ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************
Martin,
Thanks for you remarks and observations. Restating your observations and comments, there is an implicit affective aspect in the Framework and there are significant problems in measuring these aspects broadly across a population. Your observation ....Assessing student performance within the vision of the new Framework will be hard, and we are not yet where we want to be in assessing interest, motivation, engagement, identity or many of the so-called 21st Century skills in large scale or high stakes tests yet... Is undoubtedly true.
Environments, like Science Centers can clearly play a seminal role in both fostering, nurturing, and describing common themes and strategies. So there is very much a need and rationale for promoting, sharing, and analyzing such activities, and evaluation is a way to approach the topic. It's very much a useful tool. There are other metrics as well.
Science tells us that affective experience extends far beyond the realm of traditional educational theory and development. Most of our behaviors are likely driven by a whole set of other relatively unconscious and innate behaviors that have some flexible aspects to them, what measures does one use? To me this is the biggest challenge.
It may not be feasible or useful to attempt such studies across a broad range of divergent institutions. Ideally, it would be great to have a series of National Informal Educational Testbeds which might both seek to control and replicate results, and they would involve a broad range of disciplines. As it is, it is piecemeal, subject to a host of economic factors, staff capabilities, and institutional needs. This is not a bad thing but it is a complicating feature of the grand experiment.
I think, I (and others) have been mis-interpreted on occassion. As every teacher knows there are many, many signals that come back from students and it's really about adjustment. Sometimes it's subtle stuff sometimes it's big stuff, and it can be very intangible, and that speaks strongly to human nature and the nature of interaction.
Charlie
Sent from Charlie's iPad
Berkeley, CA
Mobile 510-499-8086
Skypein: (510) 984-3543
[log in to unmask]
Exploratorium
3601 Lyon St.
San Francisco, CA 94123
On May 7, 2012, at 5:25 AM, "Storksdieck, Martin" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
> Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
> *****************************************************************************
>
> RE: Common Core Standards for Science - AKA (more precisely) Next Generation Science Standards (since they are not common core in the sense that state governors did not sign on before they were developed)
>
> Alan is correct: the NRC Framework for K-12 Science Education that will guide the development of the Next Generation Science Standards referenced the four strands of 2007 Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. It leaves out motivation and interest (strand 1 in LSIE) and the development of an identity as a science learner and as someone who knows about, uses and sometimes contributes to science (strand 6). However, while not addressed directly those ideas were also not entirely ignored (I think). The discussion about science education standards in the Framework starts with 8 practices of science and engineering that students should engage with when encountering core ideas and cross-cutting concepts. It is worth looking at these eight practices since they suggest a huge role for informal science institutions, and they suggest a way to engage with science that many of us would reasonably claim foster those affective and identity-related outcomes. Furthermore, the core ideas in science were selected using a range of criteria, including their broad explanatory power, but also whether they are significant and relevant to students and whether they are teachable and learnable in K-12.
>
> The Framework makes it clear that science is meant for all students, and it also speaks about the love for science and lifelong learning. True, it doesn't specify affective outcomes, and it talks about "performance expectations" that basically ask what students can do with what they have learned, something that traditional paper-pencil multiple choice questionnaires have difficulties measuring. In that sense they are already stretching the system.
>
> I would love to see a system of accountability in K-12 (or K-16) be responsive to a variety of cognitive, affective and even conative outcomes so that the love of learning and innate curiosity would not get squeezed out of kids in our pursuit for academic excellence, no matter how sophisticated the education system. Imagine a principle having to optimize his or her school for both... My sense is, though, that we need to take small, somewhat manageable steps towards that goal. Assessing student performance within the vision of the new Framework will be hard, and we are not yet where we want to be in assessing interest, motivation, engagement, identity or many of the so-called 21st Century skills in large scale or high stakes tests yet.
>
> But in the spirit (I hope) of Alan's comment, I would also like to add that there is a growing realization that these affective and identity-related elements of (science) learning are crucial. I believe that the Framework, combined with LSIE, opens the door for these discussions, allows ISE institutions to point to their essential role in providing children and adults with experiences that engage and inspire (two important terms in Washington now). In order to be able to have this conversation we need to ensure that we can show, and show it well, that ISE institutions do this. A previous discussion on this listserv doubted the value of evaluation. I can attest: good measures of accomplishments are essential!
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
> ________________________________________________
> Martin Storksdieck, 202-334-3987 (office), 443-254-0002 (cell)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Informal Science Education Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alan Friedman
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2012 2:33 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Common Core Standards
>
> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
> *****************************************************************************
>
> RE: Common Core Standards for Science
>
> As I read the documents, one aspect of the next generation science standards framework is that, like the last generation of science standards, it does not pay attention to any of the NRC's 6 strands of learning (LSIE, 2009) except the cognitive ones. Interest, attitude, and other strands where ISE can have big positive impacts are not in the framework, so they will not be included in the standards themselves, and they will not appear in the high-stakes assessments which follow.
>
> I'd love to hear that this reading is wrong, and also I'd love to hear if anyone has a strategy for countering this ongoing shortsighted view of how learning happens.
>
> Alan
> ________________________________________
> Alan J. Friedman, Ph.D.
> Consultant for Museum Development and Science Communication
> 29 West 10th Street
> New York, New York 10011 USA
> T +1 917 882-6671
> E [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> W www.FriedmanConsults.com <http://www.friedmanconsults.com/>
>
> a member of The Museum Group
> www.museumgroup.com <http://www.museumgroup.com/>
>
>
>>>
>
> ***********************************************************************
> For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.
>
> Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.
>
> The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.
>
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to [log in to unmask]
>
> ***********************************************************************
> For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.
>
> Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.
>
> The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit
> http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.
>
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
> message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
> [log in to unmask]
***********************************************************************
For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.
Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.
The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]
|
