Next Generation Science Standards: "All Standards, All Students”

Transcript

1 - "All Standards, All Students”: Appendix D Making the Next Generation Science Standards Accessible to All Students The historic time Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) are being developed at a when major changes in education are occurring at the na tional level. On one hand , s tudent demographics across the nation are changing rapid ly , as t eachers have seen the steady increase of student diversity in . Yet, achievement gaps in science and other key academic the classrooms indicators among demographic subgroups have persisted . On the other hand, national initiatives are emerging for a new wave of standards through the NGSS as well as Common Core State se As the sh language arts and literacy and for mathematics. new Standards (CCSS) for Engli cognitively demanding , teachers must make instructional shifts to enable all are standards students to be college and career ready. The NGSS are building on the National Research Council’s con sensus reports in recent (2007) and its companion report for practitioners years, including Taking Science to School Science Learning Science in Informal Environments (2008), (2009), and most Ready , Set , ! cience 12 A F ramework for K - S notably E ducation (2012). These reports consistently highlight that , when provided with equitable learning opportunities, students from diverse backgrounds are capable of engaging in scientific practices and constructing meaning in both science cl assrooms and informal settings. This chapter, accompanied by seven case studies of diverse student groups, addresses hence the ; NGSS are accessible to all students the what classroom teachers can do to ensure that All Standards, All Students title: “ science and engineering practices cessful application of Suc .” how (e.g., engaging in argument from evidence ) and understand ing of , constructing explanations (e.g., patterns , structure and function) play out across a range of crosscutting concepts d isciplinary core ideas (e.g., structure and properties of matter, earth materials and systems ) will e demand increased cognitiv expectations of all studen ts. Making such connections has typically NGSS are bee advanced,” “gifted,” or “honors” st udents . The n expected only of “ intended to provide a foundation for all students, including those who can and should surpass the NGSS these increased performance expectations . At the same time, the NGSS make it clear that struggled to demonstrate mastery traditionally o have expectations apply to those students wh standards. The goal of the chapter in the previous generation of less cognitively demanding even and the case studies is to demonstrate that the NGSS are extended to all students. dominant” and case studies, the term s “dominant” and “non - Throughout the chapter groups are used with reference to student diversity (Gutiérrez & Rogoff, 2003). The dominant group(s) does not refer to numerical majority, but rather to social prestige and institutionalized as student diversity is increas ing in the nation’s lege. This is particularly the case privi Even classrooms. their where the dominant group(s) is the numerical minority, the privileging of persists . In contrast, non - dominant groups have traditionally been academic backgrounds - underserved by the education system. Thus, the term “non dominant” highlights a call to action nation’s system meets the education needs of the increasi the ngly diverse student that learning tion. popula The chapter highlights practicality and utility of implementation strategies that are grounded in theoretical or conceptual frameworks. It consists of three parts. First, it discusses t both present o NGSS the student groups that have that learning opportunities and challenges traditionally been underserved in science classrooms. Second, it describes effective strategies for Release 21 June 2013 NGSS Page 1 of

2 implementation the NGSS in the classroom, school, home, and community. Finally, it of context provides the ersity by addressing changing demographics, persistent of student div science achievement gaps, and educational policies affecting non - dominant student groups. The seven case studies (available at www.nextgenscience.org ) illustrate science teaching dominant student groups and learning non - of as they engage in the NGSS. Several caveats are offered to of case studies. First, the case studies are not intended to understand the purpose prescribe science instruction, but to i llustrate an example or prototype for implementation of with diverse student groups effective classroom strategies . Given the vast range of student diversity across varied educational settings, teachers and schools will implement the NGSS to ing needs of specific student groups in local contexts. Secon meet the learn d, each case study identified group (e.g., economically disadvantaged students, English language highlights one learners). In reality, however, students could belong to multiple categories of div ersity (e.g., English language learners who are racial and ethnic minorities from economica lly disadvantaged backgrounds). Third, as there is wide variability among students within each group, “essentializing” on the basis of a group label must be avoided. a form For example, ELLs level in home language heterogeneous group with differences in ethnic background, proficiency and English, socioeconomic status, immigration history, quality of prior schooling, parents’ , etc. level educational the case studies address the four accountability groups In id entifying student diversity, defined in No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 and the reauthorized Elementary and ): Section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v Secondary Education Act [ESEA], economically disadvantaged  students,  students from major racial and ethnic groups,  students with disabilities, and  students with limited English proficiency. , is extended Further by adding three groups: student diversity g irls ,  students in alternative education programs, and  gifted and talented students.  Each of the seven case studies consists of three parts that parallel the chapter. It starts connectio with a vignette of science instruction to illustrate learning opportunities through ns to the NGSS and the as well as use of effective CCSS for English language arts and mathematics classroom strategies to successfully engage The vignette emphasizes what teachers can do . students in learning the NGSS. Then, it provides a brief summary of the research literature on effective classroom strategies for the student group highlighted in the case study. It ends with the – demographics, science achievement, and educational policy. The context for the student group avily on government reports addressing student diversity contextual information relies he , including the ESEA Act, U.S. Census, National Center for Education Statistics broadly (including the National Assessment of Educational Progress), and Common Core of Data . The government reports addressing specific student groups contextual information also comes from or students in alternative education programs such as . gifted and talented students The case studies NGSS Diversity and Equity Team written by the members of the re we with expertise on specific student groups. In working on their case studies, many of the members Release 21 June 2013 NGSS Page 2 of

