Science Standards Revision Focus Group
Welcome. Science Standards Revision Focus Group. Cheryl Kleckner Office of Educational Improvement and Innovation Oregon Department of Education December 12, 2007. Agenda. Science Standards Revision Scope, Timeframe & Process Mandates, Research, & Recommendations Standards
Science Standards Revision Focus Group
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Welcome Science Standards Revision Focus Group Cheryl Kleckner Office of Educational Improvement and Innovation Oregon Department of Education December 12, 2007
Agenda Science Standards Revision • Scope, Timeframe & Process • Mandates, Research, & Recommendations Standards • Content Standards • Core Standards Our Tasks • Develop Core Benchmark Level Standards • Envision Professional Development
Scope • Grade Level • Core Standards • Alignment to Post-secondary Education & Work-force Expectations • Address Evaluation & Review Recommendations
Timeline • Draft 1 (Panel Mtg) ~ January ‘08 • Draft 1 Public Review ~ February ‘08 • Feedback → Draft 2 (Panel Mtg) ~ April ‘08 • Draft 2 Public Review ~ May ‘08 • Feedback→ Draft 3 ~ June ‘08 • Draft 3 Public Review → Draft 4 ~ July ‘08 • External Review of Draft 4 ~ August ’08 • Feedback → Final Draft ~ September ‘08 • Instructional Materials Criteria ~ October ‘08 • State Board Adoption ~ April ‘09
Process Draft standards are: • Benchmarked to national Academic Content Standards, NAEP and OUS • Reviewed by national content and standards experts • Revised by the content and assessment panel • Reviewed by the public • Recommended to the State Board of Education for adoption
Mandates & Guidance • NCLB Requirements • Oregon State Statues • Oregon Administrative Rules • Oregon State Board of Education • New Diploma Requirements • Implementation Task Forces
Schmidt’s Recommendations • Curricular Coherence • Structure • Curricular Focus • Exposure Time • Curricular Rigor • Level of Complexity • TIMSS Data
Schmidt’s Recommendations Organizing Questions • How do we know what we know? • Of what are things made? • How do systems interact and change?
WestEd Recommendations WestEd was contracted to: • Review the content standards • Evaluate the structure of the content standards • Evaluate alignment between the state assessments and the content standards • Make recommendations for improvement of structures and systems • Address ODE’s Critical Questions
WestEd Recommendations General Considerations: • Comparable Content Standard Structure • Core Standards • Reduce Redundancy • Consistency in Level of Detail • Levels of Cognitive Demand are Appropriate and Intentional
Oregon Essential Skills • Essential Skills • Essential for success in college, work and life • Process skills that cross all disciplines, not content specific • Embedded in content standards and curriculum • Can be demonstrated in a variety of courses, subjects and settings • Students must demonstrate proficiency in Essential Skills to graduate
Oregon Essential Skills Identified by the State Board: • Read and interpret a variety of texts • Write for a variety of purposes • Speak and present publicly • Apply mathematics in a variety of settings • Use technology • Think critically and analytically • Demonstrate civic and community engagement • Demonstrate global literacy • Demonstrate career-related learning: communications, problem solving, personal management, teamwork, employment foundations and career development
Content Standards Define What Students are Expected to Know and Be Able to Do
Content Standards • Specific • Aligned • Clear and Understandable • Assessable • Illustrated by Student Work • Useful for Defining and Supporting Good Instruction
Content Standards • Big Ideas • Accurate and Sound • Clear and Useful • Parsimonious • Built by Consensus • Assessable • For Students • Developmental • Visionary
Fordham Criteria • Expectation of Scientific Literacy • Effective for Assessment of Learning • Comprehensible to All • Organization Reflects Fundamental Structure • Science Content and Approach • Quality • Seriousness • Inquiry • Evolution
WestEd Recommendations Core Standards: • knowledge and skills central to a content area • significant/critical content “targets” • state-specific priorities in a content area • learning expectations and performance goals for all students
WestEd Recommendations Advantages of Core Standards: • subsume other standards and/or provide the structure for a coherent standards system • these standards are addressed in each grade and developed across grades • local curricula are expected to align • common structure across content areas
Core Standards Focus instruction • key ideas • fewer key learning objectives • greater depth of teaching and learning Incorporate other content standards • in-depth understanding will imply, and be supported by, understanding of the underlying content standards Articulate clear grade level progression in both knowledge and skills
Guiding Principles • Standards organized around “core standards”. • Under each core standard are a number of content standards that provide a detailed list of expectations. • Core standards are not intended to require the entire year for coverage, allowing a pace that suits individual needs.
Guiding Principles • “Connections” provide additional topics and possible routes for differentiated instruction. Allow individualized instruction, while strengthening student understanding of the core standards. • Core content standards will provide the basis of statewide assessments. A common set of standards that should be covered by every classroom in the state. • Standards organized around core standards will allow districts and ODE to communicate clearly to teachers, parents, and students the science expectations at each grade.
Core Standards Criteria • Endurance: Will the standard provide students with knowledge and skills that will be of value beyond a single test date? • Leverage: Will the standard provide knowledge and skills that will be of value in multiple disciplines? • Readiness: Will the standard provide students with essential knowledge and skills that are necessary for success in the next level of instruction? Beyond school?
Core Standards Criteria • Scientifically Accurate: Fundamental to the science domains; Represent scientific inquiry • Developmentally Appropriate: Reflect the age and stage of students; Represent a learning progression K-12 • Educationally Adequate: Useable in instructional materials; Assessable in classrooms, districts, states; Understandable for teachers, administrators and parents
Core Standards Process • Review the Core Standards Development Process • Review the Core Standards Criteria for Science
Working Agreements • All Opinions & Expertise Honored & Valued • Think Big Picture – All Students & All Schools • Focused Work & Active Participation From All • Cell Phones Silent or Off; Calls Out of the Room • Capture Issues & Suggestions for Task Forces • Add Your Suggestion Here
