Paper

State Science Standards: An Appraisal of Science Standards in 36 States

The Sunshine State Standards⁵⁴ is seriously flawed by a flood of pious dicta couched in jargonistic phrases and meaningless sequences. Consider the following from the introduction:

All over this country, educators, citizens, and political and business leaders are working toward education reform. An increasingly serviceoriented, informationbased society that is virtually exploding with expanding knowledge demands that everyone have the opportunity to acquire the necessary skills to succeed in the information age.

Chapter 1 is titled "Visioning," and the first section of Chapter 3 has the remarkable title, "Why is Content Important?"

Sometimes the language is impenetrable. For example, "Through a variety of methods, the need for protection of the natural systems of the Earth is expected"⁵⁵ ; or "Although our planet is quite insignificant when viewed as part of the universe, we know its relevance in time and space."⁵⁶; or "Learning emerges from context and connectedness."⁵⁷

There are some serious errors. "[Atoms consist] of a massive nucleus of protons, neutrons, and electrons. . . ."⁵⁸ [There are no electrons in the nucleus; they surround the nucleus and comprise most of the volume (though very little of the mass) of the atom.] "The nature of science and the nature of inquiry are synonymous."⁵⁹ (Whatever meaning is intended, it is not true that all valid inquiry is scientific.) ". . . [E]vidence suggests that the universe contains all of the matter and energy that ever existed."⁶⁰ (This is not a matter of evidence but of definition.) "The student knows that as electrical charges oscillate, they create timevarying electric and magnetic fields that propagate away from the source as an electromagnetic wave."⁶¹ (Fine, but the accompanying Sample Performance Description says, "With other students in a small group, [the student] builds an electromagnetic generator. . . ." This conflates electromagnetic radiation with Faradayan electromotive forcea serious error involving basic misunderstanding of the relevant physics.)

The eight major strands are subdivided into 17 standards. Unfortunately, some of the latter are poorly chosen or poorly expressed. For example, under the strand "Energy," the first of two standards is "The student recognizes that energy may be changed in form with varying efficiency."⁶² What is presumably meant is that practical energy conversion, particularly in heat engines, is imperfectly efficient in the sense that not all the heat generated can be converted into mechanical energy. But while that is an important engineering and practical concern, it is not an issue of such central scientific importance as to warrant its place as only one of two standards involving energy. Under the strand "Force and Motion," the two standards are not really separate but say the same thing a bit differently. And under "The Nature of Science," the reader finds, "The student understands that most natural events occur in comprehensible, consistent patterns." Does this imply that we understand most natural phenomena, including those we have not yet discovered? Or does it imply the existence of incomprehensible miracles? Or that the Universe has incomprehensible or inconsistent parts? The reader deserves better.

Some of the standards are trivial. Under the strand "Earth and Space," one of the two standards is "the student recognizes the vastness of the Universe and the Earth's place in it." The ambiguous antecedent of "it" aside, there are far deeper statements possible for this major standard that go beyond the fact that the Universe is vast. Much better would be something like this: "The student interprets the structure of the Universe at various scales of size and time and understands the evolutionary process that has led to the present configuration."

On occasion, the Sample Performance Descriptionswhich are examples of how a student might demonstrate his understanding of a benchmark, or element of knowledgeare irrelevant to the benchmarks. For example, the grade 68 student is meant to "know that equal volumes of different substances may have different masses."⁶³ To demonstrate this knowledge, the student "determines the mass of a solution, a solute, and a solvent before and after mixing and mathematically compares the mass of the whole with the mass of the parts." This is a useful activity for demonstrating mass conservation, but it does not show that the densities of substances differ. Moreover, "mathematically compares" is a pretty ponderous way of saying that the student adds two mass measurements and compares their sum with a third measurement.

Sad to say, irrelevant or trivial examples and poorly or erroneously stated ideas are common in this document. I made a count in the first three standards, which concentrate on the physical sciences. In 88 benchmarks and their accompanying Sample Performance Descriptions, there are at least 38 errors, irrelevancies, trivialities, confusing statements, and misstatements.

In various contexts, students are expected to build models or dioramas of systems, write skits or "infomercials," carry out publicservice projects, and so on. This is all very well, but it is striking that in no case are students ever expected to write essays.

The word "evolution" is carefully avoided. The issue is skirted and such matters as genetic variation and natural selection are treated lightly; biological evolution is certainly not treated as the central principle of the life sciences.

Georgia

The Georgia Standards⁶⁴ specify general science expectations gradebygrade through 6th grade. Life science is presented in grade 7 and earth science in grade 8. The high school curriculum consists of collegepreparatory courses in physical science, biology, chemistry, and physics, and a collection of 11 other elective courses.

