The national science standards movement is really an effort to consolidate power and control in the hands of the U.S. Department of Education, the teachers unions, and the “science establishment” (NRC, NAS, NSTA, AAAS, Achieve, et al.).  Thus NGSS is more of a political than an educational movement.



Background on the
NEXT GENERATION SCIENCE STANDARDS (NGSS)

The Common Core State Standards Initiative (www.corestandards.org)  was launched in 2008 as a project of the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The Common Core website states that the “standards were developed in collaboration with teachers, school administrators, and experts, to provide a clear and consistent framework to prepare our children for college and the workforce.”

Initial core standards were written for two areas, English Language Arts and Mathematics.  Since Science and Social Studies are more controversial subjects, standards in these areas were postponed for future consideration.  Draft “college and career readiness standards” (essentially graduation requirements) were released for public comment in September 2009, and the draft K-12 English and Math standards were released for comment in March 2010.  The final standards were released in June 2010.

Already 45 states have adopted the national English and Math standards.  The five states that have not signed up are Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, Texas, and Virginia.  Many states signed on to Common Core as a result of their participation in the Race To The Top (RTTT) funding program by the U.S. Department of Education.  A requirement for RTTT applications was that the state adopt the federal curriculum.

Neal McCluskey (Cato Institute) has studied the subject of national education standards at length and has concluded that national standards are ineffective. Three basic arguments are offered in support of national education standards:

(1) we need the standards to compete internationally;
(2) all children should have the same standards; and
(3) most countries that have bested the U.S. on tests have national standards.

McCluskey says that these arguments are specious.  Children are different, and therefore one set of standards does not fit all needs.  Also, many countries that perform worse than the U.S. on international tests also have national standards.  Standards tend to be “dumbed down” – that is, set at a low level of proficiency – so that most students can meet them.  Research has shown that national standards have no net positive effect on student learning.  McCluskey’s findings may be found at www.cato.org (Policy Analysis No. 661, Feb. 17, 2010).

The current National Science Education Standards were produced by the National Research Council (NRC) in 1995-1996.  These form the basis for science standards in nearly all states.  In 2010 NRC began the process of revising the 1996 Standards under the name Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) (www.nextgenscience.org).  NRC admits that the impetus for this revision came from the Common Core standards movement: “This project [NGSS] capitalizes on a major opportunity that exists at this moment – a large number of states are adopting common standards in mathematics and English/language arts and thus are poised to consider adoption of common standards in K-12 science education.”  Thus, while NGSS is not officially a part of the Common Core State Standards Initiative, it expects to be eventually incorporated into the Common Core.

NGSS is a partnership including the NRC, the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Achieve, Inc. (a national education reform organization), and currently 26 states.  NGSS is a two-step process.  The first is the development of A Framework for K-12 Science Education.  The second step (now in progress) is writing the Standards.  The Framework and the first draft of the Standards can be accessed on the NGSS website.  The final version of the Standards is scheduled for release in 2013.

Our overall impression is that the Next Generation Science Standards advance a biased agenda that sometimes leaves objectivity by the wayside.  This is particularly evident in sections which present unguided macroevolution (descent from a common ancestry) as fact, stress the negative effects of human activity on the environment (e.g., global warming), promote “sustainability” and “green” initiatives for the future, and advocate big government solutions to societal problems.

The national science standards movement is really an effort to consolidate power and control in the hands of the U.S. Department of Education, the teachers unions, and the “science establishment” (NRC, NAS, NSTA, AAAS, Achieve, et al.).  Thus NGSS is more of a political than an educational movement.

Scientific knowledge has traditionally been obtained by objective experimentation and observation.  The Framework and Standards, on the other hand, seek to convert science into an enterprise that is decided by “consensus.”  That is, NGSS has put together a team of like-minded “experts” from the science establishment who seem more interested in political goals and social policy than in giving students a balanced, objective education.  More details of our findings are available in COPE’s June 1, 2012, Response to NGSS.