August 2020

Introduction
Many considerations must be taken into account in designing instructional materials to
create a product that lives up to the expectations of students, teachers, schools, and
districts. There are the obvious and necessary elements that must be addressed, such as
standards, scope and sequence, instructional model, and pacing. OpenSciEd instructional
materials are thoughtfully constructed with all of these considerations and constraints in
mind. Yet, these elements are not enough. Instructional materials must have a classroom
vision, an image of how students will engage with the content, what type of discourse
students will engage in, and a sense of what a teacher needs to make standards come
alive.

As an organization, OpenSciEd is committed to acknowledging and taking on inequities in

education. As science educators, we endeavor to develop science instructional materials
that provide equitable learning opportunities for historically disenfranchised students​.
OpenSciEd’s beliefs about science learning and vision of the classroom are embodied in our
design specifications. These fourteen specifications describe what we want science learning
to look like for every student, and therefore guide our materials development process and
implementation support. The topics addressed range from equitable science instruction
and the centrality of asking questions, to meeting practical needs and constraints of a
classroom. These specifications are based on A Framework for K-12 Science Education and
the resulting Next Generation Science Standards, including the emphasis on
three-dimensional learning.

On the following pages are detailed ​descriptions​ of each design specification:

1 – Instructional Model 3
2 – Equitable Science Instruction for All Students 12
3 – Assessment to Inform Teaching and Learning 24
4 – Designing Educative Features 30
5 – Asking Questions and Defining Problems 37
6 – Planning and Carrying Out Investigations 43
​7 – Developing and Using Models, Constructing Explanations, 48
and Designing Solutions
8 – Analyzing and Interpreting Data and Using Mathematical 53
and Computational Thinking
​9 – Arguing from Evidence and Obtaining, Evaluating, and 61

1
 Communicating Information
10 – Crosscutting Concepts 71
11 – Classroom Routines 77
12 – Integration of English Language Arts and Mathematics 81
13 – Meeting Practical Needs and Constraints of Public Education 86
14 – Guidance on Modifying Instructional Units 91
Credits 93

2
1–Instructional Model
Instructional materials provide a coherent path anchored in students’ own experiences and
questions to build disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts through an iterative
process of questioning, investigating, modeling, and constructing explanations. Students
experience learning as meaningful (making sense of ideas rather than just reproducing
them), cumulative (learning challenges require them to use and build on what they figured
out in previous lessons), and progressive (the class improves explanations or solutions over
time by iteratively assessing them, elaborating on them, and holding them up to critique
and evidence).

1.1 Units are organized into a coherent storyline.

In a coherent storyline, the flow of lessons makes sense from the students’ perspective as it
builds toward three-dimensional performance expectations.

1.1.1. Units are organized as a sequence of lessons designed to build toward

three-dimensional learning targets based on the NGSS performance
expectations (PEs). This could be done in a variety of ways, including the
bundling the PEs or developing unit level three-dimensional learning goals using
the elements of the NGSS. It will be clear to educators who are evaluating or
using OpenSciEd high school materials which aspects of the PEs are learning
targets for each unit and course. The three-year sequence of high school courses
will address all NGSS high school PEs. The logic of the sequence should reflect a
storyline that makes sense to students, where each lesson is motivated by
questions students generate in order to explain phenomena, or in the case of
design challenge units, to solve a problem. Questions come from the original
anchoring phenomena or challenge and from new puzzles that arise as students
make progress on their models, explanations, or solutions.

1.1.2. The overall instructional flow of a unit involves a series of lessons that guide
teachers and students to work together to establish the driving question or
design challenge for the unit; put together a sequence of investigations to
develop portions of science ideas or design solutions; and put these elements
together to develop a model that can be used to explain the phenomena or
solve the problem. The lessons support ongoing reflection and navigation
discussions in which teachers and students evaluate their progress and
determine next steps. The sequence culminates with students putting pieces of

3
 what they have learned over the course of the unit together to explain the
anchor phenomenon or optimize the design of a solution. This should compare
competing possibilities and assemble elements of a model, an explanation, or
design solution developed across the unit and evaluate its completeness, which
may lead to additional cycles of further questions and investigation.

1.1.3. Each lesson has a clear goal, explicit for students, of improving some part of a
model or explanation for phenomena, or contributing to the solution of a
problem.

1.1.4. Each lesson is designed to enable students to make progress on their questions
by using science and engineering practices and crosscutting concepts to help
figure out a part of a science idea or make progress on the design challenge.
Each idea they develop in greater depth adds to the developing explanation,
model, or design solution. Each step may also generate new questions that add
to students’ work in the unit.

1.1.5. To support the flow of the storyline, each lesson contains guidance for teachers
to co-construct the framing of the lesson with students so it builds toward the
target performance expectations and clearly links to what students have
identified in prior lessons as areas to extend or questions to address. The
framing involves both the focus of the work (questions to address) and the way
the class will make progress (develop new hypotheses, test ideas through
investigation, argue with evidence, revise explanations, represent and compare
ideas).

An example of a coherent storyline is the investigation of body systems in the OpenSciEd

Middle Grades Program, Unit 7.3 Metabolic Reactions. Rather than taking students through
body systems, one by one, because the instructional materials provide a list of body
systems to be studied, lessons elicit student questions based on a clinical case of a
teenager who is inexplicably having digestive problems, losing weight, and lacking energy.
Students’ initial hypotheses and models are used to motivate questions, places, or
processes in the body to be studied.

A non-example is a series of biology lessons (nutrient cycles, species interdependence,

limiting factors) that all are related to a broader topic (ecosystems) but do not explicitly
help students construct the knowledge needed to understand and explain a complex

4
ecological phenomenon, do not reference and build upon one another, and do not follow a
trajectory from more basic and familiar concepts to more complex and unfamiliar ones.

1.2 Student sensemaking of anchoring phenomena and challenges drive the units.

Learning is motivated by attempting to make sense of initial phenomena or problems

students identify related to the science learning targets, leading to iterative cycles of
investigating phenomena, improving explanations, models, or designs with new evidence,
and further questioning.

1.2.1. Students’ experience with the anchoring phenomena (or the unit problem, in the
case of challenge-based units) drives the work of the unit. An anchoring
phenomenon is an occurrence in the world that raises questions for students
about how and why this event happens, or pose challenges for designing a
solution to a problem. Investigating their questions or developing design
solutions for the problem provide a context and motivation for students to
figure out the target science ideas, and build a shared mission that a classroom
learning community needs to figure out phenomena or solve a design problem.
The anchoring phenomenon grounds student learning in a common experience
and then uses that experience to elicit and feed student curiosity, which then
drives learning throughout the unit.

1.2.2. Students’ experience of the anchoring phenomenon includes several essential

elements (order may vary):
a. Students encounter and explore a phenomenon or problem as directly as
possible—in a way that enables them​ to experience the intriguing nature of
the phenomenon or problem and to publicly, as a learning community,
acknowledge aspects of the phenomenon that require explanation or
solution.
b. Students​ attempt to make sense of the phenomenon or problem in a way
that enables them to see what is important and difficult to explain, or aspects
that are problematic and require solutions, and to generate questions that
will guide future investigations or designs.
c. Students are supported to connect their prior knowledge and experiences to
the anchoring phenomenon or problem in order to broaden the scope of
what the class is interested in figuring out and for students to have a
personal connection and investment to the events being explored.

5
 d. Students generate questions about the anchoring phenomenon or problem
and work together as a class to refine them. They also generate ideas for
how to answer those questions or generate solutions through investigations
and designs they will conduct as part of the unit.

1.2.3. Instructionally productive anchoring phenomena have these characteristics:

a. Anchoring phenomena are observable events that occur in the universe and
that we can use our science knowledge to explain or predict. They are not
topics, themes, or engineering challenges used to organize a unit. For
example, instead of simply learning about the topics of photosynthesis and
mitosis, students should be building evidence-based explanatory ideas that
help them figure out how a tree grows.
b. Anchoring phenomena require students to draw upon a range of science
concepts and ideas and engage them in a number of investigations to build
knowledge or solve a problem.
c. Anchoring phenomena or problems are set in contexts that are relevant to
students’ interests, cultures, or lived experiences, so that students’
background knowledge and frames of reference are assets for their
sensemaking work.

1.2.4. Design challenge units also begin with anchoring phenomena. Problems that
require solutions should arise from phenomena, and students should use
explanations of phenomena to design solutions.

1.2.5. Anchoring phenomena are augmented by other phenomena during the unit.
They provide the initial focus for what needs to be explained or solved over the
course of the unit. As students make progress, partial models lead to new
questions, which motivate bringing in additional phenomena that can help make
progress on these questions. A single phenomenon doesn’t have to cover an
entire unit, and different phenomena may take different amounts of time to
figure out. As students figure out additional phenomena, they should apply this
new understanding to better explain the anchor phenomenon.

As in the earlier example, posing a question or problem about the investigation of

metabolic reactions through the lens of an illness creates a context that is relevant and
engaging for students. It transcends the separate facts or topics, challenging students to
build a more complete understanding of the science concepts and ideas at work in the

6
problem. There are multiple legitimate ways to represent what might be happening in the
body, and different students may choose to elaborate on unique aspects of the explanation
or model.

A non-example of an anchoring phenomena or problem is a series of biology lessons that

take students through each body system, its parts and their functions, and diseases of each
system. Other non-examples include using phenomena only as hooks to get students
interested in a lesson, or only using them after the learning has happened as an application
of learning (or both). Rather, figuring out the phenomena or designing solutions to the
problem should be the reason that students turn the page.

1.3 Learning as a classroom community is supported through a flow of activity that

includes individual, pair, small group, and whole group discussion.

Students are explicitly positioned as collaborators, not competitors, who work as a

community to figure something out about the natural or designed world. To enable access
and participation for all students, lessons lead up to argumentation, explanation, and
modeling in whole group contexts by providing opportunities for students to work out their
thinking and talking in individual, pair, and small group contexts prior to whole group
discussions.

1.3.1. Tasks are set up for students to engage in the science and engineering practices
through a balance of individual or pair work, small group work, and whole class
work.

1.3.2. Key steps in figuring out phenomena and solving problems require involvement
of the learning community. Classroom routines support students in the work of
scientific argumentation and negotiating consensus in order to identify
questions, develop plans, and develop explanations and models. Learning
sequences should culminate in lessons specifically focused on evaluating
alternatives, scientific argumentation, and reaching consensus.

1.3.3. Units support students in participating in the learning community through a

sequence that provides time for individual work, pair work, small group work,
and engagement in whole-group discussion. This allows students to develop
their initial ideas by sharing and listening to others, and receiving and giving

7
 feedback, providing less stressful opportunities to build the confidence
necessary to engage in whole-class discussion.

1.3.4. Engaging in science and engineering practices focuses on sharing, critiquing,

defending, and negotiating ideas. Units provide supports for students to
articulate their ideas and make them public so that the full community can have
access to them. Instructional materials contain opportunities for students to see
and engage with each others’ ideas. Supports include general pedagogical
approaches such as think-pair-share or jigsaw, and science-specific activity
structures, such as gallery walks, driving question boards, or summary charts.

1.3.5. Instructional materials provide support for students to engage in scientific

discourse and to learn the use of scientific representations to support this
collaboration.

1.3.6. Units support both individual representation of the ideas by students in their
notebooks and public representations of the class consensus on what they have
figured out. Individual and public artifacts keep track of the class questions, their
plans, and their progress on models, explanations, and designs. Individual work
provides the resources for group and whole-class work, and provides space for
students to develop, document, and apply their understanding. Both individual
and collective work is central to documenting and guiding progress.

1.4 Students engage in incremental revision and synthesis of ideas.

Supporting three-dimensional learning is an incremental process. Developing explanatory

ideas requires figuring out pieces of ideas and then assembling them into more complex
explanations, models, or designs, developing intermediate models or designs that are
partially successful, and providing opportunities for students to revise and improve those
ideas.

1.4.1. Teacher materials provide guidance for teachers to work with students to
incrementally develop, test, critique, and refine explanations and models over
the course of a unit. Identification of needed revisions in models may arise from
the introduction of new phenomena, classroom argumentation as part of
building and evaluating models, new evidence, new investigations students ask
to conduct, and new evidence from readings.

8
 1.4.2. Each unit includes multiple opportunities for students to synthesize ideas they
have developed across multiple lessons into a coherent, grade-appropriate
model, explanation, or design.

1.4.3. Lessons ask students to share knowledge products that depict their current
thinking: models, conceptual drawings, lists of hypotheses, partial explanations,
or designs. Students’ representations are referred to as “works in progress” and
lessons support students in critiquing and revising these ideas over the course
of the unit.

1.4.4. Lessons make coherent connections to preceding lessons to enable the

synthesis and revision of ideas. Lessons include planned discussions in which
teachers guide students to articulate the current state of the class’ explanations,
models, or designs, and identify pending questions to resolve, in order to
connect the current lesson to the past work.

An example of incremental revision and synthesis of ideas can be found in the OpenSciEd
Middle Grades Unit 8.2 Sound. The class develops an initial model for how sound is
produced, travels, and can be detected, which consists primarily in the delineation of these
three events, with underlying causes being black boxed. During the course of the unit,
students work out causal models for each of these three elements (creation of sound,
sound traveling, sound detection), and incrementally revise their models to incorporate
these new findings. A first revision adds the idea of vibration of matter as the cause of
sound. Later revisions add more detailed modeling of vibration as mathematical
relationships including frequency and wavelength, and explain sound traveling through
particle collision in a medium. Students’ final models reflect a molecular-motion model in
which energy is transferred through a medium.

A non-example is having students produce models or explanations for isolated phenomena

that do not connect to questions or problems that have been raised, or that are produced
without revision or later use. Another non-example is having students produce public
representations of their thinking for the sole purpose of labeling some of the ideas as
correct or incorrect.

1.5 Units fit into the scope and sequence with explicit connections.

9
Units are designed to support a coherent learning experience. Each unit builds explicitly on
the elements of disciplinary core ideas, practices, and crosscutting concepts that have been
established in earlier units.
1.5.1. Teacher materials contain explicit connections for teachers to help students
build on the disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts established in
prior units. Where connections are identified in the scope and sequence
between two performance expectation bundles, the unit reflecting the later
bundle includes early lessons in which teachers work with students to explicitly
identify relevant elements of disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts
from prior work that can help partially address the anchoring phenomena or
problem. Students also bring in ideas established in earlier grades. The
modeling, explanation, and design work builds explicitly on the earlier ideas
students have identified.

1.5.2. Instructional materials contain explicit connections for teachers to help students
access and build on the science and engineering practices and crosscutting ideas
established in prior grades and in prior units. While students are engaging in all
three dimensions K-12, their progression not only builds through their
explanatory power of the disciplinary core ideas, but also in their ability to
flexibly use the science and engineering practices and crosscutting concepts to
develop grade-appropriate explanations of phenomena, even if they have
encountered similar events in prior units. Lessons guide teachers and students
in identifying how they have engaged in the practices in prior units or grades,
and build in grade-appropriate advances in the unit.

1.6 Engineering practices are used in units when it furthers the science.
Units use science and engineering together when appropriate. When engineering practices
are included, those practices also help students deepen the relevant science.

1.6.1. Units include engineering practices when they can deepen science learning.
Engineering practices are always paired with disciplinary core ideas from life,
earth and space, or physical science. Engineering practices are not used just in
combination with engineering disciplinary core ideas, that is, solely to learn
about the nature of engineering.

1.6.2. Engineering challenges provide opportunities for students to deepen their

explanations and models of scientific phenomena. Engineering challenges do

10
 not simply draw from and ask students to apply science that students have
already learned, or if students are able to use trial-and-error to find a solution to
the problem, without drawing on science ideas for their solution.

11
2–Equitable Science Instruction for All Students
Recognizing the vast range of student diversity in today's classrooms and the deep
injustices in society, instructional materials build on guidelines in ​A Framework for K-12
Science Education ​and the NGSS t​ o support learners who come from non-dominant
communities or are underrepresented in STEM. Instructional materials guide teachers in
implementing equitable science instruction for all students, and are flexible enough to be
adapted to fit teachers’ and students’ local circumstances. The practices described in the
equity design specifications are central to science teaching and learning everywhere and
for all students; they are not add-on strategies that only need to be deployed in the
presence of students from historically underserved communities. Professional
development that supports implementation of the instructional materials must focus on
these equity practices.

Equity Design Stance: Instructional materials are rooted in a commitment to restorative

justice through privileging multiple ways of knowing, being, and valuing as a fundamental
human condition, and they promote the rightful presence for all students across the
multifaceted scales of justice, including scales related to race, socioeconomic class, gender,
educational sovereignty, Indigenous rights, immigration history, land and water rights,
sexual orientation, gender expression, abilities, and other dimensions of social difference
related to justice. From a critical historical perspective, working toward equity and justice
involves implementing approaches that de-settle inequitable systems, routines, and
assumptions that are likely to be in place in many educational institutions. In coordination,
it is then possible to support expansive cultural learning pathways for youth working from
an asset perspective. In particular, these pathways should be designed to center the
lifeworlds on non-dominant communities in support of multiple ways of knowing, being,
and valuing. As detailed in A Framework for K-12 Science Education, all science learning is a
cultural accomplishment.

Additionally, instructional materials are designed to follow principles of the Universal

Design for Learning (UDL): Provide students with multiple means of engagement,
representation, and expression; leverage students’ sensemaking repertoires to support
three-dimensional learning; and support peer interactions that enable active engagement
in investigation-based science learning.
Diverse Design Teams: To design for equitable instruction, instructional designers need to
acknowledge and account for the design bias that relates to the cultural diversity and
history of their team. Teams should include designers from a range of experiences and
backgrounds, or recruit consultants who can attend to issues that arise from homogeneity

12
and socially dominant positioning, in order to better de-settle oppressive curricular
representations and pedagogical practices. Design teams should include designers who
reflect the experiences along race, ethnicity, culture, gender, class, and/or ability of the
students who will learn with the OpenSciEd instructional materials. While it may not be
possible for design teams to include members that identify with all of these identities, it is
important for designers with (some of) these experiences to be present throughout the
work at all times, rather than brought on only as special consultants to review the work
produced by designers who identify with dominant groups. Many of the design
recommendations depend upon the instructional design knowledge of people who have
specific equity-focused expertise—such individuals will need to be meaningfully integrated
into design teams in order to attend to equity and justice in the design of instructional
materials.

