1一个新的概念框架 A NEW CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

一个新的概念框架
1

一个新的概念框架
A NEW CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Science and engineering—significant parts of human culture that represent some of the pinnacles of human achievement—are not only major intellectual enterprises but also can improve people’s lives in fundamental ways. Although the intrinsic beauty of science and a fascination with how the world works have driven exploration and discovery for centuries, many of the challenges that face humanity now and in the future—related, for example, to the environment, energy, and health—require social, political, and economic solutions that must be informed deeply by knowledge of the underlying science and engineering.
科学和工程是人类文化的重要组成部分，代表了人类成就巅峰的一部分，它们不仅是重要的
人类智力成就（ major intellectual enterprises），而且可以从根本上改善人们的生活。尽管数百年来，科学的内在美和对世界奥秘的迷恋一直推动着探索和发现，但人类现在和未来面临的许多挑战，例如与环境、能源和健康有关的挑战，需要社会、政治、以及经济解决方案，而这些方案必须依赖于深厚的基础科学和工程知识。

Many recent calls for improvements in K-12 science education have focused on the need for science and engineering professionals to keep the United States competitive in the international arena. Although there is little doubt that this need is genuine, a compelling case can also be made that understanding science and engineering, now more than ever, is essential for every American citizen.
最近，许多关于改善K-12科学教育的呼吁都集中在对科学和工程专业人员的需求上，以保持美国在国际舞台上的竞争力。尽管毫无疑问，这种需求是真实的，但另一个需求同样令人信服，即对每个美国公民，现在比以往任何时候都更需要理解科学和工程。

Science, engineering, and the technologies they influence permeate every aspect of modern life. Indeed, some knowledge of science and engineering is required to engage with the major public policy issues of today as well as to make informed everyday decisions, such as selecting among alternative medical treatments or determining how to invest public funds for water supply options. In addition, understanding science and the extraordinary insights it has produced can be meaningful and relevant on a personal level, opening new worlds to explore and offering lifelong opportunities for enriching people’s lives. In these contexts, learning science is important for everyone, even those who eventually choose careers in fields other than science or engineering.
科学、工程以及受其影响的技术渗透到现代生活的方方面面。事实上，我们需要一些科学和工程知识来处理当今的重大公共政策问题，并做出明智的日常决策，例如在替代医疗方案中进行选择，或决定如何为供水方案投资公共资金。此外，在个人层面上，对科学及其产生的非凡洞察力的理解对帮助开拓新天地，为丰富人们的生活提供终身机会具有重要意义。在这种情况下，学习科学对每个人都很重要，即使是那些最终选择了科学或工程以外职业的人。
7

The conceptual framework presented in this report of the Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards articulates the committee’s vision of the scope and nature of the education in science, engineer ing, and technology needed for the 21st century. It is intended as a guide to the next step, which is the process of developing standards for all students. Thus it describes the major practices, crosscutting concepts, and disciplinary core ideas that all students should be familiar with by the end of high school, and it provides an outline of how these practices, concepts, and ideas should be developed across the grade levels. Engineering and technology are featured alongside the physical sciences, life sciences, and earth and space sciences for two critical reasons: to reflect the importance of understanding the human-built world and to recognize the value of better integrating the teaching and learning of science, engineering, and technology.
“K-12科学教育概念框架委员会”在这份报告中提出的“概念框架”阐明了委员会对21世纪所需科学、工程和技术教育的范围和性质的愿景。它旨在指导下一步，即为所有学生制定标准的过程。因此，它描述了所有学生在高中结束前都应该熟悉的重要的实践、交叉概念和学科核心概念，并概述了这些内容应该如何在各个年级发展。工程和技术与物质科学、生命科学、地球和空间科学并驾齐驱，有两个关键原因：一是反映理解人工世界（human-built world）的重要性，二是认识到将科学、工程和技术的教学进行更好整合的价值。

