their teachers to adapt.
Most of today’s science teachers are “digital immigrants” like me. (This term was introduced by author Mark Prensky, whose works on the topic are easy to find and valuable reading.) We may be enthusiastic and capable of learning new tech, but it doesn’t come naturally. And for most of us, it’s awkward to plan a lesson and simply “put our money on the kids.” By contrast, digital natives have never experienced a world with limits on where they could go or what they could explore on the Internet so they are not intimidated by perceived barriers.
For several decades there was very little research to back up the use of technology in classrooms. Now there is a body of empirical evidence that can guide even the most reluctant immigrant to create better learning environments with tech tools. That’s why I’d like to propose a series of blogs here to share both the possibilities and the evidence we have to guide our own work. Questions like the one at the top deserve thoughtful consideration. Hopefully, you’ll join in the discussion.
Teaching the Y’s and I’s
Each generation is influenced by both society and technology. We look back to the “Silent Generation” of the Great Depression, the “Boomers” who were born after WWII, and their children dubbed “Gen X” who benefitted from the economic growth post-war and the technologies that wartime research provided. There are differences within each group, of course, but they share many attitudes because of their common experiences.
Beginning with the “Gen Y” and “Millennial” generations (born since the computer invasion of the 1980s) we’ve seen not only a change in social and economic factors, but significant and measurable changes in how people learn. Here’s just one example: When I began teaching, there was a lot of emphasis on eye tracking and fine motor skills in language arts. We drilled reluctant readers in left-right tracking, spent hours on penmanship. Today’s GenY readers have significantly different skills and preferences. They like big graphics, less text, clickable hyperlinks. I first noticed this difference when I began to teach online coursework. The over-40 grad student was likely to expect a reading that could be printed on paper (so they could see how far they had read). The younger students wanted the reading online. (There are other differences in how they see that go beyond the space I could devote in the blog, but are embedded in the development of devices like the Kindle™.)
There’s even a new term for our elementary students today—the I Gen. (Some call them “screenagers.”) They were never alive before Facebook™ or YouTube™. You see them playing with smart phones in their high chairs in restaurants. They have never had to use a stand-alone calculator, a rotary dial phone, or a paper map. They are never out of touch with one another or the world at large. They spend more than 5 hours a day before screens, and consume enormous amounts of information in the process. Many of the “dogmas” we learned in our education courses, like the idea that virtual experiences are not real to young children (Piaget), are simply not true any longer. In Educational Leadership, Larry Rosen talks about Teaching the IGeneration. “Researchers also are studying how preschoolers and infants deal with media exposure, both made for them and the exposure they get when parents or siblings are in the same room, using video games, TV or other content.” He reminds readers that children who used to begin with books now are exposed to electronic media first.
Earning Our Citizenship
For veteran teachers, the challenge of the Ys and Is isn’t just learning new software. It’s learning to see the world through their eyes. We need to not only add 21^st Century Skills to their curriculum, but cut the lessons they no longer need—and that’s the hardest part! But Rosen and other researchers are optimistic: “…once teachers relegate much of the content dissemination to technology, they can spend class time more productively—helping students analyze, synthesize and assimilate material.”
In the blogs that follow, I’d like to raise questions like these:

• Living through an Avatar: Can children learn real-world skills in virtual environments?
• Navigating the Jungle: How do we teach children to evaluate and discriminate sources on the web?
• Dumbing and Dumping: Why do we now talk about “Death by Power Point?”
• Social media: Can we use them for instruction?
• Platforms: Online, hybrid, and supported face-to-face models
• Sense and Safety: How to select what you need and ignore what you don’t.