2.1 Diversity is made visible.

Individuals, teams, and communities from all nations and cultures have contributed to
science and to advances in engineering—across differences of race, ethnicity, gender, and
abilities. Instructional materials have a broad range of images and stories of who does and
has done STEM endeavors in our society (through inclusive storylines, phenomena,
sustained examples), and highlight the broad range of purposes for STEM endeavors
(focusing sensemaking on community projects, civic engagement, personal and family
pursuits, justice projects, and 21st century global challenges and decision-making, not just
STEM-related career possibilities). Design teams consider whose interests are being served
by the images of STEM endeavors represented in instructional materials and prioritize the
interests of underserved communities.

2.1.1. Instructional materials acknowledge the specific contributions of members from

multiple communities to scientific and technological enterprises related to the
topic, practices, and knowledge involved. These accounts are substantial,
accurate, and respectful to the originating work and community. Both pictorial
and descriptive images of STEM endeavors include diverse images in historical,
contemporary, and future-focused terms as appropriate. The diversity of STEM
endeavors of cultural communities are not inappropriately portrayed only as
efforts from the past and make visible the diverse forms of STEM efforts that are
currently unfolding and evolving.

2.1.2. Cultural and gender diversity is integrated into lessons by carefully weaving
together subject matter, corresponding sensemaking activities, and images with

13
 relevant sociocultural contexts that recognize the scientific and technological
contributions of members from various cultural backgrounds. For example,
instructional materials include and clearly highlight the efforts of scientists of all
gender identities. Learning experiences are designed to promote a deeper sense
of global community, agency, and social responsibility, rather than using
phenomena, settings, or examples that primarily center on the activities or
interests of the dominant U.S. culture.

2.1.3. Topics, concepts, and practices within units are related to the backgrounds of
students by recognizing that all learners belong to multiple cultural communities
that share different practices, purposes, ways of interacting, and approaches to
conceptualizing and engaging with the world. Students are able to “see
themselves” in the scientific endeavor—as represented through instructional
materials—in order for them to feel comfortable engaging in science learning
meaningfully.

2.1.4. The dynamic and variable nature of cultural groups is highlighted, including the
inherent variations and regularities in cultural practices and values, and how
these may change over time. Instructional materials avoid essentializing the
activities and qualities of cultural groups and actively work against narrow and
uniform (formulaic) ways that science is conducted (for example, by highlighting
different forms of argumentation and explanation). Instructional materials do
not assume that all learners from a given cultural community engage in similar
sensemaking practices, or that certain cultural communities are homogeneous
and stable over time.

2.2 Learning experiences focus on youth relevance and community purpose.

Building on the vision of A Framework for K-12 Science Education, instructional materials
relate to the interests, identities, and experiences of students and the goals and needs of
their communities. Instructional materials create opportunities for instruction to be guided
by cultural formative assessment strategies and to leverage local funds of knowledge.
2.2.1. Instructional materials create opportunities for teachers to engage in cultural
formative assessment, eliciting and instructionally responding to their students’
prior knowledge, interests, and identities. At least twice within each unit, after
students develop an understanding of an important science idea, a
self-documentation instructional technique is used to help students see how the

14
 focal science ideas they have learned about relate to everyday phenomena of
their lives (for example, ask students to take pictures of phenomena in their life
that relate to Newton’s second law, and then make sense of the resulting
collection together).

2.2.2. Instructional materials make explicit the importance of i​ dentifying the dynamic
everyday practices and concerns in the students’ communities that can be
meaningfully related to classroom science and engineering investigations. Units
explore how anchor or investigative phenomena relate to the interests and
practices of the local community or to a shared global concern. The leading
activity of units are personally meaningful phenomena, not abstract science
ideas, and are sometimes introduced through a cultural launch that locates the
anchor phenomena in a context of the community.

2.2.3. Cultural ​formative​ ​assessments​ support teachers in building on students’ prior

interests, identities, and experiences. For example, developing expertise or
interest of a student might relate to the knowledge work in a unit, and students
can be positioned in a teacher-like role in the classroom. At least three times
each year students should be able to relate science ideas or practices they are
learning about​ and put them into some type of action​ (such as working as an
individual or in a small group to develop a public service announcement that
applies science ideas to a specific topic or practice, or working in a small group
on a design project that applies science ideas to an authentic problem).

2.2.4. Instructional ​materials​ include o​pportunities​ for teachers to support students to

engage in community endeavors as part of their science class. Each year there
are at least two sustained, culturally meaningful science investigations that occur
in the context of the local community (such as a field investigation, design
project, or local data collection at school site). A
​ t least two high school units
focus on anchor phenomena that can be meaningfully focused in relation to the
community (that is, not all units have a fully “pre-packaged” anchor phenomena).
This should include taking a place-based science education approach.

2.2.5. Instructional materials ​include​ ​opportunities​ for students to develop new

science-related interests and to learn how they relate to social pursuits in the
world. Within each unit, students are given time to document, reflect on, and
explore their developing science-related interests, and they are supported to

15
 further explore those interests (for example, by talking with an expert or
researching different endeavors online or at the library).

2.2.6. Teachers are guided in relating science to the histories, current priorities, and
aspirational futures of communities, especially those of local indigenous
communities in conjunction with their recognized rights and other groups owed
an education debt. This can shape the framing and relevancy of science ideas
and practices, the pedagogical approach, the languages used in instruction, and
the experts brought in to support science learning.

2.3 Equitable sensemaking is supported in the science classroom.

Creating equitable learning opportunities depends critically on students’ ideas and

reasoning as being connected to science, as opposed to being off topic or disruptive.
Instructional materials enable teachers to recognize and leverage diverse assets and
perspectives students bring for making sense of phenomena, and broaden what counts as
competency to include everyday and professional forms. Instructional materials actively
work against reductive accounts of proficiency (such as privileging prestige English in
rubrics, or culturally narrow images of the science and engineering practices). They scaffold
multiple forms of practice engagements and identify as well as leverage students’
sensemaking repertoires, rather than an idealized, dominant form.

2.3.1. Instructional materials cultivate​ an ​equitable​ learning community in the

classroom by engaging students in activities that promote trusting and caring
relationships, a shared understanding of the cultural diversity of its members,
and equity in all sensemaking. Each unit includes a community building exercise
or activity that relates to the focus of the unit. Instructional materials emphasize
the importance of developing and maintaining equitable learning experiences,
particularly by interrogating participation, and by promoting social norms that
support safe and fair participation while interrupting cultural norms or
stereotypes that could make science experiences feel unwelcome to students
who might otherwise feel disenfranchised from science (for example, feeling like
someone is not intelligent enough to think like a scientist, cannot do the relevant
math, or cannot share their thinking).

2.3.2. Units use Universal Design Principles to ensure all students are positioned to
intellectually engage throughout all collaborative sensemaking. Instructional

16
 materials highlight the importance of not putting students into set roles that are
less intellectually engaging, like “materials manager,” and instead use a range of
intellectual roles associated with the collaborative learning process (for example,
idea connector, causal checker, evidence wrangler, and relevance hunter).

2.3.3. Activities allow for teachers to notice and leverage s​ tudents’​ diverse
sensemaking contributions and connect them to the science and engineering
practices involved in an investigation. These contributions can relate to styles of
speaking or writing, ways of observing and interpreting, forms of reasoning, uses
of gestures or movements, or diagrams and other forms of expression.
Instructional materials create opportunities for instruction to make room for
these different kinds of contributions to all sensemaking activities, rather than
expecting students to contribute in narrow or prescribed ways. Teachers receive
instructional guidance to leverage the specific contributions of individual
students and make direct connections to science, rather than lightly polling (or
“popcorning”) across the classroom community.

2.3.4. Instructional materials guide teachers in h

​ ighlight​ing how students’ community
histories, values, and practices contribute to scientific understanding and
problem solving. Classes explore how students’ community histories, values, and
practices contribute to scientific understanding and problem solving related to
the unit investigation.

2.3.5. Instructional materials include a broad representation of how various

communities leverage their ways of knowing, ways of talking, and ways of seeing
the work for making sense of natural phenomena and solving problems, and
avoid causing epistemic i​ njury​ by communicating that science and engineering
practices occur only one way.

2.3.6. T​eachers​ are guided in using embedded cognitive formative assessments to

surface and instructionally respond to students’ facets of thinking (the full range
of students’ ideas about a topic or concept) throughout the sensemaking
process. Students develop these facets of thinking as they experience and make
sense of the natural world. Teachers are guided on how to respond to specific
ideas from an asset-based perspective (what is appreciated, what is concerning),
allowing them to recognize the richness in students’ reasoning and to support
students to refine their ideas in a constructive and respectful manner.

17
 Facet-based rubrics that account for the diversity of student’s typical thinking are
included for assessments integrated in lessons around the learning of difficult
concepts. Rubrics do not focus on single-scale learning progressions or only on
identifying students’ misconceptions.

2.3.7. Instructional materials create ​opportunities​ for students to engage in

engineering design practices in culturally meaningful ways, particularly by
leveraging students’ everyday experiences and contextualizing design projects to
be locally relevant.

2.3.8. T​eachers​ are guided in understanding the importance of navigating within and
across multiple ways of making sense of the natural world, such as
instructionally centering on the Indigenous Ways of Knowin​g and Being.

2.4 Participation and learning of multilingual learners are supported.

In order to support emerging multilingual learners*, instructional materials are designed to

support equitable participation in science and engineering practices, in ways that are
culturally sustaining; leverage students’ full linguistic repertoires, such as multiple
languages and registers; and value and promote multi-modal performances beyond
written or spoken forms of expression. Supporting the equitable participation and learning
of emerging multilingual learners and all students requires new understandings of the
language affordances and demands inherent in science learning. Additionally, this shift
requires understanding new strategies for building on the lived experiences and linguistic
resources that all students bring to the science classroom. For further guidance on
addressing the needs of multilingual learners, refer to English Learners in STEM Subjects:
Transforming Classrooms, Schools, and Lives.

*Multilingual students are often referred to as “English Language Learners,” but

instructional materials should use the term “emerging multilingual students” to
acknowledge and value these students’ bi-/multilingualism, bi-/multiculturalism, and
highlight that they have a right to learn science content beyond developing English fluency.

2.4.1. Instructional materials clearly state that cultural and professional communities
have specialized discursive practices that allow community members participate
in meaning-making activities. Specifically, they explain that science and
engineering have developed specialized discursive practices that help their

18
 members make sense of natural phenomena and solve problems. At least three
times each year, students have opportunities to identify the similarities and
differences between familiar everyday ways of communicating and the
specialized ways of communicating of science and engineering (for example, an
activity that has students identify the similarities and differences between forms
of evidence-based argumentation and forms of opinion-based argumentation).
Units make the case for why specialized ways of talking are productive for
sensemaking, and should not delegitimize students’ everyday ways of talking.

2.4.2. Instructional materials clearly state that cultural and professional communities
have specialized languages (registers) that help community members share their
ideas and collaboratively make meaning. Specifically, they explain that it is
normal for people to switch or intertwine registers from different contexts when
engaging in sensemaking activities. Every unit creates opportunities for students
to engage in register switching along the continuum of everyday language and
the specialized language of science and engineering, according to what they find
most useful. Units present content and create opportunities for teachers and
students to share ideas by leveraging linguistic resources along the continuum
of everyday language and specialized language. Activities do not bar students
from using everyday language for their sensemaking and communication,
especially when this can be a powerful tool for equitable participation. The
continuum between everyday and specialized language is available for students
to choose from when sharing their ideas and reasoning.

2.4.3. Instructional materials recognize and center students’ multilingual and

multicultural experiences, highlighting how people around the world engage in
science and engineering practices in multiple languages besides English. Units
use translanguaging approaches that create opportunities for students to
engage in science and engineering practices while fluidly leveraging the multiple
languages they speak. Specifically, every unit creates opportunities for teachers
to identify, promote, and use the various linguistic resources multilingual
students marshal when making sense of natural phenomena or solving
problems. An example is an activity where students develop and present forms
of evidence-based explanations using their heritage languages or blending the
multiple languages they speak. Units do not promote (or connote) English-only
instruction, especially in multilingual classrooms.

19
 2.4.4. Activities are included that create opportunities for teachers to leverage what
they know about specific students’ multilingual and multicultural experiences to
help students make personal connections to science content knowledge.
Specifically, instructional materials allow teachers to gather information to
encourage students to describe times and places where they see the science
they are learning in school being used outside of school, and include supports
(such as prompts) for teachers to include those understandings into their
instructional planning.

2.4.5. Instructional materials focus on more than text-based sensemaking by

promoting multimodal communication to support students in making meaning
of phenomena or address design challenges. Each unit leverages multimodal
and intertextual approaches to highlight and make visible key ideas. For
example, every unit has opportunities for teachers and students to share ideas
by using modalities that go beyond speech and written text, such as graphical
representations, gestures, onomatopoeias, and embodied representations of
key concepts and processes. Instructional materials do not bar students from
using multiple modalities for meaning-making, especially when this is a powerful
tool for equitable participation. Students are able to use both linguistic
resources and multiple modalities when sharing their ideas and reasoning.

2.4.6. Activities are organized in ways that create opportunities for multilingual
students to engage in meaningful accountable talk, by emphasizing socially safe
and relevant activity structures (such as small-group work before whole-class
discussions) and by providing a range of scaffolds for multilingual students to
find their way into discussions. For example, at least three times in every unit
students have the opportunity to engage in think-pair-share or “idea coaching”
structures, and are provided with modalities to support all students in engaging
with and making sense of each other’s ideas.

2.5. Participation and learning of special education students are supported.Instructional

materials are designed to follow principles of the Universal Design for Learning: Provide
students with multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression; leverage
students’ sensemaking repertoires to support three-dimensional learning; and support
peer interactions that enable active engagement in investigation-based science
learning. Additionally, they create opportunities for students with learning needs to
develop self-regulation, self-determination, and agency in order to meaningfully

20
 participate in sensemaking activities. From this perspective, equitable instructional
materials are designed to reduce barriers that hinder participation and offer students
multiple opportunities to engage in deep sensemaking of the natural and designed
worlds; instructional materials do not assume that students themselves require
modifications and adaptations to meet learning goals. Instructional materials support
the creation of learning environments that are more usable, accessible, safer, and
healthier in response to the needs of an increasingly diverse student body, which can
be achieved in part by avoiding ableist language and depictions of learners.

Print and web-based materials will be designed to be products that offer the maximum
flexibility of user experience for all readers, allowing the content to be accessed and
manipulated with ease by those with or without disabilities. Specifically, instructional
materials should account for the following requirements: (1) Structurally tagged
content; (2) Text to speech (TTS) capability; (3) Alternative background colors and
controllable line spacing; (4) U.S. Department of Education Standards; and (5) Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).

2.5.1. Instructional materials do not include ableist language that could be offensive
(such as abnormal, crazy, loony, or victim) and are based on the use of these
resources from the National Center for Disability and Journalism for more
information: Terms to Avoid When Writing About Disability and Disability
Language Style Guide.

2.5.2. Instructional materials provide multiple means of engagement to encourage

purposeful and motivated three-dimensional science learning:
a. Every unit r​ ecruits​ students’ interest by optimizing individual choice
throughout the learning process while engaging students in relevant,
rigorous, and meaningful sensemaking. Individual choice extends beyond
students choosing their own topic of study or investigation method and
includes choices for how students will meet classroom objectives, such as
level of perceived challenge of an activity, modes or tools for expressing
themselves, and sequence or timing for completing activities. For example,
students may be given the choice of different methods to express
themselves (such as verbal responses, drawing, acting, or movement
demonstration) when presenting information or understanding of what they
have learned.

21
 b. Instructional materials guide teachers to organize learning environments in
ways that are physically navigable to all students. They sustain learner effort
and persistence by making goals and objectives clear, fostering peer
collaboration, and building community relationships. Moreover, instructional
materials anticipate and list the barriers required equipment may present to
students and suggest alternative materials and/or setups.
c. Lessons support students’ self-regulation and self-assessment and create
opportunities for teachers to provide performance-based feedback (for
example, self-monitoring scaffolds where students can compare their
engagement and participation to the expectations of the classroom and unit).
Additionally, lessons demonstrate how professional scientists and engineers
self-monitor their experiences and self-regulate their responses to
challenges that arise during group work, during the iterative processes of
design thinking, and/or planning and implementing investigations.
d. Instructional materials guide teachers with general supports and scaffolds
that can be used across lessons or units. Teachers can tweak the general
supports to make them better match the lesson (content, types of activities)
if desired. For example, providing a “visual task schedule” to help students
learn and monitor classroom routines or the steps for completing specific
academic tasks that includes visual icons and text for each step in the routine
or task. Students refer to the visual schedule and can check off when they
have completed the steps in the routine or remove the picture icon from the
task schedule.

2.5.3. Instructional materials provide multiple means of representing information and

expectations to make the materials comprehensible to learners with learning
needs. Every unit supports students to reflect and build on their prior
knowledge, and construct generalizable explanations and models.

2.5.4. Instructional materials provide multiple opportunities for students to express

their understanding and reasoning. Every unit includes multiple tools that
support students’ engagement with activities and sensemaking (such as
investigation materials or assistive technologies), leverages multiple modalities
for communicating content and expectations, and provides opportunities for
students to express their understanding through recruiting multiple modalities
(such as drawings or gestures). Instructional materials make it clear that
providing multiple means for expression is categorically different from so-called

22
 “learning styles,” arbitrary categories such as “visual learner” and “kinesthetic
learner,” which are not scientifically valid and yet prevalent in discussions about
learning needs.

2.5.5. Instructional materials create opportunities for students to actively participate in

group work and support teachers to set clear goals for activity-driven learning,
as well as scaffolds to self-regulate progress in groups and promote students’
agency. Every unit reinforces a positive group-work culture by encouraging
students to identify their resources that can strengthen their group, as well as
systems to ensure that all students are actively participating in sensemaking.
Units include multidimensional, multi-level activities that require the work of all
group members to accomplish.