3 piloted NGSS in their own science instruction. The case studies represent science disciplines the across grade levels: th economically disadvantaged students –  grade chemistry 9 th students from major racial and ethnic groups – 8  grade life science th  – 6 students with disabilities grade space science nd students with limited English proficiency – 2  grade earth science rd grade engineering  g irls 3 – th th s in alternative education programs – 10  and 11 student grade chemistry th gifted and talented students – 4 grade life science  the chapter and the seven case studies make contribu tions in several ways. Collectively, First, they focus on issues of student diversity and equity in relation to the NGSS specifically as - both learning opportunities and challenges to all students, particularly non the NGSS present nt student groups. Second, they are domina highlight as they educational policies intended for emerging national initiatives through NGSS as well as the CCSS for English language arts the and mathematics. Third, they are intended for classroom practice as the case studies we re written by members of the NGSS Diversity and Equit y Team who are themselves teachers working with key findings in diverse student groups . Fourth, they highlight research literature on student diversity for seven demographic groups of students in scien ce education. This is and equity because research for each student group tends to exist independently from the others. noteworthy Finally, for each student group, they provide the context in terms of demographics, science achievement, and educational polic y . Dominant - d Demands for Non NGSS: Learning Opportuniti es an Student Groups a clear vision of rigorous science standards by blending scientific and The NGSS offer engineering practices with disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts acro ss K - 12. In connections to addition, the NGSS make the CCSS for English language arts and literacy and for mathematics. For the student groups that have traditionally been underserved i n science education, the NGSS offer both learning opportunities and challenges. Instead of making a long l ist of opportunities and challenges, major considerations are discussed below. Then, learning pportunities and challenges are economically o for illustrated in the seven case studies ial or ethnic minority students , students with disabilities, English disadvantaged students, rac language learners, girls, students in alternative education programs, and gifted and talented students. NGSS Connections to CCSS for English Language Arts and Mathematics con . For example, students understand curricul a The NGSS make nections across school the crosscutting concept of patterns not only across science disciplines but also across other subject areas of language arts, mathematics, social studies, etc. Likewise, the cros scutting concept of cause and effect can be used to explain phenomena in Earth science as well as to examine character or plot development in literature . Thus, students develop mastery of crosscutting concepts through . a curricul across school repeated and contrastive experiences Release 21 2013 June NGSS Page 3 of

4 The requirement s and norms for classroom discourse are shared across all the science disciplines, and indeed across all the subject areas. The convergence of disciplinary practices the CCSS for mathematics, and across the CCSS for English language arts and literacy, the (on page 2 example, students are expected to engage in . For ) 1 Figure 1 NGSS are highlighted in argumentation from evidence; construct explanations; obtain, synthesize, evaluate, and communicate information; and build a knowledge base through content rich texts across the three nce is particularly beneficial for students from non dominant groups - subject areas. Such converge who are pressed for instructional time to develop literacy and numeracy at the cost of other subjects, including science. e learning for all students, particularly for Integration of subject areas strengthens scienc students who have traditionally been underserved. In the current climate of accountability - policies dominated by reading and mathematics, science tends to be de . emphasized , which are perceiv due to the urgency of developing basic literacy and numeracy for students in This is ed - performing schools including, but not limited to, English language learners and students low ss with limited literacy development. Thus, allocation and utilization of instructional time acro subject areas will benefit these students. Furthermore, the convergence of core ideas, practices, multiple entry points to build and deepen s and crosscutting concepts across subject areas offer understanding for these students. to identify language demands and opportunities as English Initiatives are emerging and literacy CCSS for English language arts the NGSS as well as language learners engage in the and for mathematics. For example, the Understanding Language Initiative ell.stanford.edu> is a imed at heightening educator awareness of the critical role that < http:// language plays in term goal is to help educators understand - the CCSS and the NGSS. Its long that the new standards cannot be achieved without providing specific attention to the language dema nds inherent to each subject area. This initiative seeks to improve academic outcomes for English language learners by drawing attention to critical aspects of instructional practice s and by advocating for necessary policy supports at the state and local l evels. Inclusion of Engineering the Inclusion of engineering along with science in NGSS has major implications for non - dominant student groups. First, from an epistemologica l perspective, the NGSS reinterpret a ll A Science for y of science. For example, traditional view of epistemology and histor Americans stated: The recommendations in this chapter focus on the development of science, mathematics, and technology in Western culture, but not on how that development drew from earlier Greek, and Arabic cultures. The sciences accounted for in this book Egyptian, Chinese, are largely part of a tradition of thought that happened to develop in Europe during the last 500 years a tradition to which most people from all cultures contribute today. – ociation for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1989, p. 136) (American Ass At that time, although the goal of “Science for all Americans” was visionary, the definition of science in terms of Western science while ignoring historical contributions from NGSS, by emp The resented a limited or distorted view of science. other cultures p hasizing engineering, recognize contributions of other cultures historically. This (re)defines the Release 21 June 2013 NGSS Page 4 of

5 ool science, which, in turn, defines or determines sch epistemology of science or what counts as science curriculum. Second, from a pedagogical perspective, engineering has potential to be inclusive of students who have traditionally been marginalized in the science classroom and do not see t to their lives or future. through engineering in science as being relevan By so lving problems local contexts (e.g., gardening, improving air quality, cleaning water pollution in the gain knowledge of science content, view science as relevant to their lives community), students ce in socially relevant and transformative ways (Rodriguez & future, and engage in scien and Berryman, 2002). Finally, f rom a global perspective, engineering offers opportunities for “innovation” and “creativity” at the K - 12 level. Engineering is a field that is critical to innovation, a nd exposure to engineering activities (e.g., robotics and invention competitions) can spark interest in the study cience S ational , 2010). Although exposure to oundation [NSF] F of STEM or future careers (N - collegiate level is currently rare (Katehi, Pearson, & Feder, 2009), the engineering at the pre NGSS make exposure to engineering at the pre - collegiate level no longer a rarity, but a necessity. This opportunity is particularly important for students who traditionally have not to their lives or future students who come from multiple or recognized science as relevant languages and cultures in this global community. Focus on Practices evolved over time. Terms tudent engagement in science have The ways we describe s such as “hands - on” have traditionally been used to describe when students - on” and “minds National Science Education Standards (National Research Council engage in science. Then, [NRC], 1996, 2000) highlighted “scientific inquiry” as the core of science teaching and learning through which students “ develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas, as well as an understanding of how scientists study the natural world” (p. 23). In “inquiry the NGSS, - based science” is refined an d deepened by the explicit definition of the set of eight scientific and engineering practices, which have major implications for non - dominant student groups (for ; Quinn, Lee, & Valdés, 2012). details, see Lee, Quinn, & Valdés , 2013 ny of the scientific and engineering practices involves both scientific Engagement in a - (see Figure 1) making and language use sense . Students engage in these practices for the as they transition from their naïve conceptions of the world t - making process scientific sense o more scientifically - based conceptions. Engagement in these practices is also language intensive and requires students to participate in classroom science discourse. Students must read, write, uct explanations. They speak and listen and visually represent as they develop models and constr as they present their ideas or engage in reasoned argumentation with others to refine their ideas and reach shared conclusions. These scientific and engineering practices offer rich opportunities and demands for lang uage learning while they support science learning for all students, especially English , students with limited literacy difficulties language learners, students with language processing development, and students who are speakers of social or regional varieties of English that are the Standard English.” When supported appropriately, - generally referred to as “non students se are capable of learning science through their emerging language and comprehending and constructing carrying out sophisticated language functions (e.g., arguing from evidence, perfect English. By engaging in such practices, - than - explanations, developing models) using less Release 21 2013 June NGSS Page 5 of

