setting the stage: science k-7 content expectations
DESCRIPTION
Setting the Stage: Science K-7 Content Expectations. Scholar Workgroup Meeting January 25, 2007 Lansing Holiday Inn Office of School Improvement. Competencies for High School Completion Academic Content Entrepreneurship Dispositions. Core Academic. Environment for Delivery. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Setting the Stage:Science
K-7 Content Expectations
Scholar Workgroup MeetingJanuary 25, 2007
Lansing Holiday Inn
Office of School Improvement
2
Competenciesfor High School Completion
Academic ContentEntrepreneurship
Dispositions
Core Academic Environment for Delivery
Policy needed for Reform
Content Standards
MathematicsEnglishScience
Social Studies
CTE Integrated
Instructional Design & Delivery
Infrastructure
School Redesign
Policy-makingState BoardLegislature
IncentivesRequirementsPostsecondary
Information Gathering: PresentationsPosition Development: Group discussions, advisory input
Position Dissemination: Roll out, publications
High School Redesign
3
History of High School Requirements
• Cherry Commission on Higher Education and Economic Growth
• Yearlong study of resources, districts and best practices
• State Board of Education leads the movement
• Extraordinary partnership between Executive and Legislative branches
4
History of High School Requirements
• Legislation signed by Governor Granholm on April 20, 2006 created a set of rigorous high school requirements
• State graduation requirements become most comprehensive in nation
• New requirements effective Class of 2011 except for Languages other than English: 2016
5
Who Has Been Involved? Academic Work Groups
Chaired by Higher Education Other representative members
Local and Intermediate School Districts Professional Organizations Career & Technical Education
Review Committees Web Review – Legislative Review National Review
Achieve, Inc. – ELA and Mathematics Council of State Science Supervisors North American Council for Online Learning
6
What Has Been Developed?
High School Content Expectations (HSCE) The “universe” of recommended content during
a 4 year high school experience
Course/Credit Content Expectations (CCE) Specific course/credit content requirements
derived from the “universe” of the HSCE
7
High School Science Requirements Required: 3 Credits Credit content is developed for:
Earth Science, Biology, Chemistry, and Physics
Biology required of everyone Choice of Physics or Chemistry 3rd credit to be selected from district or
online options, and/or dual enrollment Legislation encourages 4th credit Sequence not mandated
8
Michigan Merit Curriculum
Global Market
National Stage
Competition $
Election Year
ACT/MME
NCLB
Gra
du
ati
on
Req
uir
em
en
ts
Imp
lem
en
tati
on
of
Law HSCE
9
Definition of Curriculum
Curriculum has been defined as…
The knowledge and skills that a community believes is important for people to know and be able to do.
(Paolo Freire)
The “Community”
Social
Political
Economic
Inte
rnati
on
al/
Nati
on
al/
Sta
te
Sta
nd
ard
s
Local Context
The Committees
The Curriculum
Cultural
11
Who Will Be Involved?K-7 Grade Level Content Expectations
Group of Scholars Co-Chairs
Larry Casler, Genesee Math Science Center Liz Niehaus, Niehaus and Associates, Inc.
Other representative members Local and Intermediate School Districts
Small Group Review Community members Professional organizations
Web Review National Review Plan for presentation to SBE November 2007
12
Draft Documents
State Board of Education Review
5 - 6 months prior to requesting approval
Web Review of Draft
30 – 90 days to review, process comments
Draft Documents
National Review
Edited Draft to Achieve or other
Final Documents
Dissemination
3 Regional
10 Localized
Curriculum Protocol Flowchart
Draft Documents
Work Group
Edit draft based on National Review
Draft Documents
MDE Internal Review Group
MDE Management, PR
Draft Documents
Small Review Group
MDE & representative practitioners
Document Development
Work Group of Scholars
Chair and 5 – 8 appointed members
OSI Convened
Draft Documents
Work Group Reconvened
Edit based on
Reviews
Final Documents
Superintendent
Final Documents
State Board Approval
Legislative Review
MDE
MDE
13
Who are the key players?
Office of School Improvement lead on Curriculum development
Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability lead on Assessment
K-7 Project Coordinators Larry Casler and Liz Niehaus
Work Group is the “Academic Review” OSI Staff as assigned
14
Your Role Collaborate as a member of a team Understand your “commission” Be sensitive to the political nature inherent
in doing work for a statewide initiative Accept the fact that this is an iterative
process Reach consensus, support group decisions
15
Your Mission As a team, develop a draft of K-7 grade
level content expectations that will consider the variables impacting our work
Virtual, face-to-face, topical groups Forward thinking…curricular format
options, companion documents, instructional support
Work group chairs are responsible for the product
16
Your Mission
Draw upon work that has been done Align with national documents,
standards Align K-12
17
Constraints: Timeline Draft ready for review by May Final document to Superintendent Flanagan for
recommendation to SBE in November 2007 Tradeoff: sharing ideas vs. setting parameters quickly Tradeoff: originality (i.e., writing ourselves rather than
adapting other models) vs. quality and consistency of product
Tradeoff: consultation vs. getting the job done (aiming for process that is transparent but based on what those of us in the room now bring to the table)
18
Criteria for Our Work RIGOR: What is the level of intellectual
demand in the standards? challenging enough to equip students to
succeed at the next grade level essential core content of a discipline; its key
concepts and how they relate to each other
19
Criteria for Our Work CLARITY: Are the standards clearly written
and presented in a logical, easy-to use format? more than just plain and jargon-free prose widely understood and accepted by teachers,
parents, school boards and others who have a stake in the quality of schooling including university faculties that will prepare teachers to convey the standards and later receive those teachers’ students
20
Criteria for Our Work SPECIFICITY: Are the standards specific
enough to convey the level of performance expected of students? enough detail to help teachers design their
courses address the given teachers’ time for
instruction
21
Criteria for Our Work FOCUS: Have tough choices been made
about what content is the most important for students to learn? priorities of facts, concepts and skills that
should be emphasized at each grade level
22
Criteria for Our Work PROGRESSION: Do knowledge and skills
build clearly and sensibly on previous learning and increase in intellectual demand from year to year? move from simple to complex, from concrete
to abstract prevent needless repetition from grade to
grade
23
Criteria for Our Work COHERENCE: Do the standards convey a
unified vision of the discipline, and do they establish connections among the major areas of study? reflect a coherent structure of the discipline and/or
reveal significant relationships among the strands and how the study of one complements the study of another.
States should eventually be able to “back-map” from the high school Academic Standards to a progression of benchmarks that middle and elementary school students would need to reach in order to be “on track” for college and work.
24
Conclusion We need to push for useful and connected
knowledge of carefully selected content Belief of people doing research and
development in science learning: We are trying to cover too much content too shallowly
Need to reach a balance with content
25
MDE Contact Information
Larry CaslerGenesee ISD Mathematics Science [email protected]
Liz NiehausNiehaus and [email protected]
Kevin Richard, Science ConsultantOffice of School ImprovementMichigan Department of [email protected]
Betty Underwood, Assistant DirectorOffice of School ImprovementMichigan Department of [email protected]
Dr. Yvonne Caamal Canul, DirectorOffice of School ImprovementMichigan Department of [email protected]