If you have other topics that you’d like to explore, please write me at Juliana.texley@nsta.org

Attendees of NSTA’s 2014 STEM Forum and Expo will be challenged to cook up a recipe for STEM success next month. No aprons will be required, though; this challenge focuses on a different mix of materials—the kind you’ll be able to use in class to whet your students’ appetites for science. NSTA’s STEM Iron Chef Competition starts on the evening of Wednesday May 14 in the Morial Convention Center. Come alone or bring friends, and be ready to collaborate! You’ll pick a challenge, and we’ll give you a set of secret ingredients to include in your solution. You can prepare your  feast on the spot, or you can meet with your group later—but be ready to turn in your final product by midnight on Thursday. On Friday, May 16, we’ll gather together and feature the top recipes for success in a fast-paced, engaging presentation. Teams will be challenged with creating one of the following meals in our “kitchen”:

I didn’t see the swan boats in the Public Garden or tea in the Harbor, but I did see many things—skylines, modern art, sunrises and fabulous sessions at the conference.


I got to use a Smart Pen, talk with other early childhood educators, draw a cricket, and hear inspiring talks.
It has taken me a few weeks to report on the conference as I adapted to only having an iPad and camera at the conference, and a busy family visit soon after. These summaries are from my notes and may not accurately reflect the presentations or the presenters’ views. Don’t delay, go to the Boston conference session schedule while it is still online and download the files from the presentations you attended, or wish you did.
Beginning on Thursday at 8am with “STEM Integration—Don’t Leave a Letter Out!” presented by Shannon K. McManus (Museum of Science: Boston, MA) the conference offered up many sessions addressing the full STEM. We handled and discussed various materials to use in making a wind sail before choosing materials to build a model to test. The activity is suggested for grades 1-5 but we adults enjoyed it as we tested it for its value for our classrooms.
The “ASTC Session: Teaching with Collections: Bringing the Next Generation Science Standards to Life” presented by Wendy Derjue-Holzer and Amy Gunzelmann (Harvard Museum of Natural History: Cambridge, MA), Wendy Hanlon (Atlantic Middle School: Quincy, MA) and Fran Ludwig (Retired Educator: Lexington, MA) had us practice learning through observations and discuss how to apply this to our classrooms. There was a selection of tree twigs to sort, match and identify, and a series of decomposition jars to view—part of an on-going investigation!
The keynote presentation by Mayim Bialik from the hit TV series The Big Bang Theory, “The Power of One Teacher,” was affirming. She was upstaged (in advance) by the student who introduced her, Nick Lombardo. He won the honor in an essay-writing contest sponsored by Texas Instruments but he won the audience with his perceptive and very funny comments about science teachers. Although science did not come naturally to Bialik, she was inspired by her biology teacher-tutor on the set of the Blossom TV series who taught her the skill set and gave her the confidence that she could become a scientist. See her speech on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2E5brNOzg8
The Exhibit Hall offered many diversions and I came away with free pens, a few purchases, and admiration for the many organizations supporting science education. The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) was an exhibitor this year, supporting all the early childhood teachers who teach science along with all other areas.
After lunch, it was easy to stay wide awake as Christina Ryan, a former kindergarten teacher and current independent consultant in Round Rock, TX, presented a Wheelock Pathway Session, “No Hands! Facilitating Meaningful Science Discussions with Elementary Science.” The wonderful video examples of meaningful science discussions in a kindergarten classroom reinforced the ideas she presented about a collaborative scientific classroom community. Christina noted that such discussions were both planned and spontaneous—”When there was an opportunity, we allowed this [discussion ] to happen.” Using Jos Elestgeest’s* ideas in “The right question at the right time,” she found that in her practice too, “A good question is the first step toward an answer; is a problem to which there is a solution.” I wish I could share her video of the moments her students discovered and observed as their iguana laid an egg. Within their excitement they expressed many questions, wonderings and possible answers. Christina noted that there are often way more questions than you can discuss with the entire class and that’s okay. Some you will discuss with just one or a few children, and some “just hang there,” literally, on a Question Wall. They used classroom rules for discussion, including an assigned “inviter” to invite quiet people to speak. This role can be given to children who usually say a lot, allowing others to speak and the child to develop an awareness of sharing the speaking time. The teacher’s task was to be quiet and take notes.
*Elsteeg, Jos. (1985). The right question at the right time. In Wynne Harlen. Primary Science: Taking the Plunge. Oxford, England: Heinemann Educational, 36-46.

