Models of Professional Development to Support

Implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards

Analysis of Practice and the PD Research TerrainChristopher Wilson

Director of Research, BSCSCommon Ground 2016

April 28, 2016

REL Mid-Atlantic

One of 10 RELs,REL Mid-Atlantic serves: • Delaware• District of Columbia• Maryland• New Jersey• Pennsylvania

2

REL Mid-Atlantic Goals

• To help stakeholders, state and local education agencies, communities, and researchers:‒ Gain access to and use high-

quality research‒ Use research, data, and data

analysis to improve policy and practice

• To respond to high-priority education needs of the region

For more information: www.relmidatlantic.org

3

Focus Questions for Today’s Session

• What challenges do the Next Generation Science Standards present for teaching and learning?

• What do we know about effective teacher professional development (PD)?

• How can an analysis-of-practice approach to PD challenge and contribute to our understandings of the consensus model of effective PD?

• How can future research on PD produce stronger understandings of what makes for effective science teacher learning opportunities?

4

Today’s Presenter

• Director of Research at Science Education Curriculum Study (BSCS)

• Ongoing research focuses on measuring the effectiveness of educational interventions in science and how to develop and measure reasoning in science

• Current work includes the impacts of a year-long lesson-analysis-based PD program on teacher science content knowledge

• Recently awarded the JRST award for the most significant article published in 2013 by the Journal of Research in Science Teaching

• Previously a visiting assistant professor at the Center for Curriculum Materials in Science in the College of Education at Michigan State University

5

BSCS MissionTo transform science teaching and learning through

research and development that strengthens learning environments and inspires a global community of scientifically literate citizens.

© 2016 BSCS

Previous Science Standards

Previous standards include:

• Benchmarks for Science Literacy from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)1

• National Science Education Standards from the National Research Council (NRC)2

1American Association for the Advancement of Science, 19932National Research Council, 1996

Motivation for New Standards

Major advances in:• Science

National Academies Press, 2012

Motivation for New Standards

Major advances in:• Science• The teaching and learning of science

National Academies Press, 2012

Motivation for New Standards

Global Competitiveness Workforce Development Diversity in Science

Other Standards Initiatives Elevating Engineering Scientific Literacy

What Are the NGSS?

• The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) are based on the Framework for K-12 Science Education developed by the National Research Council (NRC)1

• The framework provides an evidence-based foundation for standards by drawing on current research on the ways students learn science effectively – and the science all K-12 students should know.

1National Academies Press, 2012

NGSS Partners

Developers and Authors

• 26 lead states• K-12 educators• Experts in:

• Science education• Students with disabilities• English language acquisition• State-level standards• Assessment• Workforce development

NGSS Adoption as of Feb. 2016

http://www.nasbe.org/project/next-generation-science-standards/

Three Dimensions of Learning

• Dimension 1. Science and Engineering Practices• Emphasis on engaging in scientific investigation

• Dimension 2: Cross-Cutting Concepts• Concepts that have applications across all domains

of science (e.g., patterns, causes and effect, stability and change)

• Dimension 3: Disciplinary Core Ideas• Must have broad importance and provide key tools

Next Generation Science Standards, 2013

Learning at the Nexus

Disciplinary Core Ideas

Science Practices

Cross-Cutting

Concepts

How do we ensure learning at the nexus?

Conceptual Shifts and the NGSS

1. K–12 science education should reflect the interconnected nature of science as it is practiced and experienced in the real world.

2. The NGSS are student performance expectations, NOT curriculum.

3. The science concepts in the NGSS build coherently from K–12.

4. The NGSS focus on deeper understanding and application of content.

5. Science and engineering are integrated in the NGSS, from K–12.

6. The NGSS are designed to prepare students for college, career, and citizenship.7. The NGSS and Common Core State Standards (English Language Arts and Mathematics) are aligned.

Which of these conceptual shifts represent the greatest challenges for you with respect

to teaching and learning?

