Michigans New Content Expectations for K7 Science

1
Michigans New Content Expectations
for K-7 Science
Monday, January 28, 2008 Kellogg Hotel and
Conference Center East Lansing, Michigan
2
Content Expectations

• Provide a foundation for curriculum and
  assessment development that represents rigorous
  and relevant learning for ALL students.

3
Content Expectations

• Provide a description of what students should
  know and be able to do in Science by the end of
  seventh grade to prepare them for a successful
  high school experience.

4
Need for Grade Level Expectations

• Student mobility
• Cross-district professional development
• Common equipment, kits, and lessons
• Smaller districts have curriculum
• Consistency with other subjects
• Integration with other subjects
• Spreads the distribution of learning

5
Built on Current Research

• The next generation of Science standards and
  curricula at the national and state levels should
  be centered on a few core ideas and should expand
  on them each year, at increasing levels of
  complexity, across grades K-8.

6
Current Research

• Todays standards are too broad, resulting in
  superficial coverage of science that fails to
  link concepts or develop them over successive
  grades.
• Taking Science to School Learning and Teaching
  Science in Grades K-8 by National Research Council

7
Curriculum Protocol Flowchart
Draft Documents Small Review Group MDE
representative practitioners
Document Development Work Group of Scholars Chair
and 5 8 appointed members OSI Convened
Final Documents Dissemination 3 Regional 10
Localized
Final Documents State Board Approval
8
Development of Expectations

• Academic Work Group
• Liz Niehaus (Niehaus and Associates),
  Co-Chair
• Larry Casler (Genesee Math/Science Center),
  Co-Chair
• Work Group divided into content groups and grade
  level groups to provide different lenses

9
Science Academic Work Group

• Larry Casler, Co-Chair,
• Genesee M/S Center
• Hope Beringer, Romeo
• Herm Boatin, Dearborn
• Barb Armbruster, Forest Hills
• Charles Bucienski, Olivet
• David Bydlowski, Wayne RESA
• Eileen Byrnes, Warren
• Mary Carlson, Grand Ledge
• Jan Coratti, Plymouth
• Connie Crittenden, Williamston

Liz Niehaus, Co-Chair, Niehaus and Associates
Inc. Geri Elliston, Charlotte Margaret Griffin,
Detroit Carol Gutteridge, Fenton Jason Henry, New
Branches PSA Nancy Karre, Battle Creek MSC Liz
Larwa, Brighton Jane Levy, Ann Arbor Deborah
Peek-Brown, Detroit Public Michele Svoboda,
Comstock Park
10
Development of Expectations

• Reviews
• March MDE Internal and External Review
• May June Web/Public Review (over 900
  completed surveys and over 100,000 comments)
• July National Review
• November State Board of Education Review
• December State Board of Education Approval

11
Preparing for National Review

• Web responses were reviewed by Academic Work
  Group
• Developed protocol for review and editing
• IF changes were made, justifications were
  provided in writing

12
Insert Kevins Picture
13
Internal Review

• Science Leaders representing science content
  areas
• Reviewed the entire document
• Made recommendations for any change based on NAEP
  2009 Framework or learning progressions

14
Science Internal Review Group

• Theron Blakeslee, Ingham ISD
• Gary Cieniuch, Livonia
• Robby Cramer, Grand Haven
• Betty Crowder, Rochester
• Paul Drummond, Macomb MSC
• LaMoine Motz, Oakland MSC
• Robert Poel, WMU
• MDE Science Consultant
• Kevin Richard, MDE

15
External Review

• Science Leaders representing various professional
  organizations
• Reviewed the entire document
• Made recommendations for any change based on NAEP
  2009 Framework or learning progressions

16
Science External Reviewers

• Lois Doniver American Federation of Teachers
  Michigan
• Wanda Groeneveld Michigan Elementary and
  Middle
• School Principal Association
• Christine Webster Michigan Earth Science
  Teachers
• Association
• Drew Isola Michigan Association Advanced
  Physics Teachers
• Carol Jones Michigan Science Education
  Leadership
• Association
• Rochelle Rubin Michigan Science Teacher
  Association
• Paul Drummond Michigan Math/Science Center
  Network