Friday morning was too short. By staffing a table at the Elementary Extravaganza session in a ballroom, I did not take time to wander among all the others, learning from the 100+ presenters who provided hands-on experiences along with time to answer questions and share strategies for teaching science concepts. One of the presenters, Carol Ann Brennan of the University of Hawaii: Honolulu, taught us about Wonder and Discover Books. This tool is a way to record children’s unanswered questions that are worthy of later attention. The tool can be formatted in a way that fits your classroom: a student science notebook, computer file, a binder or using a big book format. Each question has its own page for students and teachers to record on, both drawing and writing and photographys, with more questions, clarifications, observations and discoveries. She recommends learning more about how to move from observations to searchable and investigable questions by reading Weiss, Tarin Harrar Weiss’s 2013 article, “Any Questions?” in Science and Children 50 (9): 36-41. Learn more about Elementary Extravaganza presentations by downloading the handouts from the session scheduler—find it quickly by searching for “extravaganza.”
I presented with Beth Van Meeteren of the University of Northern Iowa on “Ramps and pathways,” a physical science and engineering activity that can become an exploration and investigation when children are given time to explore, supportive adults to promote questioning and problem-solving, and time to reflect on what they learned. I loved being able to hear how other early childhood educators use the materials or others in similar inquiries. Experiencing the possibilities ourselves is key to understanding what children can learn from using the materials so I was delighted to have so many participants build, roll, and re-build ramp structures as we talked. We heard from proud sons of mothers who are preschool teachers, engaged children and district science coordinators, and were supported by the adjoining NAEYC table! See the session schedule to download our handouts!
Moving materials from my EE table I missed the Council for Elementary Science International (CESI) session, “Family Science Events—Logistics, Engaging Science, and Parent Involvement” presented by Jim, Jackie Swanson, Kali Remelts, and Jenna Orr, all fromCentral Michigan University: Mount Pleasant, MI. But they generously uploaded files to the conference session schedule for our use. For more resources from CESI, visit http://www.cesiscience.org/
“Preschool STEM Family Night: A University, Preschool, and Community Partnership” involved all but the kitchen sink! Or maybe that was part of it too… The first group of preservice early childhood teachers sharing their plans for a preschool STEM family night used the theme “Kitchen Science” with activities using materials that are found in most kitchens, as a way to connect with families and encourage them to continue investigations at home. Thanks to Nicole Glen, Emma Lee Hunt, Allison Mooney and Emily Tuminelli, all from Bridgewater State University: Bridgewater, MA for your presentation.
The second group of presenters created a prezi to present about two community STEM events they organized, one more successful than the other. They outlined the steps and paths they took to create their “Building Family STEM Literacy” events. I appreciate hearing about the pitfalls and problems as well as the wildly successful events. Thanks to Ellen M. Streng and Madison B. Gearhart from Wright State University: Dayton, OH for this fabulous presentation! Their uploaded files include a checklist and activities.
Gail Laubenthal and Diana McMillain’s presentation, “Connecting Science Content Using Trade Books!”went deep into and well beyond the title content and introduced us to useful technology. We learned about a game that hones observational skills, “Is this your object?” Beginning with a group of objects, the students are led through a series of clues about attributes to guide them to eliminate objects until they can identify the intended object. The students are encouraged to discuss and defend their choices. For example, in one sort, the teacher provides 5 wooden objects: tree cookie/slice, small rectangular block, large rectangular block, acorn top, and a red wooden cube. The clues are: “It is not rectangular”, followed by “It is not rough.” Then we ask, “What is it? Why do you think that?” An answer: “Red cube, because it is smooth and not rectangular.”
Two apps they suggested are iLapse for recording a series of photos over hours, and ShowMe, a way to show children’s work as they create, using video. They also use the “Big Huge Labs” program online to create inspirational posters using their photos. The Smartpen from LiveScribe helps families connect with their children’s school work during visits to the classroom by recording conversations and dictation that relate to artwork or books. See handouts on session scheduler!
Kristen Wendell and Brandon Lee’s presentation, “Creating Digital Interactive Engineering Notebooks in a First Grade Classroom” related how they and their first grade students communicated their Bridge Design Project engineering work using the Storykit app. This app allows students to upload photos, drawings, text boxes and use multiple 1 minute audio recordings to record their work, their thoughts and later reflections and additional student work. The teachers were able to record guiding open-ended questions or comments, allowing them to go beyond the limitations of paper and pencil. They feel that writing in first grade doesn’t allow expression of deep ideas, and invented spelling may further obscure children’s thinking. (Note that to download the StoryKit app, search in the App store for “iPhone only” apps. StoryKit appears as an iPhone-only app, but it does download onto iPads.) But before they launched into their presentation, we got to play, using spaghetti, marshmallows and tape in the tower building activity. Wendell and Lee generously shared the hurdles they faced in trying out this tool in the weekly 40-min “specials” class, the successes and the “oops”. Very inspiring presentation, showing how engineering can fit into a standard first grade curriculum and it is available to download from the session schedule!
I got more engineering practice in the “Design it, Explore it!” session presented by Charles Hutchison from EDC, Inc. and Michael Koski of the Fitchburg Public Schools. They reviewed the NGSS engineering design standards for grades 1-5. They described engineering as “magic” because children get involved, get to fail, teachers may learn about the capacities of children who aren’t typically high level learners. We were cautioned that for some children, fear of failure is a huge threshold to cross. Hutchison suggested that when doing engineering design work, give set of constraints up front, ask questions of observation rather than cause, use what and how questions rather than why questions–What do you see? What materials will you use? How will this piece work? What are you trying to make happen?