Science ed. should reflect interconnected nature NGSS are student performance expectations The science concepts build coherently from K-12 NGSS focus on deeper understanding Science and engineering are integrated NGSS prepares students for college, career, etc. NGSS and CCSS are aligned

NGSS and Professional Development

• How can we support teachers in making these conceptual shifts and effectively implementing the NGSS?

Consensus Model of Effective Professional Development

(Yoon et al., 2007; Desimone, 2009; Wilson, 2013)

Effective Professional Development . . . • Focuses on specific subject matter content • Engages teachers in active learning • Is coherent (aligned with teachers’ prior

knowledge and beliefs; aligned with reform documents and school policy and practice)

• Is of sufficient duration• Involves the collective participation of teachers

(all teachers in a school, grade level, or dept.)

Research Supporting the Consensus Model

• Relies heavily on teacher self-report • Rarely looks at impact on student learning• When the research does look at student

learning, the results are mixed

Our Assertions

• The consensus model is not enough to guide the development of PD opportunities that will support the kinds of teacher change needed to help students reach the NGSS.

• Stronger lines of research on effective PD, especially in science education, are needed.

Science Teachers Learning from Lesson Analysis: STeLLA

STeLLA is:A one-year professional development program for elementary teachers in the context of videocase-based analysis of practice.

Science Teachers Learning from Lesson Analysis: STeLLA

STeLLA is:A cluster randomized trial of PD with strong findings.

Sample77 Schools

STeLLA42 Schools

Comp35 Schools

Science Teachers Learning from Lesson Analysis: STeLLA

STeLLA is:A 10+ year line of research on PD, involving studies:

• At elementary, middle, and high schools• Of in-service and preservice teachers• Of face-to-face and online PD• Across the NSF cycle of innovation• Of PD leadership development• At different scales, up to districtwide sustainability

STeLLA Line of Research

STeLLA 1 ViSTA ViSTA Plus

STeLLA 2 EMAT

RESPeCT STeLLA HS MN STeLLA

TIMSS Video Study

How People Learn

Lesson Analysis

STeLLA Design Features

• Engages teachers actively in collaborative, practice-based inquiries

• Treats content as central and intertwined with pedagogical issues

• Enables teachers to see these issues embedded in real classroom contexts

• Focuses on content and curriculum teachers will be teaching

• Guided by an articulated model of teacher learning and clear teacher learning goals

Describing the STeLLA Program

STeLLA Design Principles1. Theory of teacher learning2. Conceptual framework3. Program form4. Program resources

STeLLA Theory of Teacher Learning

STeLLA Theory of Teacher Learning

Program elements that embody this theory:1) Learning progression starting with highly scaffolded

experience moving towards greater independence 2) Experiences that create a “need to know” dissonance3) Use of experts who plan for and guide teacher learning

STeLLA Theory of Teacher Learning

Science Content

Knowledge

Pedagogical Content

Knowledge

Teaching Science

Analyzing Teaching and

Learning

ability touse in . . .

STeLLA Program Substance:STeLLA Conceptual Framework

and STeLLA Teaching Strategies

STeLLA Program Form

One academic year(~90 hours of PD)

Two-week summer institute

Monthly study group meetings

Small learning communities

Key STeLLA ComponentsVideo analysis tasks: Teachers analyze videocases from other teachers’ and each other’s classrooms

Videocases include: sequence of lesson

videos student and teacher

interview videos student written work student pre- and post-

tests

Key STeLLA ComponentsAnalysis of Practice Cycle and Norms

FOCUS ON STUDENT

THINKING AND SCIENCE CONTENT

STORYLINE

Lesson Analysis• Video of other teachers using

STeLLA strategies establish a common vision of the strategies and classroom possibilities.

• Video of participants teaching common lessons provide a rich initial experience to analyze each teacher’s enactment of the strategies.

