<pre><address><span style="font-family: Arial;"><strong><font face="Arial" size="3"><font face="Arial" size="3"><p>WASHINGTON SCIENCE STANDARDS: THE FORDHAM FOUNDATION REVIEW,</p><p>PREPARING FOR NEXT GENERATION SCIENCE STANDARDS, AND</p><p>NATIONAL TRENDS IN STEM EDUCATION</p><p>Background</p></font></font><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p>One of the Board’s five Strategic Plan goals is to promote effective strategies to make</p><p>Washington’s students nationally and internationally competitive in math and science.</p><p>The Board’s work in the area of science since 2006 has included:</p></span></span><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">Reviewing the state’s science essential academic learning requirements and grade level<font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3"><p>expectations and recommending revisions to those standards (2007-2008).</p></font></span></p></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">1</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">Analyzing science course taking patterns as part of the Boards transcript study of 2008<font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3"><p>graduates</p></font></span></p></span></p><p> </p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">2 </span></span><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">(2008).</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">Providing official comment and recommendations to the Superintendent of Public<p>Instruction regarding the recommended science curricula (2009).</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">Commissioning a review of science end-of-course assessments as exit exams (2008).</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">Approving cut scores for the state science assessments (2011; August 2012).</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">Approving 3 credits of science (not yet in rule) as part of the career and college ready<p>graduation requirements.</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><p> </p></span></span><strong><font face="Arial" size="3"><font face="Arial" size="3"><p>Summary</p></font></font><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p>The 2007 legislation that authorized SBE’s review of science standards also directed the Board</p><p>to be assisted in its work by an expert national consultant. The Board hired David Heil and</p><p>Associates to work with a science advisory panel and lead the review. David Heil and</p><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3"><p>Associates produced two reports; the first, a review of the standards</p></font></span></span><p> </p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">3 </span></span><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">(May 2008) and the<font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3"><p>second, a review of the revised standards</p></font></span></p></span></p><p> </p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">4 </span></span><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">(December 2008). The firm also prepared a white<p>paper exploring the implications of using science end-of-course assessments for high school</p><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3"><p>exit exams.</p></font></span></p></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">5</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p>David Heil’s familiarity with Washington’s science standards, adopted by the Superintendent of</p><p>Public Instruction in 2009, and his knowledge of science standards and education nationally,</p><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3"><p>make him well-qualified to help the Board put the findings of the 2012 Fordham Report, </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; color: #00339a; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; color: #00339a; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; color: #00339a; font-size: small;">The<font style="font-family: Arial; color: #00339a; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3" color="#00339a"><p>State of State Science Standards</p></font></span></p></span></p><p> </p></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">, into perspective. In that report, Washington’s science</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;" face="Arial" size="1"><p>1 </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">The 2007 Legislature directed the Board to review the science standards and recommend revisions to the<p>superintendent of public instruction (SPI), and to provide official comment and recommendations to the SPI regarding</p><p>the SPI’s recommended science curricula.</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;" face="Arial" size="1"><p>2 </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">http://www.sbe.wa.gov/documents/SBE_Research_Brief_Science_FINAL01-04-10.pdf</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;" face="Arial" size="1"><p>3 </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">http://www.sbe.wa.gov/documents/ScienceStandardsReview050708.pdf</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;" face="Arial" size="1"><p>4</p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">http://www.sbe.wa.gov/documents/DHA%20Report2%20on%20Final%20WA%20Science%20Standards.pdf</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;" face="Arial" size="1"><p>5 </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: xx-small;">http://www.sbe.wa.gov/documents/EOC%20Briefing%20Paper2.pdf</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p>standards earned a “C” grade, the same grade earned by Washington’s standards in 2005,</p><p>when Fordham last reviewed them. However, Fordham’s criteria for evaluating states’ standards</p><p>changed in the seven years between the two reports, so the rationale for the grades is not the</p><p>same.</p><p>By comparison, the 2012 Fordham Report scored ten other states with a grade of “C”; twelve</p><p>states and the District of Columbia fared better, and 27 states fared worse. See Attachment A</p><p>for the foreword, introduction, and Washington section of the 2012 Fordham report.</p><p>In addition to helping the Board consider what meaning can be taken from Fordham’s evaluation</p><p>of Washington’s standards, David Heil will address what lessons the Fordham Report may offer</p><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3"><p>the state as Washington works toward the </p></font></span></span><p> </p><span style="font-family: Arial; color: #00339a; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; color: #00339a; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial; color: #00339a; font-size: small;">Next Generation Science Standards </span></span></span><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">(NGSS), and<p>what general questions or issues the Board should be tracking as this next wave of science</p><p>standards is developed and implemented. He will also highlight national trends in Science,</p><p>Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education.</p><p>Washington is one of 26 lead states providing input and reactions to the work of the writers of</p><font style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;" face="Arial" size="3"><p>the NGSS. The NGSS are based on the </p></font></span></p></span></p><p> </p><em><font face="Arial" size="3"><font face="Arial" size="3">Framework of K-12 Science Education</font></font><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">, released in July<p>2011 by the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academy of Sciences. Partners in</p><p>the development of the NGSS include the National Research Council, National Science</p><p>Teachers Association, American Association for the Advancement of Science, and Achieve.</p><p>Sponsors include the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Noyce Foundation, and DuPont.</p><p>See Attachment B for an overview of the framework.</p><p>The NGSS are scheduled to be released in fall 2012. Washington, as a lead state, has</p><p>committed to giving “serious consideration” to adopting the new standards. See Attachment C</p><p>for details about the NGSS.</p><p>The Heil presentation will focus on the big-picture implications of the Fordham Report and</p><p>national trends in science standards and STEM education. It will be followed by a discussion led</p><p>by Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) staff on some of the practical</p><p>implications for consideration and implementation of new standards.</p><p>The OSPI discussion will touch upon the following issues and questions:</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">What is the state’s work as a lead state with NGSS, and what are the next steps in the<p>upcoming 12-18 months?</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">Washington has used different processes to adopt state standards, in part as a result of<p>targeted legislative intervention.</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;" face="Courier New" size="3"><p>o </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">How is the adoption of the Common Core State Standards similar to and different<p>from the pending consideration of NGSS?</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;" face="Courier New" size="3"><p>o </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">What would the optimal process be for making a decision about adopting NGSS<p>and what role might SBE play?</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">The NGSS are based on a three-dimensional framework that includes: 1) scientific and<p>engineering practices; 2) crosscutting concepts; and 3) disciplinary core ideas. What are</p><p>the practical implications for:</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;" face="Courier New" size="3"><p>o </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">teachers to implement standards that would integrate these three dimensions?</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Courier New; font-size: small;" face="Courier New" size="3"><p>o </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">student learning (and ultimately, achievement)?</span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">Currently, Washington requires a high school biology end-of-course (EOC) assessment<p>for graduation. What are the assessment implications that might arise if the state adopts</p><p>new standards?</p></span></p></span></p><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;"><font style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: small;" face="Symbol" size="3"><p>· </p></font></span></span><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;"><p><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">The Board has approved 3 credits of science for all students to graduate, although the<p>rule has not yet been adopted. The current requirement is 2 credits. Will the scope of the</p><p>NGSS require more than 2 credits of science?</p></span></p></span></p><strong><font face="Arial"><p>Action Taken</p></font><span style="font-family: Arial;"><p>The presentation is for Board discussion only; no action will be taken</p></span></strong></em></strong></strong></span></address></pre>