By framework we mean a broad description of the content and sequence of learning expected of all students by the completion of high school—but not at the level of detail of grade-by-grade standards or, at the high school level, course descriptions and standards. Instead, as this document lays out, the framework is intended as a guide to standards developers as well as for curriculum designers, assessment developers, state and district science administrators, profession-als responsible for science teacher education, and science educators working in informal settings.
我们所说的“框架”指的是对所有学生在高中毕业时希望学到的（expected）学习内容和顺序的广泛描述，但不是在逐个年级标准的细节层面，或者在高中层面，课程描述和标准层面。相反，正如本文件所述，该框架旨在为它旨在为标准制定者、课程设计者、评估制定者、州和地区科学管理者、负责科学教师培训的专业人士以及在非正式科学环境中工作的科学教育者提供指导。

There are two primary reasons why a new framework is needed at this time.
目前需要一个新框架的主要原因有两个。

One is that it has been 15 or more years since the last comparable effort at the national scale, and new understandings both in science and in teaching and learning science have developed over that time. The second is the opportunity provided by a movement of multiple states to adopt common standards in mathematics and in language arts, which has prompted interest in comparable documents for science. This framework is the first part of a two-stage process to produce a next- generation set of science standards for voluntary adoption by states. The second step—the development of a set of standards based on this framework—is a state- led effort coordinated by Achieve, Inc., involving multiple opportunities for input from the states’ science educators, including teachers, and the public.
其中之一是，自上次在全国范围内进行类似的努力以来，已经过去了15年或更长时间，在这段时间里，我们对科学和科学教育都有了新的理解。第二是多个州将在数学和语言艺术方面采用共同标准，这造成了一个机会促使人们对科学方面的类似文件产生了兴趣。本框架是一个两步过程的第一步，该过程旨在制定一套供各州自愿采用的下一代科学标准。第二步是在这个框架基础上制定一套标准，这项工作将由州领导，由Achieve公司协调， 来自州科学教育工作者（包括教师）和公众可以有很多进言的机会。

A VISION FOR K-12 EDUCATION IN THE SCIENCES AND ENGINEERING
K-12 科学和工程教育的愿景
The framework is designed to help realize a vision for education in the sciences and engineering in which students, over multiple years of school, actively engage in scientific and engineering practices and apply crosscutting concepts to deepen their understanding of the core ideas in these fields. The learning experiences provided for students should engage them with fundamental questions about the world and with how scientists have investigated and found answers to those questions. Throughout grades K-12, students should have the opportunity to carry out scientific investigations and engineering design projects related to the disciplinary core ideas.
该框架旨在帮助实现科学和工程教育的愿景，在这一愿景中，学生在多年的学校生活中，积极参与科学和工程实践，并应用跨学科概念，加深对各领域学科核心概念的理解。为学生提供的学习经验应该让他们了解有关世界的基本问题，以及科学家如何调查并找到这些问题的答案。在整个K-12年级，学生应有机会参加与学科核心概念相关的科学调查和工程设计项目。
By the end of the 12th grade, students should have gained sufficient knowl- edge of the practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas of science and engi- neering to engage in public discussions on science-related issues, to be critical consumers of scientific information related to their everyday lives, and to continue to learn about science throughout their lives. They should come to appreciate
that science and the current scientific understanding of the world are the result of many hundreds of years of creative human endeavor. It is especially important to note that the above goals are for all students, not just those who pursue careers in science, engineering, or technology or those who continue on to higher education.
We anticipate that the insights gained and interests provoked from study- ing and engaging in the practices of science and engineering during their K-12 schooling should help students see how science and engineering are instrumental in addressing major challenges that confront society today, such as generating sufficient energy, preventing and treating diseases, maintaining supplies of clean water and food, and solving the problems of global environmental change. In addition, although not all students will choose to pursue careers in science, engi- neering, or technology, we hope that a science education based on the framework will motivate and inspire a greater number of people—and a better representation