Lesson Analysis Protocol

Analysis Guide D: Selecting and Using Content Representations

Main learning goal:_____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ Description of content representation:______________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ Part 1: Selecting the content representation: Is the content representation … YES NO

1. Scientifically accurate?

2. Closely matched to the main learning goal?

3. Presenting science ideas in ways that are comprehensible to students?

4. Reinforcing or introducing student misconceptions?

5. Addressing common student misconceptions?

6. Distracting students from the main learning goal with too many details or new terms?

Part 2: Engaging students in using the content representation. Is the content representation used in a way that involves students in … YES NO

1. Modifying or creating the content representation?

2. Analyzing the meaning of the content representation?

3. Critiquing the content representation?

Part 3: Suggestions for improvement_____________________________________

STeLLA Lesson Plans

Student Pre- and Post-Tests

Features Analysis Charts

STeLLA Planning Tools

Content/PCK Background Readings

Common Student Ideas

Lesson Analysis: The Basics

• Viewing Basic #1: Look past the trivial, the little things that “bug” you.

• Viewing Basic #2: Avoid the “this doesn’t look like my classroom” trap.

• Viewing Basic #3: Avoid making snap judgments about the teaching or learning in the classroom you are viewing.

• Analysis Basic #1: Focus on student thinking and the science content storyline.

• Analysis Basic #2: Look for evidence to support any claims.

• Analysis Basic #3: Look more than once.

• Analysis Basic #4: Consider alternative explanations and teaching strategies.

Focus Question

• What does the teacher do to make student thinking visible?

What does research on STeLLA tell us?

STeLLA is:

A one-year professional development program for elementary teachers in the context of videocase-based analysis-of-practice.

STeLLA is also:

a Scale-Up Study

NSF DRK-12 Award

DRL-0918277

Population: 77 schools, 144 4th and 5th grade teachers of ~2800 students

Sample77 Schools

STeLLA42 Schools

Comp35 Schools

Treatments

STeLLALesson Analysis +

Content Deepening

88.5 hours(2-week summer institute

& monthly meetings)

COMPARISONContent Deepening

88.5 hours(2-week summer institute

& monthly meetings)

Same learning goals

Theory of Change and Outcome Measures

STeLLA Professional

Development Program

Teacher Science Content

Knowledge

Teacher Pedagogical

Content Knowledge

Student Science Content

Knowledge

Teaching Practice

Theory of Change and Outcome Measures

STeLLA Professional

Development Program

Teacher Science Content

Knowledge

Student Science Content

Knowledge

Teacher Pedagogical

Content Knowledge

Teaching Practice

Theory of Change and Outcome Measures

STeLLA Professional

Development Program

Teacher Science Content

KnowledgeStudent Science Content

KnowledgeTeacher Pedagogical

Content Knowledge

Teaching Practice

Results

Teacher Science Content

Knowledge

p<0.001Hedges’ g=0.66

Teaching Practice

p<0.001Hedges’ g=2.05

Teacher Pedagogical

Content Knowledge

p<0.001Hedges’ g=1.17

Student Science Content

Knowledge

p<0.001Hedges’ g=0.68

Student Effect

Student Science Content

Knowledge

Practical Significance

• ES = 0.68• Larger than average effect for elementary school

interventions with this type of outcome (avg. = 0.33)

• Nearly a two year advantage• 23 percentile points• Advantage in reasoning

Impact on Reasoning

• Easy item

FSPO7: In what order do a hawk, grass, and rabbit form a food chain in a meadow? A. Hawk Grass RabbitB. Grass Hawk RabbitC. Rabbit Grass HawkD. Grass Rabbit Hawk

Impact on Reasoning

• Difficult item

WSPO23: Which of the following statements about condensation is true?A. During condensation, water turns from a liquid to a gas.B. During condensation, energy is lost.C. During condensation, water gets heavier.D. During condensation, water is created.