6 moreov their understanding of science and their language simultaneously build on er, they (i.e., capacity to do more with language). proficiency Crosscutting Concepts Crosscutting concepts are overarching scientific themes that emerge across all scientific dis ciplines. These themes provide the context for new disciplinary core ideas and enable students to “develop a cumulative, coherent, and usable understanding of science and engineering” (NRC, 1). Thus, crosscutting concepts bridge the engineering, - 2011, p. 4 physical, life, and Earth/space sciences, and offer increased rigor across science disciplines over K - 12. Although Science for All Science Education Americans (AAAS, 1989) identified “common themes” and National epts and processes,” the NGSS bring onc (NRC 1996) identified “unifying c Standards crosscutting concepts to the forefront as one of three dimensions of science learning. Crosscutting concepts offers frameworks to conceptualize disciplinary core ideas. In this , but not as memorization of isolated or disconnected facts g way, students think of science learnin as integrated and interrelated concepts. This is a fundamental understanding of science that is often implied as background knowledge for students in “gifted,” “honors,” or “advanced” the ough programs. Thr NGSS, explicit teaching of crosscutting concepts enables less privileged students, most from non dominant groups, to make connections among big ideas that cut across - who otherwise science disciplines. This could result in leveling the playing field for students might not have exposure to such opportunities. Implementation of Effective Strategies the NGSS accessible to all students, implementatio n of effective strategies To make s capitalize on learning opportunities while being aware of demands that the NGSS present to non - dominant student groups, as described in the previous section. Unfortunately, existing d in research literature does not address students’ performance expectations as envisione the NGSS and engineering practices, crosscutting concepts, and based on the mastery of scientific dominant disciplinary core ideas. Furthermore, the exi non - sting research literature addresses . F ce or ethnicity, research on English example, research on ra or student groups separately language learners, research on students with disabilities, and research on gender comprise - dominant groups in science distinct research traditions (for effective strategies for non ssue I classrooms, see Special in ; for discussion of classroom , 2013 Theory Into Practice strategies and policy issues, see Lee & Buxton, 2010). these distinct research areas. In describing here seem to be common themes that T unite - arning opportunities” for non dominant student groups, Lee and Buxton (2010) “equitable le themes : (1) value and respect the experiences that all students bring from highlight the following their backgrounds (e.g., homes or communities), (2) articulate students’ background knowledge (e.g., cultural or linguistic knowledge) with disciplinary knowledge, and (3) offer sufficient school resources to support student learning. First, to value and respect the experiences that all students bring from their backgrounds, it is important to make diversity visible. In the process of making diversity visible, there are both connections and disconnections between home/community and clas sroom/school. Effective teachers understand how disconnections may vary among different student groups, as well as Release 21 2013 NGSS June Page 6 of

7 how to capitalize on connections. students’ background knowledge These teachers bridge diverse scientific knowledge and pr actices. and experiences to Second, to articulate students’ background knowledge with disciplinary knowledge of science, it is important to capitalize on “funds of knowledge” (González, Mol l, & Amanti, 2005). - Funds of knowledge are culturally es that develop over time in based understandings and abiliti family and neighborhood contexts , and the s ocial and intellectual resources contained in families and communities can serve as resources for academic learning. Effective teachers ask questions that elicit students’ funds of kno wledge related to science topics. They also use cultural artifacts and community resources in ways that are academically meaningful and culturally relevant. Finally, school resources constitute essential elements of a school’s organizational context for te aching and learning. School resources to support student learning involve material social resources (or capital). School resources are resources, human resources (or capital), and likely to have a greater impact on the learning opportunities of non - t students who have dominan traditionally been underserved in science education. In schools and classrooms where non - dominant students reside, resources are often scarce, forcing allocations of the limited resources for some areas (e.g., reading and mathematics) a nd not others (e.g., science and other non - tested subject areas). Below, e ach classroom strategies, home and themes is described as it relates to of these non can enable all of which – resources mmunity connections, and school dominant student - co groups in the NGSS . to engage Effective Classroom Strategies Key features of effective classroom strategies from the research literature on each of non - dominant groups are summarized below. In recognition of the fact that each area of research literature has been developing as an independent body of knowledge, the description of strategies is provided for each group. Yet, it is noted that while some strategies are unique to a particular group (e.g., home language use with English language learners, accommodations or modifications for students with disabilities), other strategies apply to all students broadly (e.g., ach of the seven multiple modes of representation). More detailed descriptions are provided in e ESEA four case studies, including the additional hree and t accountability groups defined in NGSS will be based on the existing research groups. While effective science instruction of the the ons for research to actualize its vision for all literature, NGSS will also stimulate new directi students. Economically disadvantaged students. Strategies to support economically disadvantaged students include: 1) connecting science education to students’ sense of “place” as ( (2) applying students’ funds of knowledge and , sociocultural dimensions physical, historical, and cultural practices based science learning as a form of connected science - , and (3) using project , (4) providing school resources and funding for science instruction . Effective strategies for students from Students from major racial and ethnic groups. (1) culturally relevant major racial and ethnic groups fall into the following categories: tion and pedagogy, (2) community involvement and social activism, (3) multiple representa multimodal experiences, and (4) school support systems including role models and mentors of similar racial or ethnic backgrounds . Release 21 2013 NGSS June Page 7 of

8 Students with disabilities. Students with disabilities have their Individualized Education c to the individuals, that mandate the accommodations and modifications that specifi Plans (IEP , ) teachers must provide to support student learning in the regular education classroom. By definition, accommodations allow students to overcome or work around their disabilit ies with the same performance expectations of their peers, whereas modifications generally change the ectations for a curriculum or performance exp for providing Two approaches specific student. s in their accommodations and modifications are widely used by general education teacher ifferentiated instruction (2) and d (1) classrooms: . Universal Design for Learning The research literature indicates five areas . ited English proficiency im Students with l learning where teachers can support both science and language (1) for English language learners: literacy strategies for all students, (2) language support strategies with ELLs, (3) discourse strategies with ELLs, (4) home language support, and (5) home culture connections. . irls G The research literature points to three main areas where schools can positively impact girls’ achievement, confidence and affinity with science and engineering: (1) instructional to increase girls’ science achievement and their intentions to con strategies tinue studies in (2) , curricula to improve girls’ achievement and confidence in science by promoting science images of successful females in science , and (3) classrooms’ and schools’ organizational structure in ways that benefit girls in science ( e.g., a fter school clubs, summer camps, and mentoring programs ). - Students in alternative education programs. The research literature focuses on school wide approaches to promote increased attendance and high school graduation. Specific factors, collectively, correspond with alienation from school prior to dropping ublic taken . P - out alternative schools employ strategies to counteract these factors and increase student , (3) life skills training, school opportunities, (2) family outreach - engagement: (1) structured after idualized academic support. (4) safe learning environment, and (5) indiv Gifted and talented students. Gifted and talented students may have such characteristics as intense interests, rapid learning, motivation and commitment, c uriosity, and questioning skills. Teachers can employ effective differentiation strategies to promote science learning of gifted and domains: (1) fast pacing, (2) level of challenge (including differentiation in four talented students direction ), (3) oppo rtunities for self - , and of content (4) strategic grouping. Home and Community Connections to School Science While it has long been recognized that building home - school connections is important for dominant student groups, in pr the academic success of non - actice, this is rarely done in an s as parents and families want the effective manner. There are tension maintain to their children cultural and linguistic practices of their heritage while also wanting their children to participate fully in the dominant school culture. A challenge facing schools is the perceived disconnect dominant student - ractices of non between school science practices and home and community p - groups. Traditionally, research on home school connections looked at how the family and home - environments of non dominant student groups measured up to the expectations and practices of Release 21 June 2013 NGSS Page 8 of