The importance of correlating science achievement with reading, writing, and mathematical skills is mentioned, at least in a general way, as early as kindergarten. The concept of kinetic energy is introduced in a simple way in grade 1, and potential energy is introduced in grade 3:

[The student] defines movement as evidence of energy. . . . Recognizes examples of the energy of motion using simple objects, such as balls, toy cars, roller skates, bicycles.⁶⁵

Identifies and demonstrates examples of energy as potential (such as objects with ability to cause change due to position) or kinetic (such as objects in motion).⁶⁶

The distinction between temperature and heat is made explicit in grade 4. Important evolutionary ideas are introduced in grades 3 and 6⁶⁷ (though not the word itself.) Written laboratory reports are required beginning at grade 9.

The grade 9 Physical Science document has an unusually complete discussion of organic chemistry, and the student is expected to distinguish between weight and mass, and to define weightlessness.

Like many Southern states, Georgia has problems with the politics, if not the science, of evolution. In the biology course, the euphemism "organic variation" is used for evolution, yielding such delectable bits as the following:

[The learner will] describe historical and current theories of organic variation . . . describe how current geological evidences [sic] support current theories of organic variation . . . explain that a successful change in a species [sic] is most apt to occur when a niche is available.⁶⁸

In the same spirit, the theory of evolution is called "Darwin's theories," as if no one else ever had anything to do with the theory:

[The learner will] explain the development of Darwin's theories . . . recognize the impact of Darwin's theories on accepted views of change in species through time.^6-9

The purpose of this approach, of course, is to insulate the study of science from the inroads of politics. But for all its good intent, it makes it difficult or impossible for all but the most gifted students to understand the profound importance of evolution as the basis of the biological sciences. It also isolates biology from the other historical sciences, geology and astronomy, and thus wounds the student's understanding of the unity of the sciences. The total absence of evolutionary concepts from the Microbiology course, which concentrates on pathogens, makes it impossible to convey an appreciation of the origins of the diseases that from time to time appear as if from nowheretyphus, AIDS, and the annual strains of influenza. It is impossible, likewise, to make clear in the Ecology course the fundamental fact that an ecosystem bears to space the same relationship that an evolutionary sequence bears to time.

As usual, there seem to be no similar problems in setting forth the Geology curriculum; a few odd cosmological statements do crop up in the Astronomy course.

The collegepreparatory Chemistry I and Physics curricula are wellorganized and cover the standard material at a depth that will make substantial demands on the student.

Very lengthy and detailed, the Georgia document is of the list genre, each item being exemplified by a brief activity description. The list is reasonably wellorganized but its terseness is such as to make grasping the structure of the sciences difficult. The lack of more than a sketchy introductory section makes it difficult to read and interpret the document.

Note added in proof: A revision, dated Novemeber 1997, makes brief but explicit mention of evolution at the grade 9-12 level. Uniformitarianism gets brief mention at the grade 8 level. The depth of treatment is, however, still far from satisfactory. [See http://admin.doe.k12.ga.us/gadoe/qcc.nsf]

Hawaii

There are two documents, entitled "Essential Content" and "Performance Standards."⁷⁰ While the precise relationship between them is not explicit in the materials available to me, it appears that the former is a brief catalogue of items that students should know while the latter is a more detailed list of both content standards and associated performance standards.

Both documents suffer from the limitations of lists; although they give a detailed account of what elements of knowledge are to be learned, they do not lend themselves to emphasizing the connectedness that is so essential to science. List entries under such categories as "Habits of Mind" are intended to express the importance of this connectedness, and succeed to some extent. Furthermore, the writers of the Hawaii documents clearly knew what they were writing about, and their understanding of the connectedness of scientific knowledge is reflected in the organization of the items.

Some of the items concerning general scientific methodology are exceptionally well thought out; among these are the following:⁷¹

Demonstrate honesty by reporting and considering all observations even when these contradict [the students'] ideas.

Demonstrate the value of skepticism by asking many questions and looking for evidence to support or contradict explanations.

Demonstrate tolerance for ambiguity by recognizing that data are seldom compelling and scientific information does not always prove something.

Demonstrate an understanding that technological issues are rarely simple and onesided.

Demonstrate an understanding that, at present, all fuels have advantages and disadvantages so that society must consider tradeoffs among them.

Judge theories by how well they mesh with other theories, how [wide] a range of observations they explain, how well they explain observations, and how effective they are in predicting new findings.

But how the student is to "demonstrate" these achievements is an unanswered question. A supplementary set of assessment criteria is much to be desired.

