Next Generation Science Standards For States, By States (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
APPENDIX B: Responses to the Public Drafts
APPENDIX B: Responses to the Public Drafts
Pages 339-344
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 339... ...
The first public draft of the NGSS was posted document online from May 11 to June 1, 2012, and the second public draft • The practices matrix was revised was posted online from January 8 to January 29, 2013. The draft • A new chapter was added to describe the intent and use of received comments from more than 10,000 individuals during crosscutting concepts each of the two public review periods, including those in lead • A new chapter on equity was drafted about implementation of state review teams, school and school district discussion groups, the NGSS with diverse student groups and scientific societies.
|
From page 340... ...
resulted in the removal they liked the pedagogical vision described in the Framework, and of about 33% of the PEs and associated DCIs while retaining the integration of the three dimensions in the NGSS: Science and the progression of DCIs across the grade bands Engineering Practices, Disciplinary Core Ideas, and Crosscutting • Separate ETS1: Engineering Design PEs were added to each Concepts. The structure of the NGSS received high praise, includ grade band to supplement PEs that had integrated engineer- ing the foundation boxes that show the source of the language ing design into the traditional science disciplines and ideas in the PEs.
|
From page 341... ...
• Suggestions for a few additional topics to include Feedback on the January 2013 draft indicated that the previous • Lack of language clarity reductions in content were not sufficient to allow for the instruc• Concerns about including and addressing engineering and tion time necessary to build student proficiency in all of the prac technology tices, core ideas, and crosscutting concepts. Therefore, additional • Confusion about the role of the one practice specified in content was removed by deleting both the PEs and associated DCI each PE endpoints that covered content beyond the central focus of each • Concern about the amount of support that will be needed for core idea.
|
From page 342... ...
from the NGSS -- instead, it is now specified in the eight practices throughout every PE. In both the first and second public drafts, many reviewers expressed concern that specific content normally included in high In addition, many reviewers requested more guidance for impleschool elective courses was not in the NGSS, including thermo- mentation with diverse student groups.
|
From page 343... ...
Based on the public draft feedback draft was mixed. Reviewers enthusiastically praised the idea of and additional feedback from lead states, the different writing integration as a way to help ensure that engineering design core styles were assessed and the highest-rated writing style was then ideas would be incorporated into science instruction, but comadapted for all of the standards.
|
From page 344... ...
Many organizations, including the National Science Teachers Response Association, are currently planning for programs and support The writers, upon direction from the lead states, have revised the for teachers and states that adopt and implement the standards. front matter documents to provide a more detailed explanation The National Research Council is now researching ways to assess of the nature of PEs -- that they specify student outcomes and not the kind of science education envisioned in the Framework.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.