New science tests are rolling out across the country, but some teachers are worried that they will include a lot of questions on subjects their students haven鈥檛 studied.
With schools in spring-testing mode, high school science teachers are watching intently to see how their students will do on the new exams. In some schools and districts, they鈥檙e noticing a mismatch between state or local science requirements and what鈥檚 on the tests.
鈥淚n California, kids only have to take two years of science, but now they鈥檙e taking one test that encompasses four years鈥� worth of science standards at the end of their junior year,鈥� said a high school chemistry teacher in a Southern California district. She asked for anonymity because she didn鈥檛 have administrators鈥� permission to discuss the issue.
鈥淚f I鈥檓 a student who only takes biology and chemistry, I won鈥檛 have [covered] the physics or earth science鈥� material on the test, she said. Many of her students follow the biology-chemistry-physics sequence that strengthens college applications, she said, but others take just a 9th grade 鈥渘atural science鈥� course and biology.
The schisms between the science students take鈥攂y choice or requirement鈥攁nd what they face on the new tests are becoming uncomfortably clear as more than 40 states phase in new science tests. Federal law requires schools to test students in science at least once in elementary, middle, and high school.
Forty-plus states have shifted to new tests to reflect standards they鈥檝e adopted in the last six years. About half of those states are using the Next Generation Science Standards, which debuted in 2013. The other half crafted standards that are similar. New tests designed for those standards draw on a wide range of topics: engineering and technology; earth and space sciences such as geology; life sciences such as biology, and physical sciences, including astronomy or chemistry.
Early Glimpses Stir Concern
The new tests don鈥檛 have much of a track record yet, as many states are just introducing them, or are still field-testing. But as they get closer, teachers have gotten glimpses through practice tests. And they鈥檙e seeing that the assessments鈥攍ike the underlying standards鈥攊nclude more science topics than many high school students take.
The difference takes on additional freight in financially strapped districts. David Upegui, an award-winning biology teacher at Central Falls High School in Rhode Island, said his school can鈥檛 afford enough teachers to adequately cover earth and space science, even though those topics account for a good chunk of the test in his state. He tries to meet the test鈥檚 engineering expectations by weaving them into his anatomy instruction.
鈥淚n a high-poverty school like mine, those courses don鈥檛 exist, but the students are still getting testing on it,鈥� he said.
The Next Generation Science Standards emphasize a blend of 鈥渒nowing鈥� and 鈥渄oing鈥� science. They envision students memorizing less, and doing more of what scientists actually do: developing a hypothesis, collecting and analyzing data, coming up with solutions.
Student learning is supposed to be 鈥渢hree dimensional,鈥� including the 鈥渃ore ideas鈥� of each science domain, science 鈥減ractices鈥� such as developing models or engaging in argument, and 鈥渃ross-cutting concepts鈥� like patterns or cause and effect.
Science requirements vary widely from state to state. As of last summer, 37 states and the District of Columbia required students to take three or more years of science in high school. Thirteen states required only two years or leave such decisions to the districts, according to a forthcoming survey report by Achieve, an organization that helped states write the Next Generation Science Standards.
Most state science requirements 鈥渁re not likely to ensure all students have access to the learning necessary to meet the [new] high school science standards,鈥� Achieve鈥檚 report says.
. Those policies afford districts鈥攁nd students鈥攊mportant flexibility, said Aneesha Badrinarayan, Achieve鈥檚 director of special projects. But that flexibility, combined with the variety of course choices students make, can translate into an uneven landscape of test readiness.
鈥淭he degree to which individual students are prepared for the assessments will be incredibly different, even building to building in the same district,鈥� said Matt Krehbiel, Achieve鈥檚 science director.
Integrated or Traditional Model?
How districts transform the standards into curriculum can shape students鈥� readiness for the tests, too.
Some districts are moving to an integrated model that blends science topics such as biology, physics, astronomy, and earth science, building in complexity as students move from 9th to 12th grade, while others retain the more traditional single-subject focus in each science course.
In the Golden State, where this spring鈥檚 new California Science Test includes a range of science topics, students would probably be 鈥渓ess likely鈥� to have been 鈥渆xposed to the standards鈥� on the test if their district uses a more traditional topic-by-topic course sequence, and they fulfill the state鈥檚 two-year requirement by taking entry-level science in 9th grade and biology in 10th, skipping chemistry and physics, said Scott Roark, a spokesman for the California Department of Education.
While teachers have noticed the potential for a mismatch between students鈥� classroom work and the test content, few in California are seriously worried, because schools there aren鈥檛 yet under pressure to reach certain levels of science proficiency for their federal accountability reports.
鈥淚n the first year or two of testing, we know there will be significant gaps,鈥� said Shawna Metcalf, the president-elect of the California Science Teachers Association.
鈥淏ut the state was expecting that,鈥� she added. 鈥淲e knew full well that there will be a learning curve鈥� as districts 鈥渆mbrace the pedagogical shifts鈥� in the standards and rework courses to better reflect them.
Most states鈥� federal accountability plans for 2018-19 do include science results, though, according to Achieve. That could add some pressure as states examine how well classroom teaching lines up with the new tests.
Peter J. McLaren, a science teacher who helped write the Next Generation Science Standards and now consults with schools about putting them into practice, said mismatches between what students study in school and what they face on the test won鈥檛 be as much of a problem as most teachers think.
Questions are designed less to plumb deep, detailed knowledge of a domain than to explore students鈥� grasp of scientific processes, McLaren said. In earth science, for instance, students might be asked to analyze strata in rock and discern patterns that might indicate their age, he said. Questions like that capitalize on the 鈥減ractices鈥� and 鈥渃ross-cutting content鈥� of science, McLaren said.
But those are the areas where many teachers still need to get stronger, McLaren said. When he travels around to districts, teachers 鈥済o all Zen鈥� on the standards鈥� science content, but they are less confident and 鈥渢heir pulses quicken when I start moving them into the practices and cross-cutting concepts.鈥�
