Tag: NGSS

New Admission Requirements at the University of California?

The University of California (UC) is considering revising its eligibility standards for admission, focusing on requirements for science education. California changed its K–12 standards in this area five years ago, when the State Board of Education adopted the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). UC must decide whether and how to align the NGSS with the a–g requirements—a set of courses students must complete in order to be considered eligible for admission to UC. A change in science requirements was proposed by the UC Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools and was approved by the UC Academic Senate earlier this year.

The NGSS has profound implications for science curriculum and instruction in high schools. Currently, to meet the a–g requirements, students must take two science courses from three core disciplines: biology, chemistry, and physics. But the NGSS includes four science categories: physical sciences; life sciences; earth and space sciences; and engineering, technology, and applications of science.

Changes approved by the UC Academic Senate include increasing the minimum science requirement from two to three years. UC would continue to require two years of work in at least two of three disciplines: biology, chemistry, and physics. Students may take a third course within these disciplines or in other science disciplines identified by the NGSS.

If the UC Regents vote on and approve the recommendations of the UC Academic Senate, the change will take effect in the fall of 2023—meaning that students entering high school in the 2019–20 school year will be subject to the new requirements. (CSU is in the process of updating its science requirements—which are currently similar to those of UC—and may follow UC’s guidelines.)

Some high schools would need to make changes to align their curriculum with the NGSS. One area of concern is the relatively low number of course-offerings in science among small and rural schools. PPIC’s work has shown that not every high school offered the entire a–g sequence in science in 2016–17; small and rural schools were much less likely to do so. Another area of concern is staffing, as a teacher shortage has left California schools struggling with large class sizes for years. Finally, ensuring awareness of these changes will be important. Parents and students should be informed of the new requirements with adequate time and detail to be able to plan accordingly.

Under NGSS, science course sequencing in high school may affect whether and how students meet the proposed a–g requirements. PPIC researchers are examining early implementation of the NGSS in the K-12 system and will discuss findings in an upcoming report. Moving forward, more research is needed to understand the implications of any new a–g requirements for high school graduates’ eligibility for UC and CSU.

Video: Implementing New K–12 Science Standards

California’s K–12 schools are implementing the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) to improve the way science is taught. The standards, adopted in 2013, represent a paradigm shift for science education. Although awareness of the new standards is high, implementation has been uneven, according to a new PPIC report.

Report coauthor Niu Gao presented the analysis in Sacramento last week. She said many districts report that instructional materials are a big challenge, and most also struggle with inadequate science labs and equipment. Insufficiently credentialed science teachers and challenges in professional teacher training are two other ongoing concerns. These problems are exacerbated by California’s chronic teacher shortage.

Gao concluded with a brief summary of the report’s policy recommendations, which include a greater emphasis on science in the early grades and three science courses—instead of two—as a high school graduation requirement. Gao’s presentation was followed by a discussion among a panel of experts who work in this area.

Jessica Sawko, executive director of the California Science Teachers Association, explained the rationale for teaching science in the early grades. Since NGSS builds upon the previous years’ instruction, this can put older students at a disadvantage if they’re not taught science early. “If you’re not teaching science in grade two, then you’re underpreparing students” for courses taught in grades three to five, she said.

When asked about the upcoming field test of the NGSS, Trish Williams, a member of the California State Board of Education, called it a “great opportunity” to collect data and get a snapshot of where we are—and what to do next. But she acknowledged that test results could vary. With a large state like California, Williams said, we can’t expect everyone to “knock it out of the park” on the first try. She also expressed concern about economic issues that put “low-performing districts at a terrible disadvantage.”

Stacey Lerma, a professional development specialist with the Moreno Valley Unified School District, added, “It’s going to take time for teachers to be comfortable with everything the test is assessing and for students to be prepared” for the new standards. Despite the challenges ahead, Lerma expressed deep support for the NGSS. When kids are dreaming about what to do when they grow up, “they need to think of things besides teacher, fire fighter, police officer, and think astronaut, scientist, and engineer.”