Better Integrating “Keys to Literacy” Scaffolds and Strategies Across the Science Curriculum

x4oxgsgr_400x400

Over the past several years our Burlington elementary educators have been inundated with changes. Besides the upending of our K-5 science and engineering curriculum classroom educators were introduced to “Keys to Literacy” a K-12 ranging program designed to boost student literacy skills through scaffolds and instructional strategies that build over time and can cross all disciplines. While initially this work was being done seemingly in parallel to the science overhaul, enough institutional knowledge around the “KTL” practices were able to be integrated into the units developed toward the end of our staged curriculum turnover.

Screen Shot 2019-11-18 at 2.17.39 PM

Google Slide “presentations” with links to copyable KTL scaffolds made by BPS teachers such as this one can be found in our grades 2, 3, and 5 curriculum resource pages.

Last week, we were graced with time and opportunity to face the reality of our disconnected work in the earlier units and allow teachers to adapt and revise some of our templates while developing exemplars of commonly used KTL scaffolds for their peers to lean on, saving them valuable prep time for scaffolds to use on their own so they might direct their attention instead to the host of other needs to meet.

Teachers spent their afternoon creating paper and digital versions of two-column notes, top-down webs, question/sorting activities, and more in an effort to lessen the collective burden of everyone and better reinforce the use of these strategies and (hopefully!) their students’ own synthesis and understanding of science’s “disciplinary core ideas.”

I’d like to take this time to thank the Grade 2, 3, and 5 teachers of Burlington for their dedication to this work and their craft. You’ll find links to all of their models shared publicly at the very top of our grade specific curriculum resource pages. While our Grade K, 1, and 4 teachers were tied up with other trainings, we hope to repeat this model and support their units in similar ways moving forward.

Direct links to the Grade 2, 3, and 5 KTL resource pages can be found below:

KTL Grade 2 Examples (Produced and shared by Burlington educators 11/2019)

KTL Grade 3 Examples (Produced and shared by Burlington educators 11/2019)

KTL Grade 5 Examples (Produced and shared by Burlington educators 11/2019)

Posted in 3-5, Curriculum, K-2, Professional Development | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Supporting Informal Educators Navigating the Currents of NGSS

 

05d2756959b5a0e94044797c074a1826

Over the past two months I have had the pleasure of supporting NSTA’s pivot to a more inclusive “National Science Teaching Association” by assuming the role of editor for the NSTA’s “Next Gen Navigator” monthly e-newsletter. The role provided me the opportunity to connect with several Massachusetts based science institutions, including the WADE Institute, the New England Aquarium’s Teacher Resource Center, and the Christa McAuliffe Center for Integrated Science Learning.

A web version of the October 2019 publication, “Refashioning Informal Education to Support 3-D Learning” can be found here. You’ll find my editorial remarks there as well. 🙂

Science educators of all kinds interested in making shifts in their practice aligned with the Next Generation Science Standards should consider signing up for the Next Gen Navigator on the NSTA website linked here. Along with three or four articles from NGSS practitioners you’ll find classroom and professional development resources included in each monthly installment, all aligned with a different theme relevant to NGSS curriculum and instruction.

Posted in NGSS, Professional Development | Tagged | Leave a comment

Seeking Patterns in Workshops: Making a NSTA Conference – Part 2

Roughly a year after our NSTA Boston 2020 arrangements team met for the first time, I was back in DC for our next big step toward making the national conference a reality. With Programming Coordinator, Pam Pelletier and the NSTA conference arrangements team, roughly one-thousand workshop proposals were reviewed and sorted in roughly a day and half’s time. The work cemented the hundreds of hours already put in by 60+ volunteers from the Massachusetts Science Teachers Association and New England more broadly.

While the NSTA team had already sorted proposals by grade level before our arrival, Pam and I took the time to dig a little deeper, using our “human instinct for patterns” to uncover a trove of subtler themes. On several occasions we stopped to take in the descriptions and summations of the great work that will be on display next April. While our conference’s four strands are and will be explicitly highlighted in the months leading up to the conference, NSTA2020 in Boston will also have a number of recognizable undercurrents including:

Human Impact and Student Activism:

After just a few hours on day one it was clear that K-12 science educators have been paying attention to ESS3 in their NGSS standards. What really excited us was the inclusion of opportunities for students to act on their new found understanding of the role humans are playing in changes to our planet. While the spotlight certainly centered on climate data and action, several proposals took on biodiversity conservation, soil, water, air degradation, and even light pollution!