A New Conceptual Framework 9

❚ The framework is designed to help realize a vision for education in the sciences and engineering in which students, over multiple years of
school, actively engage in scientific and engineering practices and apply
crosscutting concepts to deepen their understanding of the core ideas in these fields. ❚

of the broad diversity of the American population—to follow these paths than is the case today.
The committee’s vision takes into account two major goals for K-12 science education: (1) educating all students in science and engineering and (2) providing the foundational knowledge for those who will become the scientists, engineers, technologists, and technicians of the future. The framework principally concerns itself with the first task—what all students should know in preparation for their individual lives and for their roles as citizens in this technology-rich and scientifi- cally complex world. Course options, including Advanced Placement (AP) or hon- ors courses, should be provided that allow for greater breadth or depth in the sci- ence topics that students pursue, not only in the usual disciplines taught as natural sciences in the K-12 context but also in allied subjects, such as psychology, com- puter science, and economics. It is the committee’s conviction that such an educa- tion, done well, will excite many more young people about science-related subjects and generate a desire to pursue science- or engineering-based careers.
Achieving the VisionThe framework is motivated in part by a growing national consensus around the need for greater coherence—that is, a sense of unity—in K-12 science education. Too often, standards are long lists of detailed and disconnected facts, reinforcing the criticism that science curricula in the United States tend to be “a mile wide and an inch deep” [1]. Not only is such an approach alienating to young people, but it can also leave them with just fragments of knowledge and little sense of the creative achievements of science, its inherent logic and consistency, and its uni- versality. Moreover, that approach neglects the need for students to develop an understanding of the practices of science and engineering, which is as important to understanding science as knowledge of its content.
The framework endeavors to move science education toward a more coherent vision in three ways. First, it is built on the notion of learning as a developmental

10 A Framework for K-12 Science Education

progression. It is designed to help children continually build on and revise their knowledge and abilities, starting from their curiosity about what they see around them and their initial conceptions about how the world works. The goal is to guide their knowledge toward a more scientifically based and coherent view of the sci- ences and engineering, as well as of the ways in which they are pursued and their results can be used.
它（框架？）的目的是帮助孩子们从他们对周围事物的好奇心和他们对世界如何运作的最初概念开始，不断地建立和修正他们的知识和能力。 目标是引导他们的知识朝着更科学和连贯的科学和工程观点，以及他们追求的方式和可以使用的结果的方向发展。
Second, the framework focuses on a limited number of core ideas in science and engineering both within and across the disciplines. The committee made this choice in order to avoid shallow coverage of a large number of topics and to allow more time for teachers and students to explore each idea in greater depth. Reduction of the sheer sum of details to be mastered is intended to give time for students to engage in scientific investigations and argumentation and to achieve depth of understanding of the core ideas presented. Delimiting what is to be learned about each core idea within each grade band also helps clarify what is most important to spend time on and avoid the proliferation of detail to be learned with no conceptual grounding.
其次，该框架侧重于学科内和跨学科的科学和工程领域的少数核心概念。委员会之所以做出这样的选择，是为了避免对大量话题进行肤浅的覆盖，让师生有更多的时间更深入地探索每个想法。减少大量的细节，是为了让学生有时间进行科学研究和论证，并对这些已经提出的核心概念有更深入的理解。在每个年级范围内划定关于每个核心概念要学习的内容，也有助于阐明这些概念是最重要的内容需要花费大量时间，而避免在没有概念基础的情况下学习细枝末节。
Third, the framework emphasizes that learning about science and engineer- ing involves integration of the knowledge of scientific explanations (i.e., content knowledge) and the practices needed to engage in scientific inquiry and engineer- ing design. Thus the framework seeks to illustrate how knowledge and practice must be intertwined in designing learning experiences in K-12 science education.
第三，该框架强调科学与工程的学习过程，涉及对科学知识的解释（即内容知识）、科学探究、工程设计，这些实践内容的整合。 因此，该框架旨在说明在设计 K-12 科学教育的学习体验时，如何把知识和实践交织在一起。
Limitations of This Framework
框架的局限性
The terms “science,” “engineering,” and “technology” are often lumped together as a single phrase, both in this report and in education policy circles. But it is important to define what is meant by each of these terms in this report—and why.
无论是在本报告中还是在教育政策界，“科学”、“工程”和“技术”这三个术语通常被归为一个短语。但在本报告中定义这些术语的含义及其原因是非常重要的。
In the K-12 context, science is generally taken to mean the traditional natu- ral sciences: physics, chemistry, biology, and (more recently) earth, space, and environmental sciences. In this document, we include core ideas for these disciplin- ary areas, but not for all areas of science, as discussed further below. This limita- tion matches our charge and the need of schools for a next generation of stan- dards in these areas. Engineering and technology are included as they relate to the applications of science, and in so doing they offer students a path to strengthen their understanding of the role of sciences. We use the term engineering in a very broad sense to mean any engagement in a systematic practice of design to achieve solutions to particular human problems. Likewise, we broadly use the term technology to include all types of human-made systems and processes—not in the