Impact on Reasoning

• Items STeLLA students perform better on

SSPO11: Which position shows summer in Earth’s Southern Hemisphere?A. AB. BC. CD. D

FSPO6: The diagrams below show three food chains. Each food chain uses 100 pounds of green plants as a source of food. In which of the three food chains is the most energy available to people?

ESPO24: Which of the following figures best shows the location of the earth's tectonic plates?

Pedagogical Content Knowledge (Teacher)

(~20 minutes per video)

In Ms. Dieken's fifth grade class, students are trying to explain different scenarios that were provided to their groups (e.g., condensation on the outside of a cold soda can). The teacher instructs the groups to explain their respective scenarios in terms of evaporation, condensation, and water molecules.

View the clip below and then spend 5–10 minutes describing and analyzing anything you notice regarding the science content, the teaching, and/or the students. Explain the issues and/or questions that the video raised for you. Use complete sentences.

You can use the paper copy of the video transcript while you are watching. Looking at the transcript after you watch the video can help you review what you have just watched.

Please type your response in the box below.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge

Before Professional Development“There seemed like many students in the classroom as it was quite noisy. I thought that the teacher was helping the students a little too much to complete their sentences. When the teacher was trying to say something, the students kept interrupting and not letting her complete her sentences. However, the same thing was happening when the students were trying to say something. I thought that the students should be raising hands when they want to say something so that they might be able to share their ideas and listen to others to get more ideas. Since this was their 3rd lesson I would like to see how much they could explain things on their own, and then help them to complete what they are trying to explain.”

Pedagogical Content Knowledge

After Professional Development“The teacher in clip three engages students in activities that highlight science ideas and that are explicitly linked to science ideas. The teacher links weather, erosion, and deposition as processes that wear down the Earth’s surface. The main learning goal is apparent even if it is not directly stated. The main learning goal is weathering, erosion, deposition, and earthquakes are contributing factors that change the Earth’s surface. The teacher asks elicit, probing and paraphrasing, and challenge questions throughout the lesson to get a better understanding of student knowledge and to push their understanding further. More probing and challenge questions are asked in the group circle. Examples of challenge questions can be found at 49:41, 50:05, and 50:11. The activities including quick writing, peer sharing, and group sharing are linked to science ideas and also link science ideas to other science ideas in the discussions. The content representations are scientifically accurate and aid in students’ accurate understanding of the science ideas. The lesson is content rich including specific vocabulary and facts. Mr. Potter also does a great job synthesizing and summarizing at the end of the lesson.”

Impact on Practice

• Hardest to change• Teachers are using STeLLA strategies in the

classroom,not just in their science teaching

Next Steps

• Dissemination• Mediation analysis: folding in teacher PCK and teacher

practice measures to examine how teacher learning and practice predict student learning

• Moderation analysis with student demographics• Examining which STeLLA strategies were most

predictive of student learning • Studies in different contexts• Qualitative analyses• PD leader studies

STeLLA Contributes to Knowledge about Effective PD: Beyond the Consensus Model

• The PD program is guided by a theory of teacher learning.• The program substance is organized around a conceptual

framework.• Science content learning is intertwined with analysis of

practice.• Analytical tools and videocases support collaborative, deep

analysis of science teaching, student learning, and science content.

• There is an internal coherence of program form and substance.

• Learning is directed and scaffolded by knowledgeable PD leaders.

© 2015 BSCS

Conclusions

• The consensus model is not enough to guide the design of professional development opportunities that will support NGSS.

• The STeLLA line of research contributes to building a research-based model of effective PD—beyond the consensus model.

• More strong lines of research on effective PD are needed.

© 2015 BSCS

This material is based upon work supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation under Grants DRL-0918277. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation

Contact

Chris WilsonChristopher Wilson

Director of Research, BSCScwilson@bscs.org

Kasia RazynskaMaryland State Coordinator,

REL Mid-Atlantic krazynska@relmidatlantic.org