9 interpreted in terms of deficits in students’ family and the dominant group. The results were home environments, as compared to their dominant counterparts. In contrast, more recent research has identified resources and strengths in the family and home environments of non - dominant student gro ups (Calabrese Barton et al., 2004). Students bring to the science classroom funds of knowledge from their homes and communities that can serve as resources for academic learning , and teachers should understand and find ways to activate this prior knowl edge (González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005). Science learning builds on tasks and activities that occur in the social contexts of day - to - day living, whether or not the school chooses to recognize this. neering practices, scientific and engi in NGSS, students can engage Through the crosscutting concepts , and disciplinary core ideas by connecting school science to their out - of - school experiences in home and community contexts. Several approaches build connections ncrease parent involvement in their children’s between home /community and school science: (1) i science classroom by encouraging parents’ roles as partners in scienc e learning , (2) e ngag e students in defining problems and designing solutions of community projects in their in informal science learning neighborhoods (typically enginee ring) , and (3) focus on . environments . Concerted efforts should be made to support and Parent involvement in school science in - positive engagement and achievement of non ing promot encourage parent involvement serve as dominan classrooms. Siblings and peers can t student groups in science role models on academic achievement. Parents without academic background in science can still be partners in and higher their children’s science education by setting high expectations fo r academic success education. to solicit their help Teachers can form partnerships with parents, facilitating dialogue with homework and their attendance at scienc e - related events in the school. To promote parents’ i nvolvement in school science, schools can play a part to address needs from the school and remove roadblocks to participation. Schools may need to s’ parent individually invite underserved families on science related field trips, making certain that p articular concerns are met (e.g., child care, translation, transportation) so that the parents are create homework assignments that invite joint participation of the can able to attend. Teachers child and parent to complete a task together (e.g., observe t he phases of the moon, record water use in the house). A non - evaluative survey related to science content can generate classroom encourage dialogue, can discussions that bridge home and school. Homework assignments increase interest among both parents and students, and solicit home language support for science learning. - dominant backgrounds feel comfortable with the school when they Parents from non perceive the school as reflecting their values, and such parents, in turn, are most likely to partner with th e school. For example, a science camp focused on African American achievement had high parental participation because its goals highlighted issues related to African American identity and culture (Simpson & Parsons, 2008). Teachers can also increase paren t involvement by relating after school and summer school themes around values that are important to the - families and communities. Student engagement w Strategies that contexts. ith school science in community involve the community underscore the importance of connecting the school science curriculum to the students’ lives and the community in which they live. It is through these connections that science recognize scie been alienated from students who have traditionally nce as relevant to their 21 2013 NGSS Release June Page 9 of

10 lives and future, deepen their understanding of science concepts, develop agency in science, and consider careers in science. s in community context learning Science First, both may take different approaches. al education experts underscore the connection between science and the disciplinary and inform neighborhood that the students reside in. Effective approaches can include engaging in outdoor and analyzing local natural resources ) exploration (e.g., bird surveys, weather journals (e.g., land forms in the neighborhood, soil composition). Second, the community context for science education capitalizes on the community resources and funds of knowledge to make science more culturally, linguistically, and socially student groups (González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005). For example, a teacher relevant for diverse could tap into the community as a resource by recruiting a community member(s) to assist an By upper elementary class, as students investigate the pollution along a river near the school. bringing the neighborhood and community into the science classroom, students learn that science is not only applicable to events in the classroom, but it also extends to what they experience in their homes and what they observe in their communities. Finally, “place - based” science education is consistent with culturally relevant pedagogy - (Ladson Billings, 1995). Through social activism, students develop critical consciousness of social inequities, especially as such inequities exist in their communiti es. When youth find science education to be empowering and transformative, they are likely to embrace and further investigate what they are learning, instead of being resistant to learning science. Thus, school more central role to students’ lived experiences and science should be reconceptualized to give a identities. Informal environments for science learning Science learning in informal environments. (e.g., museums, nature centers, zoos, etc.) have the potential to broaden participation in science Informal environments may also dominant communities. - and engineering for youth from non institutional - include non opportunities that are not traditionally recognized by school systems However, informal institutions face , community gardens, woodlots, campgrounds). (e.g. challenges in reaching and serving non - dominant groups, as reflected in low attendance patterns. Alt hough research on how to structure science learning opportunities to better serve non - dominant groups in informal environments is sparse, it highlights two promising insights and 2009). practices (NRC, ld be developed and implemented First, informal environments for science learning shou with the interests and concerns of particular cultural groups and communities in mind. Project goals should be mutually determined by educators and the communities and cultural groups being served. It is also important to de velop strategies that help learners identify with science in based contacts that are familiar and safe can be - personally meaningful ways. Having community critical in engaging families in science explorations and conversations and even, at a more basic dominant groups see museums as worthwhile destinations for their families. lev - el, in helping non Second, environments should be developed in ways that expressly draw upon participants’ cultural practices, including everyday language, linguistic practices, and cultural experiences. In designed environments, such as museums, bilingual or multilingual labels ns and sense making among - provide access to the specific content and facilitate conversatio nt to foster sustained . Developing peer networks may be particularly importa participants consider dominant groups. Designed spaces that serve families should - participation of non visits by extended families. Members of diverse cultural groups can play a critical role in the Release 21 2013 NGSS June Page 10 of