A New Conceptual Framework 11

limited sense often used in schools that equates technology with modern computational and communications devices. Technologies result when engineers apply their understanding of the natural world and of human behavior to design ways to satisfy human needs and wants. This is not to say that science necessarily pre- cedes technology; throughout history, advances in scientific understanding often have been driven by engineers’ questions as they work to design new or improved machines or systems.
在 K-12 的背景下，科学通常被认为是指传统的自然科学：物理学、化学、生物学，以及地球、空间和环境科学。在本文中，我们包含了这些学科领域的核心概念，但并非所有科学领域的核心概念，如下文进一步讨论的。这一限制符合我们的要求和学校对这些领域下一代标准的需求。工程和技术与科学应用相关，因此也包括在内，因为它们为学生提供了一条途径，以加强对科学作用的理解。我们在广义上使用“工程”，来表示任何参与系统设计实践以实现特定人类问题的解决方案。同样，我们使用广义的“技术”，来包括所有类型的人造系统和过程——而不是学校中经常使用的将技术等同于应用现代计算和通信设备这些内容。当工程师应用他们对自然世界和人类行为的理解来设计满足人类需求的方法时，技术就会产生。这并不是说科学必然先于技术。纵观历史，科学理解的进步通常是由工程师在设计新的或提出改进的机器或系统时呗不断推动前进的。
Engineering and technology, defined in these broad ways, are included in the framework for several reasons. First, the committee thinks it is important for students to explore the practical use of science, given that a singular focus on the core ideas of the disciplines would tend to shortchange the importance of applica- tions. Second, at least at the K-8 level, these topics typically do not appear else- where in the curriculum and thus are neglected if not included in science instruc- tion. Finally, engineering and technology provide a context in which students can test their own developing scientific knowledge and apply it to practical problems; doing so enhances their understanding of science—and, for many, their interest in science—as they recognize the interplay among science, engineering, and technol- ogy. We are convinced that engagement in the practices of engineering design is as much a part of learning science as engagement in the practices of science [2].
It is important to note, however, that the framework is not intended to define course structure, particularly at the high school level. Many high schools already have courses designated as technology, design, or even engineering that go beyond the limited introduction to these topics specified in the framework. These courses are often taught by teachers who have specialized expertise and do not consider themselves to be science teachers. The committee takes no posi- tion on such courses—nor, in fact, on any particular set of course sequence options for students at the high school level. We simply maintain that some introduction to engineering practice, the application of science, and the inter- relationship of science, engineering, and technology is integral to the learning of science for all students.
❚ The committee’s vision takes into account two major goals for K-12 science education: (1) educating all students in science and engineeringand (2) providing the foundational knowledge for those who will become the scientists, engineers, technologists, and technicians of the future. ❚

12 A Framework for K-12 Science Education

More generally, this framework should not be interpreted as limiting advanced courses that go beyond the material included here—all students at the high school level should have opportunities for advanced study in areas of interest to them, and it is hoped that, for many, this will include further study of specific science disciplines in honors or AP courses. Such course options may include top- ics, such as neurobiology, and even disciplines, such as economics, that are not included in this framework.
Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences
Although some aspects of the behavioral sciences are incorporated in the frame- work as part of life sciences, the social, behavioral, and economic sciences are not fully addressed. The committee did not identify a separate set of core ideas for these fields for several reasons.
First, the original charge to the committee did not include these disciplines. Second, social, behavioral, and economic sciences include a diverse array of fields (sociology, economics, political science, anthropology, all of the branches of psy- chology) with different methods, theories, relationships to other disciplines of science, and representation in the K-12 curriculum. Although some are currently represented in grades K-12, many are not or appear only in courses offered at the high school level.
Third, the committee based the framework on existing documents that out- line the major ideas for K-12 science education, including the National Science Education Standards (NSES) [3], the Benchmarks for Science Literacy [4] and the accompanying Atlas [5], the Science Framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) [6], and the Science College Board Standards for College Success [7]. Most of these documents do not cover all of the fields that are part of the social, behavioral, and economic sciences comprehensively, and some omit them entirely.
Fourth, understanding how to integrate the social, behavioral, and economic sciences into standards, given how subjects are currently organized in the K-12 system, is especially complex. These fields have typically not been included as part of the science curriculum and, as noted above, are not represented systematically in some of the major national-level documents that identify core concepts for K-12 science. Also, many of the topics related to the social, behavioral, and economic sciences are incorporated into curricula or courses identified as social studies and may be taught from a humanities perspective. In fact, the National Council for the Social Studies has a set of National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies that

