|
|
 |
 |
|
The NSRC's Impact on Student Achievement NSRC's Impact on the Adoption of Research-Based Science Curriculum NSRC's Impact on the Engagement of Business and Industry in Science Education NSRC's Impact on Leadership Development Case Studies of Science Education Reform In the Classroom: What Teachers Say About the NSRC Curriculum NSRC's Impact on Science Education in Other Countries
Through its programs and services, the NSRC provides school districts with tools and resources for initiating and sustaining effective science education programs. Using the NSRC model for science education reform, these school districts implement research- and standards-based science instructional materials, provide professional development for their teachers, and continually assess student progress. Further, they develop a system-wide support structure that provides science materials to the classroom and builds support from school district administration and the community. These programs have led to significant, documented improvement in student achievement. An emerging body of research indicates that inquiry-based science programs are effective at improving the learning and teaching of science. For example: Delaware. Although a small state, Delaware is an excellent example of the NSRC’s impact on science education reform. Its size is comparable to one of the nation’s larger school systems. The statewide student body is economically and ethnically diverse: 44% are members of minority groups and 34% are in poverty. In 1996, Delaware began a statewide science education reform program that included a partnership with the NSRC. The reform work began in elementary schools and has gradually moved to the middle and high school levels during the past decade. Between 1997 and 2001 every school district in Delaware attended an NSRC Science Education Strategic Planning Institute, resulting in the development of five-year strategic plans for reforming districts’ K-8 science education programs. These plans were based on “The NSRC Science Education Reform Model.” Using this model, the state developed a comprehensive technical assistance infrastructure to support the districts’ implementation of research-based instructional programs. This infrastructure included sustained professional development programs for teachers and state tests that aligned with state standards and research-based instructional materials. Results of state tests during the past six years provide evidence that Delaware is closing the achievement gap, beginning in grade four. At grade four the percentage of students meeting the statewide science standards increased from 80% in 2000 to 90% in 2005 for all ethnic groups. African-American and Hispanic students’ performance increased from 73% in 2000 to 87% in 2005, a gain of 15%. Additional data for grades six and eight can be found on the Delaware State Education Web site illustrating the continued progress Delaware is making in closing the gap for its students.
Gaston, G., Wood, R., Collette, J. (2002)Delaware Smithsonian Project Report: Building on Success to Improve Our Children’s Future, 1995–2002 Update http://www.doe.state.de.us/aab/NAEP%20Science%202006%20PR.pdf
El Centro, California. The science reform effort in this economically deprived rural community shows that an investment in science education provides an excellent return in other areas of the curriculum as well. Imperial County ranks highest in poverty of all 58 California counties with 66% of students receiving free/reduced lunches, and 47% of the students are English language learners. The El Centro Elementary School District implemented a reform effort following the NSRC model, including research-based instructional materials. Students in Imperial Valley public schools who have been taught using inquiry methods significantly outperform their classmates who have had traditional (textbook-based) science instruction. Stanford Achievement Test results indicate that the longer students are enrolled in research-based science programs, the better they perform on nationally normed science, writing, and mathematics tests.   Klentschy, Michael, Leslie Garrison, and Olga Maia Amaral. 1999. “Valle Imperial Project in Science (VIPS): Four-Year Comparison of Student Achievement Data, 1995-1999.”
http://www.carolinacurriculum.com/stc/publications.asp#Evidence Klentschy, Michael P., and Elizabeth Molina-De La Torre. 2004. “Students’ Science Notebooks and the Inquiry Process,” In Crossing Borders in Literacy and Science Instruction: Perspectives on Theory and Practice. NSTA Press, Arlington, VA. Vanosdall, Rick, Klentschy, Michael, Hedges, Larry, and Weisbaum, Kathryn Sloane. 2007. “A Randomized Study of the Effects of Scaffolded Guided-Inquiry Instruction on Student Achievement in Science.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Michigan. A small-scale study conducted in Michigan showed that students in school districts that used the NSRC’s Science and Technology for Children (STC elementary curriculum) performed better on the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) for Science than those who did not. The study compared the results from 15 STC school districts in affluent, moderate, and poor districts (socioeconomic categories aggregated according to the percentage of students who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch) with the results from districts using a textbook approach to science education. Ten of the 15 STC districts, including two of the low-income districts, improved their scores of the MEAP at a greater rate than the state average. http://www.carolinacurriculum.com/stc/publications.asp#Evidence
Southwestern Pennsylvania. Under the leadership of Pittsburgh-based ASSET Inc., a nonprofit educational leadership group, more than 50 school districts in western Pennsylvania have followed the NSRC model for science education reform, emphasizing the use of research-based instructional materials and professional development. Results from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) show that students in these 50 districts outperformed their peers in the United States and internationally. They also performed on par with students from the highest scoring nations in the TIMSS study. This progress convinced Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell to launch an initiative to support the implementation of this approach to science learning and teaching in all school districts in the rest of the state. The NSRC is a partner with ASSET in this effort. Raghavan, Kalyani, Shira Cohen-Regev, and Shelley A. Strobel. 2001. “Student Outcomes in a Local Systemic Change Project.” In School Science and Mathematics Journal, volume 101, number 8, Dec. 2001. Davison, Reeny, and Kalyani Raghavan. 2000. “Impact of ASSET Inc. on Student Learning: Report on Results of the Systemic Reform of Education in Southwestern Pennsylvania from 1995–2000. http://lsc-net.terc.edu/do.cfm/paper/7034/show.  Science Is Elementary Year One Full Report: http://www.horizon-research.com/reports/2007/sieyr1.pdf Science Is Elementary Year One Summary: http://assetinc.org/documents/SIEYearOneHighlights.pdf Washington State. During its eight-year partnership with the NSRC, the Washington State LASER has established a strong alliance with the Washington State Department of Education, corporations, and nonprofit organizations. It has increased the number of school districts implementing research-based science education programs from a few pilot districts to districts that serve 75% of the state’s student population. Statewide data show significant improvement in student learning in schools that have fully implemented the NSRC reform model, with a strong emphasis on teacher professional development. As a result of the progress shown in the state, Washington Governor Christine Gregoire has supported a measure that would increase funding for mathematics and science education in Washington schools by almost $200 million.