23
3–Assessment to Inform Teaching and Learning
According to the National Task Force for Assessment Education, “assessment is the process
of gathering evidence of student learning to inform education-related decisions. The
impact of decisions depends on the quality of the evidence gathered, which in turn,
depends on the quality of the assessment, and associated practices, used to gather it.”

Assessment design is considered in tandem with instructional materials design so that the
evidence gathered through assessment can inform instruction and learning. There are
well-designed assessment opportunities that support evidence gathering for a wide range
of purposes, including formative assessment conversations that occur during instruction,
embedded tasks with rubrics that support the interpretation and use of student ideas to
inform instruction, and summative assessments. Assessment is a process that involves
students in analyzing their own and their peers’ ideas and considering how to use those
ideas as they move forward in making sense of phenomena. Teachers are guided in
collecting and using assessment evidence to assist all students in their learning so that
both teachers and students benefit from the process. Due to the different assessment
formats used by different states, assessments do not attempt to prepare students for a
specific type of large-scale summative state-level test.

For assessment to inform teaching and learning, there must be not just alignment in the
pieces of the standards that are addressed, but coherence between how students learn
and how that learning is measured. This means that assessments in OpenSciEd’s materials
should be focused on a phenomenon or problem and require students to engage in
sensemaking as they demonstrate their knowledge and capacity of the three dimensions of
the standards. Further guidance and examples of tasks can be found at
https://www.nextgenscience.org/taps​.

3.1 A systems approach is used to design assessments.

Instructional materials use a systems approach to assessment that takes multiple purposes
of assessments into account, and ensures that all assessment opportunities coherently
provide multiple pieces of evidence that can support claims about what students know and
can do in science. The format for the different types of assessments throughout each unit
is matched to the assessment purposes. Assessments are sensitive to students’ learning
experiences, embedded in instruction, are seen by students as connected to what and how
they learned, and respond to the instructional features of the materials.

24
 3.1.1. Each unit includes an incoming formative assessment task or discussion to
determine what incoming ideas and experiences students bring to the unit.
These incoming formative tasks are linked to the unit learning goals and
phenomenon, design problem, or driving question. Teacher materials have
information for how to elicit students’ ideas and use them as resources to
inform future instruction.

3.1.2. Activities include informal formative assessment opportunities to determine

whether students are building understanding. Teacher materials include
information on how to interpret student ideas to provide feedback and make
instructional decisions.

3.1.3. Instructional materials include key formative (or mini-summative) embedded

assessment tasks to be used as checkpoints at critical junctures in the unit.
Teacher materials include a rubric on how to provide feedback and make
instructional decisions based on results of these tasks.

3.1.4. Instructional materials include end of unit summative assessment (for example,
a performance task) to determine whether students met the learning goals for
the whole unit that uses a closely related (but separate from the unit)
phenomenon, problem, or context.

3.1.5. Instructional materials include student self assessments. Self assessments are
opportunities for students to evaluate their learning and growth in the class
learning community. Teachers can decide wherever in the unit they would like to
help students reflect on their growth. In addition, specific opportunities in the
unit are identified where teachers can have their students assess their own
progress by using more generic tools that help teachers facilitate this process.

3.1.6. Instructional materials include student peer assessments. Peer assessments

involve students giving and receiving feedback from each other. Peer
assessments are most useful when there are complex and diverse ideas visible
in student work and not all work is the same. Peer feedback will be more
valuable to students if they have time to revise after receiving peer feedback.

3.2 Assessments measure progress toward three-dimensional learning goals.

25
Assessment opportunities examine students’ performance of scientific and engineering
practices in the context of crosscutting concepts and disciplinary core ideas. The multiple
assessment opportunities implemented in a unit provide evidence of students’ building
ability with all three dimensions.

3.2.1. All assessment opportunities ask students to integrate disciplinary core ideas,
science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts to investigate and
make sense of phenomena and solve problems, and occur in multiple modalities
and include multimodal representations (such as words, images, diagrams).

3.2.2. Incoming formative assessment tasks ask students to use their incoming ideas,
experiences, and cultural ways of knowing to engage with the unit phenomenon
or problem, and appropriately scaffold engagement with disciplinary core ideas,
science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts. Formative
assessment tasks support teachers to consider how students' background
knowledge, cultural ways of knowing, and prior experiences can serve as
resources for learning.

3.2.3. Informal formative assessment opportunities are aligned to three-dimensional

learning goals of the particular activity or lesson, based on a bundle of
performance expectations, and may scaffold aspects of the three dimensions.

3.2.4. Embedded assessment tasks are aligned to learning goals to that point in the
unit, based on a bundle of performance expectations, and may scaffold aspects
of the three dimensions.

3.2.5. End of unit summative assessment tasks use detailed scenarios involving
phenomena and problems, accompanied by one or more prompts, and have
multiple components (such as a set of interrelated questions) that yield evidence
of three-dimensional learning. Individual prompts and tasks as a whole require
students to demonstrate and use each targeted dimension appropriately, use
multiple dimensions together, and use three-dimensional performances to
sense-make (reason with scientific and engineering evidence, models, and
scientific principles). End of unit assessments require at (or below) grade-level
English language arts and mathematics competencies, and use the evidence
statements from Achieve and the performance expectation assessment

26
 boundaries and clarification statements, as well as the progressions, described
in the appendices and prompts in STEM Teaching Tools.

3.3 Assessments are designed to allow for a range of student responses.

Assessment opportunities anticipate the wide range of backgrounds, experiences,

resources, questions, and ideas that students bring to the science classroom. Assessment
tasks are dexterous enough to capture students’ background knowledge and initial ideas at
the start of the unit as well as how these ideas develop as students integrate information
and evidence from activities during the course of the unit. To the extent possible,
assessments embedded with instructional materials allow students the option of
expressing their emergent understanding in a language and format in which they are most
comfortable, and offer students choices in how they respond (for example, orally, in
writing, or through a diagram).

Formative assessment opportunities allow for a range of student ideas to be expressed so

that the teacher and students can use those ideas to shape subsequent teaching and
learning. Teachers are advised that providing “correct” responses right away undermines
the instructional model. Instead, they are guided to provide students with time to make
sense of ideas themselves. Formative assessment opportunities allow students from a wide
range of backgrounds to participate. Summative assessment opportunities allow for all
students to demonstrate where they are in their progression toward the learning goals.
3.3.1. All assessment opportunities are appropriate for diverse populations of
students. They have gone through a bias and sensitivity review for all students,
including female students, economically disadvantaged students, students from
major racial and ethnic groups, students with disabilities, students with limited
English language proficiency, and students in alternative education, and include
diverse representations of scientists, engineers, phenomena, and problems to
be solved.

3.3.2. Incoming formative assessment tasks incorporate multiple modalities for

students’ to share complete, partial, or incomplete ideas, using the process
described by the Formative Assessment for Students and Teachers State
Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards (FAST SCASS).

3.3.3. Informal formative assessment opportunities follow the FAST SCASS process that
incorporates multiple modalities for students’ to share complete, partial, or

27
 incomplete ideas. They can be discussion-based, and use strategies to allow all
students to make their thinking visible (such as providing thinking time to
rehearse responses). Informal formative assessments encourage students to
listen to one another, compare and evaluate competing ideas, and merge ideas
to construct new explanations. They invite students to revise their ideas based
on new information or evidence and include opportunities for teachers to ask
follow-up questions or revoice students’ ideas.

3.3.4. Embedded assessment tasks provide opportunities for students to engage with
self- and peer-assessment and critique, and provide teachers with actionable
information, data, and evidence for planning instructional sequences.

3.3.5. End of unit summative assessments suggest modifications or scaffolding for

English language learners and special education students and include multiple
task formats (multiple choice, true or false, short answer, and model
development).

3.4 Teachers are guided in interpreting and using student ideas.

Assessments, and ways of interpreting those assessments, help teachers understand

students’ current understanding on a range of less to more sophisticated. Instructional
materials include assessments and educative materials that support a learning
progressions stance, meaning that student ideas are not considered simply right or wrong,
but rather as ideas that can be used to support a progression toward higher levels of
understanding. Information comes from field-testing directly as a way to capture authentic
student experience and learning.

3.4.1. All assessment opportunities provide teachers with examples of student ideas
that may emerge and how to use those ideas as resources for instruction. They
provide resources for supporting student use of feedback and information to
inform their learning.

3.4.2. Formative assessment tasks include possible student responses and strategies
for using responses to drive further instruction (for example, Driving Question
Board, sticky notes, or talk moves).

28
 3.4.3. Informal formative assessment opportunities include options for talk moves or
instructional tasks that help support students on different learning progressions
(or with different facets of understanding), including examples of student
responses.

3.4.4. Embedded assessment tasks include learning-progression-based or asset-based

rubrics and teacher materials that help teachers identify the range of different
student ideas and how to score students using a rubric. They provide guides for
peer- and self-assessment that align with the learning progression or rubric.

3.4.5. End-of-unit summative assessments include rubrics for scoring and examples of
student responses for each item and rubric level, and provide support to
teachers for guiding students toward more sophisticated ideas.

29
4–Designing Educative Features
The goal of educative instructional materials is to efficiently support teacher learning as
well as student learning. Educative features are the elements added to the base materials
that are explicitly intended to promote teacher learning. OpenSciEd’s educative features
are designed to support the wide range of teachers who use the instructional materials and
to help teachers find the support they need, when they need it. The educative features
should be designed so that the ones a teacher accesses in their first year using the
materials are different from those accessed in future years when the material is more
familiar.

4.1 Instructional materials support equitable science teaching.

All students deserve to experience rigorous and consequential science learning. By

attending to issues of equity explicitly, educative features within science materials work to
promote a more just, equitable, and inclusive society.

4.1.1. Lessons incorporate high leverage teaching strategies and best practices to
support teachers to meet the needs of diverse learners such as emerging
multilingual learners, economically disadvantaged students, students from
groups traditionally underrepresented in science, students from non-dominant
communities, students with special needs, students who need extra challenge,
and other students who may need particular support. These can be customized
for specific locations or contexts.

4.1.2. Teachers are guided to adapt lessons as appropriate to incorporate local

examples and make other changes that maintain rigor, but increase local
relevancy (for example, suggestions in instructional sequence or narrative
descriptions).

4.1.3. Instructional materials support teachers of emerging multilingual learners, and

all teachers, by providing student-friendly definitions, connections to cognate
words, and other language supports that have been documented to support
language learners.
4.1.4. Instructional materials support teachers to help prompt cultural connections,
including both ideas that can be emphasized as connections as well as what
should be avoided. They provide teachers with strategies that help recognize
students’ diverse ideas as resources on which to build (for example, sample

30
 student work, suggestions in instructional sequences, rubrics with sample
teacher comments, or vignettes of a student story).

4.1.5. Instructional materials support teachers of students with special needs by

providing suggestions for potential modifications (such as changes to a specific
expectation) and accommodations (such as provision of additional scaffolding)
that could be made (for example, suggestions in instructional sequence, call-out
boxes, or videos of enactments).

4.2 Teachers are guided in teaching toward a Next Generation Science Standards vision.

Instructional materials are aligned to the goal of moving classrooms toward the intention
and vision of A Framework for K-12 Science Education and the Next Generation Science
Standards, with instruction driven by students figuring out phenomena and solutions to
problems and aimed toward rigorous and consequential science learning for every student.

4.2.1. Teachers are guided in understanding that each of the three dimensions
requires both subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge.
a. At the unit level, teachers are provided links to resources that support
understanding each dimension, which may include links to specific
Framework sections or appendices, or to National Science Teachers
Association webinars. These resources help teachers understand each
science practice, crosscutting concept, and disciplinary core idea (with
examples and non-examples), and how practices differ from process skills,
why each element is a fundamental element of the NGSS vision, and what
the connections are (how practices work together, how crosscutting concepts
thread across disciplines, and how disciplinary core ideas connect to one
another).
b. At the lesson level, additional guidance is provided to help teachers recognize
specifically where each dimension is at play in the lesson plan, support
students in engaging in each relevant practice, see the crosscutting concepts
within and across units, develop disciplinary core ideas through engaging in
practices, and anticipate the challenges students are likely to face when
engaging in each relevant practice or developing an understanding of each
relevant crosscutting concept or disciplinary core idea.

31
 4.2.2. Teachers are guided in understanding what constitutes a phenomenon,
recognizing what makes a phenomenon productive for exploration, and making
the shift from students learning about ideas to figuring out how phenomena
work, including helping them see what this looks like when students do it (for
example, graphic organizers or links to outside readings or videos).

4.2.3. Teachers are guided in developing a set of high-leverage science teaching

practices, such as leading a sensemaking discussion, supporting small group
work in investigations, eliciting students’ ideas, developing classroom norms for
discourse and work in the disciplines of science, and supporting students’
explanation and argumentation (for example, videos of enactments, narrative
descriptions of enactments, or links to outside readings or resources).
Instructional materials provide lesson-specific supports including discussion
questions, tasks, or problems that a teacher can use to elicit students’ ideas;
student roles, discourse norms, and accountability mechanisms for small-group
work in investigations; and discourse moves and scaffolds. They provide
classroom-level supports, including guidance on developing discussion norms,
routines, and protocols for explanation, modeling, and argumentation, and
suggestions (such as posters and table cards) that can support students in
developing and implementing classroom norms for discourse and work in the
disciplines of science.

4.2.4. Teachers are guided in their use of assessments. Instructional materials provide
supports for engaging in a range of assessment forms, including informal,
formative, and end-of-unit summative, including rubrics with sample teacher
comments, sample student work, call-out text boxes, as well as support to
promote understanding of how each form contributes to students’ science
learning, and strategies for addressing the practical challenges of assessing
many students in a timely manner.

4.2.5. Instructional materials include guidance for making productive adaptations

based on the needs of the class that make instruction more accessible (such as a
continuum of scaffolding), paying particular attention to scaffolding students’
early experiences with science practices. They help teachers identify appropriate
support depending on their students’ experiences with three-dimensional
learning in elementary grades.

32
 4.2.6. Instructional materials help teachers see how each of the three dimensions build
coherently over time within and across units of the program, and provide
strategies for helping students see where they have been and where they are
going (for example, the Navigation Routine in the middle grades materials).

4.3 Instructional materials support teachers and students to spend more time engaged in
teaching and learning.

Instructional materials encourage classrooms where effective management supports

students in rigorous and consequential learning. Effective management means teachers
and students spend less time on non-instructional issues and more time engaging in
teaching and learning.

4.3.1. Teacher materials support effective preparation, classroom management

(including grouping of students), materials management (obtaining, organizing,
distributing, and cleaning up), space organization, and development of
productive classroom norms. For each lesson, they provide photos, drawings, or
videos of classrooms or artifacts that illustrate effective preparation or
management strategies. Teacher materials provide alternatives for teachers
without a home classroom (such as cart-based materials management) or with
other particular needs (for example, via call-out boxes, narratives, or videos).

4.3.2. Teacher materials help teachers anticipate likely lesson pitfalls and how they
might be able to either prevent or recover from them (for example, via
narratives).

4.3.3. Teacher materials provide guidance for the effective use of technology (such as
simulations or websites) for different technology setups (single-computer
classroom, one-to-one classrooms, shared computers).

4.3.4. Teacher materials support teachers in communicating with families and

caregivers, administrators, and other stakeholders (for example, by providing
sample text for newsletters describing the intent of the OpenSciEd materials, or
descriptions of projects or assignments that will require time or resources from
home).

33
 4.3.5. Where appropriate, teacher materials provide suggestions for effective
opportunities for getting outside the classroom (for example, park, zoo,
aquarium, pond, woods, or museum) as well as options for assignments and
activities for such trips and scripts about the value of the trips that teachers can
use when seeking funding and approval for field trips.

4.4 Teachers are guided in the use of the instructional materials.

Instructional materials are designed for efficient and effective use, particularly designed so
teachers can experience success early on, and then dig in deeper to continue learning as
they use the materials over time. Educative features help to guide that learning process.

4.4.1. Teacher materials highlight how the embedded UDL principles support all
learners and include guidance on how instruction can be differentiated, and
include tools and alternative activities that teachers can use selectively
depending on classroom needs, school or community contexts, or district
priorities.

4.4.2. The front matter of units and program-level materials provides guidance to help
teachers recognize and use different aspects of the instructional materials. They
present educative features in a user-friendly format, and suggest that teachers
may focus on working on one or two elements of their instruction at a time
(rather than trying to attend to all of the educative features included in the
materials).

4.4.3. Teacher materials inspire teachers and support them in realizing that engaging
in this work will have bumps in the road, but that those challenges can be
productive for teachers’ own learning and can support future change (for
example, via narrative descriptions of enactments, or videos of enactments or
interviews with teachers).

4.4.4. Where appropriate, teacher materials provide recommendations for resources

for further exploration (such as readings, videos, simulations, professional
development opportunities, graduate coursework), recommend that teachers
join professional learning communities or engage in other collaboration with
colleagues, and help teachers see connections to common pedagogical
approaches and common school-based rituals (such as science fairs or

34
 exhibition nights) that can be leveraged for and integrated with the intentions of
NGSS.

4.4.5. For more complex investigations or design challenges, videos are provided for
teachers to help them understand the setup and the materials.

4.4.6. All investigations are designed to meet safety standards for high school using a
set of safety specifications to be approved by OpenSciEd. Examples of
acceptable specifications can be found on NSTA’s website
https://www.nsta.org/topics/safety​.

4.5 Instructional materials are effective and efficient.

Instructional materials effectively and efficiently support teacher learning. Every student
deserves a teacher who understands and is able to use new instructional materials that
support current reforms. Teacher materials are developed based on research about
effective instructional design for supporting teacher learning.

4.5.1. Teacher materials include rationales for the design of lessons and units to give
teachers confidence in implementing instructional practices that differ from
their prior teaching and learning experiences. They are selective about what to
include in teacher materials and how, so the materials do not become too
lengthy.

4.5.2. Instructional materials anticipate that teachers will adapt them and make
suggestions that can help teachers make productive adaptations, rather than
assuming teachers will follow lesson plans exactly.

4.5.3. Teacher materials recognize that teacher learning is a process and provide
recommendations for changes to make, or techniques to try over time, to build
complexity. Educative features are worded positively (for example, “allow
students to struggle”) and acknowledge the variability among teachers and
recognize that no teacher will use all of the educative features.