A New Conceptual Framework 13

includes standards in such areas as psychology, sociology, geography, anthropol- ogy, political science, and economics [8].
The limited treatment of these fields in this report’s framework should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the social, behavioral, and economic sci- ences should be omitted from the K-12 curriculum. On the contrary, the commit- tee strongly believes that these important disciplines need their own framework for defining core concepts to be learned at the K-12 level and that learning (the development of understanding of content and practices) in the physical, life, earth, and space sciences and engineering should be strongly linked with parallel learning in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences. Any such framework must also address important and challenging issues of school and curriculum organization around the domain of social sciences and social studies.
Our committee has neither the charge nor the expertise to undertake that important work. Thus, although we have included references to some of the social, behavioral, and economic issues connected to the sciences that are the focus of our own framework (see, for example, Core Idea 2 in engineering, technol-
ogy, and applications of science), we do not consider these references to define the entirety of what students should learn or discuss about social, behavioral, and economic sciences.
In a separate effort, the National Research Council (NRC) has plans to con- vene a workshop to begin exploring a definition of what core ideas in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences would be appropriate to teach at the K-12 level and at what grade levels to introduce them. As noted above, there are many quite distinct realms of study covered by the terms. Given the multiplicity and variety
of disciplines involved, only a few of which are currently addressed in any way in K-12 classrooms, there is much work to be done to address the role of these sci- ences in the development of an informed 21st-century citizen. It is clear, however, to the authors of this report that these sciences, although different in focus, do have much in common with the subject areas included here, so that much of what this report discusses in defining scientific and engineering practices and crosscut- ting concepts has application across this broader realm of science.
Computer Science and Statistics
Computer science and statistics are other areas of science that are not addressed here, even though they have a valid presence in K-12 education. Statistics is basi- cally a subdiscipline of mathematical sciences, and it is addressed to some extent in the common core mathematics standards. Computer science, too, can be seen

14 A Framework for K-12 Science Education

as a branch of the mathematical sciences, as well as having some elements of engi- neering. But, again, because this area of the curriculum has a history and a teach- ing corps that are generally distinct from those of the sciences, the committee has not taken this domain as part of our charge. Once again, this omission should not be interpreted to mean that computer science or statistics should be excluded from the K-12 curriculum. There are aspects of computational and statistical thinking that must be understood and applied in learning about the sciences, and we iden- tify these aspects, along with mathematical thinking, in our discussion of science practices in Chapter 3.

ABOUT THIS REPORT
The Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards was established by the NRC to undertake the study on which this report is based. Composed of 18 members reflecting a diversity of perspectives and a broad range of expertise, the committee includes professionals in the natural sciences, mathematics, engineering, cognitive and developmental psychology, the learning sciences, education policy and implementation, research on learning sci- ence in the classroom, and the practice of teaching science.
The committee’s charge was to develop a conceptual framework that would specify core ideas in the life sciences, physical sciences, earth and space sciences, and engineering and technology, as well as crosscutting concepts and practices, around which standards should be developed. The committee was also charged with articulating how these disciplinary ideas and crosscutting concepts intersect for at least three grade levels and to develop guidance for implementa- tion (see Box 1-1).
Scope and ApproachThe committee carried out the charge through an iterative process of amassing information, deliberating on it, identifying gaps, gathering further information to fill these gaps, and holding further discussions. In our search for particulars, we held three public fact-finding meetings, reviewed published reports and unpub- lished research, and commissioned experts to prepare and present papers. At our fourth meeting, we deliberated on the form and structure of the framework and on the content of the report’s supporting chapters, to prepare a draft framework for public release in July 2010. During the fifth and sixth meetings, we considered the feedback received from the public and developed a plan for revising the draft framework based on this input (see below for further details).