11 development and implem line - entation of programs, serving as designers, advisers, front educators, and evaluators of such efforts. School Resources for Science Instruction School resources to support student learning generally fall into three categories Gamoran ( Penuel, Krause, & Frank, 2009) et al., 2003; . First, material resources include time available for teaching, professional development, and collaboration among teachers. Material resources also l personnel and include curricular materials, equipment, supplies, and expenditures for schoo other purposes related to teaching and learning. Second, human capital includes individual knowledge, skills, and expertise that might become a part of the stock of resources available in teachers’ knowledge, including content , human capital involves s an organization. In school knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge, as well as principal leadership. Finally, social capital concerns the relationships among individuals in a group or ms as trust, collaboration, common values, shared responsibility, organization, including such nor a sense of obligation, and collective decision making. School resources are likely to have a greater impact on the learning opportunities of dominant student group is more likely to dominant student groups. This is because the - non have the benefits of other supports for their learning, such as better equipped schools, more material resources at home, and highly educated parents. In contrast, the academic success of ds more heavily on the quality of their school environment; yet, it dominant students depen non - is these students who are less likely to have access to high quality learning environments. Thus, both opportunities and The NGSS present inequitable resources are a central concern. challenges to reconceptualize the allocation and utilization of school resources. Science receives less instructional time (a form of material Material resources. ered to be basic skills. resources) than language arts and mathematics, which are both consid performing schools is often limited and tightly regulated - Particularly, science instruction in low due to the urgency of developing basic literacy and numeracy. In addition, under the demands of ote extended time and attention to the heavily tested subjects accountability policies, schools dev language arts and mathematics, leaving limited time for science. of on the synergy with the CCSS for English language arts and literacy The NGSS capitalize and for mathematics. The standards across the three subject areas share common shifts to focus - on core concepts and practices that build coherently across K 12. S cientific and engineering NGSS the share commonalities with those of (e.g., argumentation from evidence) the practices in CCSS for English language arts and for mathematics (see Figure 1). Furthermore, the CCSS for literacy s, and text complexity across strong content knowledge, informational text require the subject areas, including science. In a similar manner, the NGSS make connections to CCSS. help effective use of instructional time among English language arts, Such synergy will mathematics, and science. Human capital. While all students deserve access to highly qualified teachers, schools serving non students to - dominant student groups require the most effective teachers to enable require science teachers who The NGSS (Marx & Harris, 2006) . overcome achievement gaps pos sess knowledge of disciplinary core ideas, scientific and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts. For non dominant student groups, teachers should also be able to connect - Release 21 2013 June NGSS Page 11 of

12 science to students’ home and community experiences as the students engage in the NGSS. Such expectations present both opportunities and challenges to teacher preparation and professional performing schools where non development for urban or low - dominant student groups tend to be - concentrated. NGSS is built on continuity of learn ing progressions across grade levels. This presents , both opportunities and challenges to students who are highly mobile or transient. On one hand the nationwide purview of NGSS may help these students by providing them with consistent the standards am ong states, districts, and schools. On the other hand, this assumption may impede the ability of new immigrant students to catch up as they are unable to draw from a base of years of shared experiences. Likewise, students who miss school because of homeles sness or other reasons for mobility may struggle to fill gaps in understanding. Social capital. The conditions of urban or low - performing schools are not conducive to building social resources in the form of trust, collaboration, and high expectations col lectively. Urban settings present challenges, including overcrowding, management issues, and emotional concerns related to conditions of poverty in students’ homes. the need for collaboration among teachers of different The NGSS reinforce specializations and subject areas beyond the traditional forms of collaboration. Science teachers need to work with special education teachers and teachers of English language learners in order In addition, science, math, and English language arts t eper understanding of science. o foster a de teachers need to work together in order to address both the opportunities and demands for boration needs to involve meaningful connections among these subject areas. Furthermore, colla the entire school personnel, including teachers, administrators, counselors, etc. Utilization and the key to effective implementation of is development of social capital among school personnel - dominant groups. ularly students from non NGSS with all students, partic Context the To engage all students in learning NGSS, it is important to understand the context that influences science learning by diverse student groups. This section briefly describes student demographics, scie nce achievement, and educational policies affecting non - dominant student economically groups. More details are presented in each of the seve n case studies in terms of minority students ial English , students with disabilities, ethnic disadvantaged students, rac or language learners, girls, students in alternative education programs, and gifted and talented students. Student Demographics The student population in the U.S. is increasingly more diverse: Community Survey report The American Economically disadvantaged students.  from the U.S. Census Bureau summarized the poverty data ( U.S. Census Bureau, ). Overall 21.6% of children in the U.S. live in poverty, the highest poverty rate 2012 hest for Black at since the poverty survey began in 2001. The poverty rate was the hig 38.2% and Hispanic at 32.3%, compared to White at 17.0% and Asian at 13.0%. 48% report, Common Core of Data According to the of students were eligible for free 21 2013 NGSS Release June Page 12 of

13 price lunch in 20 10 - 11. A greater number of students live in povert y in the or reduced cities compared to suburban areas, towns, and rural areas . Students from major racial or ethnic minority groups . The student population in  the U.S. is increasingly more diverse racially and ethnically. According to the 2010 U.S. Census , 36% of the U.S. population is composed of racial minorities, including Asians, 5% 16% American Indian or Native and 1% Blacks, Hispanics, 13% Alaskans (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012). Among the school age population under 19 years old in 2010, 45% were minorit ies. It is projected that the year 2022 will be the turning point when minorities will become the majority in terms of percentage of the . school - age population  Students with disabilities. The number of children and youth ages 3 - 21 receiving ion services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act special educat (IDEA) rose from 4.1 million to 6.7 million between 1980 and 2005, or from 10% to 14% of the student enrollment (National Center for Education Statistics , [NCES] . ed to 6.5 million or 13% of student enrollment by 2009 2011). That number decreas  ited English proficiency Over 1 in 5 students (21%) speak a . im Students with l language other than English at home, and limited English Proficient (LEP) students (the federal term) have more than doubled from 5% in 1993 to 11% in 2007. The 11% as LEP when younger but of LEP students does not count those who were classified who are now considered proficient in English or during a monitoring period.  Students in alternative education programs. Reporting the demographics of students in alternative education is difficult due to wide inconsistencies in definitions across the nation A significant proportion of students who attend public alternative . scho ols specifically targeting drop out prevention are economically disadvantaged students, racial and ethnic minorities, and English language l earners (NC ES, 2012). . Reporting the demographics of gifted and talented  Gifted and talented students students is difficult due to wide inconsistencies in s , assessments to identify definition the se students , and funding for programs across the nation . The National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC, 2012) defines giftedness as “those who demonstrate outstanding levels of aptitude or competence in one or more domains” and estimates that this de finition describes approximate ly three million or roughly 6% of all 12. students, K - Several caveats are made with regard to student diversity. First, each demographic subgroup is not a homogenous or monolithic group, and there is a great deal of variability among ic learning members of the group. For example, categories of disabilities include specif disabilities, speech and language impairments, other health impairments, intellectual disability, emotional disturbance, developmental delay, autism, multiple disabilities, hearing impairment, - dness, and traumatic brain injury. These blin visual impairment, orthopedic impairment, deaf categories could be classified as cognitive, emotional, and physical disabilities. Such variability essentializing that among members of a group cautions . should be avoided Release 21 2013 June NGSS Page 13 of