4.5.4. Teacher materials use a range of forms to support teachers’ different needs and
avoid using extensive expository text. Some support is not directly grounded in
teachers’ practice and can be used sparingly (such as call-out text boxes with

35
 definitions or information, links to outside readings, videos, or other resources,
and graphic organizers). Other support can be directly connected to and used in
teachers’ practice (for example, rubrics with sample teacher comments, sample
student work, videos of enactments of specific lesson portions, narrative
descriptions of enactments, videos of interviews with teachers, student-friendly
definitions, or suggestions within an instructional sequence).

36
5–Asking Questions and Defining Problems
A Framework for K-12 Science Education states about the practice of Asking Questions that
“Science begins with a question about a phenomenon and seeks to develop theories that
can provide explanatory answers to such questions,” and about the practice of Defining
Problems that “Engineering begins with a problem, need, or desire that suggests an
engineering problem that needs to be solved.” Therefore, a basic practice of the scientist is
“formulating empirically answerable questions about phenomena, establishing what is
already known, and determining what questions have yet to be satisfactorily answered,”
while engineers “ask questions to define the engineering problem, determine criteria for a
successful solution, and identify constraints” as part of the core engineering practice.

An important assumption in this description is that, if students are the ones participating in
these practices, then it should be students’ questions about phenomena or engineering
problems that drive their activity—and their learning—forward. It should be their curiosities
and interests that motivate their learning through the cycles of investigation, analysis,
modeling, and argumentation that come out of this science and engineering practice.
NGSS-aligned instructional materials explicitly support the practice of asking the following
five types of questions:

a. Wonderment questions draw out the awe and wonder of a phenomenon and
highlight areas of puzzlement or weirdness. These questions support students’
curiosity and motivation for learning science, and are especially important in
establishing the driving phenomenon or articulating an engineering problem.
b. Classroom discourse questions that students ask of each other help support
productive disciplinary discussions. These instructional materials draw on Michaels
& O’Connor’s Conceptualizing Talk Moves as Tools to support academically
productive discourse as a framework for supporting these questions.
c. Investigation questions guide the design of a specific investigation. This also
includes questions that support the examination and evaluation of criteria and
constraints of engineering design solutions. These are the “empirically answerable”
questions emphasized in most existing literature about “Asking Questions.”
d. Procedural or design questions are about measurement or methods. These
questions often arise while doing investigations and are often taken for granted, but
need to be asked and answered explicitly in order to carry out investigations in
science, design a solution during an engineering process, or to evaluate existing
data.

37
 e. Epistemic questions are about reasons for pursuing specific questions, what we
already know and don’t know, and the design and conceptual steps we need to take
next and why. This also includes questions evaluating what criteria and constraints
are desirable for a particular engineering design challenge. Though students are not
solely responsible for asking these questions early on, instructional materials
support students in taking increasing ownership over both asking and answering
these kinds of questions.

These types of questions are related and interdependent: wonderment questions evolve
gradually, perhaps over the course of several lessons, to investigation questions; epistemic
questions mediate the evolution of wonderment questions; procedural and design
questions may arise from the investigation process, and new wonderment questions may
arise from the results of an experiment. This evolutionary process—a continual cycling of
refining and broadening—is only made possible through sophisticated use of classroom
discourse questions by both teachers and students.

The following design specifications are organized around three foundational design
categories: coherence (sequencing activities that simultaneously position students’
questions and questioning practices as driving the learning and ensure that particular
bundles of performance expectations will be met), pedagogical scaffolds and supports
(developing a classroom culture that supports students in asking questions and defining
engineering challenges), and student scaffolds and supports (providing support for students
in asking questions, defining engineering challenges, and increasing their agency over time).
For further guidance on implementing these design specifications, refer to NGSS Appendix
F.

5.1 Student questions and identification of problems drive instruction.

Central to the vision of​ A Framework for K-12 Science Education and the NGSS​ is that posing
questions and identifying problems is the basis of science and engineering, and that
engagement in both should be a primary feature of classroom learning. Student questioning
and ideas are the foundation of and driver of science instruction; student problem scoping
and understanding of the design challenge are the foundation and driver of the engineering
process. In addition, students need to be provided with opportunities to apply their
understanding and science and engineering practices to answer their questions and design
solutions to identified problems.

38
As classroom instruction ​shifts​ to become student-centered and consequently student
question-focused, the need for a supportive classroom culture in which students are
encouraged to ask questions and define problems become key. Within such an
environment, different types of questions and problems can be identified and used to
develop student understanding of core science concepts to explain of real-world
phenomena. OpenSciEd instructional materials both follow students’ questions and meet
the identified learning goals in coherent ways.

5.1.1 Instructional materials connect students’ everyday knowledge to the

wonderment of the world and school science and to the need to ask questions
and define problems. Materials use phenomena that allow for links between
students’ questions, desired science content knowledge, and identified bundles
of performance expectations.

5.1.2. Teacher materials are structured to anticipate the questions students will ask
about a phenomenon or problem and to connect conceptual and epistemic
ideas using students’ questions, specific investigations, and lesson-level learning
performances. They create a coherent roadmap from the students’ perspective
of a developed sequence of instructional activities.

5.1.3. Activities are included that make explicit the importance of students generating
their own questions around scientific phenomenon in science instruction (such
as a driving question board), and the identification of the scope of the problems
to solve during the engineering process.

5.1.4. Instructional materials emphasize and discuss the many reasons scientists have
for asking questions and engineers for identifying and defining problems, the
different types of questions, and the purpose of asking these different questions
throughout the unit for both science and engineering.

5.1.5. Students are supported to first develop their own individual questions prior to
group discussions and whole-class consensus building. Instructional materials
provide opportunities and scaffolds for students to ask different types of
questions and support their understanding of the differences between them
and the specific context for each question. In the engineering process, they
provide opportunities and scaffolds for students to identify and define
problems.

39
 5.1.6. Instructional materials include strategies to support students in asking questions
that direct their learning, and to create opportunities for students to iterate on
their design solutions in meaningful ways, on multiple occasions throughout the
year.

5.2 Students understand that science and engineering involve unresolved questions or
problems, and instructional materials support students in navigating this uncertainty.

OpenSciEd seeks to normalize the idea that science and engineering involve unresolved
questions or problems, and that not knowing the answer or solution to a question or
problem is productive and drives the learning process. Instructional materials support the
goal of creating learning environments that embrace students’ scientific and engineering
uncertainty, and willingness to accept not knowing the answer to a question that they are
asking or a problem that they are defining. Readiness to accept and embrace uncertainty by
both teachers and students is a prerequisite condition for student-centered and
open-ended activities. Teacher materials guide teachers in creating learning environments
that support and scaffold students in navigating uncertainty in the learning process.

5.2.1. Instructional materials explicitly indicate the multiple ways that students assume
more and more responsibility over their own learning (within a lesson, a unit,
and across a year) around asking questions or defining problems.

5.2.2. Teacher materials provide explicit support for teachers to guide students to
assume more and more responsibility around asking questions and defining and
scoping problems​.

5.2.3. Activities afford multiple opportunities for divergent and convergent thinking
and support a diversity of questions across the unit around science phenomena
and engineering problems for which we might not know the answers to.

5.2.4. Engineering tasks are designed to support student questioning so that they lead
to investigations of the underlying science ideas. Teachers and materials need to
support students’ shift in thinking from “will this work” to “why does this work” in
order to address the disciplinary core ideas.

40
 5.2.5. Teacher materials help teachers develop a safe and supportive space for
students’ uncertainty around science and engineering concepts, and focus on
the need to ask and answer questions in order to address the uncertainty across
the span of a unit. Considerations and norms for equitable class culture are
described in Chapters 2, 4, and 11 of the Design Specifications and should be
utilized to create this safe space.

5.2.6. Instructional materials provide scaffolds for students as they develop expertise
in framing questions and scoping problems across a lesson, a unit, and a year.
Scaffolds address various aspects, such as developing good or productive
questions where the answer isn’t yet known or there are multiple answers, as
well as the different types of questions (for example, sentence starters, criteria
for evaluating questions, use of the Driving Question Board throughout a unit,
gallery walk to provide feedback on questions, think-pair-share, or
comprehension checklists).

5.3 Opportunities​ for productive questioning are provided at key instructional junctions
within a lesson or across a unit for all students.

Students are provided opportunities for productive questioning at key instructional

junctions within a lesson or across a unit. Instructional materials include multiple
opportunities that lead to productive questioning for all students, regardless if it is a
science or engineering unit. Both teachers and students understand the importance of
asking questions, and how asking questions at key points in learning enables them to
understand the phenomenon studied. Especially early on in the scientific or engineering
process, teachers may need to expertly draw attention to key conceptual gaps or puzzles in
existing models or explanations to focus students’ questioning. As the process continues,
students become aware of these gaps by themselves. Teacher materials support this form
of instructional expertise.

5.3.1. Units are designed to include key transition points or moments that
problematize students’ current understanding, in order to motivate additional,
or the refinement of, questions to lead to new investigations about the
phenomenon or problem.

41
 5.3.2. Instructional materials provide ​opportunities​ for students to collect evidence
from investigations that helps take steps towards resolving the problem or
discrepancy in ideas and answering their questions.

5.3.3. Activities are included that focus on the link between the practice of asking
questions to the other science and engineering practices, such as planning and
carrying out investigations.

5.3.4. T​eacher​ materials identify what needs to be problematized in order to motivate

the learning across the entire unit, and provide sample phenomena that could
motivate an important next step by raising new problems or discrepancies that
allow students to ask a variety of productive questions (for example, flashlight
on paper versus mirror, walking through a mirror-house hallway versus a regular
hallway, or shiny metal jewelry versus paper-art jewelry).
5.3.5. Teachers are supported with​ ​strategies​ to capture and organize students'
questions, and leverage these questions in future sensemaking activities (such
as a Driving Question Board, flowcharts, tables, or concept maps).

5.3.6. Instructional materials provide ​multiple​ opportunities for both collective and
individual record keeping of what questions all students have and what they
want to figure out next, explicitly connected to what has gone on before. They
provide s​ caffolds​ for ​students​ to make connections between models,
phenomena, and questions explicit.

42
6–Planning and Carrying Out Investigations
Planning and carrying out investigations is often the most salient feature of scientific work,
in part because past images of science instruction has focused on a 5-step “scientific
method.” However, this version of science is limiting in that it presents an overly simplistic
version of science whose implementation is often the rote following of a set protocol.

The Next Generation Science Standards promote a version of scientific investigation that is
part of a complex constellation of knowledge-building practices. What counts as an
“investigation” is broader than the empirical control-of-variables investigations that have
often been presented and focused upon in school science instruction. A core criterion of an
investigation is that the proposed activity needs to generate evidence and that students
must engage with the data as evidence. Equally important, a hands-on activity without talk
or discussion around planning it, carrying it out, and interpreting and communicating what
happened, is not considered an investigation, even if evidence is generated. For further
guidance on implementing these design specifications, refer to NGSS Appendix F.

6.1 Instructional materials highlight connections between the practice of planning and
carrying out investigations to the other practices and crosscutting concepts.

Students are supported to apply ideas present in the practice of planning and carrying out
investigations in ways that explicitly and seamlessly link to other practices and crosscutting
concepts. Planning and carrying out investigations is viewed as an organizing structure
(hub) for the other science and engineering practices. Instructional materials emphasize
connections between the practices and crosscutting concepts in order to leverage the role
investigations have in developing deeper understanding of the disciplinary core ideas.

6.1.1. Students connect investigations to other practices and make explicit the
connections between planning and carrying out investigations and other
practices. For example, students need to plan and carry out investigations in
order to test their current model, and they need to analyze and interpret their
data from their investigation in order to develop new models and questions.

6.1.2. The instructional design emphasizes the iterative nature of investigations and
connections to other practices, and units provide opportunities for students to
engage in a series of investigations in which an answer to the initial question
sparks the next question, which requires further investigation.

43
 6.1.3. Instructional materials connect investigations to the crosscutting concepts,
provide opportunities for students to design investigations, and focus on the
connections between designing investigations and the crosscutting concepts
(such as patterns, cause and effect, and scale, proportion, and quantity).

6.2 Investigations honor student agency to support student engagement and learning of
disciplinary core ideas, practices, and crosscutting concepts.

Instructional materials provide opportunities around specific investigations to

accommodate students’ developing and evolving epistemic agency so that students’
questions can be addressed in meaningful ways. Initially, developing questions to
investigate is challenging for students and requires practice so that students can identify
and ask questions that can be investigated and answered through the collection and
analysis of empirical data. These investigations need to be authentic, relevant, and have a
purpose from a student perspective that can be related back to the original student
question and build to the next question.

Teacher materials guide teachers in how to allow students the space to plan and carry out
meaningful, theory-based, valid, and reliable investigations while avoiding taking over the
responsibility for the process, making the decisions about the process, or ending up
scripting the experimental process.

6.2.1. Instructional materials promote meaningful investigations for students by

providing o
​ pportunities​ to pursue investigations that stem from their own
questions.

6.2.2. Units include multiple investigations so that students practice the planning and
carrying out investigations and develop agency in the process. Planning and
carrying out investigations is part of every unit with increasing levels of
sophistication across the year, so that by the end of high school, students are
implementing the complete practice as described in NGSS Appendix F. These
investigations could be the same (or similar) investigations, or a series of
investigations, that build to a deeper understanding of the underlying science.

6.2.3. Lessons and activities provide multiple opportunities for public documentation
of all aspects of an investigation by students, including opportunities for
students to identify and make public questions for investigation ​around​ a

44
 phenomenon, mechanistic models of a phenomenon, or an engineering design
solution so they might revise, refine, or propose new questions for investigation.

6.2.4. Instructional materials embrace uncertainty and provide space for i​ nvestigations
that allow for students not knowing an answer or for being uncertain about next
steps. They emphasize the importance of learning through productive hurdles
and failures, embrace the challenges and uncertainty inherent in scientific
investigations, and provide opportunities for students to make decisions and
learn ​from​ them.

6.2.5. Explicit instructional supports allow for the ​development​ of student agency and
ownership of learning across the unit using metacognitive strategies (for
example, checklists, organizational tools, flow charts, Driving Question Board, or
model tracker).

6.3 Investigations have an authentic and explicit purpose for student sensemaking.

Instructional materials support students in designing and carrying out investigations that
allow students to develop a deeper understanding of the science being investigated.
Scaffolds and support for students are provided to help them become skilled at applying
ideas present in the planning and carrying out investigations practice in ways that link
explicitly and seamlessly to other practices and to their own lived experiences, and that
facilitate sensemaking.

6.3.1. Investigations​ are part of a coherent constellation of activity and often have
multiple roles (such as learning a scientific concept, developing experimental
skills, and gaining an understanding of how scientific knowledge is produced).
Instructional materials emphasize that the nature of investigations will vary
based on the question being asked and the discipline being studied.

6.3.2. Instructional materials focus on investigation authenticity and include

investigations that are connected to students’ past experiences in and out of the
classroom that are developed out of students’ own questions.

6.3.3. Classroom science is explicitly linked to the scientific enterprise. Lessons make
explicit the relation between the investigations students are doing in class and
the scientific endeavor, allowing for explicit connections to the nature of science.

45
 6.3.4. Students apply investigated ideas to the real world. Instructional materials
create opportunities for students to apply the investigations they are doing in
class to their own lived experiences or meaningful contexts.

6.4 Teachers are guided in creating a supportive space for student-centered investigations.

Instructional materials support both students and teachers in learning how to navigate
learning with student-centered investigations. Central to this design specification is the idea
that a “hands-on activity” without talk or discussion around planning it, carrying it out, and
interpreting and communicating what happened, is not an investigation.

Planning an authentic investigation involves making a series of decisions that require

experience and expertise. These decisions involve identifying and revising questions with a
specific purpose in mind as well as understanding how to structure and carry out valid,
reliable empirical investigations. Students often struggle with understanding that
experiments are based on theory, and that they need to be planned and grounded in
selecting specific variables to test, and they must have a reason to conduct the experiment.
Students need both teacher and peer support as they engage in science learning by
participating in the practices of science, constructing their own understanding of what it
means to be a scientist or engineer, and to do and learn from science.

6.4.1. Lessons and activities provide p ​ edagogical​ scaffolds and supports for helping
students plan and conduct empirically based, valid, and reliable investigations
(for example, providing supports and rationale for iterating on a single
investigation or a series of investigations).

6.4.2. Instructional materials emphasize the importance of discussions, and provide

support and space for students to talk (not just do hands-on activities) while
engaging in the planning and carrying out investigations practice. They support
rich class discussions for procedural and practical purposes, and engage
students in discourse to uncover the necessity for gathering observations or
data (students are supported in figuring out “what do we need to know?”) as well
as to engage students in defining the strategies or methods used for collecting
observations or data (“how will we come to get the information we need?”).

46
 6.4.3. Instructional materials support rich class discussions for sensemaking, and
emphasize the centrality of discourse for sensemaking throughout the planning
of and carrying out of an investigation (not just at the start and end of the
investigation). They emphasize the importance of learning through productive
hurdles and failures, embrace the challenges and uncertainty inherent in
scientific investigations, and provide opportunities for students to make
decisions and learn from them.

47
7–Developing and Using Models, Constructing Explanations, and
Designing Solutions
Developing and using models is an intellectual endeavor that guides scientific work and
goes well beyond simply drawing pictures. ​It can be challenging to create the conditions in
the classroom that engage students in a deeper version of this practice that goes beyond
depiction. OpenSciEd instructional materials position models as intellectual tools that
students use to reason with and use to develop explanations for phenomena. This
intellectual work happens through negotiation between students, whether in small groups
or in a whole-group setting, and important learning happens in the discussions students
have while deciding how to construct or revise models and how to explain a phenomenon
or design a solution. F
​ or further guidance on implementing these design specifications,
refer to NGSS Appendix F.

7.1 Developing models and constructing explanations are central to the units.
The practices of “Developing and using models” and “Constructing explanations and
designing solutions” are central to science and the way that scientists make sense of the
world. The creation of models and explanations is both the goal of an OpenSciEd classroom
and the means by which learning occurs. Through these practices, students achieve and
demonstrate key understanding of the disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts.
Modeling and explanations are also central in that they coordinate and guide the use of the
other practices.

