|
|
|
|
author:
|
Lawrence S. Lerner
|
description:
|
"The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation is pleased to present this appraisal of state science standards, prepared by Dr. Lawrence S. Lerner, Professor of Physics and Astronomy at California State University, Long Beach, in consultation with a distinguished panel of fellow scientists and science educators.
...His [Dr. Lerner's] twenty-five criteria for judging state standards in this domain are a model for any such analysis. (Indeed, for a state that is starting from scratch to write or rewrite its science standards, those criteria would be a fine place to begin.) His appraisal of individual state standards against those criteria was systematic, careful, and rigorous. His five expert consultants played key roles in both stages of the analysis-and broadened the disciplinary base beyond Dr. Lerner's own specialty of physics. We are sincerely grateful to them."
Published by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, March, 1998.
|
published in:
|
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
|
published:
|
03/01/1998
|
posted to site:
|
04/30/1998
|
TABLE 3. ORGANIZATION
(Category B: Maximum Score = 9)
State | Clusters of 4 Grades or Fewer | Consistency with Scientific Theory | Sound Theoretical Basis | Subtotal |
Alabama | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
Alaska | - | - | - | - |
Arizona | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Arkansas | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
California | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Colorado | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Connecticut | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Delaware | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
District of Columbia | - | - | - | - |
Florida | 3 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
Georgia | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
Hawaii | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Idaho | - | - | - | - |
Illinois | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Indiana | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Iowa | - | - | - | - |
Kansas | 3 | 3 | 2 | 8 |
Kentucky | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
Louisiana | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Maine | 3 | 3 | 2 | 8 |
Maryland | - | - | - | - |
Massachusetts | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Michigan | - | - | - | - |
Minnesota | - | - | - | - |
Mississippi | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
Missouri | 3 | 3 | 2 | 8 |
Montana | - | - | - | - |
Nebraska | 3 | 2 | 2 | 7 |
Nevada | - | - | - | - |
New Hampshire | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
New Jersey | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
New Mexico | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
New York | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
North Carolina | - | - | - | - |
North Dakota | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
Ohio | - | - | - | - |
Oklahoma | - | - | - | - |
Oregon | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 |
Pennsylvania | - | - | - | - |
Rhode Island | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
South Carolina | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
South Dakota | - | - | - | - |
Tennessee | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 |
Texas | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Utah | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Vermont | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
Virginia | 3 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
Washington | 2 | 3 | 3 | 8 |
West Virginia | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
Wisconsin | 3 | 2 | 2 | 7 |
Wyoming | - | - | - | - |
Virgin Islands | - | - | - | - |
Note: See Criteria, Section III, for the precise meaning of the abbreviated table headings.
TABLE 4. COVERAGE AND CONTENT
(Category C: Maximum Score = 27)
State | Experi- mental Evidence, Classical Experiments | Clear Termin- ology, Rigorous Defin- ition | Stringent Criteria for Data | Progressive Mastery of Graphs | Theory & Experiment | Basic Principles | Ability to Grasp Abstractions | Method- ology | Science & Tech- nology | Subtotal |
Alabama | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 18 |
Alaska | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Arizona | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 25 |
Arkansas | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 17 |
California | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 26 |
Colorado | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 18 |
Connecticut | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 23 |
Delaware | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 22 |
District of Columbia | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Florida | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 14 |
Georgia | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 16 |
Hawaii | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 24 |
Idaho | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Illinois | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 22 |
Indiana | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 26 |
Iowa | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Kansas | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 19 |
Kentucky | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 10 |
Louisiana | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 23 |
Maine | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 14 |
Maryland | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Massachusetts | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 21 |
Michigan | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Minnesota | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Mississippi | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 7 |
Missouri | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 21 |
Montana | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Nebraska | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 12 |
Nevada | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
New Hampshire | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 12 |
New Jersey | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 23 |
New Mexico | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
New York | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 16 |
North Carolina | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
North Dakota | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5 |
Ohio | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Oklahoma | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Oregon | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 21 |
Pennsylvania | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Rhode Island | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 23 |
South Carolina | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 18 |
South Dakota | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Tennessee | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 14 |
Texas | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 20 |
Utah | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 22 |
Vermont | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 24 |
Virginia | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 |
Washington | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 22 |
West Virginia | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 12 |
Wisconsin | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 16 |
Wyoming | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Virgin Islands | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Note: See Criteria, Section III, for the precise meaning of the abbreviated table headings.
TABLE 5. QUALITY
(Category D: Maximum Score = 15)
State | Unambiguous & Appropriate | Specific but Flexible | Comprehensive but Not Encyclopedic | Demanding, Cumulative | Demanding, Specific | Subtotal |
Alabama | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 10 |
Alaska | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Arizona | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Arkansas | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 8 |
California | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Colorado | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 12 |
Connecticut | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Delaware | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
District of Columbia | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Florida | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7 |
Georgia | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 11 |
Hawaii | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Idaho | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Illinois | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Indiana | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Iowa | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Kansas | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 13 |
Kentucky | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7 |
Louisiana | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Maine | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 13 |
Maryland | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Massachusetts | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 13 |
Michigan | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Minnesota | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Mississippi | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
Missouri | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 14 |
Montana | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Nebraska | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Nevada | - | - | - | - | - | - |
New Hampshire | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7 |
New Jersey | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
New Mexico | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
New York | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 9 |
North Carolina | - | - | - | - | - | - |
North Dakota | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Ohio | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Oklahoma | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Oregon | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Pennsylvania | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Rhode Island | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
South Carolina | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 12 |
South Dakota | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Tennessee | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
Texas | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Utah | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
Vermont | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 14 |
Virginia | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 12 |
Washington | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 15 |
West Virginia | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
Wisconsin | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 |
Wyoming | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Virgin Islands | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Note: See Criteria, Section III, for the precise meaning of the abbreviated table headings.
TABLE 6. NEGATIVES
(Category E: Maximum Score = 12)
State | Eschew Pseudo-Science, Quackery | Not Race-, Gender-, Ethnic-Specific | Science Not Confused with Technology | Reject Anti-Science, Anti-Technology | Subtotal |
Alabama | 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 9 |
Alaska | - | - | - | - | - |
Arizona | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Arkansas | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 |
California | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Colorado | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Connecticut | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Delaware | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
District of Columbia | - | - | - | - | - |
Florida | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 11 |
Georgia | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 11 |
Hawaii | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Idaho | - | - | - | - | - |
Illinois | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Indiana | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Iowa | - | - | - | - | - |
Kansas | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Kentucky | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 11 |
Louisiana | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Maine | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Maryland | - | - | - | - | - |
Massachusetts | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Michigan | - | - | - | - | - |
Minnesota | - | - | - | - | - |
Mississippi | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 8 |
Missouri | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Montana | - | - | - | - | - |
Nebraska | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Nevada | - | - | - | - | - |
New Hampshire | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
New Jersey | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
New Mexico | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
New York | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
North Carolina | - | - | - | - | - |
North Dakota | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Ohio | - | - | - | - | - |
Oklahoma | - | - | - | - | - |
Oregon | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Pennsylvania | - | - | - | - | - |
Rhode Island | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
South Carolina | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 11 |
South Dakota | - | - | - | - | - |
Tennessee | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 10 |
Texas | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Utah | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Vermont | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Virginia | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Washington | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
West Virginia | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 10 |
Wisconsin | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Wyoming | - | - | - | - | - |
Virgin Islands | - | - | - | - | - |
Note: See Criteria, Section III, for the precise meaning of the abbreviated table headings.
|
|