Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Next Generation Science Standards -- 2nd draft -- public comment



Reference:
http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards
http://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/ngss/files/Topic Arranged Standards- Public Release.pdf

The standard is scheduled to be "released for adoption" in the next few months,
i.e. "winter/spring 2013".

In the 2nd draft, there are numerous basic errors of fact. These are so numerous
and so basic as to seriously call into question the process that produced them.

A couple dozen glaring errors are listed at
http://www.av8n.com/physics/pedagogy.htm#sec-nextgen
especially
http://www.av8n.com/physics/pedagogy.htm#sec-nextgen-errors

This greatly underestimates the number of errors, partly because the list is
incomplete, but also because many errors that are listed only once in the list
occur in multiple places in the standard, sometimes worded the similarly,
sometimes differently. Fixing one or two examples will not fix the underlying
problem. Asking unpaid reviewers to catch all the mistakes is unreasonable.
Expecting public review to result in consistency is foolish. Something with
this many errors and inconsistencies should never have been sent out as a
first public draft, let alone a second public draft. The errors should have
been caught at the alpha stage, during internal review. The process needs
to be changed so as to provide for a thorough professional review by people
who actually understand the subject matter ... preferably people who have
hands-on experience in the field. Experience teaching the material out of
textbooks is not sufficient, because there are many errors in the textbooks.

I found the survey provided on the ngss site (or rather some partner site) to
be impossible to complete. Clicking on the "Finished completing the survey"
link has no discernible effect chez moi. Not even an error message. Also,
the survey never even asked about basic factual correctness.

I recommend that each and every person contact the sponsoring organizations
including NSTA, AAAS, NAS/NRC, and Achieve. Ask them to *not* endorse or
approve adoption of these standards, at least until the quality-control
issues have been resolved.

A contact form for NGSS and/or Achieve can be found at
http://www.nextgenscience.org/contact
I have no idea whether it has any effect, but I recommend that you give it
a try. At least it immunizes you from later accusations that you didn't
make a timely protest.