Larry Woolf and I recently transmitted an Op-Ed piece (very slightly
revised below) to the "San Diego Union Tribune." Since the proposed
California "Criteria" could have an impact on K-8 (and hence 9-16)
education nationwide - see below - we think that all subscribers
should be concerned with this issue.
OP-ED TO THE "SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE (submitted on 2 January 2004).
The End of Hands-On Science Activities in California's K-8 Classrooms?
Hands-on science activities in grades K-8 may soon be effectively
gone from California's classrooms.
How is this possible? The first WARNING SHOT came with the
non-mandatory teaching guidelines contained in the "California
Science Framework" (online at
<http://www.cde.ca.gov/cdepress/downloads.html>) that stated, with no
substantive justification: "Hands-on activities may compose up to a
maximum of 20-25 percent of the science instructional time in
kindergarten through grade eight."
Interestingly, this guideline contrasts with
(a) another "Framework" guideline that "Multiple instructional
strategies . . . are useful in teaching science," [apparently they
are useful only if the hands-on approach is limited to less than
25%]; and
(b) the introduction to the state standards
<http://www.cde.ca.gov/standards/science/message.html>, according to
which
"Standards describe what to teach, not how to teach it. Standards-based
education maintains California's tradition of respect for local control of
schools. To help students achieve at high levels, local school officials and
teachers - with the full support and cooperation of families, businesses,
and community partners - are encouraged to take these standards and design
the specific curricular and instructional strategies that best deliver the
content to their students."
The DIRECT SHOT is now in the 2003 California Curriculum Commission
(CCC) draft "Criteria For Evaluating K-8 Science Instructional
Materials In Preparation for the 2006 Adoption, online at
<http://www.cde.ca.gov/cfir/science>. This document, if passed by the
State Board, will become a mandatory directive for the state purchase
of educational material, and hence could adversely affect K-8 science
education not only in California, but also NATIONWIDE because text
publishers generally prefer to print texts that can be adopted in
their two largest markets: California and Texas.
The proposed "Criteria" reinforce the "Framework" guideline regarding
the time allotment for hands-on activities, stating in lines 97-103
that for materials to be approved for use for K-8, they must show
that "California Science Standards can be comprehensively taught from
the submitted materials with hands-on activities composing no more
than 20 to 25 percent of science instructional time." In addition,
the "Criteria" now add the ominous new provision (lines 271-273) that
"each hands-on activity provided, must include suggestions for how to
adapt the activity to "direct instruction" methods of teaching." But
such adaption, if actually carried out for even a small fraction of
the allowed 25% of hands-on activities, would probably conflict with
the "Experimentation and Investigation" requirements in the state
"Science Content Standards"
<http://www.cde.ca.gov/standards/science/>.
Is the anti-hands-on science orientation of the CCC consistent with
that of scientists, science-education experts, and the overwhelming
majority of science teachers? NO! The CCC stands in opposition to
the National Research Council's "National Science Education
Standards," the American Association for the Advancement of Science's
"Science for All Americans," and the National Science Teachers
Association's following position statements:
"Elementary science classes must include activity-based, hands-on
experiences for all children. A minimum of 60 percent of the science
instruction time should be devoted to hands-on activities, the type
of activities where children are manipulating, observing, exploring,
and thinking about science using concrete materials."
"Teachers, regardless of grade level, should promote inquiry-based
instruction and provide classroom environments and experiences that
facilitate students' learning of science."
"Elementary school students learn science best when they are involved
in first-hand exploration and investigation and inquiry/process
skills are nurtured."
A recent review article on K-8 science instruction by Ramon Lopez and
Ted Schultz in "Physics Today"
<http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-54/iss-9/p44.html> stated "Some of the
best research on issues in teaching and learning has, in fact, been
done by physicists . . . who study how students learn physics. . . .
. One common conclusion of these investigations is that active
engagement techniques are more effective than traditional, more
didactic approaches to teaching science."
Can California's K-8 science instruction become even worse? YES!
The draft CCC "Criteria" state in lines 140-141 that for materials to
be adopted, they must have a "Program organization that supports the
PRE-TEACHING of the science content embedded in any hands-on
activities." This draconian directive is akin to requiring that an
answer be given to a riddle prior to asking someone to solve it. The
CCC evidently believes that in any hands-on activity, students must
be told what they are going to learn first; thus eliminating their
role as budding scientists, their natural curiosity, and any mental
struggle to account for their experimental results. In other words,
the CCC apparently wants children to memorize the vocabulary and
facts of science, without experiencing science.
These CCC "Criteria" will also effectively prohibit the use of the
top science education curricula as identified by the US Department of
Education, as well as all science curricula developed with National
Science Foundation funding. This is like forbidding California's
high technology companies from using basic research results developed
by universities, an action that would ultimately lead to the failure
of the state economy. Similarly, these CCC actions will surely lead
to the demise of quality science instruction in California and
perhaps the nation.
California's children deserve better than an "anti-science" science
curriculum. The CCC will discuss and probably act on its
anti-hands-on draft "Criteria" at its next meeting scheduled for
January 14-16 in Sacramento. The agenda is online at
<http://www.cde.ca.gov/cc/agenda/agenda0104.pdf>. The final
"Criteria" passed by CCC then go to the State Board of Education
<http://www.cde.ca.gov/board/> for final action.
We urge you to join us in opposing the current draft of the
"Criteria" by sending your comments to Tom Adams, Director Curriculum
Frameworks and Instructional Resources Division; State Board of
Education; 1430 N Street, Room 5111; Sacramento, CA 95814; FAX:
916-319-0175; Phone 916-319-0881; Email <tadams@cde.ca.gov>. We shall
also compile any listserv responses to this message and forward them
to Tom Adams and the members of the CCC before the CCC meeting on
14-16 January 2004.
Larry Woolf
General Atomics
San Diego, CA 92121
<larry.woolf@gat.com>
<http://www.sci-ed-ga.org>