Science Proficiency And Course Taking In High School

This report from The Nation's Report Card provides further information about students' lack of preparation in science, their apparent disinclination to enroll in challenging science courses, and the comparatively low achievement of Back and Hispanic students, females, economically disadvantaged students, and non-college bound students. These Science Report Card results are based on a national survey of nearly 20,000 students in grades 4, 8, and 12, conducted during the winter and spring of 1990 by the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP). The results from the 1990 science assessment were analyzed using item response theory (IRT) methods, allowing NAEP to describe performance across the grades and subpopulations on a 0 to 500 scale. Along this continuum, four levels of proficiency were defined: Level 200: Understands Simple Scientific Principles; Level 250: Applies General Scientific Information; Level 300: Analyzes Scientific Procedures and Data; and Level 350: Integrates Specialized Scientific Information. Overall science proficiency by race/ethnicity, gender, region, type of community, type of school, parents' highest level of education, additional home factors, types of high school programs, and plans after high school was determined. Chapters include: (1) "Overall Science Proficiency for the Nation and Demographic Subpopulations"; (2) "Levels of Science Proficiency for the National and Demographic Subpopulations"; (3) "Science Proficiency by Content Areas for the Nation, Subpopulations, and in Relation to High School Course-Taking"; (4) "Attitudes toward Science Education and Students' Experiences in Science"; (5) "Toward Scientific Literacy for All: Instructional Goals and Practices"; and (6) "Who Is Teaching Science? A Profile of the Eighth-Grade Science Teaching Force." The profile survey on teachers included data on race/ethnicity, years of teaching experience, level and type of teaching certification, academic training, teachers' perceptions of their preparation to teach science topics, and teachers' professional activities in science. An overview of the procedures used in the 1990 science assessment, the NAEP scale anchoring process for the 1990 science assessment and additional example anchor items, and statistical data for all parts of the survey are appended. (KR)

This special issue examines the underlying assumptions of the "A Nation At Risk" report, the context within which the Commission's work was situated, and the effects of the report in improving teaching and learning, as well as the performance of the public educational system. The purpose is to address three broad questions: Was America's education system really putting the nation at risk in the early 1980s? What is the legacy of "A Nation At Risk"? Given our current knowledge on education and human development, the report's overall concern is restated: What risks and opportunities lay before the nation today, and how will they affect the notion of a "learning society" and our public education system? Taken as a whole, the seven articles address the three broad issues identified regarding the past, current, and future of educational reform in the United States.

Following a 2011 report by the National Research Council (NRC) on successful K-12 education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), Congress asked the National Science Foundation to identify methods for tracking progress toward the report's recommendations. In response, the NRC convened the Committee on an Evaluation Framework for Successful K-12 STEM Education to take on this assignment. The committee developed 14 indicators linked to the 2011 report's recommendations. By providing a focused set of key indicators related to students' access to quality learning, educator's capacity, and policy and funding initiatives in STEM, the committee addresses the need for research and data that can be used to monitor progress in K-12 STEM education and make informed decisions about improving it. The recommended indicators provide a framework for Congress and relevant deferral agencies to create and implement a national-level monitoring and reporting system that: assesses progress toward key improvements recommended by a previous National Research Council (2011) committee; measures student knowledge, interest, and participation in the STEM disciplines and STEM-related activities; tracks financial, human capital, and material investments in K-12 STEM education at the federal, state, and local levels; provides information about the capabilities of the STEM education workforce, including teachers and principals; and facilitates strategic planning for federal investments in STEM education and workforce development when used with labor force projections. All 14 indicators explained in this report are intended to form the core of this system. Monitoring Progress Toward Successful K-12 STEM Education: A Nation Advancing? summarizes the 14 indicators and tracks progress towards the initial report's recommendations.