14 dominant student groups. For example, - t overlap among non Second, there is a significan 60 most English language learners are racial or ethnic minorities. In addition, % of economically , including large proportions of racial or ethnic minorities and English disadvantaged students ge lear cities (NCES, 2012 langua ). As a result, these students face multiple challenges ners, live in achieving academic success. Finally, specific student groups are either overrepresented or underrepresented in education programs. For example, females are ed in engineering and physics underrepresent (NSF , 2012). Racial or ethnic minority students, economically disadvantaged students, and English language learners are underrepresented in gifted and talented programs, whereas they are overrepresented in specia l education programs (Harry & Klingner, 2006). Science Achievement While the student population in the U.S. is becoming more diverse, science achievement gaps persist by demographic subgroups. The results of international and national science assessments indicate the need for a two - pronged approach to enhancing student science outcomes. Achievement gaps must be closed among demographic subgroups of students, while improved science outcomes should be promoted for all students. In the report, “Preparin g the of STEM eneration , (NSF, 2010) the National Science Board states, “In I N ext G nnovators - performing at - America, it should be possible, even essential, to elevate the achievement of low risk groups while simultaneously lifting p. the ceiling of achievement for our future innovators” ( 16 ). U.S. students have not ranked favorably on international comparisons of science achievement as measured by Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). Although TIMSS science results for U.S. 4th and 8th graders showed positive trends since its first administration in 1995 through the latest administration in 2007, PISA results for 15 year olds did not corroborate trends indicated by TIMSS . When it comes to applying science in meaningful ways (e.g., using scientific evidence, identifying scientific issues, and explaining phenomena scientifically) as measured by PISA, U.S. students performed in the bottom half of the international comparison and did not show significant improvements since its first administration in 2000 through its latest administration in 2009. At the national level, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) provides data for S. students’ science performance over time. Focusing only on more recent NAEP science U. assessments in 1996, 2000, 2005, 2009, and 2011, achievement gaps persist among demographic ly income level subgroups of students across grades 4, 8, and 12. Resul ts are reported by fami (based on eligibility for the National School Lunch Program students with race or ethnicity, ), type of school (public or private) ities , English language learners , gender, and . It is noted disabil that these subgroups represent the accountability groups defined in ESEA . The framework for N AEP science involves science content in three areas (physical science, life science, and Earth and space sciences) and four science practices (identifying science principles, using science principles, using scientific inquiry, and using technological the developments are noteworthy in relation to NGSS. First, the 2009 NAEP design). Two included interactive computer and hands - on tasks to measure how well assessment science life situations. - ly science to real problems and app students were able to reason through complex the This approach could pave a way for assessment of scientific and engineering practices in Release 21 2013 June NGSS Page 14 of

15 ever NAEP Technology and Engineering Literacy Assessment (TELA) - Second, the first NGSS. — tial assessment, planned for 2014, will be a probe is currently under development. a The ini scale, focused assessment on a timely topic that explores a particular question or issue. smaller - NGSS. the This approach could be used for assessment of engineering in achievement gaps should take into account certain A clear understanding of science methodological limitations in how these gaps are measured and reported. Science achievement is typically measured by standardized tests administered to national and international student of these measures is that they provide access to large data sets that allow for samples. A strength the use of powerful statistical analyses. However, these measures also present limitations. First, standardized tests provide only a general picture of how demographic variabl es relate to science achievement. For example, “Hispanic” is likely to be treated as a single category - of race or ethnicity, masking potentially important differences in performance among Mexican Cuban - American s. Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Simila rly, the group of students with Individualized Education disabilities (SD) is generic, referring to students who usually have (IEP) and could include both learning disabled (LD) or emotionally disturbed (ED). Program s Thus, achievement data are g enerally lumped together for very different disabilities. Such overgeneralization hinders more nuanced understanding of achievement gaps, thereby limiting the potential effectiveness of educational interventions aimed at reducing these gaps. Second, standa rdized tests have the potential to reinforce stereotypes, both positive and negative, of certain demographic groups (Rodriguez, 1998). For example, the “model minority” stereotype of Asian American students as strong performers in mathematics and science m ay well be supported by generalized test data for the racial category of Asian American. However, Southeast Asian refugees with such a result masks great disparities within this group, such as limited literacy development in their homes or communities. These students are less likely to have their needs met in equitable ways if teachers presume that they “naturally” learn science achieving Hispanic or African American and mathematics with little trouble. In contrast , high - students may be disadvantaged by teachers or counselors who underestimate them and set low expectations of their academic success. Finally, standardized tests do not analyze or report interactions between demographic variables . For example, as racial/ethnic minority students are dispropo rtionately represented in free or reduced price lunch programs, science achievement gaps between race/ethnicity and between science achievement gaps socioeconomic status are confounded . In a similar manner, ethnicity and gender race/ . d are confounde Educational Policies The passing of the NCLB Act of 2001 (the reauthorized Elementary and Secondary stakes testing and accountability policies. - Education Act [ESEA]) ushered in a new era of high gain each Districts and schools are accountable for making an adequate level of achievement ESEA ( assumes NCLB ) year, referred to as annual yearly progress (AYP). The theory behind that states, districts, and schools will allocate resources to best facilitate the attainment of AYP. Decisions concerning resources and practices are determ ined largely by test scores on state assessments. Although ESEA ere is a second is most often associated with accountability systems, th that has also property of ESEA mandates that each state report been a focus of attention. ESEA AYP disaggregated for dem ographic subgroups of students. Mandating this disaggregated Release 21 2013 NGSS June Page 15 of

