posted by:
|
Linda Gregg
on November 12, 2000
at 10:07AM
|
subject:
|
Systems-Responses-
|
Las Vegas, Nevada (Mathematics and Science Enhancement -MASE) is a K-5 LSC. Our effort to address the systems (national, state, district, school ) that swirl around us is to work to achieve a "balanced" vision and approach to science and mathematics. Early on we moved to stop using "reform" language that was misunderstood by many groups, alienating many educators as well as parents. We focused our work on students, what we could do to help teachers provide access for all children to improved science and mathematics. Implementation of Nevada State Content Standards actually helped the LSC effort as the standards are primarily based on national standards. State accountability systems put in place at the same time however, are creating problems similar to what others describe. To balance assessment, the project schools are implementing MARS assessment in mathematics and hopefully will implement a science assessment this year that is aligned with standards-based teaching and learning. Our belief, based on successful achievement of students with teachers who implement Investigations as designed, is that students learning in standards-based situations score as well or better on multiple choice normed tests than students in nonstandards-based classrooms.
The national push for accountability by normed national tests surrounds Nevada's two-year old plan for accountability by the CTB Terra Nova. Fourth grade is the only grade K-5 that is tested with the Terra Nova. The state is in the process of constructing assessments for other grades. Science was tested with the Terra Nova for the first time and scores published last year. Not pretty - teachers consider it primarily a vocabulary/reading test. Currently we also have district tests K-5 in mathematics and reading -- science is in our future. All are multiple choice. The state field tested their multiple choice tests this year and there may be one or two open-ended tasks. We really need to think about what we ask for -- is it possible we are better off without the normed, multiple choice science tests than with them?
It seems many teachers have a very difficult time trusting that if they use standards-based instructional strategies and curriculum materials their students will know enough to score high enough on multiple choice tests to keep their school off the needs improvement list. It also seems that it is easy to slip back into old ways of teaching when accountability is based on multiple choice tests. As others describe, literacy is the district priority as mathematics scores have been steadily improving the last few years. We are, however, concerned because we are seeing less mental computation K-5 and that was a prime focus to help students develop flexibility with numbers and sound concept development with Investigations in Number, Data, and Space.
We feel very good about our approach with science notebooks and expository trade books to incorporate writing, reading, listening and speaking with science. The focus is on science as the context for literacy, without decreasing the emphasis on science. Professional development in both science and mathematics competes with PD for literacy not built around science. Science is still not the subject of choice by most K-5 teachers which is sad - students are natural scientists. So we just keep working with everyone that sees the potential of science and new teachers seem to be among the most eager to learn and implement scientific inquiry. We feel that although we are not where we want to be and this is harder and taking much longer than ever expected - we are making slow progress.
Enough for now - - as Gail noted - a report is due. Cheers to all, Linda Gregg
|
|