 
 
 
 
We got to invent bridges to cross a 8.5″ wide “river” using 4 sheets of 8.5×11″ paper and just a little tape because it is “hugely expensive”, then test its strength with metal washers, pennies, a baggie and a paper cup (only to hold the load). Each group was assigned three jobs: materials person, scout/spy to look at other designs and find other ideas, and reporter. The scout job is important so students will feel comfortable using ideas they get from observing others, something that engineers do but is not promoted in schools.
We discussed what worked and what is a fair way to test the different designs. And the presenters discussed these important parts of the activity: teamwork, an activity that is open-ended with some constraints, including re-design as part of the process, building in failure, not giving answers, giving permission to scout which made it all about making our own design better over time not being the best, and using materials are relatively inexpensive.
Hutchinson and Koski modeled the teacher’s role—they visited each group three to five times for just a few minutes, asked open-ended questions, asked us to stay away from materials while we gave them attention, and avoided judgements. They suggest that if you can interrupt the students before they get finished or bored, they stay involved. One way to have students leave the materials alone during discussions, is to invite all students up to the board to discuss (away from materials). We were urged to prepare, pace, create interest, engage, promote and lead discussions, find conclusions and support sharing. What we did in less than an hour is designed to do over four or more sessions.
I’d love to hear about sessions you found inspiring and worthy of review. Post a comment to spread the word about your own session or that of others. I’ll report on more sessions in my next post.

From students, to families, to interested novices … citizen scientists are people from all walks of life who participate in projects that help document biological and environmental trends over regions and timelines far broader than anyone could tackle by themselves. For teachers, citizen science is a way to motivate and inspire students through participation in research that is relevant both locally and globally. Students connect to the natural world as they make observations, collect data, and view their findings within the broader scope of the project.

In the new Citizen Science: 15 Lessons that Bring Biology to Life 6-12 book, scenarios of middle school classes engaging in citizen science are coupled with lessons that help teachers build citizen science data collection and analysis into their classrooms. From butterflies to birds, plants to frogs, turtles to squirrels—your students can collect meaningful data! Your students will not only learn science, they will be scientists. What better way to fulfill the NGSS mandate to couple science practice with content and give students a real-world context in which to apply what they are learning?

Here are five tips to consider as you and your students become citizen scientists on Earth Day… and beyond.

1. Foster a detective attitude
: Set the scene. Tell kids that they are detectives on an important investigation; one where making observations and asking questions will be the ultimate keys to discovery.  With this setup, you will have your very own team of Sherlocks ready to start inspecting the project at hand.  As you collect citizen science data, invite your students to observe closely and record questions that will pique their curiosity about the world around them.

2. Share the learning process: For example, if you’re participating in a citizen science project on birds, don’t be afraid to tell your students that you are not an expert and that you will learn about birds together. You may find them feeling even more empowered to become bird experts themselves. There is a wide variety of projects available and most projects offer online support, so whether you know a little or a lot, your students can be citizen scientists!

3. Keep track of observations in a personal journal: Scientists keep journals or field notes of their observations. Budding citizen scientists can too!  Keeping a journal helps develop keen observational skills. Encourage students to write descriptive notes and draw what they see as you work on your citizen-science project.

4.  Let them know it matters: As one teacher who participates in the eBird citizen-science project shared, “Citizen science gives students the ability to genuinely participate in science. When students realize that their bird observations are important data that will be used to make connections that couldn’t otherwise be made, they realize, ‘I am helping.’ This really motivates the kids to get out there and do science!” Citizen-science data has been used to make conservation recommendations, to document the spread of disease in wild animals, and to understand impacts of climate change. Your data matters!

5. Share your observations: Don’t just keep your data in a notebook or on a datasheet. Be sure you submit your citizen-science data to the project you are participating in. That way, your data helps researchers put the Earth’s puzzle together.  You can also share your actions on BirdSleuth’s Action Map (and have a chance to win a schoolyard habitat improvement grant or other prizes).

Wherever you are, and whatever your interests, there is a citizen-science project to meet your needs.  Many projects require few (if any) supplies, are free to participate in, and offer online support. You can explore options and search for a project at Citizen Science Central and SciStarter. For Earth Day and beyond… consider citizen science as a real-world, engaging way to teach science!

Today’s guest blogger is Jennifer Fee, Manager of K-12 Programs at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology (email: birdsletuh@cornell.edu).  Visit www.birdsleuth.org for resources, information, and inspiration related to school-based citizen science!

How many of us have said that students don’t study enough? A more fundamental question: Do they know how to study? Teachers may assume so, especially for secondary students. Many of the featured articles in this issue focus on strategies that focus on students learning how to learn and making the language of science accessible to all.
Beyond “Hitting the Books”* has concrete suggestions for helping students develop strategies for independent study and learning, including student-created tools such as science vocabulary notecards and study decks. Reducing Stress by Improving Study Skills notes that students’ parents list homework as a major source of stress (for the students). At the secondary level, if students have 4-6 major subjects and each teacher requires at least an hour of homework, it’s no wonder that students feel stressed, at least in terms of time. The author suggests that helping students develop their study skills could relieve some stress.

