NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION:

AN OVERVIEW OF BENCHMARKS FOR SCIENCE

LITERACY AND NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION
STANDARDS

Rodger W. Bybee

A Presentation for the First Conceptual Framework

Committee Meeting

The National Academies

Washington, DC

28-29 January 2010

 A BRIEF HISTORY

• The Committee of T en (1893)

• The Harvard Descriptive List of Physics Laboratories

• A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in

Education, 1983)

• Educating Americans for the 21st Century (Commission on

Precollege Education in Mathematics, Science, T echnology of
the National Science Board, 1983)

• National Governors’ Conference (1989)

• Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics

(NCTM, 1989)

• AMERICA 2000: An Education Strategy (1991)

• GOALS 2000: Educate America Act (1994)

 PROJECT 2061 (1985)

Science for All Americans (1989)

Ø A vision of adult science literacy

Ø A broad view of common core knowledge—science,

mathematics, technology , social sciences

Ø Criteria for content selection

 SCIENCE FOR ALL AMERICANS:
CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF CONTENT
Utility . Will the proposed content—knowledge or skills—significantly enhance
the graduate’s long-term employment prospects? Will it be useful in making
personal decisions?

Social Responsibility . Is the proposed content likely to help citizens

participate intelligently in making social and political decisions on matters
involving science and technology?

The Intrinsic Value of Knowledge. Does the proposed content present

aspects of science, mathematics, and technology that are so important in
human history or so pervasive in our culture that a general education would
be incomplete without them?

Philosophical Value. Does the proposed content contribute to the ability

of people to ponder the enduring questions of human meaning such as life
and death, perception and reality , the individual good versus the collective
welfare, certainty and doubt?

Childhood Enrichment. Will the proposed content enhance childhood

(a time of life that is important in its own right and not solely for what it
may lead to in later life)?
 BENCHMARKS FOR SCIENCE LITERACY

Benchmarks for Science Literacy (AAAS, 1993)

Ø Back-mapped ideas from Science for All Americans

Ø Became de facto national standards

 NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION STANDARDS

• U.S. Department of Education and National Science Foundation fund

the National Research Council to create national standards
in science (1991)

• National Science Education Standards released December 1995

 VISION

…create a vision for the scientifically literate person and

standards for science education that, when established, would
allow the vision to become reality . The standards, founded in
exemplary practice and contemporary views of learning,
science, society , and schooling, will serve to guide the science
education system toward its goal of a scientifically literate
citizenry in productive and socially responsible ways.
 GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR NATIONAL STANDARDS

1. All students, regardless of gender , cultural or ethnic background, physical or

learning disabilities, aspirations, or interest and motivation in science, should have the
opportunity to attain higher levels of scientific literacy than they do currently .

2. All students will learn all science in the content standards.

3. All students will develop science knowledge as defined in the content standards and an
understanding of science that enables them to use their knowledge as it relates to
scientific, personal, social, and historical perspectives.

4. Learning science is an active process.

5. For all students to understand more science, less emphasis must be given to some
science content and more resources, such as time, personnel, and materials must be
devoted to science education.

6. School science must reflect the intellectual tradition that characterizes the practice of
contemporary science.

7. Improving science education is part of systemic education reform.

 CRITERIA TO JUDGE SUBJECT MATTER STANDARDS

World Class, at least as challenging as current standards in other leading industrial countries, though not
necessarily the same;
Important and Focused, parsimonious while including those elements that represent the most important
knowledge and skills within a discipline;
Useful, developing what is needed for citizenship, employment, and life-long learning;
Reflective of Broad Consensus-Building, resulting from an iterative process of comment, feedback, and
revision including educators and the lay public;
Balanced, between the competing requirements for:
• depth and breadth;
• being definite/specific and being flexible/adaptable;
• theory or principles and facts or information;
• formal knowledge and applications;
• being forward-looking and traditional;
Accurate and Sound, reflecting the best scholarship within the discipline;
Clear and Usable, sufficiently clear so that parents, teachers, and students can understand what the
standards mean and what the standards require of them;
Assessable, sufficiently specific so their attainment can be measured in terms meaningful to teachers,
students, parents, test makers and users, the public, and others;
Adaptable, permitting flexibility in implementation needed for local control, state, and regional variation,
and differing individual interests and cultural traditions;
Developmentally Appropriate, challenging, but with sustained effort, attainable by all students at
elementary , middle, and high school levels.
 CONCLUSION

THE SISYPHEAN QUESTION IN SCIENCE EDUCATION:

WHAT SHOULD THE SCIENTIFICALL Y AND TECHNOLOGICALL Y
LITERATE PERSON KNOW, V ALUE, AND BE ABLE TO DO—
AS A CITIZEN

(Bybee, 1985)