16 reporting of AYP results in potentially desirable outcomes: (a) each of the groups is publicly monitored to examine achievement and progress; (b) resources are allocated differentially to roups to enhance the likelihood that they meet AYP; and (c) if AYP is not met for these these g groups in schools receiving Title I funding, students are provided with additional academic assistance through Supplemental Educational Services (e.g., tutoring) and th e right to transfer to another public school. Schools, districts, and states cannot hide historically underperforming demographic groups, since ESEA forces the state to publicly monitor these groups and to be irable side, however, all of the added attention to accountable for their performance. On the undes high - stakes testing does not necessarily result in improved teaching. In fact, the increased emphasis on testing could detract from academically rigorous learning opportunities that are students from certain demographic subgroups. Similarly, calling more public often lacking with attention to the failures of schools to adequately meet the needs of these students does little to they will receive instruction that is more engaging, more intellectu ensure that ally challenging, or more culturally or socially relevant. ESEA Although mandates reporting of AYP for reading and mathematics, the same is not 2008 year - true for science. With respect to science, ESEA only requires that by the 2007 school tate would have science assessments to be administered and reported for formative each s 5, grades 6 9, and grades 10 - 12. However, it is up to each - - purposes at least once during grades 3 untability systems or stakes science testing in state acco - state to decide whether to include high AYP reporting. Although science accountability policies affect all students, the impact is far greater for student groups that have traditionally been underserved in the education system. Separate from federal and state policies that apply to all students, specific policies apply ESEA to specific student groups. According to the Act: intended for “improving Title I is the largest federally funded educational program  the academic achievemen t of the disadvantaged” in order to meet “the educational poverty schools, limited - achieving children in our Nation's highest - needs of low English proficient children, migratory children, children with disabilities, Indian children, neglected or delinquent children, and young children in need of reading assistance.” to provide for school Title I, Part H, states that the Dropout Prevention Act aims “  dropout prevention and reentry and to raise academic achievement levels by e all children to attain their highest academic providing grants that (1) challeng potential; and (2) ensure that all students have substantial and ongoing opportunities wide programs proven - to attain their highest academic potential through school reentry.” effective in school dropout prevention and  Title III addresses “language instruction for limited English proficient and immigrant students.” Title VII is designed for “Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native education.”  Title IX prevents gender - based discrimination within federally funded educational  No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, programs. Title IX states, " be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to Release 21 2013 NGSS June Page 16 of

17 discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance" (Public Law No. 92 - 318, 86 Stat. 235). Title IX, Part A, SEC. 9101 (22), provides a federal definition and federal research  "The term gifted and talented, when used funding for gifted and talented students : with respect to s tudents, children, or youth, means students, children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities."  The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a law ensuring services to children with disabilities. Conclusions and Implications The NGSS offer a vision of science teaching and learning that presents both learning opportunities and demands for all students, particularly student groups that have traditionally been underrepresented in the science connected to classroom. Furthermore, the NGSS are th e CCSS for English language arts and mathematics . Changes in the new standards occur as student demographics in the nation become increasingly diverse while science achievement gaps persist among demographic subgroups. the less familiar to many science f NGSS are The academic rigor and expectations o teaching practices and require shifts for science or traditional conventional than teachers the CCSS for English language arts and teaching, which are consistent with shifts for teaching mathematics (see Figure 1). Science teachers need to acquire effective strategies to include all students regardless of racial, ethnic, cultural, linguistic, socioeconomic, and gender backgrounds. m strategies that While ef fective classroo enable students to engage in the NGSS will draw from the existing research literature, the NGSS will also stimulate new research agenda. F or example, research ience and school sc identify ways to make connections between uture may f dominant student groups as they engage in the NGSS. Future research home/community for non - to utilize and allocate school resources to support student learning in terms may also explore how NGSS of material reso urces, human capital, and social capital in relation to the . dominant student - all students, including non NGSS for the tive implementation of Effec groups, will require shifts in the education support system. Key components of the support system include teacher preparation and professional development, principal support and leadership, public - private - community partnerships, formal and informal classroom experiences logical that require considerable coordination among community stakeholders, techno - capabilities, network infrastructure, cyber learning opportunities, access to digital resources, the online learning communities, and virtual laboratories. As NGSS implementation takes root lso evolve and change accordingly. over time, these components of the education system will a Release 21 June 2013 NGSS Page 17 of

18 References American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). New Science for all Americans. York: Oxford University Press. Calabrese Barton, A., Drake, C., Perez, J. G., St. Louis, K., & George, M. (2004). Ecologies of Educational Researcher, 33 12. , 3 parental engagement in urban education. - Gamoran, A., Anderson, C. W., Quiroz, P. A., Secada, W. G., Williams, T., & Ashmann, S. teaching in math and science: How schoo Transforming (2003). ls and districts can support change. New York: Teachers College Press. González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms . Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates. & Rogoff, ). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of 2003 B. ( Gutiérrez, K., Educational Researcher, 32 25. - 19 practice. , Why are so many minority students in special education?: Harry, B., & Klingner, J. K. (2006). New York: Teachers College Press. ility in schools. Understanding race and disab Engineering in K 12 education: Understanding the - Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (2009). Washington, DC: The National Academy Press. status and improving the prospects. American Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. Billings, G. (1995). - Ladson - 491. 465 Educational Research Journal, 32, Lee, O., & Buxton, C. A. (2010). Diversity and equity in science education: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press. , G. Valdés ( Science and language for English language learners: 2013 ). Lee, O., Quinn, H., & Language demands and opportunities in relation to Next Generation Science Standards. Educational Researcher , , 223 - 233 42 Marx, R. W., & Harris, C. J. (2006). No Child Left Behind and science education: Opportunities, 477. - 467 , The Elementary School Journal, 106 challenges, and risks. National Association for Gifted Children (2010). entury ew n for a iftedness g Redefining : c Retrieved from: . aradigm p Shifting the http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles/About_NAGC/Redefining%20Giftedness%20for%20 . New%20Century.pdf a%20 - (NCES 2011 The condition of education 2011 National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). . , Institute of Education Sciences 033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education Release 21 2013 NGSS June Page 18 of

