In a harrowing National Assessment of Educational Progress report conducted in 2019, it is revealed that only 22% of high school seniors in the US demonstrated proficiency in the field of science. That’s less than 1 in 4. Teachers and administrators have pointed fingers to the outdated science curriculum, and are conducting a nation-wide science experiment to tackle this very issue.

You may or may not have heard of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) before. If you haven’t, you likely will in your future high school science classes. New York is among the 44 states that have shifted towards these new standards that seek to contemporize their archaic science learning standards. But this means more than merely modifying the curriculum—to some, it resembles more so like an attempt to abolish the status quo of science education.

The NGSS focuses on three core values: Science and Engineering Practices, Disciplinary Core Ideas, and Crosscutting Concepts. But what exactly does that mean?

Science and Engineering Practices

In the workplace, scientists & engineers often have to perform hands-on tasks and rigorous problem solving. The problem? Students do not possess the ability to think critically and work physically. Most of the secondary science curriculum revolves around theory and stresses memorization. The focus on science and engineering practices would seek to change this. By reinforcing 8 practical principles into the science curriculum, students would ideally memorize less and think more like scientists & engineers through their classes.

Disciplinary Core Ideas

Although there is an emphasis on practicality in the NGSS, there is still a significant weight placed on core scientific concepts. There is a standard for the foundational scientific concepts that students should be familiar with by the time they graduate. However, they would be hand-picked to ensure significance across multiple disciplines, not just one course. These ideas are housed in 4 broader categories: physical sciences, life sciences, earth and space sciences, and engineering/technology/applications of science. These standards will be expanded upon across K-12, with concepts becoming progressively more advanced yet adhering to the basic core ideas. The main significance of this emphasis is the interdisciplinary nature of these ideas. A student studying the inner-workings photosynthesis works would be required to understand core ideas from both life sciences (plant biology) and physical sciences (chemical reactions). Through this approach, students would theoretically have a more interconnected understanding of the sciences, which also acts to prepare them for the workplace.

Crosscutting Concepts

If the first value enhances a student’s ability to think like a scientist, and the second strengthens their technical scientific understanding, then Crosscutting Concepts would act as a glue that holds the two together. Essentially, this value focuses on broad themes that apply across all branches of science and helps students discover a framework to understand all kinds of scientific phenomena. This is arguably the most abstract of the 3 core values, but it is instrumental to the NGSS vision. The concepts include ideas fundamental to all kinds of science, such as cause & effect, structure & function, and stability & change. With the reinforcement of these concepts, a student will be able to learn how to think about science, especially when they are tasked with difficult problems. 

A State of Contention

Although the standards were first introduced in 2013, New York State only began to implement them at select schools starting in 2017. For Shaker High School, these changes had been in the works for quite some time, but has only recently manifested itself. In the 2022-2023 school year, a “Pilot Biology” class was run to test out the functionality of the NGSS-encoded curriculum. Changes from the original biology curriculum were abundant. Each class had 4 honors students, 8 regents students, and 4 applied students—all organized in groups of 4. There was a heavy emphasis on experiment-based learning and lectures were barely to be seen. As a former student of the program, I definitely enjoyed the unique classroom environment, but was surprised to hear that it would replace the traditional regents and honors classes 2 years later. What’s more, similar structures would be implemented for the earth science, chemistry, and physics classes in future years. 

On paper, the standards set by the NGSS template are noble. In an age where technologies such as artificial intelligence control most facets of life and where scientific professions dominate job markets, it is important students grow up with the practical skills needed to succeed. But opinions and anecdotes from teachers online impart nuance to the issue. 

A looming conversation for teachers is their new lack of direction in the dawn of NGSS. Nationwide, teachers have created forums and organized social media groups to discuss the standards. Papers and commentary on the effectiveness of NGSS have also been created that criticize the broadness of the actual content they’re supposed to teach. Although most would agree that students should put their scientific knowledge into practice, many teachers say that the framework does not balance necessary content with practices, leaving students confused and struggling.  

There’s also something to be said about the sacrifices that inevitably will come with the widespread implementation of NGSS. The biggest? Learning for the simple purpose of learning. Kids are, after all, just kids. Having students figure every part of a science experiment causes not only a breeding ground for misguidance, but also a decreased presence of fact-based learning. 

But why would this be a problem if students are still learning what they’re supposed to? Well, in a Fordham Institute study, one of the biggest flaws in NGSS was actually determined to be the inadequate amount of content. Standards in the physical sciences proved to be the most concerning, as NGSS puts less of an emphasis on mathematical content than other models, despite its necessity in those fields. The scope of tested content has also shrunk as assessments switch more towards hands-on performance. By focusing on practical learning, students lose passive knowledge and rigorous fact-based learning, which are both important for success in college–the place where practical scientific knowledge is predominantly taught today. Therefore, some teachers might compare the NGSS to trying to teach someone how to construct a house before teaching them how to use a hammer. 

Not all is doom and gloom though. It is important for us to remember that these are just standards. A teacher may have flexibility in the way they choose to teach these standards, which can include elements of fact-based learning. And although many teachers are struggling to adjust to these standards, students actually seem to prefer it as opposed to classroom lectures. A study by Northeastern University revealed that students in programs that adopted NGSS were reportedly calmer and more engaged, enjoying the teamwork and collaboration that older standards did not allow for. Depending on a district’s specific implementation, it was observed that standardized testing scores also did increase in areas such as math, science, and even nonfiction reading. 

Conclusion

This change will undoubtedly affect everyone but will greatly depend on Shaker’s implementation. From the Pilot Biology trials, it seems that the transition is currently a net success. This year, Earth Science has also shifted to the new standards, and physics and chemistry will follow the year after. It’s time we cherish the end of an era and welcome a new set of standards that will, from now on, shape the future leaders in science.