1

Introduction

On October 14 and 15, and December 8, 2021, the Board on Science Education at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a virtual Summit entitled Taking Stock of ScienceStandards Implementation. The Summit, said Taunya Nesin (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation), was designed to take stock of the implementation of state science standards and to determine the next steps for continuing or reinvigorating implementation efforts. Through three days of presentations and conversations, said Nesin, stakeholders will consider implementation across all states and territories, identify successes and challenges, and identify areas where additional resources or work is needed. The goal by the end of the Summit, she said, is for attendees to understand the current state of science standards implementation; identify what needs to happen in the next phase of implementation; and identify the tools, resources, and capital needed to advance a more just, equitable, and inclusive learning experience for our youth, teachers, and communities. (See Box 1-1 for Statement of Task.)

“Transformations in the way that science is taught across the country are under way,” added Maya Garcia (Colorado Department of Education). These changes have been shaped primarily by A Framework for K–12 Science Education (the Framework) (NRC, 2012) and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) (NGSS Lead States, 2013). Garcia noted that many other studies and publications have informed the work being done, including Developing Assessments for the Next Generation Science Standards (NRC, 2014); Guide to Implementing the Next Generation Science Standards (NRC, 2015); Design, Selection, and Implementation of Instructional Materials for the Next Generation Science Standards (NASEM,

2018); Science and Engineering for Grades 6–12 (NASEM, 2019); and Science and Engineering in Preschool Through Elementary Grades: The Brilliance of Children and The Strengths of Educators (NASEM, 2022). As states and districts move forward with changes, this Summit presents a unique opportunity to convene as a group and reflect on the key principles and approaches that are guiding the implementation of Framework-based science standards. At this moment in time, said Garcia, states and districts may be feeling “implementation fatigue,” along with fatigue related to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is hoped, she said, that the conversations during the Summit will “renew your efforts.” The insights generated by the Summit “will generate a wave of momentum and collaboration” to support the field and communities moving forward with implementation.

The Summit planning committee process, said Garcia, began with a virtual listening tour to generate the big areas of interest; they also examined the reports listed above to identify themes across recommendations and insights from multiple sectors and stakeholders. The workshop was designed to explore the strategies and tools that communities are using to enact Framework-based standards, to engage with researchers and practitioners, and to reflect on the current landscape. Community engagement will continue through the spring of 2022, said Garcia, and a final workshop will be held to review what was learned and to plan the next steps as a community.

The committee used the Framework as a grounding point for the Summit, said Garcia, and planned the agenda and topics around its principles for implementation:

• Attend to coherence across levels, across grades, and across different components of the system.
• Attend to what is unique about science.
• Develop and provide continuing support for leadership in science at the state, district, and school levels.
• Build and leverage collaborations, networks, and partnerships.
• Take enough time to implement well.
• Make equity a priority.
• Ensure that communication is ongoing and relevant.

The planning committee pulled out two elements of these principles as a particular focus for the Summit: equity and coherence. In the 10 years since the Framework was released, the collective understanding around equity has evolved, said Garcia. Summit panelists were encouraged to explore how implementation efforts are making equity a priority and to provide specific examples, but they were challenged to avoid using equity as a catchall phrase. Second, the Summit is focused on how aligned and coherent efforts are key to implementation of three-dimensional science standards. For both topics, said Garcia, the Summit participants were asked to consider where there have been successes and where efforts have been constrained. Finally, the planning committee aimed to invite a wide range and diversity of voices to the table. The panels reflect a balance of practitioner and research voices across multiple sectors, said Garcia; the goal is to bring together voices from different areas and fields.

STRUCTURE OF SUMMIT AND PROCEEDINGS

The Summit took place virtually over three days, with each day featuring a combination of presentations, panel discussions, and question and answer sessions. This proceedings follows the structure of the Summit. Chapters 2 through 4 cover the first day of the Summit, with discussions on the vision of the Framework and the NGSS, the landscape of science standards implementation across all states, and the role of leadership. Chapters 5 and 6 cover the second day and focus on the student experience and teacher professional learning. The final panels of the workshop, held on Day 3, are summarized in Chapters 7 and 8, covering instructional materials and systems of assessment. Also on the third day, workshop participants divided into breakout groups to discuss tools and resources in different areas; the summaries of these discussions are in Chapter 9. Finally, Chapter 10 contains reflections and next steps for the field. This proceedings has been prepared by the workshop rapporteur as a factual summary of what occurred at the workshop. The planning committee’s role was limited to

planning and convening the workshop. The views contained in the proceedings are those of individual workshop participants and do not necessarily represent the views of all workshop participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.