Equity and Social Justice:

Challenges around access and equity in science have been well documented and hold a prominent place in the Framework for K-12 Science Education, so it was great to see just how many educators are working so hard to do something about it! Many workshops highlighted partnerships where urban students and communities connected with scientists to do authentic science work, changing their perceptions and/or doubts about themselves as scientists. Others focused on supporting English Language Learners access and understanding of scientific language while still more centered on research and work being done to improve access to high-quality science education in underserved urban and rural areas alike.

Engineering for all:

Many hands-on workshops and presentations hit on the integration of engineering and use of the engineering design process across the PreK to 12 realm. While there will always be bridges to build, workshops diverged to coastal erosion mitigation, rocketry, polymers for soft-bodied surfaces, and solutions to fairy-tale dilemmas. Some took the extra step of integrating such art in the way of origami, and the beauty in the balance of forces and motion.

Tech Integration:

Makerspaces, programming, robotics, oh my! Lots of workshops, presented by individuals or teams from schools or school districts, will bring to life the interplay between building strong foundations in computer science and three-dimensional learning. Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality has also made its own space next to 3D printers, dash-and-dots, LEGO Mindstorms, and other technologies on display at past NSTA conferences. Interested in using NASA, NOAA, and citizen science data sets? NSTA Boston will have that covered for you too.

So why all the fuss? To minimize the amount of overlap among similar workshops of course! Conference regulars know the “FOMO” feeling they inevitably get when having to select between two or more outstanding workshops. While I am 100% certain that you will be unable to avoid this feeling at NSTA2020, we’ve tried our best to give attendees the opportunity to catch similarly-themed presentations at another time.

IMG_6317

A quick selfie at NSTA with Program Coordinator, Pam Pelletier and NSTA’s Conferences Director, Delores Howard.

Before we left Pam and I got to sit down with long-time NSTA Conference Coordinator, Delores Howard and layout our favorite recommendations for the conference’s keynote and conference strand speakers. While I can not share who they will be until NSTA finalizes agreements, I am very excited about the possible lineup to be! Before leaving, Pam and I snapped a few pictures in the lobby and with our NSTA colleagues that we are so very grateful for. The grind that the NSTA conference team goes through to host not one, but five conferences over a calendar year can not be understated and I am so appreciative of their work. Thank you, Delores Howard, Beverly Shaw, Dayna Ward, Donna Fletcher, and Linda Crossley!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How do you “Choose Your Own (PD) Adventure?”

coolandcollected_forsale_119b.0

A quick glimpse at the 25 most recent emails in my inbox included three seemingly outstanding upcoming professional development opportunities. A stipended opportunity to learn about engineering design and the physics centered on designing your own hand held vacuum at MIT’s Center for Materials Science and Engineering:

Still another was a reminder from my NSTA Professional Learning Community about an upcoming NSTA web conference around STEM instruction and ELs, and still another regarding the summer offerings by the Wade Institute (previously known as MITS) in the local Northeast MA region.

Oh, and how can I forget the Valerie Bang-Jensen and Mark Lubkowitz book, “Sharing Books, Talking Science” I just purchased? When will I take the opportunity to read that? And let’s just forget that Twitter feed (as we’ve already pointed out a few cross posts above, a mere tip of the iceberg…)

“Personalized Learning” is a best practice that gets batted around not only in our students classrooms but among professional development facilitators as well. As educators we don’t always have control around what forms of professional development we need to participate in, but when we do have choice its important to have some framework for decision making.

For me, I try to select around personal needs just as much as professional ones during a time when my children are young and me-time precious! PD needs to be:

  • Timely (flexible or over a day typically)
  • Engaging (stretches me beyond my current strengths and/or into new learning domains)
  • Applicable (I should be able to put this learning to good use in the upcoming academic year, if not sooner!)
  • Credit-worthy (keep moving on that schedule… cost of living in the Boston area isn’t getting any cheaper!)