The article Vocabulary, Concepts, Evidence, and Examples states that “Strategies they [students] have used in other contexts, such as fiction reading, don’t usually help in reading science content.” In the elementary years, the emphasis is often on reading speed, but science text may require a slower, more focused style of reading (and rereading) that includes features of the text such as sidebars and captions on graphics. Our elementary and reading specialist colleagues may talk about students interacting with the text they’re reading, but what could that look like in science? The authors describe and share an organizer to help students as they read (examples of student work are provided). This looks like a powerful alternative to traditional reading guides with their “read the text and answer questions approach” to a focus on what scientists would find important.
Low-level recall questions, avoiding calling on students, watering down the curriculum—unfortunately, these strategies overlook the facts that ELL students have various proficiency levels and abilities even though they may struggle at first with the English language and the language of science. The authors of Leveling Up share a description of the five levels of proficiency, including starting, emerging, developing, expanding, and bridging. They then crosscheck these proficiencies with the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy to show types of activities that can be used to make sure that students of all levels have opportunities to demonstrate remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. The article includes both a chart and a more detailed description of this framework.
It might not be enough to teach just vocabulary, especially for English language learners. “A particular stand-alone science term is like a brick in a structure of students’ understanding of science, and the language structures that connect the bricks are the mortar that holds the edifice of science understanding together.” A Brick and Mortar Approach describes language structures related to crosscutting concepts and an example of what structures relate to the process of comparing. I could see how this would be helpful to any students who struggle with the language and concepts of science.
How can we provide choices for students to demonstrate their learning? The author of Tic-Tac-Toe: An Experiment in Student Choice* adds to the literature about this strategy for  differentiating instruction. Students are given a grid of nine different ways to demonstrate their learning. They choose 3 in a row. It was interesting that in the student feedback on the strategy, the students actually suggested additional tasks that could be used! The author provides two examples in the Connections* for this issue.
At a workshop I attended at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, we received t-shirts that said “We all live downstream.” But what if you don’t live near a body of water or you and your students can’t get to one during the school day? Upstream, Downstream* shows how to simulate a water quality activity. The 5E lesson includes a scenario and how to prepare water samples that relate to the situation. “Framing the lesson within a pretend community and a hypothetical problem helps with student engagement and deepens connections between individual and business actions and the health of aquatic ecosystems.” [SciLinks: Watersheds, Water Quality, Water Pollution]
If you’re thinking of involving students in scientific argumentation, Choose Controversies Wisely. The authors list several suggestions for insuring that the activity will result in science learning. For example: choosing topics that are scientifically controversial rather than those that are religiously or politically controversial; keeping the focus at a level the students can understand and within a reasonable scope; and providing resources that address all sides of the controversy. For additional ideas on how to engage students in choosing topics and developing skills in argumentation, check out a new publication from NSTA–It’s Debatable! Using Socioscientific Issues to Develop Scientific Literacy K-12 by Dana L. Zeidler and Sami Kahn.

Lisa Ernst models perseverance and critical thinking for her elementary students, encouraging them to persist when faced with challenges. Throughout her career, Ernst has developed project–based units that allow her students to tap into their creativity and curiosity while learning scientific and engineering principles, such as her cross–curricula  Building Bridges in Earthquake Country: From the Past to the Present unit. At a workshop during the first annual California STEM Symposium, Ernst’s students led educators through the bridges unit which spans physical and Earth science, technology, and history.

Ernst works to advance elementary science teaching through research as a co-developer with the Strategic Education Research Partnership (SERF), being a field test teacher for the Understanding Language Institute at Stanford University, as presenter at national and regional conferences, and by organizing and leading informal science programs with entities including the Exploratorium, NASA, Chabot Space and Science Center, and the Monterey Aquarium.

 “She has stood out as an educator committed to developing skills that will assure that all students have a quality science, and STEM, education,” says Jerry Valadez, director of the Central Valley Science Project.