17
National Review

• Richard Vineyard, Ph.D., Council of State Science
  Supervisors, Review Coordinator
• General review and summary report
• States selected based on their recent adoption of
  elementary standards elementary teaching
  experience and geographic diversity
• Followed Achieve criteria

18
National Review Provided

• Positive feedback
• Specific rewording suggestions
• Suggestions for learning progressions to avoid
  redundancy
• Support for grade level content
• Big Picture vs. Mile Wide and Inch Deep

19
Final Revisions

• Re-worded possessive format of some
  statements/expectations
• Re-examined to eliminate redundancy
• Re-evaluated the uniformity of the
• depth of understanding required
• assessment grain size

20
Reasons for Expectations

• National Standards Alignment
• NSES (National Research Council, 1996)
• AAAS Benchmarks and Atlases (1993, 2001, 2007)
• NAEP 2009 Framework Alignment
• Taking Science to School Learning and Teaching
  Science in Grades K-8 (National
  Research Council, 2007)

21
Development of Expectations

• GLCE Selected Performance Verbs

22
Structure of K-7 Science

• K-7 document includes grade level documents
• Each grade document contains
• General Introduction
• Grade Span Organization Structure
• Grade Level Specific Narratives
• Grade Level Specific Table of Contents
• Grade Level Specific Expectations

23
Structure of K-7 Science

• Discipline
• Standard
• Content Statement
• Content Expectation

24
Structure of K-7 Science

• Discipline Earth Science
• K-7 Standard E.ES Earth Systems Develop an
  understanding of the warming of the earth by the
  sun as the major source of energy for phenomenon
  on Earth and how the suns warming relates to
  weather, climate, seasons, and the water cycle.
  Understand how human interaction and use of
  natural resources affects the environment.
• Content Statement E.ES.E.2 Weather Weather
  changes from day to day and over the seasons.
• Content Expectation E.ES.01.23 Describe severe
  weather events.

25
K-4 Organization, Example, p. 3
26
5-7 Organization, Example, p. 50
27
Structure of K-7 Science

• Expectation Count

28
Overview of K-7 Science
29
Overview of K-7 Science
30
K-7 Science Coding

• Discipline
• Standard
• Content Statement
• Content Expectation
• P.PM.04.23
• Discipline Standard (Grade Level)
  Statement Expectation

31
Acknowledgements

• Internal and External Review Members
• Fellow Educators K-16
• National Review Participants
• State School Board Members
• MDE
• Academic Work Group

32
Break

• Break 1000 1020
• Table Investigation Begins at 1020

33
Table Investigation

• First opportunity to review and respond to new
  Content Expectations
• Become familiar with organization and content of
  the Expectations
• Provide valuable feedback to MDE
• Assist MDE in designing rollout sessions and
  companion documents

34
Table Investigation

• Explanation (1020 1025)
• Part 1 (1025 1110) Individual analysis of
  expectations from one grade level
• Part 2 (1110 1120) Group Discussion
• Part 3 (1120 1130) Debrief

35
Table Investigation

• Envelope includes
• 1 investigation description sheet, and
• 8 individual response sheets
• Individual response sheets include directions.
• Identify timekeeper for each table.
• Facilitators available to answer questions about
  process.

36
Table Investigation

• Part 1 (1025 1110)
• Read standards, content statements, and
  expectations.
• Provide feedback.
• Code each expectation (1, 2, or 3) using rubric.
• Add comments as appropriate.
• Review remaining expectations for your grade.
• Estimate the percent of the expectations at your
  grade that you currently teach.

37
Table Investigation

• Part 2 (1110 1120)
• Discuss findings as a group.
• Collect individual response sheets and place back
  in envelope.
• Facilitators will collect envelopes.
• Part 3 (1120 1130)
• Debrief as time allows.

38
Code Expectations

• Use the 1-2-3 numbering system.
• 1 I currently teach this content at this grade
  level and
• will need to make little instructional
  modification.
• 2 I currently teach related content and will
  need to
• modify instruction to meet this
  expectation.
• 3 I currently do not teach this expectation.
• This is new content for this grade level.