A New Conceptual Framework 15

The nature of the charge—to identify the scientific and engineering ideas and practices that are most important for all students in grades K-12 to learn— means that the committee ultimately had to rely heavily on its own expertise and collective judgments. To the extent possible, however, we used research-based evidence and past efforts to inform these judgments.

负责的本质——对所有 K-12 年级学生来说最重要的是掌握科学和工程的理念和实践——这意味着最终委员会十分依赖自己的专业知识和集体判断。我们尽可能使用基于研究的证据和过去的研究成果来为这些判断提供信息。

16 A Framework for K-12 Science Education

Design Teams
Our approach combined evidence on the learning and teaching of science and engineering with a detailed examination of previous science standards documents. It is important to note that even where formal research is limited, the report is based on the collective experi- ence of the science education and science education research communities. All the practices suggested have been explored in classrooms, as have the crosscutting concepts (though perhaps under other names such as “unifying themes”).
我们的方法结合了有关科学和工程中学习和教学的证据，并对以前的科学标准文件进行了详细审查。值得注意的是，即使正式研究非常有限，但该报告也基于科学教育和科学教育研究团体的集体经验。包括跨学科概念在内，所提出的实践都在课堂上进行了探索（尽管可能用“统一主题”等其他名称）。

The committee’s work was significantly advanced by the contributions of four design teams, which were contracted by the NRC to prepare materials that described the core ideas in the natural sciences and engineering and outlined how these ideas could be developed across grades K-12. Each team had a designated leader who provided guidance and interacted frequently with the committee. The materials developed by the teams form the foundation for the core disciplinary ideas and grade band endpoints described in this report (Chapters 5-8). A list of the design team participants appears in Appendix D.

与NRC签订合同的四个设计团队的贡献极大地推动了委员会的工作，设计团队不仅准备了有关自然科学和工程领域核心思想的材料，并且阐述了如何在K-12年级发展这些想法。每个团队都有一名指定的负责人，负责提供指导，并经常与委员会互动。团队开发的材料构成了本报告（第 5-8 章）中描述的核心学科理念和等级终点的基础。设计团队成员名单见附录D。

The design teams were asked to begin their work by considering the ideas and practices described in the NSES [3], AAAS Benchmarks [4], Science Framework for the 2009 NAEP [6], and Science College Board Standards for College Success [7] as well as the relevant research on learning and teaching in science. The teams prepared drafts and presented them to the committee dur- ing the closed portions of our first three meetings. Between meetings, the teams revised their drafts in response to committee comments. Following the release of the July 2010 draft (see the next section), the leaders of the design teams continued to interact with committee members as they planned the revisions of the draft framework. No members of the design teams participated in the dis- cussions during which the committee reached consensus on the content of the final draft.
设计团队要基于 NSES [3]、AAAS 基准 [4]、2009 NAEP [6] 科学框架和大学成功科学大学理事会标准 [7] 中陈述的想法和实践来开始他们的工作以及科学学与教的相关研究。在前三场会议的非公开环节中，团队准备了草案并在提交给委员会。在 2010 年 7 月的草案发布后（见下一节），因为他们计划对草案框架进行修订，所以设计团队的负责人继续与委员会成员互动。委员会就最终草案的内容达成共识的期间，没有设计团队成员参与

❚ The framework and subsequent standards will not lead to improvements in K-12 science education unless the other components of the system—curriculum, instruction, professional development, and assessment— change so that they are aligned with the framework’s vision. ❚
该框架和后续标准不会影响 K-12 科学教育的改进，除非该系统的其他组成部分（课程、教学、专业发展和评估）改变，使它们与框架的愿景保持一致。