I inherited a classroom-lab from a retired teacher, and I want to replace some of the generic posters with displays of student work. One of my colleagues says this is not a good idea. She didn’t explain her reasons, but now I’m not sure what to do.
—Therese, Charlotte, North Carolina
I’ve worked on statewide projects in which I had the opportunity to visit K-12 classrooms. The classrooms were generally very colorful; the bulletin boards and walls included motivational posters, teacher-created displays related to seasons or holidays, or artifacts related to the teacher’s interests. But I was surprised by the lack of student contributions. In some places, the student work was limited to cookie-cutter artwork (e.g., snowflakes, hearts, pumpkins). In some classrooms, every available inch was covered with something, which I found very distracting. And there were a few with completely bare walls.
By having students create the displays or showcasing student work, you show that you value student work and that the classroom really belongs to the students. Students have a chance to learn from and celebrate each other’s work, as they demonstrate connections to the current content or the processes they are learning.
I would check with your principal or department chairperson to see if there are any guidelines about displaying student work. (There are some schools where this is not allowed.)
The purpose of student displays is to reinforce students’ efforts and creativity, not necessarily to reward perfection. I would not display answer sheets from tests or quizzes or assignments with teacher-awarded final grades on them. Likewise, papers or projects with a simple “good job” comment don’t provide enough feedback on why they are on display.
Here are some suggestions:

• Most science teachers have a bulletin board with important safety rules and lab routines. Instead of purchasing posters or making the signs yourself, have the students design and make them.
• With lab reports or other assignments, each group could select one from their group and use a sticky note to highlight a desired feature: This data table is well-organized. This graph shows…. Look at how the diagram is labeled. You may need to model this type of reflection and how to select and annotate the work. Students could use this strategy as a self-evaluation, too.
• Students could use digital cameras to document their activities and create mini-posters.
• Try to include something from as many students as possible during a semester or marking period.
• Invite students to contribute based on their interests and talents. One of my students did a good job of illustrating a lab report, so I asked her to create a larger version that I could use as a teaching tool with the class. (She was very pleased.)
• Remember that less is more and avoid cluttering every space. Students and classroom visitors should be able to focus on the work.
• Before you display a student’s project or report, ask his or her permission.
• My school did not have a laminator, so I used (and reused) plastic sheet protectors.
• Many of these ideas would also apply to displaying student work in digital formats on class webpages, wikis, or blogs.

I’ve seen elementary classrooms in which large walls or bulletin boards are divided so that each student has a personal space to show examples of their work, photographs, and articles. A middle school teacher I know started the year with totally blank bulletin boards (except for the one that posted emergency and safety information). As the year progressed, students filled them with their own work. At first the principal was concerned, but he eventually saw the ownership the students had in the classroom.
I am concerned about the practice in some classrooms and hallways of “data walls” on which student information is displayed. These often identify individual students by name along with their proficiency level or recent test scores. Having students chart their progress in their own notebooks can be useful, but I can’t figure out the purpose of a public display, other than perhaps to recognize the high achievers. The lower achieving students I worked with would not be motivated by seeing their names associated with low scores (They would think: I’m already at the bottom—why should I try?), and I would question the ethics of this public display in the context of student privacy. There are many other ways to make displaying their work a positive learning experience for students.
 
Photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rabi/2885547951/

It’s been one year since the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) were adopted (on April 9, 2013). Since then, the National Science Teachers Association has been incredibly busy, learning what science teachers need, creating resources that will help with implementation, and most importantly, creating a new hub where all our resources are collated and that facilitates user-friendly access to the standards. Eleven states plus Washington, D.C. have adopted the NGSS, and we’ve been there to support science teachers every step of the way. Whether you’re in a state that has adopted the NGSS or not, you’ll find that the practices they describe can be applied in any science classroom. They are based on new research on how students learn best, and they are worth a look!

Earth Day 2014 is right around the corner (April 22), and I’ve noticed a huge number of NSTA members talking about Dr. Suess’s The Lorax on our members-only lists. Coincidence? I doubt it, because the book has a powerful message that appeals to both adults and children: We shouldn’t wait until it’s too late to think about becoming good stewards of the Earth. And that ‘s something that many of our NSTA authors focus on.
Steve Rich, author of Outdoor Science, urges us to get kids outside. Research shows that environment-centered education improves student achievement, and Rich shows teachers how to create outdoor learning spaces that can be used from year to year—with little extra effort or resources. These practical suggestions for creating, maintaining, and using outdoor classrooms work for both elementary and middle school students.
What’s your favorite book for getting students outside and into science?