Developing Learning Progressions in
Support of the New Science
Standards
Aaron Rogat
Consortium for Policy Research in Education
Teachers College, Columbia University
Sponsors include the Hewlett Foundation, Pearson
Education, and National Science Foundation
Outline
I.
II.
Overview of Learning Progressions
A.
Key Elements
B.
One Example
Overview of project: Give sense of what doing
A.
B.
III.
Key elements of our Learning Progressions
Products of our work [framework and examples]
Feed back, recruit reviewers
Panelists Who Informed Report on LPs


















Charles (Andy) Anderson, Michigan State University
Alicia Alonzo, Michigan State University
Karen Draney, University of California-Berkeley, BEAR
Ravit Golan Duncan, Rutgers University
Amelia Gotwals, Michigan State University
Janice Earl, National Science Foundation
Joseph Krajcik, University of Michigan
Richard Lehrer, Vanderbilt University
Charles Luey, Pearson Education
Ron Marx, University of Arizona
Mike Padilla, University of Georgia
James Pellegrino, University of Illinois-Chicago
Linda Reddy, Pearson Education
Brian Reiser, Northwestern University
Ann Rivet, Teachers College, Columbia University
Jo Ellen Roseman, Project 2061, AAAS
Leona Schauble, Vanderbilt University
Mark Wilson, University of California-Berkeley, BEAR
What Problems & Questions Can
Learning Progressions Address?




How do students’ understandings and abilities to
use core ideas develop over time?
How can a sequence of instructional experiences
be identified to promote optimal progress for
most students?
How can students’ progress towards targeted
understandings and abilities be monitored and
diagnosed?
How can we develop standards that reflect
achievable performance expectations?
What are Learning Progressions
in Science?
Empirically grounded and testable hypotheses
about how students’ understandings and
abilities to use core science ideas develop and
become more sophisticated over time
(Corcoran, Mosher and Rogat, 2009)
Components of a Learning Progression
Targets of Progressions
• Understanding of core science ideas and
practices at the levels thought to support
postsecondary success; The end points
society cares about
Starting Points
• Children’s initial, or early, ideas and ways
of thinking that they bring with them.
In between
• Hypothesized intermediate levels through
which understandings shift towards more
sophisticated understandings and serve
as leverage to next level of
understanding.
Other Key Features of a Useful LP
Levels of Achievement
Describe changes in thinking or ability
Progress variables
Capture change in understanding along some
key dimensions of understanding and are
instantiated by assessment items
[attempt to identify clear areas of progress]
Learning performances
A cross between science content and practice
Assessments
Informed by Learning Performances
Instructional context considered
Validation of Learning Progressions:
What is being done?
Construct validity


Validate hypothesized sequence of partial or
intermediate levels of understanding en route
to the target understanding or ability
Research groups are collecting evidence to
test their hypothesized progressions with
data from students

longitudinal or cross-sectional data
Questions?
Flow of Matter and Energy
in Ecosystems: Big Ideas
Anderson, Mohan & colleagues
Matter: CO2, H2O,
and minerals
Matter: Organic
matter & O2
Energy: Sunlight
Photosynthesis
Movement of CO2,
H2O, and minerals
Biosynthesis,
digestion, food
webs, fossil fuel
formation
Energy: Chemical
potential energy
Combustion,
cellular respiration
Energy: Work
& heat
Progress Variables Identified
& Aligned to Scientific Ideas
Scientific
Accounts
[upper levels]
Generating
organic carbon
Photosynthesis
Macroscopic
events
Plant Growth
Transforming
organic carbon
Biosynthesis
Digest
-ion
Biosynthesis
Animal Growth
Oxidizing
organic carbon
Cellular respiration
Breathing, exercise
Weight loss
Decay
Here progress variables are informed by events that
students at all levels can think about (macroscopic events).
Testing and Revising
Learning Progression

Learning Performances


Assessments for idea



Accounts: Explanations and Predictions
Carbon compound Generation: When an acorn
grows into a tree, where does the increase in
mass come from?
Assessments for carbon-compound
Transformation: Explain how an infant grows.
Where does her mass come from?
Cross-sectional study



independent of curriculum
grades 4- 12
>300 Ss across diff countries
Learning Progression
Level
Accomplishments
Limitations
Level 3:
Causal
sequences
of events
with hidden
mechanisms
Stories
involving hidden mechanisms
(e.g., body organs).
Recognition of events at microscopic
scale.
Descriptions of properties of solid and
liquid materials.
Tracing matter through most physical
changes
Coherent stories of food chains.
Matter
Level 2:
Event-based
narratives
about
materials
Coherent
stories that focus on
causation outside of human agency (e.g.,
needs of plants and animals).
Clear distinctions between objects and
the materials of which they are made.
Tracing matter through simple physical
changes (e.g., pouring, flattening a ball of
clay)
Focus
Level 1:
Humanbased
narratives
Coherent
Focus
stories about macroscopic
events such as plant and animal growth,
eating, and burning.
Naming objects and materials
(especially gases) not clearly
distinguished from conditions or forms
of energy.
O2-CO2 cycle separate from other events
of carbon cycle (e.g., plant and animal
growth, decay, food chains).
Macroscopic events (e.g., growth,
breathing) are associated with specific
organs (e.g., stomach, lungs) rather than
cellular processes.
on reasons or causes for events
rather than mechanisms (e.g., “the wood
burns because a spark lit it”).
Vitalistic explanations for events
involving plants and animals (e.g., “the
tree needs sunlight to live and grow”).
Carbon-transforming events are not
seen as changes in matter.
on human agency and human
analogies in stories and explanations.
For example, plants and animals are
classified by relationship to humans
(pets, flowers, weeds) and given human
needs and emotions. Human causes of
events are emphasized (e.g., “The match
burns because you strike it.”)
Progression Continued
Level 5:
Qualitative
model-based
accounts
Model-based
accounts of all carbon
transforming processes.
Ability to understand and use
information about chemical composition
of organic substances.
Clear accounting for role of gases in
carbon-transforming processes.
Difficulty
Level 4:
“School
science”
narratives
about
processes
Stories
Mass
of events at atomic-molecular,
macroscopic, and large scales.
Gases clearly identified as forms of
matter and reactants or products in
carbon-transforming processes.
Some knowledge of chemical identities
of substances.
with quantitative reasoning
that connects atomic-molecular with
macroscopic and large-scale processes
(e.g., stoichiometry, global carbon
fluxes).
Difficulty with quantitative reasoning
about risk and probability.
of gases not consistently
recognized.
Incomplete understanding of chemical
identities of substances and atomicmolecular models of chemical change
leads to impossible accounts of what
happens to matter in photosynthesis,
combustion, cellular respiration (e.g.,
matter-energy conversions).
Highlighted Features in Review