7.1.1. The d​ evelopment​ and revision of models and explanations is the central activity
of all instructional materials. Each unit has one or more models (or model
revisions) that serve as organizing features for the unit. Some repeated
routines are established within units and within courses so students can
practice and improve upon development and revision of models, and
approximately 25% of homework and other activities focus on the cycle of
model development, explanation, and revision.

7.1.2. Science​ and engineering practices are coordinated and support one another.
Instructional materials connect​ modeling and constructing explanations and
solutions to the other scientific practices going on in the classroom so that they
are informed by and inform questioning, investigations, data analysis, math and
computational reasoning, argumentation, and communication.

48
 7.1.3. The target disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts of each unit are
closely aligned with the development of models, explanations, and solutions.
Engaging in these practices is always in service of developing understanding of
important disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts. Developing
models, explanations, and design solutions are not additional activities but
rather are positioned as central to the unfolding sensemaking work of the
classroom.

7.2 Supports and scaffolds manage the complex practices of modeling and explanation.

Developing models, explanations, and solutions is complex and cognitively demanding.

This process needs to be carefully scaffolded so that students and teachers have the
support they require for managing the complexity and demand, while responsibility for the
models and explanations remains with the classroom community. I​ t can be challenging to
move beyond depiction and drawings in the modeling practice, or position models as more
than a container for declarative knowledge (a glorified worksheet) to be memorized.
Explanations need to go beyond unstructured storytelling. They need to provide clear
answers, based on evidence and established model ideas, to how and why questions about
phenomena.

7.2.1. The practice of developing and using models always has the purpose of
constructing an explanation for a phenomenon or providing the basis for a
design solution. An activity to focus the classroom knowledge building work on a
specific phenomenon or class of phenomena occurs in the first lesson set of
each unit and in other lessons where new phenomena are introduced to drive
the model building. Usually the purpose is communicated with a clear question
that the model can be used to answer in the form of an explanation or a design
solution. These questions focus on causal mechanisms to move from simple
what explanations to why or how explanations. Instructional materials require
students to develop explanations using their models, which often requires
pressing for an unseen cause of the phenomenon (for example, molecular
motion or differential survival).

7.2.2. Instructional materials draw a clear distinction between developing a model and
representing it. They avoid the phrase “draw a model” and instead use language
such as “develop a model and represent it” that puts the cognitive demand on
the students. For example, instructional materials will ask “What do you think

49
 needs to be revised in your model?” as opposed to “Today we learned about
evaporation. Please be sure it is represented in your model.” The learning occurs
as students negotiate what does and does not get included in their models.

7.2.3. Students are provided with explicit opportunities to share their ideas with one
another and evaluate them based on established criteria. Instructional materials
include repeated and explicit conversations about how to evaluate knowledge
products in the classroom, and how they connect to other practices. These
criteria are established in each classroom at the beginning of the year and
revisited in each unit.

7.2.4. Students represent models in multiple ways that convey different aspects of
underlying model ideas. Instructional materials require that models about the
same ideas be represented in multiple ways to convey underlying model ideas.
Typically this is a combination of labeled drawings and text statements. Some
models cannot be easily represented in pictorial form (such as natural selection)
and in those cases it is okay for a model to exist as a list of principles in text only.
Models are not represented with drawings or pictures alone. When using
simulations, instructional materials ask students to connect the computer output
to the underlying rules or code that runs the simulation.

7.3 Modeling and explanation involve an iterative process of revision.

To provide an authentic experience of making sense of phenomena through modeling and

explanation, students have multiple opportunities to return to their ideas to revise, discard,
add, or expand them as they gain new evidence from investigations and other sources
(readings, simulations, further observations). Students use their models to develop
explanations and in doing so realize where there are gaps or issues that need to be taken
up to move forward.

7.3.1. Students develop and revise models and explanations over time based on new
information gained through investigations and discussions. Instructional
materials include multiple opportunities to create models, construct
explanations, and design solutions, and return to them to revise them based on
their ongoing work. The instructional materials have clear stopping points for
this revision to happen and include opportunities for students to develop and
share initial ideas about the anchoring phenomena, identify gaps in their

50
 understanding, revise their ideas each time they have new information (from
investigations, readings, simulations), and return to their models in explicit ways
at the end of the unit as they come to closure in explaining the driving questions.

7.3.2. Students have opportunities to apply their models to explain multiple

phenomena. Model and explanation development is centered on an anchoring
phenomenon. At least once in all units there is an explicit conversation or activity
that requires students to consider how their model could be modified to account
for a different related phenomenon or be generalized to account for a class of
phenomena.

7.3.3. Instructional materials provide explicit opportunities for the students to map
between their model and explanations or design solutions. Students use their
models when constructing explanations or identify gaps in their explanations
that imply a need for new ideas in the model. Going back and forth between
explanations and solutions and models is an important feature of these
practices. The model points to the unseen, underlying mechanisms at play and
the explanations and solutions connect those unseen and often abstract ideas to
the specifics of the phenomenon or design challenge. Instructional materials are
explicit about these connections toward the middle and end of a unit, and might
include a prompt that asks students to write an explanation or develop a
solution and then go back to their model and annotate where each part of the
model shows up in their explanation or design solution.

7.3.4. Instructional materials require students to use their models for a purpose.
Models are dynamic and need to be applied to be useful. When assessing
understanding of the models under development, students are asked to use the
model, not to just describe it. Most often this involves students using their model
to develop an explanation. Students are not asked to simply repeat back an
element of a model or even an entire model as an inert fact.

7.4 Students experience modeling and explanation as collaborative processes.

In scientific communities, modeling and explanation are collaborative endeavors that

advance the understanding of the members of the community. Instructional materials are
structured so that the work​ of the classroom community is made public, and students have
opportunities to share, critique, and build on one another’s ideas throughout each unit.

51
 7.4.1. Activities are structured so that students work together ​through​ a collaborative
process to develop and revise shared models that represent a class consensus.
Instructional materials provide scaffolds and routines that support collaboration
and class consensus about models, explanations, gaps that need filling, potential
investigations, and revisions to the models.

7.4.2. Teacher materials guide teachers​ in keeping public records of the ongoing
models that the students are creating (either digitally or through posting on a
wall or board) and provide guidance on the format of those artifacts and how to
hold students accountable for keeping their own individual records.

52
8–Analyzing and Interpreting Data and Using Mathematical and
Computational Thinking
Instructional materials provide students with opportunities to learn the practices of
“Analyzing and interpreting data” and “Using mathematics and computational thinking,”
with ample opportunities for students to use these practices to develop explanations and
design solutions. Often when exploring a natural event or thinking about solutions to a
problem, we are not just interested in describing what is happening. We are also interested
in how much, how fast, or how frequently something has happened, and how it may
happen in the future or in a different circumstance. Both of these practices offer
specialized ways for describing the observations made during investigations precisely and
systematically. Analyzing and interpreting data is about developing, exploring, and
conducting analyses on observations that have been precisely recorded and are meant to
reflect aspects of the natural world. Using mathematics is about describing a system of
interest quantitatively, and computational thinking focuses on using a computer to
simulate the processes and relationships that make up a system, or using digital tools to
analyze and visualize large data sets or mathematical relationships.

“Analyzing and interpreting data” and “Using mathematics and computational thinking” are
best understood relative to the other practices. “Asking questions and defining problems”
enable them, “Developing and using models” and “Planning and carrying out investigations”
are interwoven with them, and “Constructing explanations and designing solutions,”
“Engaging in argument from evidence,” and “Obtaining, evaluation, and communicating
results” are enabled by them. These practices involve making use of statistics, mathematics,
and computation as specialized tools for organizing and analyzing the products of
investigations in order to build scientific models, develop explanations, and design
solutions. For further guidance on implementing these design specifications, refer to NGSS
Appendix F.

8.1 Instructional materials focus on students’ ability to contextualize data, mathematical

models, and simulations.

Data, mathematical models, and simulations are human-constructed abstractions of the

world. Data are conceptualized as collections of numerical values (lengths, number of
clicks, voltages, temperatures) or qualitative representations (field notes, sketches, photo,
video, or audio records) collected from systematic observations of the natural world,
investigations such as experiments, or generated through automated means such as
simulations or environmental sensors. Mathematical models describe the important

53
quantitative patterns and relationships embedded in natural systems, and simulations are
computer models that encode some of the behaviors or relationships that unfold in
scientific systems over time. A perpetual challenge for students is to connect these
abstractions back to the world from which they originated.

Students already know a tremendous amount about the natural world that is used as a
resource for thinking about how data, mathematical models, and simulations are created.
At the same time, the conventions used to create these abstractions (for example, the
processes of obtaining and recording data, describing quantitative relationships
algebraically, or translating behaviors in the world into computer algorithms) are tacit and
are supported through well-facilitated instruction. Supports build on students’ prior
understandings, but also help them to see the rationale that underlies existing
conventions. The goal is to help students recognize that data, mathematical models, and
simulations are human-constructed abstractions grounded in observations of the natural
world.

8.1.1. In units that involve collecting and working with data, students reflect explicitly
on measurement. When collecting data themselves, students are given
opportunities to choose between multiple measurement options, or to develop
their own. When provided with data, students are asked to consider how
measurements were taken and discuss possible alternatives. Students are asked
to assess possible sources of error or imprecision in data due to measurement
choices. ​In at least one unit per year, students have the opportunity to collect
data using a variety of measurement methods they select themselves, compare
the results of their findings, and then iterate on their data collection methods.

8.1.2. In units that involve working with data, mathematical models, or simulations,
students are asked to describe connections between what is visualized or
represented and their real-world referents.​ Instructional materials include
opportunities for students to consider what important features of the
phenomenon under investigation might be missing from the dataset,
mathematical model, or simulation.

8.1.3. At least half of these units provide opportunities for students to observe and
reason about more than one outcome (for example, what different patterns or
trends in data, results from mathematical models, or output of simulations imply
for the same natural phenomenon under investigation), which is especially

54
 appropriate for engaging students in the testing and comparison of proposed
solutions to engineering design problems.

8.1.4. At least half of these units provide students with opportunities to create their
own mappings between abstractions and natural phenomena (for example,
students may be asked to determine the appropriate distribution for a set of
data or develop an algebraic model that allows them to forecast future
outcomes).

8.1.5. To avoid treating da​ta analysis, mathematical models, or simulations​ as

input-output processes that simply generate results rather than as models of the
world, instructional materials focus on grounding both the inputs and outputs of
these sources of data. Units that involve data, mathematical models, or
simulations include opportunities for students to explore mappings between
abstracted input parameters (individual data points, input variables, simulation
setup conditions) and the natural phenomenon of interest. At least half of such
units provide students with opportunities to make predictions about what
real-world outcomes will result based on a given set of inputs before an output
is calculated, or given a particular output, to determine what real-world
conditions may have led to that output.

8.1.6. Students have at least three opportunities over the course of a year to record
their own observations of natural phenomena, with the goal of encoding those
observations as data, mathematical models, or simulations. For example,
students may be asked to determine the parameters worthy of measurement
for a planned investigation, to hypothesize the rate of growth (linear,
exponential, logarithmic) of a biological organism, or to observe a physical
system (ants, moon cycle, projectile motion) with the ultimate goal of describing
its behavior in terms of mathematical functions.

8.2 Students develop their statistical, mathematical, and computational toolkits.

Once students have assembled or been provided with a data set or simulation and
understand its connection to the natural world, they can begin to make use of statistical,
mathematical, and computational tools to explore the patterns within. The practices of
“Analyzing and interpreting data” and “Using mathematics and computational thinking”
both involve selecting and making use of a wide variety of technological, conceptual, and

55
representational tools. Some are broadly useful, such as the concepts of variability and
distribution, representations such as histograms, line graphs, and algebraic equations, or
tools such as spreadsheets. Others, such as maps, agent-based simulations, or
box-and-whisker plots are more specialized and may only be appropriate in certain
circumstances. Understanding and navigating this landscape of available tools is critical for
engaging in the practices of data analysis and mathematical and computational thinking.

A challenge for students is to recognize that on one hand, there is no “one right way” to
analyze or model natural phenomena (in fact, sometimes using multiple tools together
provides more insight into a data set or system). On the other hand, certain tools are more
appropriate to use depending on the investigation you are conducting or the problem you
are solving, and some tools may be inappropriate or lead to invalid conclusions. One
powerful way to address this challenge is to leverage the diversity of approaches that
students are likely to bring to any classroom investigation. Different student approaches to
the same investigation might be more or less useful in moving students’ investigations
forward, and different tools might be useful in different ways. This approach avoids the
implication that there is one right way to conduct analysis or modeling, but it does teach
that some approaches can be inappropriate for a particular task. Through repeated
experiences making use of these tools, especially to address well-grounded problems
whose connections to natural phenomena are known, students can begin to appreciate
when and why certain tools work for some investigational contexts, but not others.

8.2.1. Students are given many opportunities—especially toward the beginning of the
academic year—to choose, apply, share, and compare among a variety of
statistical, graphical, and digital tools while working on a shared problem or
investigation.
a. As part of these opportunities, students review and critique their peers’
solutions, are asked to consider how different approaches might reveal or
obscure important features of the phenomenon under study, and are given
the opportunity to modify their own approaches.
b. At least one opportunity each year focuses on selecting from a variety of
statistical representations (scatter plot, box-and-whisker plot, etc.) when
describing basic distributions of quantitative data (for example, to draw
conclusions about some measure for which two populations differ in center
and spread, one with a higher mean but lower standard deviation versus one
with a lower mean and higher standard deviation, or asking students to

56
 describe or predict the likelihood of data falling within a specified range
within a population).
c. At least one opportunity focuses on selecting from a variety of graphical
displays (maps, charts, graphs, tables) or displays that students invent
themselves to analyze data. At least one opportunity focuses on selecting
from a variety of digital tools when analyzing data (spreadsheets, data
visualization tools such as Tuva, TinkerPlots, or CODAP), working with
mathematical models (graphing tools such as Desmos™ or Geogebra™), or
creating or interacting with simulations (Scratch™, NetLogo, SageModeler).

8.2.2. Students are asked to explore the nature and causes of variability in data, and to
discuss whether it exists naturally or because of measurement error. Variation
from both error and natural variation is acknowledged in every unit involving
data sets collected from the natural world. Students have at least one
opportunity to engage with, and work to differentiate between, error and natural
variation in data. Students have an opportunity to observe or discuss the degree
to which natural variability is accounted for (or more often, not accounted for) in
mathematical models and simulations of scientific phenomena.

8.2.3. Whenever​ they analyze data collected from the natural world or produced by
simulations, ​students​ are asked to consider questions of causation, correlation,
and significance.
a. In any unit that r​ equires​ students to make conclusions based on differences
between measures in collected, provided, or simulated data, students’
intuitions about statistical significance (as reflected in differences between
measures or trends) are elicited and reconciled with their intuitions about
practical significance (dependent on the situation and circumstances).
b. In any unit that requires students to make conclusions based on
relationships or trends identified in data, differences between causation and
correlation are raised and considered. Students are asked to share their
concerns about whether the nature of data collection (controlled experiment
or observational sampling), the mechanisms that underlie the phenomenon
of interest (known or suspected causal variable versus possible confound),
and how alternative hypotheses for observed relationships limits their ability
to make causal inferences.

57
 8.2.4. Students​ are asked to make connections between data, mathematical models,
and simulations as different but related ways to model scientific phenomena.
Students compare each pair of abstraction types (data analysis and
mathematical models; data analysis and simulations; simulations and
mathematical models) and discuss differences in treatment of causation,
variability, measurement, and what is modeled. If possible, connections should
be made between student-constructed abstractions as well as
student-constructed and curriculum-provided abstractions.

8.3 Data, mathematics, and computing are specialized forms of modeling.

The prior issues focus on emphasizing the human-constructed and interpretive nature of
work with data, mathematical models, and simulations. Because of their complex and
technical nature, students might continue to see these abstractions as illustrations of
factual truth, rather than models constructed by humans to highlight particular aspects of a
scientific phenomenon. Alternatively, they may view them merely as communicative
artifacts meant to show their own knowledge of scientific facts, rather than also as a way to
figure out the world.

To address this challenge, instructional materials position all data sets, mathematical
models, and simulations—regardless of whether they are provided as a part of
instructional materials, sourced by students during investigations, or created by
students—as scientific resources and models whose validity is established through their
connections to natural phenomena, explanatory and predictive power, and utility toward
particular student-defined goals. Students construct and make use of more sophisticated
mathematical or computational models to explore, explain, and predict complex causal
chains or multi-level relationships in systems.

8.3.1. As appropriate, and at least three times within the academic year, data
visualizations, mathematical expressions or equations, and simulations are put
forth as options for students to use to represent models. Mathematical
expressions or equations are appropriate for encouraging students to clearly
articulate and elaborate models that predict certain quantitative relationships.
They are a useful way to plan and prepare for controlled experiments.
Simulations are an appropriate way for students to express and test their

58
 models of enacted behaviors in a wide variety of scientific systems (physical,
chemical, or ecological). Introducing data, and encouraging students to develop
data models, is an effective way to provoke critique and revision of their earlier
models.

8.3.2. When multiple examples are available, students are invited to compare data,
mathematical models, or simulations pertaining to the phenomenon under
study to explore what each emphasizes or downplays.

8.3.3. Data, mathematical models, or simulations are never used as a direct check of
student work or theories. Instead, they should be presented as an additional
resource, evaluated in terms of its explanatory and predictive power, clarity, and
other criteria for validity that have been established by the classroom
community.

8.3.4. In any unit that makes use of curriculum-provided data sets, mathematical
models, or simulations, students are asked to consider their “life cycle.”
Specifically, students learn about and question who authored the data sets,
models, or simulations, what their goals were, what they chose to select and
leave out, what are the possible limitations and threats to validity imposed by
this resource given students’ own interests and paths of investigation, and
whether students would have made different decisions if they were the authors
instead.