There are a few goofs. The theory of (biological) evolution is to be applied to the origin of life on earth.⁷² In fact, the purpose of this theory is to explain the processes by which life proliferated subsequent to its origin. And I could not make sense of this: "Demonstrate an understanding that an object in motion can only be described in relation to a reference point of another object (i.e., objects near the earth will fall to the ground unless they are held up by something)."⁷³ Nor could I agree that electricity and light are forms of energy that humans use but other living things do not.⁷⁴

Important scientific ideas are introduced early, but at appropriate depth. For example, graphing of linear motion and the connection between motion and unbalanced force (an entree to Newton's second law) are introduced for the first time at grades 4-6, and subsequently explored in greater depth. The grade 4-6 student is expected to "demonstrate that a magnetic field surrounds an electric current and may pass through nonmagnetic material."⁷⁵ The intimate connection between geology and biology is likewise introduced at this level: "Demonstrate the use [of] the stratification of rocks as a record of changes to show the evolution of living and nonliving things over time."⁷⁶ At grades 7-8 there is this explicit item: "Demonstrate an understanding that there are no fixed steps called `the scientific method' for conducting a scientific investigation."⁷⁷

The importance of communication is explicitly recognized, if rather vaguely set forth. Students in grades 7-8 are expected to "analyze, evaluate, and discuss findings with clarity in oral, written, or graphic format."⁷⁸ This is fine as far as it goes, but students will be more likely to carry out these desirable activities if the expectation is much more detailed.

Idaho

The Idaho Science Framework⁷⁹ is organized gradebygrade through grade 8; a brief, rather general section serves to cover the various areas studied in grades 9-12. As a result, it is quite articulate on generalities, as these examples show:

• All students will understand the empirical nature of science as one method of knowing about the universe. Science questions all things, rejects the labeling of statements as unalterable, and opens itself to continual scrutiny and modification.⁸⁰

• Mathematical skills and reasoning are especially important in developing . . . habits of the mind in science.⁸¹

Illinois

The Illinois Learning Standards⁸² includes, as one of its three major goals, the following: "Understanding the fundamental concepts, principles, and interconnections of the life, physical and earth/space sciences." This explicit recognition of the structured nature of the sciences is laudable. The individual items in the standard are terse but complete, and the corresponding expectations that students are to meet are wellchosen, as are the examples that illustrate them. Most of the expectations are ageappropriate; the only exception I found was one which (perhaps overambitiously) expects earlyhigh school students to "explain and predict motions in inertial and accelerated frames of reference."⁸³ At 10 pages long (plus about five pages of general introductory material covering all subjects), the science Standards is about as short as such a document might be. Within this limit, it appears to be satisfactory.

Indiana

The Indiana Science Proficiency Guide⁸⁴ is carefully organized and thorough in its coverage of science learning from kindergarten through high school. Although mathematics is not a principal subject, the importance of mathematics to science is made clear throughout by a strand called "The Mathematical World" which elegantly states many of the salient aspects of mathematics and statistics, especially in their relation to science. The importance of communication in various modes is made clear. For instance, the middleschool student is expected to "organize information in simple tables and graphs . . . read simple tables and graphs produced by others and describe in words what they show . . . understand writing that incorporates circle charts, bar and line graphs, twoway data tables, diagrams, and symbols."⁸⁵

The ethical and social aspects of science are handled in an especially lucid way. The first three of the following excerpts are intended for middlejunior high students; the fourth for high school students:

• Some matters cannot be examined usefully in a scientific way. Among them are matters that by their nature cannot be tested objectively and those that are essentially matters of morality. Science can sometimes be used to inform ethical decisions by identifying the likely consequences of particular actions, but cannot be used to establish that some action is either moral or immoral.⁸⁶

• Until recently, women and racial minorities, because of restrictions on their education and employment opportunities, were essentially left out of much of the formal work of the science establishment; the remarkable few who overcame these obstacles were likely even then to have their work disregarded by the science establishment.⁸⁷

• Rarely are technology issues simple and onesided. Relevant facts alone, even when known and available, usually do not settle matters entirely in favor of one side or another. That is because the contending groups may have different values and priorities. They may stand to gain or lose in different degrees, or may make very different predictions about what the future consequences of the proposed action will be.⁸⁸

• By the 20th century, most scientists had accepted Darwin's basic idea. Today that still holds true, although differences exist concerning the details of the process and how rapidly evolution of species takes place. People usually do not reject evolution for scientific reasons but because they dislike its implications, such as the relation of human beings to other animals, or because they prefer a biblical account of creation.⁸⁹

The Indiana Science Proficiency Guide treats such touchy subjects as evolution (including human evolution), reproductive and mental health, ethics, and environmental issues in a forthright, accurate, and dispassionate manner. More generally, the Guide is a model of clarity, accuracy, and completeness. A student who fulfills the requirements set forth will have received an excellent education.

A companion document to the Science Proficiency Guide, entitled Indiana High School Science Competencies,⁹⁰ sets forth standards for the traditional collegepreparatory courses in biology, chemistry, earth/space science, and physics. This document is explicitly aimed at setting forth expected competencies rather than the curricula intended to achieve these competencies, and is intended to furnish a basis for assessment. Its purpose, however, is not identical with that of the Science Proficiency Guide; it aims much more at specific skills and, while it achieves its stated purpose, we do not review it here.