19 - (NCES 2012 ndition of education 2012 The co National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). , Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education . 045) National science education standards. National Research Council. (1996). Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research C ouncil. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K Press. ington, DC: National Academies - 8. Wash Ready, set, science!: 8 science Putting research to work in K - National Research Council. (2008). classrooms. National Academies Press. Washington, DC: National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, National Academies Press. Washington, DC: and pursuits. A framework for K 12 science education: Practices, - National Research Council. (2011). Academ Press. ies crosscutting themes, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Preparing the next generation of STEM innovators: National Science Foundation. (2010). Identifying and developing our nation’s human capital. Washington, DC: Author. National Science Foundation. (2012). eering indicators 2012: A broad base of Science and engin quantitative information on the U.S. and international science and engineering enterprise. Washington, DC: Author. Penuel, W., Riel, M., Krause, A., & Frank, K. (2009). Analyzing teachers’ professional Teachers College in a school as social capital: A social network approach. interactions 163. Record, 111 , 124 - Language demands and opportunities in relation to Quinn, H., Lee, O., & Valdés, G. (2012). : What teachers need Next Generation Science Standards for English language learners Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Understanding Language Initiative at to know. Stanford University (ell.stanford.edu). Rodriguez, A. ( ). Busting open the meritocracy myth: Rethinking equity and student 1998 Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and achievement in science education. 195 , Engineering, 4 216. - Rodriguez, A. J., & Berryman, C. (2002). Using sociotransformative constru ctivism to teach for understanding in diverse classrooms: A beginning teacher’s journey. American Educational Research Journal, 39 1045. , 1017 - Release 21 2013 June NGSS Page 19 of

20 Parsons, E. (2008). African American perspectives and informal science Simpson, J. S., & 293 Science Education, 93, educational experiences. - 321. in science education. (2013 Theory into Practice, 52 Special issue on diversity and equity ). (1). U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). Statistical abstract of the United States, 2012. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Accessed online at http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/education.html Release 21 2013 June NGSS Page 20 of

21 rds for Figure 1. Relationship s and convergences f ound in the Common Core State Standa M athematics (practices), Comm on Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy tices) ring prac Framework NRC the (student portraits), and (science & enginee Note: The letter and number set preceding each phrase denotes the discipline and number Framework The designated by the content standards. NRC is being used to guide the development e Standards. of the Next Generation Scienc We acknowledge Tina Cheuk for developing Figure 1 as part of the Understanding Language Initiative at Stanford University . Release 21 2013 June NGSS Page 21 of

Related documents

CityNT2019TentRoll 1

CityNT2019TentRoll 1

STATE OF NEW YORK 2 0 1 9 T E N T A T I V E A S S E S S M E N T R O L L PAGE 1 VALUATION DATE-JUL 01, 2018 COUNTY - Niagara T A X A B L E SECTION OF THE ROLL - 1 CITY - North Tonawanda TAX MAP NUMBER ...

More info »
CRPT 116hrpt9 u2

CRPT 116hrpt9 u2

U:\2019CONF\HJRes31Front.xml APPRO. SEN. [COMMITTEE PRINT] REPORT { } CONGRESS 116TH 1st HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Session 116- FURTHER APPROPRIATIONS FOR MAKING CONTINUING OF HOMELAND SECURITY FOR THE...

More info »
CalCOFI Atlas 33

CalCOFI Atlas 33

THE EARLY STAGES IN OF THE FISHES CALIFORNIA CURRENT REGION CALIFORNIA FISHERIES COOPERATIVE OCEANIC INVESTIGATIONS ATLAS NO. 33 BY THE SPONSORED STATES OF COMMERCE DEPARTMENT UNITED OCEANIC AND ATMOS...

More info »
RIE Tenant List By Docket Number

RIE Tenant List By Docket Number

SCRIE TENANTS LIST ~ By Docket Number ~ Borough of Bronx SCRIE in the last year; it includes tenants that have a lease expiration date equal or who have received • This report displays information on ...

More info »
ppacacon

ppacacon

111 TH C ONGRESS " ! LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL P RINT 111–1 2d Session COMPILATION OF PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT [As Amended Through May 1, 2010] INCLUDING P ATIENT P ROTECTION AND A FFORDAB...

More info »
MPI: A Message Passing Interface Standard

MPI: A Message Passing Interface Standard

MPI : A Message-Passing Interface Standard Version 3.0 Message Passing Interface Forum September 21, 2012

More info »
Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals Update

Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals Update

201 8 Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals U pdated Tables, March 2018 , Volume One

More info »
untitled

untitled

G:\P\16\HR1\INTRO.XML ... (Original Signature of Member) TH 116 CONGRESS 1 ST S ESSION H. R. 1 To expand Americans’ access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, and strengt...

More info »
JO 7400.11C   Airspace Designations and Reporting Points

JO 7400.11C Airspace Designations and Reporting Points

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORDER FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 7400.11C JO Air Traffic Organization Policy August 13, 2018 SUBJ: Airspace Designations and Reporting Points . This O rder, publ...

More info »
June2018CUR

June2018CUR

CHANCELLOR'S UNIVERSITY REPORT JUNE 25 2018

More info »
me bpd eng

me bpd eng

2013–14 Estimates Amendment Atlantic Canada Opportunity Agency: On February 22, 2013, the Prime-Minister announ ced changes to the Ministry. Effective immediately, the Minister of National Revenue is ...

More info »
pisa 2012 results volume I

pisa 2012 results volume I

PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do tICS, themA StuDent PeRfoRmAnCe In mA ReADIng AnD SCIenCe Volume I rogramme for ssessment A tudent S nternational I P

More info »
USDA Rural Development

USDA Rural Development

Select a state to see the income limits for the counties in that state. Rural Development Single Family Housing Loan Program Direct ME WA VT ND MT RI NH CT NY MN OR MA WI ID SD MI WY PA NJ IA DE OH NE...

More info »
catalog 2019

catalog 2019

2019 ® HARLEY-DAVIDSON GENUINE MOTOR PARTS & ACCESSORIES

More info »
OctoberCUR2018

OctoberCUR2018

CHANCELLOR'S UNIVERSITY REPORT OCTOBER 29 2018

More info »
The Health Consequences of Smoking   50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General

The Health Consequences of Smoking 50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General

The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress A Report of the Surgeon General U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

More info »
OperatorHoursReport

OperatorHoursReport

John Bel Edwards Rebekah E. Gee MD, MPH SECRETARY GOVERNOR State of Louisiana Louisiana Department of Health Office of Public Health Certified Water and Wastewater Operators 2018 - 2019 Hours Hours li...

More info »
625137

625137

2018-19 Nebraska All-Sports Record Book - Nebraska Communications Office -

More info »
UNSCEAR 2008 Report Vol.I

UNSCEAR 2008 Report Vol.I

This publication contains: VOLUME I: SOURCES SOURCES AND EFFECTS Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation to the General Assembly OF IONIZING RADIATION Scie...

More info »
PB

PB

OFFICIAL 2019 CONNECTICUT PRACTICE BOOK (Revision of 1998) CONTAINING RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT RULES FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE APPENDIX OF FORMS...

More info »