8.4 Instructional materials sustain data analysis, mathematics, and computational thinking
as classroom practices.

For students to develop more complex understandings of interpreting and analyzing data
and using computational thinking over time, instructional materials must shift from a focus
on learning concepts to a focus on co-developing concepts alongside these practices.
Practices are a form of hidden instruction, and inviting students to contribute to the
development of practices can help them understand their overarching purpose, when and
why they are useful for developing knowledge, and how to participate in and transform
those practices in service of their own personal, in-the-moment goals.​ F​or students, the
move to practices means learning new things (practices as well as concepts), doing so in
new ways (invention, critique, and revisiting), and playing a central role in determining what

59
counts as good work (students, rather than teachers, evaluating their own work and the
work of others).
For teachers, the move to practices means engineering student encounters with problems
of practice; orchestrating cycles of construction, critique, and revisiting; and supporting the
interplay of individual and collective histories of development. Instructional materials
encourage students to connect their use of data, mathematics, and computing across
different problems and experiences. The idea that practices make use of a broad, flexible
kit of mathematical and computational tools rather than “how-to scripts” are reinforced by
revisiting, maintaining flexibility, and building connections across the tools and approaches
students use during various investigations over time.

8.4.1. Teacher materials characterize the intended development of data, mathematical,

and computational concepts and practices in construct maps or learning
progressions. These maps provide teachers with interpretive systems they can
use to evaluate a range of student products, describe a continuum between
expected beginning and ending points in a given unit or grade to address the
progressive nature of learning, and offer guides to help teachers understand the
range of student responses expected during a given activity, and decide on next
steps in instruction.

8.4.2. Instructional materials support the development of practices with sequenced

experiences. A unit might begin with measurement and contextualization tasks,
move to encoding, invention, and comparison tasks, offer new contexts in which
preferred tools and approaches might be re-employed or expanded, provide
ways to connect preferred tools and approaches to one another, and make use
of recurring classroom activity structures (for example, familiar cycles of
invention, critique, and revisiting practices in formative assessments with new
content or tools).

8.4.3. Teacher materials make the logic of the instructional design transparent and
actionable to teachers. They demonstrate how the problems of practice and
classroom activity structures are designed to elicit a variety of ways of thinking
that can be seen and understood, and offer suggestions for using the
heterogeneity in student thinking to support the emergence of group concepts,
forms of practice, and links to convention.

60
9–Arguing from Evidence and Obtaining, Evaluating, and
Communicating Information
Students learn more when engaged in meaningful forms of argumentation and
communication. Instructional materials provide structured opportunities for students to
participate in arguing and communicating about elements of their work for the authentic
purpose of explaining a phenomenon or designing a solution, at increasing levels of
sophistication over time. For further guidance on implementing these design specifications,
refer to NGSS Appendix F and The Common Core State Standards for English Language
Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects.

9.1 Argumentation and communication vary across individuals, classrooms, disciplines,

and out-of-school contexts.

Enabling every student to be successful requires creating opportunities for students’ home
experiences, and ways of knowing, to be a productive part of the classroom sensemaking.
Instructional materials support this is by showing the ways argumentation and
communication vary across individuals, classrooms, disciplines, and out-of-school contexts.
They include vignettes, sample student work, interviews conducted with scientists and
engineers about their argumentation and communication, and comparisons of the language
used to describe these practices. For further guidance, refer to NGSS Appendix F.

9.1.1. Teacher materials include educative examples for teachers to help them
understand the productivity inherent within student variation of ideas and
practices (for example, synthesized vignettes of classroom activities, sample
student work, or transcripts or videos of classroom activities).
a. Examples show variation in how individuals participate (participation does
not always require verbal participation in whole-class discussions) and ways
that students argue and communicate successfully (emphasizing differences
that stem from students’ backgrounds and experiences, familiarity with the
practices, comfort with English).
b. Teacher materials provide examples of how teachers explicitly use and build
on students’ ideas, including incorrect ideas that do not initially appear
productive. They show how teachers explicitly make connections among
student resources, what students are doing in science classrooms, and the
intended disciplinary practices associated with argumentation and
communication.

61
 c. Examples show variation in the sophistication of the students’ scientific
reasoning and articulation of their thinking, and in school contexts and
student demographics (gender, race, language proficiency) to highlight the
ways that all students are capable of engaging in argumentation, and
obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information.
d. Examples of students engaged in arguing and communicating in the sciences
and engineering enable teachers to help students see how communicating
and arguing are interrelated but different. Examples show variation with
respect to when in the investigation students are arguing and
communicating so that it’s clear that these practices aren’t only part of a
culminating task.

9.1.2. Educative examples show teachers the ways in which the variation shown in the
examples is consistent (or inconsistent) with disciplinary practices (for example,
how scientists and engineers argue and communicate and why).

9.1.3. Examples show how to emphasize the productivity of what students are doing,
and help teachers think about ways they can recognize and build on student
resources for engaging in argumentation and communication, including
multimedia examples and vignettes (such as real classroom videos and audio
clips).

9.2 Students engage in argumentation and communication to explain phenomena or

design solutions to problems.

When students are engaged in meaningful forms of argumentation and

communication—when they have an authentic reason to argue or to communicate—their
performance is better. Instructional materials ensure that students are arguing and
communicating about elements of their investigative or design-related work (involving the
other practices), for the authentic purpose of explaining a phenomenon (or elements of it),
or designing a solution.

9.2.1. I​nstructional​ materials ​create contexts in which students are explicitly focused
on figuring something out, and on the criteria they use to evaluate their ideas
and processes, rather than focusing solely on demonstrating acquisition of a
“right” answer.

62
 a. The goal of argumentation and communication is sensemaking—figuring it
out—and the right answer is learned by using particular scientific or design
criteria as they attend to that goal. The right answer is a tool to achieve the
goal, rather than being a goal in and of itself. Instructional materials make
these criteria part of the assessment and discussions.
b. With respect to engineering, the criteria are project “constraints and criteria”
which become the primary means of evaluation (and can offer the potential
for multiple “right” answers, as long as the design requirements are
achieved).
c. With respect to argumentation and communication, teachers and students
are asked to explicitly build on evidence, past experiences, or shared ideas to
address the question asked, construct ideas with appropriate levels of
generality, and address the needs of their audience.
d. Lessons ask students to self-assess their own arguments, designs, and
communicative practices and products, in addition to assessing those of
others. For example, What worked well in my design? What parts of my
argument were well supported? What parts might require more evidence or
better explanation? Given my audience, did the communicative genre I chose
help them understand my ideas?

9.2.2. Lessons and ​activities​ make students’ work with argumentation and
communication public because argumentation and communication are
inherently public practices (whether written, spoken, or illustrated). Making an
argument public, for example, is essential for others to respond and evaluate
the thinking and reasoning behind it. This means both sharing final form ideas
and showing, discussing, and debating works in progress, including justifications
for students’ decisions.

9.2.3. Units provide ​students​ with opportunities to engage in purposeful revision of

their argument and communication-related processes and products. For
example, students revise their solution if they receive feedback that it does not
address elements of users’ needs; students revise their claim if they receive
feedback that it does not align with the investigative question or if it does not
attend to the evidence generated; and students re-examine their
decision-making processes if they select a genre that is not aligned with the
intended audience and purpose (such as writing the discussion section of a

63
 scientific poster as a story rather than an argument when writing for a scientific
audience).

9.2.4. The practice of a​ rgumentation​ happens where uncertainty is expected and

enabled, either as a result of disagreement or because they are in the midst of
sensemaking.
a. Argumentation can also occur around questions that feel resolved to
students. Students must have a meaningful reason for engaging in
argumentation in these situations. For example, they might be providing an
argument others could use, or articulating their final form argument in a way
that could convince others.
b. Argumentation occurs throughout science investigations, not only as a
culmination of students’ work. Students may argue about the
appropriateness of their questions, research methods, or data
interpretations, just like scientists do.
c. Argumentation occurs throughout an engineering design project, not only as
a culmination of students’ work. Students may argue about their
interpretations of the user’s needs, about which materials, resources, and
methods they think will work best in the design, about how well a design fits
the criteria, and about the relative prioritization of different potentially
competing design criteria as well as other considerations such as feasibility
of construction and optimization.
d. Argumentation does not always require consensus. Teacher materials help
teachers identify when consensus is necessary and when it is not.
Argumentation occurs in speaking (talk stems, teacher and peer modeling) as
well as writing (sentence stems, graphic organizers, and opportunity for
revision).

9.2.5. In instructional materials, students obtain, evaluate, and communicate

information throughout an investigation or design project, not only as a
culmination of students’ work. For example, students obtain and evaluate
background information that helps situate their investigative work, or they might
conduct user needs assessment.
a. Students communicate their preliminary investigative findings, or the
affordances and constraints of their designs, to other peer groups, in
addition to communicating findings, understandings, explanations, or design
solutions, to teachers, community groups, or family members. Students

64
 consider audience, purpose, and genre when engaging in science and
engineering-related communication, and they experience many
opportunities to communicate to different audiences, for different purposes,
using a variety of genres, in speaking as well as writing.
b. Students use information from a variety of sources (books, journals, online
blogs, videos, photographs, interviews with community members) and decide
what information and sources are most relevant to their tasks as part of their
investigative work. In some instances, students learn how to search for these
sources (conduct keyword searches in online databases, learn to use their
libraries’ systems for finding sources and information, learning how to
conduct information-gathering interviews with family and community
members), while in other instances activities include texts in varied formats
and genres that provide evidence and other information needed for
sensemaking.
c. Instructional materials include excerpts or adapted versions of important
science formats, including the opportunity for students to make sense of
diagrams, tables, graphs, and procedural instructions. Texts do not provide
an explanatory account of the phenomenon, but rather are a source of
evidence, a component piece of information that can contribute to figuring
out the phenomenon, or additional examples and counterexamples to allow
students to support claims or reject claims, or to generalize claims or narrow
claims as needed.
d. In order to develop both receptive (reading and listening) and productive
(speaking and writing) communication skills throughout the investigative and
design processes, supports are provided for listening in addition to reading,
such as the setting of norms and expectations for active listening, teacher
talk that sets the expectation for listening to and working with the ideas of
peers, talk stems, and teacher or peer modeling.

9.2.6. Engineering ​design​ projects use disciplinary core ideas in authentic and
purposeful ways such that those ideas are clearly necessary for achieving the
design goals. I​nstructional materials might also​ expose students to real
examples of how scientists and engineers use the practices of arguing and
communicating as part of their work. Students explore why and how this is
essential to the field and to building knowledge and a collective understanding
about our world. Instructional materials embed some vignettes or real-world
examples of a way someone’s engagement in argumentation and

65
 communication has helped respond to a question or propose solutions to a
problem related to the core ideas being explored in that unit.
9.3 Students participate in argumentation and communication at increasing levels of
sophistication and decreasing levels of scaffolding over time.

Instructional materials support students in participating in argumentation and

communication practices in increasingly sophisticated ways as they become increasingly
familiar with these practices. Sophistication includes the structure, content, and
interactions within the students’ communication and argumentation, as well as the context
(scaffolding and activity structures).

9.3.1. Instructional materials use the Common Core State Standards for English
Language Arts to support and scaffold grade-appropriate uses of the literacy
skills in their transfer to grade-appropriate science practices. They acknowledge
where scaffolding needs to be provided in order to support a more sophisticated
use of literacy skills in the disciplinary context, and to gauge reasonable
boundaries and identify necessary scaffolding for the literacy skills needed to
engage in scientific argumentation and communication in high school and
beyond.

9.3.2. The claim-evidence-reasoning framework is used to support students in

argumentation, particularly in the earlier grades. The use of this framework
fades over time, and teacher materials provide both general and specific
prompts at different points in the unit. Instructional materials support students
in distinguishing between fact and inference (or even speculation) and provide
opportunities for students to develop a clear understanding of what constitutes
a claim and the types of evidence (data and observations gathered
systematically) and reasoning (logical versus emotional) that are valued in
science.

9.3.3. Students have multiple opportunities within a single unit and across the
instructional materials to practice evaluating the credibility, validity, and
reliability of the information they obtain, and to practice communicating
information to a variety of audiences for different purposes (for example, a
scientific audience for the purpose of sharing research, their families for the
purpose of sharing what they are investigating in school, a local museum for the
purpose of helping to construct an exhibit). Students practice selecting the genre

66
 of communication that best suits a given audience and purpose, and they have
opportunities to move across multiple representations of the same ideas.
9.3.4. Lessons and activities provide students with a purpose for argumentation and
communication. Students can do more when they are engaged in meaningful
forms of the practices—when they have an authentic reason to argue or to
communicate in various ways—thus scaffolds are imbued with a purpose that
aligns with the expectations such that student work can be meaningful. Scaffolds
do not oversimplify such that they obscure the sensemaking purposes.

9.3.5. Instructional materials provide students with opportunities to identify and

obtain information from a variety of sources and depending on purpose (for
example, interviews, print text like journal and review articles and newspapers,
videos, photographs, graphical representations). Students learn to search and
use databases and various search engines to obtain information.

9.3.6. Teacher materials include educative supports that help teachers model their
thought processes when evaluating whether information is accurate, credible, or
useful.

9.3.7. Students are provided examples of how to evaluate information in light of the
task at hand. For example, some data may be interesting and credible but
useless given the task. Students start to use a scientific stance of “skepticism” to
evaluate the information based on the quality of evidence and reasoning, or any
potential bias that might come from the author’s intended purpose and
audience.

9.3.8. Instructional materials support students in creating arguments and

communicating ideas that increase in content sophistication but also in the
sophistication of the contexts in which the argumentation and communication is
happening, recognizing that teacher led discussions are often a less
sophisticated form of the argumentation and communication than student to
student discussions because of the teacher’s dominate role.

9.4 Instructional materials support the linguistic demands of arguing and communicating.

To enable every student to successfully participate in scientific practices, instructional

materials attend to the linguistic demands inherent to engaging in the particular practices

67
of arguing and communicating across productive (writing and speaking) and receptive
(reading and listening) language functions.

9.4.1. I​nstructional​ materials provide a variety of examples ​of language supports for
teachers that can help their students with linguistic demands ​(relative to writing,
speaking, reading, and listening).
a. For argumentative and c​ ommunication​-related writing and speaking, the
instructional materials make use of supports like sentence starters and talk
strategies.
b. Instructional materials make use of listening strategies, such as helping
students learn to pay attention to words that are repeated often, and
stressed words (that are spoken longer and louder) because these words are
usually an indication of importance. With respect to supporting students in
listening to each other, instructional materials emphasize the importance of
talk strategies for listening carefully, using phrases such as, “I hear you saying
that…,” “If I understand you correctly, your claim is…,” and “I think you are
saying that your audience is….” Additionally, the materials provide supports
for helping students learn how to productively summarize or add to what
their peers are saying (for example, teachers are prompted to ask, “Does
anyone want to add onto that?” and “Can anyone summarize what they
said?”).
c. For argumentation-related writing, speaking, reading, and listening,
instructional materials make use of supports like vocabulary instruction of
argument-related words, peer modeling, and the modeling of language
expectations for an activity.

9.4.2. I​nstructional​ materials encourage teachers to reflect upon how their students
currently engage in the language requirements embedded in arguing and
communicating, and reflect on their own instructional strategies for supporting
students in this literacy work.
a. Teachers are guided in using strategies to better understand what students
think argumentation is and how students go about arguing in various
contexts in their lives. For example, teachers can ask students to pick some
activities in which they engage outside of school and identify what they might
argue about in those activities, what claims they might have to make, what
types of evidence they use to support their claims, and how that is
dependent on the activity itself (for example, in basketball there might be an

68
 argument about whether someone traveled, and video tape might be
analyzed to find evidence to support that someone did travel). From there,
teachers can compare the structures and processes involved in students’
everyday argumentation with the structures and processes involved in
scientific argumentation.
b. Teachers are guided in using formative assessments to better understand
what students know and are able to do with respect to obtaining, evaluating,
and communicating information (Do students know how to use search
engines and keyword searches to obtain information? Do they know how to
assess the credibility of a source that they find? Do they know how to select
an appropriate genre to communicate their explanations given the intended
audience?).
c. Instructional materials support teachers and students in the use of
techniques like functional grammar analysis to identify certain patterns in
scientific texts (such as compare and contrast, problem and solution, or
cause and effect).

9.4.3. I​nstructional​ materials use language supports like discourse markers to analyze
existing arguments and to produce them. They support teachers in helping
students learn to identify discourse markers in scientific text and talk, and use
them in their writing and speaking. For example, markers can include words and
phrases such as “because,” “we contend,” “therefore,” and “others might argue.”

9.4.4. Teachers are guided in using these different language supports at various points
throughout the materials, ideally when students are about to engage in a
particularly demanding task. Teacher materials include suggested language
supports when appropriate, including when a task is introduced for the first time
(for example, the first time students read their peers’ written arguments to give
them feedback related to strength and persuasiveness). However, a language
support is not included for every lesson. The goal is for teachers to build a
repertoire of practices that they could incorporate to better support their
particular students.

9.4.5. I​nstructional​ materials embed metacognitive prompts to support teachers with

having metacognitive conversations around the disciplinary literacy goals
associated with argumentation and communication.

69
 a. For argumentation, teachers and students are prompted to ask the following
types of questions: What is the claim being advanced? What is the evidence
for this claim? Is the evidence convincing? Is all of the evidence being
considered? Are all of the plausible claims being addressed? Is the reasoning
logical and valid? Why or why not?
b. For obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information, teachers and
students are prompted to ask the following types of questions: Given the
phenomenon we are exploring, what types of information do we need to
obtain to better understand that phenomenon? Where should we look for
that information? How will we know if the information we find is credible and
accurate? What are the important ideas that need to be included in the
explanation? What would be the best way to organize the ideas? How did we
decide the best way to organize the ideas? What is the purpose for this
communication and who is the intended audience? What format would best
be used to communicate with this audience for this purpose? Is my choice of
language suited to the audience?

70
10–Crosscutting Concepts
Crosscutting concepts are central to robust and applicable science understanding.
Crosscutting concepts are not mere concepts, facts, or definitions for students to learn.
Rather, they are ways of understanding scientific concepts as they relate to real-world
phenomena. Crosscutting concepts are not taught in isolation, but continually developed in
conjunction with disciplinary core ideas and science and engineering practices as students
explore, explain, and make sense of phenomena at increasing levels of sophistication
within units, across units, and across grades. For further information, including sample
prompts and responses for each of the crosscutting concepts to support instruction and
the development of formative and summative assessment performance tasks, refer to
Using Crosscutting Concepts to Promote Student Responses developed by the CCSSO
Science SCASS Committee on Classroom Assessment.

