Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The issue I'm having is how broad the standards are and how to unpack them. I can show that what I currently teach fits into the standards but without unpacking them I can't show that I meet the intent of NGSS.
Earth science is one of our issues. Like many high schools, we don't have an earth science class so we're looking at incorporating earth science into chemistry, physics and biology.
The bundles are very different than what we've been teaching.
The issue I'm having is how broad the standards are and how to unpack them. I can show that what I currently teach fits into the standards but without unpacking them I can't show that I meet the intent of NGSS.
Earth science is one of our issues. Like many high schools, we don't have an earth science class so we're looking at incorporating earth science into chemistry, physics and biology.
The bundles are very different than what we've been teaching.
I don't know enough about the subject to speak to any specifics but it sounds like the same problem we see in so many standards... They are purposefully written broad enough that any half good teacher can fit their curricula under the umbrella but they fail to create any real universal standard or do much to redirect education in any particular direction.
All flair and no substance so that politicians can say they are "doing something." It's just too bad this kind of eduspeak gobbledygook costs a fortune.
...
All flair and no substance so that politicians can say they are "doing something." It's just too bad this kind of eduspeak gobbledygook costs a fortune.
From what I saw on their website, these are developed by non governmental organizations and educators using private funds. Is that not the case?
I'm not a defender of politicians, but every time there is a new educational method proposed, educators distance themselves from responsibility and point toward "the politicians." Educators really need to start owning the process, standards, and methods.
From what I saw on their website, these are developed by non governmental organizations and educators using private funds. Is that not the case?
I'm not a defender of politicians, but every time there is a new educational method proposed, educators distance themselves from responsibility and point toward "the politicians." Educators really need to start owning the process, standards, and methods.
That's because educators are seldom the good idea fairies that come up with the newest, greatest, latest change in education, it is education researchers, most of whom have spent little to no time as a teacher in a classroom.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
That's because educators are seldom the good idea fairies that come up with the newest, greatest, latest change in education, it is education researchers, most of whom have spent little to no time as a teacher in a classroom.
On the one hand there aren't 10,000 targets with NGSS on the other it's hard to tell how high they expect you to go.
Here's one of the eight for chemistry:
"Use the periodic table as a model to predict the relative properties of elements based on the patterns of electrons in the outermost energy level of atoms."
This is very broad. My question is how deep do they expect me to go? Are they asking for a functional level where students can do the task that would take a few weeks to achieve or a deeper understanding that will take months to achieve? When have I met this target?
That's because educators are seldom the good idea fairies that come up with the newest, greatest, latest change in education, it is education researchers, most of whom have spent little to no time as a teacher in a classroom.
And why should teachers get involved? We know that standards are largely numbers on a lesson plan that administration doesn't read and if they do they don't regularly check to see if those plans are being implemented.
Only good teachers care about the standards, and they are largely already compliant by default.
Hopefully, one of the outcomes will be Earth Science in all high schools. It is ridiculous that so many states don't mandate it.
Earth Science was offered at our schools, but the only kids who took it were the kids who weren't on the college prep schedule. It would have interfered with having four college prep sciences courses.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
