Have you seen the evidence statements that have been developed for the NGSS?  I anxiously awaited their release throughout the school year last year.  I knew that they would play an integral role in my understanding of the NGSS.  

In 7th grade, we are wrapping up our first big unit on chemical reactions.  While we didn't use the evidence statements when we developed the unit, we are reflecting on them at the close of the unit.  In this reflection, we are finding validation of some of what we've done and we're also finding that in some areas we may not have gone deep enough.  

When we looked at the evidence statements for MS-PS1-2, we found validation.  We found that that we had prepared students to achieve proficiency.  We had given students many opportunities to analyze data from before and after a change to determine if a chemical reaction had occurred.  In doing so, we also required them to provide evidence to support their ideas.

However, when we looked at the evidence statements for MS-PS1-5, we realized that we had missed a few key details for this performance expectation.  We had students creating models to show the before and after of a chemical reaction.  We had students counting atoms in the before and after models to show that the number of atoms remains the same while the arrangement of atoms changes.  However, we   had failed to help students understand that each type of atom has a specific mass that stays the same.  

After this realization, I decided to use students as human models of a chemical reaction.  The same students generated the reactants and the products so that students could visibly see that the "atoms" had the same mass before and after the reaction.  

As we move throughout the rest of the year, we'll be using the evidence statements as part of our curriculum design.  As we do, we'll be keeping these things in mind (from the Introduction and Overview of the evidence statements). 

• Evidence statements are not curriculum
• Evidence statements define the floor (minimum proficiency) and not the ceiling of achievement
• All components of an evidence statement should be visible for a student's work to be considered proficient.  

As you work through your curriculum, I encourage you to use the evidence statements to help you refine your definition of proficiency on each performance expectation.  Let me know how you use these statements in your classroom.  

Year two of implementation of NGSS is in full force here in Kentucky.  We're all in different stages of implementation, but we are all working towards a better science education for our students.  As a science teacher at this point in time, I have two basic options.  I can admit that I don't know everything, admit that I don't understand exactly how to translate NGSS theory into practice every day in my classroom.  OR, I can put on a mask, pretending that I know exactly what I'm doing each and every day.  The first option is scary for the teacher, but the second option has scary implications for the students. 


I place myself squarely in the first category.  Having taught science for several years, I am confident about some of the strategies that I've used in the past to help students learn basic science facts for classroom and state tests. However, I also realize that the NGSS demands much more than content coverage and the recall of facts. NGSS demands that students experience science as scientists and that they develop their own conceptual understandings about big ideas in science.  These conceptual understandings take time to develop, but they last longer in students' minds than a unit or the school year.  The NGSS also demands instruction that integrates the three dimensions (disciplinary core ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts).  This kind of instruction is difficult to achieve on a daily basis.  So, I spend a lot of time planning and collaborating.  Then, I watch as things don't go quite the way I planned for them to.  My colleague and I spend time debriefing lessons and figuring out what worked and what didn't work.  In doing this, we make adjustments for next year as well as fine tuning our instructional practice for future units.  


On a regular basis, we take risks.  And you can often hear us say between classes, "well, that didn't go the way we hoped."  As we embrace the growth mindset, we can fail forward.  Using each success and failure as a building block for our NGSS instruction.  


Our other choice would be pretending we know everything, risking nothing, and robbing our students of higher-quality science instruction.  


There's no better time that now to admit that you don't know everything--the standards are new so no one knows everything.  Together we are smarter and stronger.  Use this year to start a blog and share your classroom successes and failures.  We can all move forward together, ensuring that our students received an ever-improving science education. To share your blog posts with more people, please promote them on Twitter with the hashtag #NGSSblogs.