10.1 Crosscutting concepts are continuously integrated with the other two dimensions in
ways that students recognize are relevant and useful to the context of the unit.

To support the teaching and learning of three-dimensional science understanding,

instructional materials maintain the interconnectedness of the crosscutting concepts with
the disciplinary core ideas and science and engineering practices consistently through the
units. The crosscutting concepts are not additional content or information that students
need to learn separately, but used as a way of thinking about and understanding the
disciplinary core ideas and science and engineering practices in relationship to the
phenomena under study.

10.1.1. Instructional materials intentionally integrate instruction of the crosscutting

concepts with instruction on disciplinary core ideas, science and engineering
practices, and phenomena.
a. Storylines for units and lessons make students aware of the crosscutting
concepts they are learning about and using to address the anchor
phenomena, in the same manner and to the same degree that they make
students aware of the d ​ isciplinary core ideas and science and engineering
practices​ they are learning.
b. Lessons are designed such that the teacher and students use the language of
one or more crosscutting concepts each time they discuss how a disciplinary
core idea relates to a phenomenon (​as part of classroom dialogue, writing
prompts, peer feedback, or assessments). A ​ t minimum, students are asked
to reason with at least one crosscutting concept in each set​ of lessons.

71
 c. When appropriate, lessons or tasks are designed to feature how the
crosscutting helps students see the connection between a disciplinary core
idea and the phenomenon or to connect different disciplinary core ideas or
phenomena together. Language such as “related to” or “applied to” is used
often for structuring classroom discussions, writing prompts, modeling
activities, and assessment tasks. One type of formative or summative
assessment task that may be used in each unit is to ask students to engage in
a practice (model, explain, argue, analyze, question) to express the
relationship between a disciplinary core idea and a phenomenon in two or
three different ways using different crosscutting concepts (for example, first
with patterns, then with cause and effect, then with energy and matter).

10.1.2. Instructional materials avoid common pitfalls with integrating crosscutting

concepts as part of three-dimensional learning​.
a. All lesson sets include​ a r​ eference​, discussion, or activity involving at least
one of the crosscutting concepts. While a crosscutting concept is not the
focus of each lesson, instructional materials prompt both teachers and
students to think about and apply the crosscutting concepts to phenomena
and disciplinary core ideas.
b. Crosscutting concepts are part of the storyline that students are figuring out
as they work through the unit. ​Instructional materials d​o not ask or direct
students to think about any of the crosscutting concepts without some
explicit attention, instruction, or scaffolding. This support is present yet
sensitive to where the activity is situated with respect to prior instruction,
and is flexibly responsive to student learning needs. Sources of support
include educative features, supplemental resources, and instructional moves
integrated into the lesson.
c. Units do not include​ a “mini-lesson” or a stand-alone section on each
crosscutting concept. Instead, they introduce and reinforce the development
of crosscutting concept understanding in the context of the problem or
scenario students are working on.

10.2 Students experience an increase in the sophistication and complexity of their

understanding of all crosscutting concepts across units and courses in an identifiable
and planned manner.

72
Students’ three-dimensional understanding of science is developed in ways that increase in
sophistication and complexity across units and grades with an intentional and visible plan.
The introduction and development of each of the seven crosscutting concepts across units
and grades reflects this overall commitment. Each crosscutting concept is distinct with its
own learning trajectory for the middle grades. Instructional materials help teachers and
students see and understand these learning trajectories, and provide visible and
intentional opportunities for student to demonstrate changes in their learning of each
crosscutting concept across units.

10.2.1. The sophistication and complexity of crosscutting concept understanding

increases across units and grades based on the descriptions of the crosscutting
concept learning progressions provided in the NGSS Appendix G, especially the
transitions between grade bands. Teacher materials map the learning trajectory
for each crosscutting concept across units and courses in ways appropriate to
the context and conceptual focus of the units. When appropriate, the design of
activities and lessons include supports for teachers and students to recall and
build from previous crosscutting concept understandings developed in prior
units. Teacher materials provide unit-level support that identifies what current
student understanding of and experience with crosscutting concepts is assumed,
and suggested adaptations or scaffolds for addressing situations where students
may not have the assumed prior learning experiences. Instructional materials
include both formative and summative assessment opportunities for students to
demonstrate and document their current understanding of each crosscutting
concept over the course of a unit and across units within a year.

10.2.2. Instructional materials avoid common pitfalls with developing crosscutting

concept learning trajectories over time.​ They do not teach a crosscutting concept
only once in high school, but rather provide multiple opportunities for students
to engage with each of the seven crosscutting concepts across units in each
course. They also do not teach each crosscutting concept the same way each
time, varying the structure, routine, or template to each use of a crosscutting
concept. While teachers and students are supported in using consistent
language in discussion and writings about crosscutting concepts, how students
are asked to think about, reason with, and apply crosscutting concepts in
three-dimensional learning varies across units and courses in ways that
challenge students.

73
10.3 Students engage in multiple crosscutting concepts in each unit, and students reason
with and discuss all seven of the crosscutting concepts in each course.

In three-dimensional science learning, there is not just one way to relate a disciplinary core
idea to a phenomenon through a practice. There are multiple ways to relate disciplinary
core ideas to phenomena, and crosscutting concepts are a set of tools and resources that
teachers and students use to do this. Every science concept has one (or more) of the
crosscutting concepts that constitute what it means to understand that idea. Facts that can
be known without crosscutting concepts are not three-dimensional and are not the focus
of instruction. Explicitly using multiple crosscutting concepts to relate disciplinary core
ideas to a phenomenon (through explanations or models) makes the crosscutting concepts
a powerful dimension for students, and can make the robustness of their scientific
reasoning and understanding visible to both teachers and peers.

10.3.1. Students engage with multiple crosscutting concepts in each unit.​ Activities and
lessons guide teachers and students to reason about the anchoring phenomena
in different ways. When possible, there are at least two opportunities in a unit
for students to think about the anchoring phenomenon and other phenomena
in ways that are similar to how scientists would draw on different perspectives to
explain the same thing. Each of these perspectives should use a different
crosscutting concept to reason about the phenomenon. As student learning
progresses across units, materials are designed so that students take more
responsibility​ and ownership for considering phenomena using different
crosscutting concept perspectives. In early units, activities are clearly specified
and closely scaffolded to provide students with support for thinking from
multiple perspectives. Later units provide less structured tasks and more open
opportunities for students to engage in this kind of relational sensemaking
around constructing explanations or solving problems around phenomena, both
individually and socially in groups or as a whole class.

10.3.2. Instructional​ materials avoid common pitfalls with engaging students with
multiple crosscutting concepts around phenomena​. They a​void aligning a single
crosscutting concept to a disciplinary core idea or anchoring phenomena. While
a lesson set might focus more explicitly on developing one crosscutting concept,
there are opportunities in the unit for students to consider other crosscutting
concept perspectives on that same idea or phenomenon. ​Activities ​do not ask

74
 students to apply a crosscutting concept without some form of responsive
instructional supports or scaffolding.

10.4 Students use consistent language of crosscutting concepts in all units, particularly
when discussing phenomena and engaging in science practices.

Crosscutting concepts are not seven distinctly different, unrelated ideas. Together, they are
a set of resources to support scientific reasoning and meaning making. Crosscutting
concepts are also central to communicating science (between peers or between student
and teacher, verbally or written). To help students understand the role that all of the
crosscutting concepts play in supporting reasoning and meaning-making, instructional
materials use common language when discussing crosscutting concepts.

10.4.1. Instructional materials use consistent language about crosscutting concepts

within and across activities, lessons, and units to support students’ developing
understanding and application of crosscutting concepts.
a. When students discuss phenomena, they ​us​ e the language of crosscutting
concepts as a lens or a way of “looking at” or “seeing what’s going on.” For
example, materials can provide supports, models, or scaffolds for students to
talk about seeing a system or recognizing a pattern in a phenomenon or
experiment.
b. When students are establishing and articulating relationships between
disciplinary core ideas and phenomena or to other disciplinary core ideas,
they use the language of the crosscutting concepts as a bridge or connector
to make the relationship visible and salient. For example, instructional
materials support students to write initial explanations for an unexpected
event by connecting the observed causes and effects to science ideas they
learned about before.
c. When students are engaging in science practices, they use the language of
the crosscutting concepts as tools to encourage engagement in more
meaningful ways. Materials use features of the crosscutting concepts as
prompts to structure classroom dialogue or written responses as students
engage in the different practices. Asking students to be clear about how the
crosscutting concepts are used in the science and engineering practices
builds these concepts into powerful tools, and provides common language
for students to discuss and share ideas when collaborating in the practices.

75
 d. When the class is figuring out how to organize concepts or relate seemingly
disparate phenomena to each other, students use the language of
crosscutting concepts as rules to help students organize and categorize their
understanding. This is a way to make the big ideas visible for students that
can often get lost when focused on individual examples of phenomena.
Students and teachers can use the language of crosscutting concepts as rules
toward the end of a unit or set of investigations to place new insights and
understandings in the context of the broader disciplinary core ideas that are
developed across units and courses.

76
11–Classroom Routines
Classroom routines are activity structures that students engage in repeatedly over the
course of a year and across multiple years to serve several goals. Structured routines with
discrete steps that have explicit goals can serve as scaffolds for students to learn
sophisticated scientific or engineering practices. They can support the establishment and
maintenance of a classroom culture by providing norms and expectations about behavior
and social interaction. Routines contribute to efficient use of time because once students
have learned a routine, they can begin the work with minimal direction and focus their
attention on the work of the routine rather than how to do the work. In OpenSciEd
instructional materials, routines serve all of these goals. The following design specifications
address five key issues, all of which are complementary and draw on the instructional
model for three-dimensional learning.

11.1 Instructional materials draw out student questions and identification of problems and
use them to guide the ongoing science work of the class.

Instructional materials support students in developing public representations of their

thinking, progress, and questions. They elicit current student understanding throughout
the unit, and attend to navigation and coherence from the student’s perspective.

11.1.1. Units provide multiple opportunities for public representations of student

questions. At the opening of a unit, and as students make progress on models
and designs, lessons provide opportunities for students to raise questions about
phenomena or to inform design solutions. A Driving Question Board is an
example of a public repository for students’ questions created within the first
few lessons and updated throughout the unit. All units use comparable routines
to compile and track questions about phenomena and designs. Lessons include
supports for teachers to work with students to connect to the questions
students have generated to motivate the work and to monitor progress.

11.1.2. Instructional materials support students in generating questions by eliciting

students’ current understanding about phenomena and problems and asking
them to make sense of the phenomena, generate ideas about how to solve a
problem, and connect the phenomena or problem to their own experiences.

11.2 Routines support students in tracking the flow of progress and the current
explanations, models, or designs.

77
 11.2.1. Instructional materials include opportunities for public representation of the
flow and progress of lessons. The class records their progress in a public
representation (such as a model tracker or summary table) that includes the
lesson question or purpose, phenomenon, and what they figured out. Each
lesson or set of lessons includes a discussion-based activity to update the model
tracker representation. Individual students also keep a version of this
representation in their notebooks.

11.2.2. Instructional materials include opportunities to create and update public

representations of scientific models. Units contain frequent opportunities for
students to revise their models, first as individuals or pairs, and then in small
groups. At key points when enough evidence has been accumulated, a lesson
provides an opportunity for students to compare their models in small groups
and attempt to reach consensus. Following the small group consensus-building
process, the whole class should develop a class consensus model through
discussion, and create a shared, public representation of it.

11.2.3. Teacher materials guide teachers in eliciting current student understanding at

key points in the unit (not just prior knowledge at the beginning) so that teachers
are aware of the resources that students have drawn on when reasoning about
a phenomenon or problem. When teachers elicit and connect to current
understanding, students are more likely to experience instruction as coherent
and are able to track their progress over time.

11.3 Instructional materials involve students in discussions about how to move from one
lesson to the next in the storyline (navigation).

11.3.1. Student questions are key to the navigation and coherence from the students’
perspective because they provide a clear purpose that links one activity to
another. Throughout the units, lessons prompt teachers to bring students back
at regular intervals to the record of questions to determine which ones have
been addressed, which haven’t, and to determine if there are new questions.

11.3.2. Transitions between lessons in units (at the closing of a lesson, the opening of
the next lesson, or both) contain whole-class navigation discussions to maintain
coherence from the students’ perspective. The discussions have both a reflective

78
 and a prospective element. The reflective element asks students to articulate the
question or problem for the lesson and the way the class decided to investigate
it and what they figured out, referencing public representations such as a
summary table or model tracker. The prospective element involves asking
students to evaluate their current progress, and discuss possible next steps.
While the flow from one lesson to the next is anticipated in the unit outline,
these discussions involve students working as partners through the logic of
where to go next, and maintain the coherence from their perspective.

11.4 Instructional materials ask students for gapless explanations.

11.4.1. Teacher materials guide teachers in helping students to iteratively develop and
evaluate their models, test them for generality, and uncover limitations that lead
to productive directions for investigation.

11.4.2. Teachers are provided with discussion strategies to press students for gapless
explanations and models. Teachers support students in linking their ideas, from
a variety of sources including prior knowledge, into a coherent chain of
reasoning which ultimately allows students to put those pieces together into a
causal explanation or complete solution to a problem. Instructional materials
contain guidelines students can use to evaluate the coherence and
completeness of models, and of explanations derived from models.

11.4.3. Units contain sequences of phenomena selected to help students develop

explanatory models, and then uncover questions that lead to either generalizing
the model or elaborating it to handle the new cases. For example, after figuring
out that instruments and speakers appear to make sound by vibration, students
ask whether all objects that make a sound (including very solid objects like
floors, walls, and tables) vibrate when they make a sound.

11.5 Teachers are guided in developing and maintaining classroom norms that support
student engagement in the science and engineering practices through productive talk.

11.5.1. Teacher materials provide supports for teachers to engage students in science
and engineering practices through whole-class discussion. Teacher supports
provide example prompts and strategies to support students making their
thinking public, building on ideas of others, and supporting models,

79
 explanations, and designs with argument. Example approaches include supports
for science talk moves.

11.5.2. Instructional materials provide supports for teachers to establish classroom

norms that support three-dimensional learning, including going public with one’s
thinking, respectfully questioning ideas, listening to others and building on their
ideas, continued testing of the generality and limitations of candidate models,
and supporting models and explanations with empirical evidence.
Considerations and norms for equitable class culture are described in Chapters
2 and 4 of the Design Specifications and should be utilized to create a classroom
where all students feel safe in sharing their thinking.

11.5.3. Instructional materials include whole class, small group, and student pair
discussion activity structures used to support productive science talk, such as
Scientists Circles, group norms and roles, or think-pair-share.

80
12–Integration of English Language Arts and Mathematics
Instructional materials integrate English Language Arts (ELA) a
​ nd mathematics through
both the careful alignment of content standards and the deep integration of practices that
transcend subject areas. For example, in ELA, students are expected to comprehend as well
as critique and evaluate evidence in constructing and evaluating arguments and claims
(CCSS). In mathematics, students are expected to “construct viable arguments and critique
the reasoning of others” (CCSS). Likewise in science, students are also expected to carry out
the process of argumentation in advancing their content knowledge (NGSS). Science
teachers can take advantage of this language practice of argumentation and create
interdisciplinary learning opportunities that deepen students’ learning in not only science
content and crosscutting concepts, but also extend into connecting student knowledge in
literacy and mathematics. This increased importance of argumentation across all these
new standards signals a major change in how we think students should learn and how
teachers should teach (Stage, Asturias, Cheuk, Daro & Hampton, 2013).

12.1 Support for integrating English language arts into science classrooms is provided.

The goal of integrating English language arts within units is t​ o use literacy practices of
reading, writing, speaking, and listening to develop and reinforce important science ideas
and practices, while supporting students in strengthening their E ​ nglish language arts
practices, extending their vocabulary, and demonstrating the importance of language
practices for science.

12.1.1 Instructional materials are intentional in their placement and purpose of text.
Text is placed within the unit at key junctures where students need to gather
information to motivate the storyline, better understand a concept, or work
through an investigation. Generally, students experience a concept in some way
prior to reading about it, allowing them to make a connection between their
experience of a concept and scientific information in the text. Text that
introduces a phenomenon to students is adapted for classroom use and
intended to engage students into the storyline (for example, a doctor’s note, an
abstract and methodology section from a study, or field observations). Some text
is just in time to help the storyline along, to generate questions or ideas from
students, to help to clarify some piece of the puzzle students are figuring out, or
to give students language to describe what they are seeing. Text features people
of different ages, genders, cultures, abilities, and racial and ethnic groups
engaged in the scientific enterprise, and include individuals with different

81
 perspectives, working toward similar or different purposes, as part of different
disciplines and communities (such as citizen scientists, families, or classmates).

12.1.2 Instructional materials are intentional in the variety and complexity of text. Units
include text from a variety of sources that require students to interpret key
science ideas from the text (such as words, graphs, images, and other media).
Instructional materials include a balanced mix of authentic science sources
adapted for classroom use, and custom fictional, historical, and informational
texts matched to the storyline of the unit. Students access multiple sources so
that they can evaluate audience, purpose, and tone. Text is aligned appropriately
to grade level and text complexity and matches the learning goals of the activity.
Some texts may vary in length and complexity, but should be intended to push
the storyline forward.

12.1.3 Students analyze texts using strategies drawn from Common Core State
Standards. Students cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science
and technical texts; determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; provide
an accurate summary of the text distinct from prior knowledge or opinions;
follow precisely a multistep procedure when carrying out experiments, taking
measurements, or performing technical tasks; determine the meaning of
symbols, key terms, and other domain-specific words and phrases as they are
used in a specific scientific or technical context; analyze the structure an author
uses to organize a text, including how the major sections contribute to the whole
and to an understanding of the topic; analyze the author’s purpose in providing
an explanation, describing a procedure, or discussing an experiment in a text;
integrate quantitative or technical information expressed in words in a text with
a version of that information expressed visually (such as a flowchart, diagram,
model, graph, or table); distinguish among facts, reasoned judgment based on
research findings, and speculation in a text; and compare and contrast the
information gained from experiments, simulations, videos, or multimedia
sources with that gained from reading a text on the same topic.