A New Conceptual Framework 17

Public Feedback

The committee recognized early in the process that obtaining feedback from a broad range of stakeholders and experts would be crucial to the success of the framework. For this reason, we obtained permission from the NRC to release a draft version of the framework for public comment.
The draft version was prepared, underwent an expedited NRC review, and was released in early July 2010. It was then posted online for a period of three weeks, during which time individuals could submit comments through an online survey. In addition, NRC staff contacted over 40 organizations in science, engi- neering, and education, notifying them of the public comment period and asking them to hold focus groups to gather feedback from members or to at least notify their members of the opportunity to comment online. The NRC also worked closely with the National Science Teachers Association, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Achieve, Inc., and the Council of State Science Supervisors both to facilitate the public input process and to organize focus groups. Finally, the committee asked nine experts to provide detailed feedback on the public draft.
During the 3-week public comment period, the committee received exten- sive input from both individuals and groups: a total of more than 2,000 people responded to the online survey. More than 30 focus groups were held around the country, with 15-40 participants in each group. The committee also received let- ters from key individuals and organizations. A list of the organizations that par- ticipated in the focus groups or submitted letters is included in Appendix A.
NRC staff, together with the committee chair, reviewed all of the input and developed summaries that identified the major issues raised and outlined possible revisions to the draft framework. Committee members reviewed these summaries and also had the opportunity to review the public feedback in detail. Based on discussions at the fifth and sixth meetings, the committee made substantial revi- sions to the framework based on the feedback. A summary of the major issues raised in the public feedback and the revisions the committee made is included in Appendix A.

Structure of the Report
The first nine chapters of this report outline the principles underlying the frame- work, describe the core ideas and practices for K-12 education in the natural sciences and engineering, and provide examples of how these ideas and practices should be integrated into any standards.

18 A Framework for K-12 Science Education

The remaining four chapters of the report address issues related to design- ing and implementing standards and strengthening the research base that should inform them. Chapter 10 articulates the issues related to curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Chapter 11 discusses important considerations related to equity and diversity. Chapter 12 provides guidance for standards developers as they work to apply the framework. Finally, Chapter 13 outlines the research agenda that would allow a systematic implementation of the framework and related standards. The chapter also specifies the kinds of research needed for future iterations of the standards to be better grounded in evidence.

NEXT STEPS
The National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers have developed “Common Core State Standards” in mathematics and language arts, and 43 states and the District of Columbia have adopted these stan- dards as of early 2011. The anticipation of a similar effort for science standards was a prime motivator for this NRC study and the resulting framework described in this report.
To maintain the momentum, the Carnegie Corporation commissioned the nonpartisan and nonprofit educational reform organization Achieve, Inc., to lead states in developing new science standards based on the NRC framework in this report. There is no prior commitment from multiple states to adopt such stan- dards, so the process will be different from the Common Core process used for mathematics and language arts. But it is expected that Achieve will form partner- ships with a number of states in undertaking this work and will offer multiple opportunities for public comment.
As our report was being completed, Achieve’s work on science standards was already under way, starting with an analysis of international science bench- marking in high-performing countries that is expected to inform the standards development process. We understand that Achieve has also begun some prelimi- nary planning for that process based on the draft framework that was circulated for public comment in summer 2010. The relevance of such work should deepen once the revised framework in this report, on which Achieve’s standards will be based, is released. It should be noted, however, that our study and the framework described in this report are independent of the work of Achieve.
The framework and any standards that will be based on it make explicit the goals around which a science education system should be organized [9]. The com- mittee recognizes, however, that the framework and subsequent standards will not

A New Conceptual Framework 19

lead to improvements in K-12 science education unless the other components of the system—curriculum, instruction, professional development, and assessment— change so that they are aligned with the framework’s vision. Thus the framework and standards are necessary but not sufficient to support the desired improve- ments. In Chapter 10, we address some of the challenges inherent in achieving such alignment.

20页

The com- mittee recognizes, however, that the framework and subsequent standards will not lead to improvements in K-12 science education unless the other components of the system—curriculum, instruction, professional development, and assessment— change so that they are aligned with the framework’s vision. Thus the framework and standards are necessary but not sufficient to support the desired improve- ments. In Chapter 10, we address some of the challenges inherent in achieving such alignment.

然而，委员会认识到，除非改变系统的其他组成部分——课程、教学、专业发展和评估，使它们与框架的愿景一致，否则框架和后续标准将不会导致K-12科学教育的改进。因此，框架和标准是必需的，但不足以支持所希望的改进。在第10章中，我们解决了一些固有挑战，以实现一致。

20 A Framework for K-12 Science Education