Green Bay, Wisconsin. The Einstein Project in Green Bay, Wisconsin, is a collaborative effort among schools, businesses, and communities in northeastern Wisconsin. It is dedicated to improving the quality of mathematics, science, and technology education using kit-based curriculum materials and is based on the principles of the NSRC. The Einstein Project commissioned the St. Norbert College Survey Center (SNC) to evaluate the effectiveness of Science and Technology for Children curriculum units on student achievement versus a textbook approach to science class. The SNC found that the Einstein students performed better than non-Einstein students on a wide range of assessments. In addition, “Einstein Project students did significantly better than non-Einstein students when asked to perform a task, investigate, classify, arrange, draw and label, describe, or explain a scientific phenomenon.” http://www.einsteinproject.org/?page_id=35&parent_page_id=24 Independent Evaluation of STC/MS® by The Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Education Policy (CSTEEP). “Consistent, statistically significant differences provided evidence to support the contention that the four curriculum units were more effective in teaching the scientific concepts assessed than were the more traditional instructional approaches employed with the control groups. Students exposed to the STC/MS (Science and Technology Concepts for Middle Schools) curriculum also outperformed the nation and international groups. Together, this pattern of results suggests that all four of the curriculum units were very effective in teaching science and technology concepts to middle school students.” Pedulla, J., The Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Education Policy (CSTEEP), Boston College, Boston, MA, 2002 NSRC's Impact on the Adoption of Research-Based Science Curriculum When school district leaders are provided access to information about research and best practices, given time to develop a strategic plan, and become members of a sustained learning network, they are highly likely to implement a research-based science curriculum. For example: More than 700 school districts have sent representatives to the NSRC’s Leadership and Assistance for Science Education Reform (LASER) strategic planning institutes and predecessor leadership institutes. Participants at these institutes have developed plans for moving from a traditional, textbook-based instructional model to research-based, inquiry-centered science learning and teaching. Independent evaluations of LASER show that more than ninety percent of these districts have successfully begun the reform process and that many are well on their way to institutionalizing it. Through the work of the NSRC’s Centers of Excellence – Leadership and Assistance for Science Education Reform (LASER) Center, the Professional Development Center, and the Curriculum Development Center– more than 700 diverse school districts representing twenty percent of the United States K-eight student population are now implementing research-based, inquiry science programs in their communities. NSRC's Impact on the Engagement of Business and Industry in Science Education Since 1992, a sustained and growing coalition of major corporations and foundations has been investing time and resources to implement the NSRC’s science education reform model with hundreds of school districts throughout the country. More than fifty percent of NSRC program support is obtained from private foundations and corporations. This support has been leveraged by grants that the NSRC has received from the National Science Foundation. More about business and industry’s involvement with science education reform. NSRC's Impact on Leadership Development Through the LASER Center These leaders have received 48 hours of professional development related to current research, case studies representing best implementation practices, strategic planning, and the nature of organizational change. More than half of these leaders have participated in follow-up LASER Center services and have requested ongoing support for their reform efforts. Case Studies of Science Education Reform: Examples of Science Education Reform following the NSRC model (from Science For All Children): A Large Suburban School District Works to Build a Cadre of Effective A City School District Struggles to Put the Pieces Together Corporate Sponsorship and an Emphasis on Strong Professional A Small School District Builds a Strong Corporate Partnership A University-School District Partnership Creates a Multidistrict Program Step by Step Pasadena Develops a Model for Teacher-Scientist Partnerships A University Works Collaboratively with a City School District The Einstein Project Builds a Science Program Through Community Partnerships In the Classroom: What Teachers Say About the NSRC Curriculum “As a new teacher, without an extensive science background, I found the STC/MS program to be very easy to use….The activities are thought provoking, yet easy to set up and manage. The lessons provide opportunities for constant assessment, which gives the teacher better understanding of how the students are progressing.” Ana Morris “Scope and sequence are STC’s strengths. The program engages children in inquiry-based process skills and science concepts. STC has a really nice flow.” Ann Bower “We liked the quality of the STC kits and the design of the instruction that comes with them….The Teacher’s Guide is logically arranged, so teachers can go through the unit in sequence. The guide makes it pretty easy for teachers – even if they’re a little uncertain about science activities.” Eugene Hungate “In my 38 years as an educator, I have seen and used a variety of approaches for teaching elementary science. The STC kits have moved science instruction away from reading comprehension and demonstration to hands-on activities. As a result, my students find science more enjoyable, while they gain a better understanding of the basic processes.” Don Johnson “I have used the STC/MS program in my class for quite a few years now…I really like the fact that on a daily basis, my students are not reading about certain content area…rather, they are ‘doing it.’ I have found that the program allows me to address the needs of a broad spectrum of student abilities all in one lesson! I have especially seen a dramatic change in students’ attitudes towards science. They just can’t wait to find out what we’re doing next!” Sherri Petrella-Jak “STC units have helped me to completely change the way I teach science. They promote not only a hands-on, but a minds-on approach to science. They have helped my students to learn to become better thinkers and problem solvers. I cannot imagine going back to a textbook approach to teaching science.” Sue Gunter |
|
|
|
| © NATIONAL SCIENCE RESOURCES CENTER | |
|
|