12.1.4 Instructional materials are intentional about the purpose, placement, and variety
of written work. Units incorporate a student science notebook and additional
written student work on a daily basis for students to write, draw, and
communicate their understanding of science ideas and practices. Written work
integrates standards for writing from the Common Core State Standards, and

82
 instructional materials ask students to articulate claims and arguments, cite
evidence from their own work and scientific sources, and evaluate the claims
and counterclaims of others. Students draw upon a variety of texts and analyze
graphs, tables, and images as part of writing development. Student writing is
regularly revisited through re-evaluation of models, conclusions, and the
reasoning behind them. Teacher materials will include guidance on how to
support student growth from informal language describing science ideas to
more precise/appropriate language.

12.1.5 Teacher materials provide support and modifications for students with special
learning needs, such as emerging multilingual students or students with learning
differences. For example, they may provide suggestions on how to highlight a
hands-on investigation to develop language, modified texts with additional
comprehension scaffolds, or sentence starters and sentence frames to guide the
development of verbal or written work.

12.1.6 Students will frequently e​ ngage​ in speaking, listening, and responding to others
as part of their participation in scientific and engineering practices. Materials
provide guidance and rubrics aligned to Common Core State Standards for
speaking and listening, including standards for comprehension and
collaboration, and presentation of knowledge and ideas. Students frequently
engage in peer-to-peer discussion to share, express, and refine their thinking
based on new information. They develop, present, and defend their ideas to one
another, verbally, in written forms, and in expressive forms in a focused,
coherent manner with relevant evidence, sound valid reasoning, and
well-chosen details. Student advocacy for ideas and willingness to consider their
peers differing perspectives must be fostered in the instructional materials and
core the classroom instruction.

12.2 Support for the integration of mathematics into science classrooms is provided.

The goal of integrating mathematics within units is t​ o use mathematical understanding and
practices to develop and reinforce important science ideas and practices, while supporting
students in strengthening their math understanding and practices, and demonstrating the
importance of mathematical thinking and practices to science. The mathematics relied
upon in science courses should not be new to students. The alignment to the CCSS

83
materials should expect that students have already been exposed to and understand the
mathematical concepts being employed.

12.2.1 Instructional materials are intentional in their placement and purpose of

mathematics. ​Mathematics is intended to help the storyline along, to help to
clarify some piece of the puzzle students are figuring out, or to give students
tools to highlight, analyze, model, and interpret important patterns in the data
they are exploring. Mathematical practices will be employed to develop student
understanding of science ideas and deepen science practices. When applying
mathematics, materials connect to and reinforce the Common Core State
Standards for Mathematics.

12.2.2 The variety and complexity of mathematics is intentional, and instructional

materials include a variety of mathematical representations and ideas.
Mathematical analysis is accessible for all students and provides them with a
deeper understanding or speeds up insights into qualitative patterns in data for
needed understanding of the target science ideas. Analysis that detracts
students from the science storyline or slows down the pace at which students
are developing insights into the patterns in data or qualitative relationships
necessary for understanding of the target science ideas is avoided. Where
mathematical analysis is part of an investigation, multiple models,
representations, and ways of interpreting the data are supported. Teacher
supports are provided for leveraging multiple ways of student thinking,
connecting, and representing their mathematical ideas, both in investigations
that are targeting the use of those mathematical ideas and in those where it is
likely that some students may bring them in. Students are provided the
opportunity to explore and evaluate the validity of multiple mathematical
models, approaches, and representations.

12.2.3 Instructional materials integrate mathematical understanding and practices that

are grade-level appropriate across both math and science standards. They align
to the development of the mathematical topics in the Common Core State
Standards for Mathematics, and do not require or attempt to teach them before
they have been addressed in the Common Core. This requires that each science
course only consider the math standards for the previous grade levels as usable
for the entire science course. Should mathematics for the current grade level be
necessary for a science course, this science content should be taught toward the

84
 end of the school year so that there is greater opportunity for the student to
have learned this content before using it in science. As OpenSciEd high school
materials are a three-year sequence of courses assumed to be taken during
grades 9, 10, and 11, the math utilized in these courses should not exceed that
of the grade level content of CCSS math (for instance, Algebra 1, Geometry, and
Algebra 2 or an equivalent integrated sequence).

12.2.4 Teacher materials provide support and modifications for students with special
learning needs related to mathematics. For example, they may provide alternate
student prompts to provide opportunities for students to engage with the
mathematics qualitatively prior to quantitatively. Instructional materials embed
scaffolds to help students break down the use of mathematics into manageable
parts and use multiple representations and manipulatives of mathematics
concepts to help reinforce mathematical concepts or reasoning. Teacher
materials provide support to break down analysis of the data into smaller steps
or explain the problem in a different way. Students are provided the opportunity
to explore, evaluate, and learn from multiple mathematical approaches when
employed.

85
13–Meeting Practical Needs and Constraints of Public Education
An important risk in efforts to transform educational practices and improve outcomes is to
overlook the importance of practicality. In the rush to incorporate attributes that are
known to support transformation and improvement, programs must make sure that it is
practically possible and realistic for teachers to implement in order to bring about real and
lasting change. Practicality is contextual. The thresholds for what makes a program too
challenging or infeasible depend on the social capital and material resources that are
available in a particular setting. Therefore, the design specifications for practicality have
been designed in consultation with core state partners to fit the contexts in their states.

13.1 Instructional materials help teachers plan and implement coherent three-dimensional
learning experiences for all students in every activity.

In keeping with chapter 2, Equitable Science instruction for All Students, OpenSciEd
instructional materials are designed for heterogeneous groupings of students. OpenSciEd
materials are not designed to be used in courses where students are separated into honors
and non-honors tracks. They are designed to engage and challenge students at all levels
within the same classroom. . Tracking and/or ability grouping often contributes to
segregated classes and harms the ability of students to succeed in their college and career
pursuits. Therefore, the instructional materials will be designed to support students with a
variety of science education backgrounds, invite them to share their existing knowledge
and experiences, and build to the target standards.

Teachers need supports to help them plan and implement their NGSS designed instruction
across an activity, lesson, or unit, and effective supports are needed to help teachers
successfully engage all students in three-dimensional learning. Students need materials
that support their own engagement in three-dimensional learning in every activity across a
unit. ​OpenSciEd seeks to provide the necessary instructional materials to help teachers
plan and implement a coherent three-dimensional learning experience for all students in
every activity.

13.1.1. Instructional materials for year long courses are designed to be completed
within a typical school year. A typical school year consists of 180 school days,
not all of which are available as instructional days. Courses should be designed
for no more than 160 days of instruction, with a day consisting of approximately
45 minutes of instruction.

86
 13.1.2. Instructional materials u​se a consistent structure for units, consisting of a
four-level hierarchy (units made up of lesson sets, made up of lessons, made up
of activities) with information provided to teachers at each level.

13.1.3. Teacher materials provide​ instructional supports for planning and implementing
an activity or lesson, and for different goals and outcomes, while foregrounding
the interconnected role of phenomena, practices, disciplinary core ideas, and
crosscutting concepts in the students’ sense making.

13.1.4. I​nstructional materials provide educators with presentations for use in

classrooms (class-facing slides) that are easily editable and adaptable to local
contexts. They also include activity guides and readings for students.

13.2 Instructional materials include meaningful learning opportunities after specific points in a
unit to motivate students to think, talk, and explore outside of school.

Home learning provides a vehicle to extend student thinking beyond the time they spend in
class. Meaningful home learning helps students develop, build on, or extend learning from
the classroom. It should be tightly connected to the learning goals, but also compelling and
motivating for students to think about, talk about, and explore outside of the bounds of
school with their family, friends, or other people they interact with throughout the day.
OpenSciEd seeks to provide meaningful, home learning opportunities for teachers to use
flexibly in their classroom, after specific points in an instructional unit.

13.2.1. The purpose of home learning is to provide students opportunities to learn

more about how science ideas developed in class can be used to make sense of
additional phenomena and problems in their lives and in their communities; to
provide new contexts for students to extend their interest, curiosity, and
creativity about what they have figured out in class; and to provide a venue for
students to engage in discourse with other people in their lives about what they
are wondering, thinking, and figuring out related to the experiences in the
classroom​.

13.2.2. The structure of home learning opportunities might include framing around a
small number of compelling questions, relevant connections to real-world
examples, protocols for students to engage in or to explore additional
phenomena first hand, concise background information and text, simplified (but

87
 not oversimplified) data and protocols, scaffolds for supporting the development
of student thinking across an assignment around one big idea, prompts
designed to help student raise new questions (leaving them more curious at the
end of the assignment than when they started it), and suggestions to help spark
student interest in initiating or participating in a conversation about what they
are doing or figuring out with other people.

13.2.3. Teacher materials provide specific guidance on how to follow up on and connect
to students’ findings, ideas, and questions raised in the assignment to
subsequent discussions in future lessons. Example “alternate prompts” and
“expected students responses” are included to help students make connections
for cases where the class or student didn’t complete the assignment.

13.2.4. Instructional material must also guide teachers in supporting students who are
or have been absent from class with home activities and/or readings intended to
help absent students maintain progress with their classmates while remaining
true to the storyline instructional model. For instance, laboratory investigations
could have a video or simulation version from which students can gather data.

13.3 Teachers are guided in using student work for grades while also providing meaningful
feedback to students about their learning.

Each district and school has varying needs for grading that cannot all be addressed in the
instructional materials. However, teacher materials provide guidance on which student
work products could be graded and also the appropriate supports to do such grading. This
approach allows educators to choose what to grade based on the needs of their classroom
and their district. T
​ eacher materials provide the necessary supports to educators to use
student work for grading purposes while also providing meaningful feedback to students
about their learning.

13.3.1. Teacher materials provide a list of grading opportunities that include the
intended purpose of the student work and how the work can be used to
determine a grade (in particular if there are no right or wrong answers) by
providing ideal student responses and examples of incorrect student responses,
and clear answer keys, rubrics, and scoring guidance that is aligned to those
tools.

88
 13.3.2. Teacher materials identify grading opportunities approximately every other day
of instruction and at least one major grading opportunity at the culmination of
the unit. While there might be more frequent opportunities, regular checkpoints
provided allow teachers to determine student progress. Teachers may choose to
use these opportunities as grading opportunities depending on their district or
school policy.
13.3.3. Teachers are supported in sufficient detail to understand why answers are
graded in such a way and how those answers could be improved so that both
teachers and students can have meaningful feedback from the grading
opportunity.

13.4 Instructional materials are provided in a convenient form that is usable by the largest
possible audience.

Instructional materials are convenient and usable by the largest possible audience.

13.4.1. Student print materials consist of a full-color, non-consumable student edition

and a set of black-and-white, consumable student handouts to be distributed for
students to write on. Digital versions are also available. Students are provided or
asked to supply a science notebook as a persistent space for them to record and
organize their work.

13.4.2. Teacher print materials consist of a full-color teacher guide that is bound to lay
flat. Teachers are also provided a digital version formatted for a laptop or tablet
that supports printing. Teacher materials include presentation slides for each
lesson to help with structuring discussions and activities.

13.5 Computational technology supports three-dimensional science learning, within school

constraints.

Instructional materials seek to take advantage of the benefits of computational technology

to support three-dimensional science learning, while conforming to the practical
constraints of current schools.

13.5.1. Instructional materials assume that every classroom has a dedicated device that
can project on a screen or display that is large enough for the entire class to see,
and has an internet connection that is fast enough to support video streaming.

89
 The instructional materials may call for interactive use of computers,
Chromebooks, or tablets by students in a ratio of 2 students per device, as long
as those activities can also be done as a whole class or as one station that
students rotate to through during a class session.

13.5.2. To accommodate teachers who need to schedule device carts or technology

labs, interactive activities require no more than 2 consecutive class periods of
instruction and are scheduled so that they don’t require more than 2 out of
every 10 instructional periods.

13.6 Students are provided with the greatest possible opportunity to engage in scientific
and engineering practices with appropriate tools and techniques, within school
constraints.

Instructional materials seek to provide students with the greatest possible opportunity to
engage in scientific and engineering practices with appropriate tools and techniques, within
the practical constraints of current schools.

13.6.1. Instructional materials assume that every teacher has space in the classroom
where students can conduct hands-on activities that require table or counter
space of 18” by 24” inches for every group of 2 to 4 students.

13.6.2. Instructional materials assume that every teacher has access to standard high
school laboratory equipment (glassware, microscopes, balances) for every group
of 2 to 4 students.

13.6.3. Instructional materials may require consumable supplies and non-standard

equipment that can be purchased for less than $400 for 6 sections per unit on
average. The cost of replenishable supplies to implement a unit in subsequent
years average less than $80 for 6 sections each year.

13.6.4. Instructional materials assume that every teacher has access to a laboratory
setting where it is safe to conduct typical high school investigations for earth,
space, life, and physical science courses.

90
14–Guidance on Modifying Instructional Units
OpenSciEd instructional materials are designed as an Open Educational Resource with the
explicit goal of supporting the adaptation and customization of the program for different
goals and circumstances. As the design includes building understanding and abilities over
time, the units and the lessons within units are intended to be taught in a specific order.
Modifications to the sequence of units or the contents of units could undermine the
design.

To enable adaptation and customization of the program without undermining the design,
guidance is provided to those who might modify the units. The materials will make teachers
and curriculum coordinators aware of the implications of potential changes and are
provided with information that will allow them to make changes in a way that still achieves
the goals of the program. Teacher materials describe the dependencies within the program
and with other content areas as well as provide a clear rationale behind the sequence and
design of materials in the program. Informing educators of these dependencies and
rationale helps to avoid modifying the materials in ways that are detrimental to student
learning. Teacher materials also provide teachers with information about pacing of the
materials (including where activities could be compressed or extended) to help with
avoiding a breakdown in the storyline for students. Information on which learning goals are
emphasized at key parts of the materials allows teachers to make informed decisions
about supplementing materials or customizing those materials for a particular student
audience.

14.1 Support for modifying unit sequences is provided.

14.1.1. To a
​ llow​ educators to change the sequencing of units, instructional materials
document how concepts and practices are developed over time and across
units. This documentation provides information about how a unit depends on
previous units and how it supports subsequent units, about the prerequisite
knowledge (science, math, and ELA) necessary for each unit and what actions are
necessary to supplement this knowledge if the unit is taught out of the designed
sequence, and about how future units may be impacted if the unit changes in
the sequence.

14.1.2. I​nstructional​ materials provide guidance about making slight changes to the
sequence to increase or decrease the instructional time for the unit. This

91
 includes places in the unit where instructional time can be shortened or activities
can be eliminated without compromising the learning goals for the unit.

14.2 Support for modifying unit storylines is provided.

14.2.1. To allow educators to customize the storyline for specific locations or

populations, instructional materials document how the central task and/or
phenomenon connects the learning goals of individual activities into a coherent
storyline.

14.2.2. Units include and document opportunities to locally frame the phenomena or
design problems for students and to continually make connections to the
students’ lived experiences in their community.

14.3 Support for modifying activities is provided.

14.3.1. To allow educators to modify or replace individual activities, instructional

materials document the learning goals for each activity. Learning goals for each
lesson are clearly stated within the teacher materials, allowing educators to
determine whether switching or supplementing the lesson with a different
activity is appropriate or not.

92
Credits
This document is a refinement of the OpenSciEd Middle School Design Specifications.
These refinements were made by OpenSciEd to optimize these specifications for the high
school context and reflect lessons learned during the middle school development process.

The chapters in this volume were originally developed by collaborative teams for our
Middle School Design Specifications. For that process, each team had one or two
designated leads and several members selected for their expertise by OpenSciEd
Developer Consortium and State Steering Committee members. Their work was
coordinated by Daniel Edelson and Audrey Mohan of BSCS Science Learning. Final editing
was conducted by OpenSciEd.

Since these specifications are very similar to the original, the names of those who
contributed to the Middle School Design Specifications are shared below.

Chapters 1 Instructional Model and 11 Classroom Routines

Brian Reiser, Lead
T.J. McKenna
Cynthia Passmore
Pam Pelletier
Mark Windschitl

Chapter 2 E​ quitable Science Instruction for All Students

Philip Bell, Lead
Megan Bang
Cory Buxton
Michael Heinz
Okhee Lee
Deb Morrison
Alberto Rodriguez
Enrique (Henry) Suárez
Gina Tesoriero
Carrie Tzou

93
Chapter 3 A
​ ssessment to Inform Teaching and Learning
Amelia Gotwals, Lead
Dante Cisterna
Savitha Moorthy
Emily Pohlonski
Megan Schrauben
Tamara Smolek

Chapter 4 D
​ esigning Educative Features
Elizabeth A. Davis, Lead
Katherine McNeill, Lead
Janet Carlson
Kris Grymonpré
Katherine Barnett Rivas
P. Sean Smith

Chapters 5 ​Asking Questions and Defining Problems and 6 Planning and Carrying Out
Investigations
Barbara Hug, Lead
Idit Adler, Lead
Christina Krist
Samantha Lindgren
Brian MacNevin
William Paddock III
David Stroupe

Chapter 7 Developing and Using Models, Constructing Explanations, and Designing

Solutions
Cynthia Passmore, Lead
Ron Gray
Samuel Hindi
Sinead Klement
Mechelle La Lanne

94
Chapter 8 Analyzing and Interpreting Data and Using Mathematical and Computational
Thinking
Michelle Wilkerson, Lead
Corey Brady
Shafiq Chaudhary
Victor Lee
Ananda Marin
Mayumi Shinohara

Chapter 9 Arguing from Evidence and Obtaining, Evaluating, and Communicating

Information
Leema Berland, Lead
Leah Bricker, Lead
Amy Deller-Antieau
María González-Howard
Breigh Rhodes
Christopher Wright

Chapter 10 ​Crosscutting Concepts​1

Ann Rivet, Lead
Dora Kastel

Chapter 11 Instructional Routines

Brian Reiser, Lead
T.J. McKenna
Cynthia Passmore
Pam Pelletier
Mark Windschitl

95
Chapter 12 Integration of English Language Arts and Mathematics, and
Chapter 13 Meeting Practical Needs and Constraints of Public Education, and
Chapter 14 Guidance on Modifying Instructional Units
Audrey Mohan, Lead
Michael Novak, Lead
Daniel Edelson

The work that resulted in this product was supported by the National Science Foundation.
The opinions and positions asserted here are of the author only and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

96