But despite these seemingly appropriate criteria, opportunities of interest continue to present themselves that are difficult to shy away from. Are they too vague? Probably. But before I go under the deeper reflection hood I’m curious to hear how others approach their own professional development learning adventure? What criteria do you use? What kinds of learning and opportunity have your criteria led you to or how has it held you back? What suggestions can you offer a parent of toddlers still unwilling to give up on that “never stop learning” mindset?

Oh and if you were looking for awesome “Choose Your Own Adventure” references here you are sadly out of luck. But I will share this amazing atlasobscura blog post in which every Choose Your Own Adventure book from the series has been data mapped to show all the possible outcomes.

Posted in Professional Reflections | Leave a comment

#NSTA 2019 Takeaways

NSTA 2019 marks my sixth national conference and the start to a 51-week countdown to NSTA’s 2020 National Conference in Boston! Plenty of personalized learning opportunities and professional networking happens at an NSTA conference, even if you can only attend a day or two! Here are some of my takeaways from this year’s conference in St. Louis.

#1: “Where we start is no indicator of what we can become”

Astronaut and spacewalker, Scott Kelly’s message as the conference keynote did not include instructional takeaways or pedagogical know-how. Instead his reminder that those we do not identify as “model students” are still capable of great accomplishments and exceeding our own self-identified potential. His quote, ““where we start is no indicator of what we can become” is echoed in the K-12 Science Framework’s emphasis on “Science for All Students” and a message I hope will percolate in my mind the next time I find myself doubting my own students’ potential. His acknowledgement of Tom Wolfe’s 1979 book,  “The Right Stuff” as his inspiration spoke to the power of a spark that lights a student’s imagination, and the power of literature to carry ideas and experiences to our audience with perspective and authenticity. Plus, there was this: 

#2: “We are all in this together”

While cliche to say “there’s always more to learn” it is powerful to hear this message from noted leaders such as Paul Anderson, creator of the Youtube series Bozeman Science and now his own education consulting business, “The Wonder of Science.” During his packed presentation Andersen shared acknowledgements to those he continues to learn from…

… while sharing his own resources designed to support teachers in bolstering their instructional methods and train their eyes to identify strong, three-dimensional curriculum and assessments. His hat tip to elementary educators as teachers who should be stood with and not over as deliverers of science education spoke to me personally – noting that they are teaching “half the science education in our students’ K-12 schooling.” Putting his message that “we are all in this together” to practice, his fantastic, Creative Commons stamped materials can be found on his website under the resources tab including his SEP and CCC graphic organizers and new three-dimensional “Inquiry Cards”. This reminder, like Scott Kelly’s, was also one shared at NSTA and will aim to keep with me from a science, education, and science education perspective:

#3: Interest and resources for Standards Based Grading is growing across grades K-12

I was both floored and heartened by the number of high school teachers present at the presentation “Standards-Based Grading: Impact on Student Engagement in a Science Classroom” as SBG remains an enigma in our 6-12 Burlington grades. The connection between the SBG criteria and standards they made visible to students through their “I can” statements (replacing the more traditional “objective” statement). Time and encouragement of student-to-student support to achieve for mastery was also a shared staple. Room for improvement remains as examples shared centered around parochial school practice-based standards unfamiliar to me and did not explicitly connect with SEPs, DCIs, or CCCs. Admission that their SBG system had yet broken free from the requirements and mindsets of a school’s point scale system also demonstrated work to be done. Nevertheless their willingness to share in front of a packed house and their status as pioneers in this space should be honored!

#4: NSTA’s “Elementary Extravaganza” never disappoints!

Friday’s learning started with the dopamine hit that is the Elementary Extravaganza. Every turn of the head brought about an interest-piquing investigation, new and delightful trade book, or connection with an organization such as CESI or NEAYC leaving me ready to enlist in their membership ranks as well! I loved an ocean-oriented variation on the bird beaks lesson involving fish mouths and a balloon joust requiring clever engineering of a ramp car to both pop and defend. An inheritance variation tree innocently introduced the idea of dominant and recessive traits while a three rope tug-of-war brought about force diagram arrows to kindergarten children!