Focused on core ideas (or big ideas) in science
Levels of understanding informed by a theory
of how students learn the core idea [initial
hypotheses informed by review of existing
research]
Student achievement informed by learning
performances reflecting an integration of
science content and science practice
Assessment data from students used to inform
revision of progression
Questions?
Developing Hypothetical Learning
Progressions in Support of New
Science Standards


One year grant from National Science
Foundation
Meant to support state science supervisors
[and potentially district science supervisors]
Main Objective

Develop hypothetical learning
progressions that elaborate upon
four core ideas from NRC framework


Use existing research inform
hypothesized progression
Bring together experts studying learning
Purpose
Primary Aims:


Help inform the revision of science
standards after states receive the new
national science standards
Help inform the selection or design of
curricula and assessments by states or their
local school districts
Secondary Aims:


Provide a vehicle (in the form of a learning
progression) to bridge research and
practice.
Stimulate more discussion and research on
learning progressions around the country.
Consultants on Working Groups


Life Science:
 Brian Reiser, Northwestern Univ., chair
 Andy Anderson, Michigan State Univ.
 Richard Lehrer, Vanderbilt Univ.
 David Kanter, New York Hall of Sci
 Jennifer Hicks, Indiana DOE
Physical Sciences
 Joseph Krajcik, Univ. of Mich, Chair
 Marianne Wiser, Clark Univ.
 Fred Goldberg, San Diego State Univ.
 Shawn Stevens, Univ of Mich
 Jacob Foster, Massachusetts DOE
Ideas We Are Addressing


Ideas for Life Sci Working Group to target
 LS4.B-D: Evolution
 LS 3.B: Flow of matter & energy in ecosystems
 LS1.C: Flow of matter & energy in organisms
Ideas for Physical Sci Working group to target
 PS1.A&B: Structure and Properties of Matter
 PS3.A&B: Energy forms & energy
transformations
Key elements of Our Hypothetical
Learning Progressions
For each component idea targeted:




Levels of understanding
 Using ideas from NRC framework consider research to
review what is appropriate, or may need revision
 Articulate students’ use of ideas to form explanations
 What is progressing in student thinking between levels?
Student ideas, boundaries, rationales
 What should we look for (or not look for) in student
thinking?
 What difficulties might student face with certain ideas
 How might we sequence ideas between and within a
grade band?
Learning Performances
 cross of content and practice
General features of phenomena and learning experiences
 aimed as supporting progression
Core Science Practices Identified
1. Questioning
2. Find, evaluate, and communicate information
3. Designing Investigations
4. Collecting, representing, and analyzing data
5. Explanation and prediction
6. Modeling
7. Argumentation


All (but #2) are consistent with the NRC framework;
Taking Science to School/Ready, Set, Science; & College
Board Standards for College Success
#2 is consistent with common core reading and writing
standards and 21st Century skills.
One Representation for LP (table)
Level 1 (Grades k-2 ) Content Statements from NRC framework (or added, revised, or modified)
Student
Explanations
What changes in
Student thinking
Rationale, Boundaries &
Student Ideas
Learning
Performances
Phenomena &
Sample
Experiences
Connections to level 1
Level 2 (Grades 3-5 ) Content Statements from NRC framework (or added, revised, or modified)
Student
Explanations
What changes in
student thinking
Rationale, Boundaries &
Student Ideas
Learning
Performances
Phenomena &
Sample
Experiences
Connections to Level 2
Level 3 (Grades 6-8 ) Content Statements from NRC framework (or added, revised, or modified)
Student
Explanations
What changes in
Student thinking
Rationale, Boundaries &
Student Ideas
Learning
Performances
Connections to level 3
Note: We will continue to refine the representation
Phenomena &
Sample
Experiences
Another Representation is
To be Determined

Potentially a Narrative description


Articulates connections across columns and
rows, and emphasizes what is progressing.
May provide more elaboration of the
thinking that guided development of the
progressions.
Draft Example Hypothetical LP
Flow of matter through
Ecosystems and Organisms
Time Line

Drafts ready for External Review


June 14, 2011
Final draft ready for distribution

Aug 31, 2011
Comments from
State Science Supervisor on Project:
Jenny Hicks

How could you use this work?

What do you see as potentially most useful?
Note: Jake Foster also on Project
Questions and Feedback
1. What would you like to see in the framework
(the table representation) that we do not have?
2. What do you think about these science
practices?
3. With regard to the specific example DRAFT
progressions examined:
a. Could you follow the logic in the columns and
rows?
b. Suggestions on how to better organize or
communicate the information?
4. How do you think you might use this work?
Anybody interested in reviewing?
Email [email protected]
Questions about Project and
work?
Thank You !