I hope that others will share their learning from NSTA 2019 and also come to Boston in 2020. Boston is NSTA’s largest national conference and never disappoints with its rich learning and cultural opportunities. See you there!

 

Posted in NGSS, Professional Development, Professional Reflections | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What will you share at NSTA 2020?

Screen Shot 2019-03-07 at 3.16.02 PM

The due date for submitting proposals to present at NSTA 2020 in Boston is just one month away. Why not share the great learning do you and your students do everyday with the broader science education community?

The best part about having the National Conference in your backyard is the opportunity to connect with other local educators and share relevant strategies, lessons, units and nearby partnerships. How would I know? Five years ago Burlington teacher, Jane Lynch and I presented a science-social studies interdisciplinary unit on engineering water wheels connected to student learning around the industrial revolution and Lowell mills. We presented alongside three Burlington third-graders, who had a wonderful time exploring the exhibit floor before proudly sharing their learning and expertise in designing, testing, and improving water wheels. They practically ran the workshop for us! Of the several educators who attended, four of them went on to adapt the unit for their own classrooms, sharing their thanks and appreciation with us long after the conference was over.

Students and Mrs. Lynch ready to present and facilitate a water wheels engineering challenge!

There are four learning strands associated with every national conference. While not required, proposal that align with one of these four domains tend to take higher priority when being accepted to present at the conference. 2020’s learning strands are:

  • The Long View: Building a Lifelong Passion for Science
  • Learning Science in All Spaces and Places: Near and Far
  • Thinking, Acting, and Communicating Like Scientists: A Focus on Disciplinary Literacy
  • Aligning the Lenses: Authentic, Three-Dimensional Measurement of Student Learning

Greater detail about what precisely these strand titles are referring to can be found here on this Google Doc developed by the local planning committee. To learn more about proposal guidelines, tips for writing a successful workshop proposal, and to submit a session proposal online visit nsta.org/conferenceproposals. Remember that the due date is April 15th. It will creep up on you so don’t wait!

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Pathways to Personalization and Science for All Students

Science educators now familiar with the Next Generation Science Standards and the Framework for K-12 Science Education are likely aware of its emphasis on recalibrating science classrooms to be for all students. The NGSS dedicates an entire appendix to this motto, including seven separate case studies on non-dominant student groups to illustrate different models for implementation of effective classroom strategies that meet the specific needs of student subgroups that historically have exhibited persistent gaps in science education proficiency.

This motto was on my mind while participating in a PD short course titled, “Pathways to Personalization.” Highlander Institute facilitators, Shawn Rubin and Cathy Sanford charged us with the need to “update our one size fits all [education] system to meet the specific needs of the students we serve” while recognizing the great challenges that come with making such a shift. Together they presented a roadmap for district and teacher leaders to work together to actualize such goals using a framework that could just as well be a roadmap for many school changes.

Screen Shot 2019-03-05 at 8.53.25 PM

 

I found several points to be valuable across my work as both a science coach and district improvement committee member, most notably the following:

1: The importance of articulating “the why?”

During our district breakout session, one of the facilitators emphasized the importance of “articulating the why” when and planning and piloting personalized learning models. Why are we pursuing the initiative? What characteristics of the initiative are our priorities? Four domains of change were highlighted in a tool titled the “Walkthrough Tool Domains and Indicators” which included several indicators that overlapped with the Framework vision and goals of the NGSS. Among them just to name a few (with my own science contextualization in parentheses):

  • “Students are engaged in work that is authentic” (phenomena based sense-making, constructing explanations and/or designing solutions to engineering problems)
  • “Teacher uses a variety of techniques to assess student progress toward learning goals” (through explanations supported by modeling, various forms forms of media, etc.)
  • “Teacher uses data to inform instruction” (as done through formative assessment)
  • “Students are given the opportunity to apply learning from one task to another” (as seen when teachers take on a ‘storyline’ approach to curriculum sequencing)
  • “Students present evidence that supports their thinking” (via sense-making approaches to curriculum and instruction)
  • “Students design or create a product to demonstrate their understanding” (such as models, claim arguments, etc)

These indicators were later used to develop a vision statement for what sorts of changes we would come to expect to observe happening in those classrooms piloting our personalized learning programs. To this effect, what we selected as our priorities were to be baked into how we would go about assessing both our students and the new system. Bringing me to my next takeaway…

2: The need for clear goals tied to valid assessments

During one of the workshop’s exercises, we absorbed start-of-year and mid-year datasets for our personalized learning pilot school in the form of qualitative classroom observations, standardized test data aggregates, and then some. The data was overwhelming in part because what our mock-district aimed to achieve had not been articulated outright, leaving us to wonder whether certain data points should be looked up as good, great, outstanding, or short of the mark.

One of the greatest challenges NGSS shifting teachers fess-up to is the need for more formative and authentic assessment of students that require a shift in what kinds of assessments are being used and how. A diversity of methods of assessment allow for a wider range of student scientists to show what they know in different ways, but not without challenges.

Without clear goals and exemplars about what new learning should look like, educators fall back on the methods and strategies traditionally used, methods which likely do not reflect what new student understanding should look like under the NGSS. Disappointing “results” lead educators to feel insecure about their learning path, frustrated with the process, and may lead to teachers abandoning the initiative all together. A February KQED Mind/Shift series on equitable grading practices (thank you, PLN member Cari Williams!) highlighted this fact through a standards based grading exposé, attributing such an assessment system as one that whittles away at the gap between dominant and non-dominant groups.

A featured teacher quoted in the article noted that, “teacher experiences will drive change — they must have opportunities to try out strategies and see the effects themselves — but district leaders also have to provide the tailwind for this to become a reality. And that’s where [I see] the biggest challenge to this work.” Such tailwinds include instruction and assessment models to adopt or adapt as well as “cover” from skeptical community members and students familiar and/or successful with the more traditional system. Leading me to my final point:

3: “Bottom-up” research & development with “top-down” support

Boxed curriculums dropped from the heavens marked with well polished NGSS-ready tags may ‘equip’ your classrooms, but with what? For genuine implementation of the shifts necessary to meet all students it will take work from classroom educators and support staff familiar with the strengths and challenges of their specific student bodies. Work that will be need to be done day-in and day-out over several years. Not only will curriculums need to be vetted but classroom instructional strategies and practices will need to be looked at critically to evaluate which will meet the needs of all.

Teacher leaders who innovate and try new approaches will need understanding from administrators and evaluators who may see untraditional learning at work, as well as support in the form of time and resources, commonly resources only administrators have control over. They will also need coaching and time as they recalibrate their own instructional strategies, highlighted in a recent read from the California Science Teachers Association blog titled, “Re-novicing of Science Teachers and the Science Coach” (thank you PLN member, Kristen Rademaker!) Administrators themselves will need to come to more deeply understand the shifts being undertaken in their NGSS classrooms, both the why and the how.

4: “The chasm” is a problem and requires an engineered solution

Even with all this work, it is likely that uptake of these shifts will be slow, with “innovators and early-adopters” taking the lead, before new curriculum, instructional practices, and methods of assessment jump “the chasm” to their school and district colleagues.

chasm-curve-01-640x489

The challenge is real (observed in everything from educational initiatives to technology adoptions) and the stakes high, for “pockets of innovation” in a school or district can only go so far while being held to standards like the NGSS that build over time. Without foundational knowledge in elementary and middle grades, high school students will be ill-prepared for classrooms where the shift has been made and calls to return to “what worked” (for historically dominant student groups) will become louder.

“Pathways to Personalization” presents a path under the context of personalized / blended learning, but the idea of paths is important. Like an engineer, failure points will be identified as curriculum, practices, and assessment evolve, leading to refinement, and additional redesign cycles. It’s important that we all share such learning through our PLNs from local to global so that we can bridge the chasm as a collective, pulling ourselves ever upwards to the goal of meeting the needs of all our students.

Posted in NGSS, Professional Reflections | Leave a comment