SURVEY TOOL Iowa Department of Education Next Generation Science Science Standards Review Team 5 March 2015

Next Generation Science Standards Survey
1. Do you currently live in Iowa?

Response
Percent
Answer Options
a. Yes
b. No
97.9%
2.1%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
2471
52
2523
0
2. Which stakeholder group do you primarily represent as you complete this survey?
Response
Percent
Answer Options
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
c. Area Education Agency Personnel
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
f. Student
g. Community member
h. Business
i. Other (Please specify)
50.7%
4.3%
1.3%
3.5%
25.7%
2.4%
6.7%
0.9%
4.4%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
1280
108
34
88
649
61
168
23
112
2523
0
3. Are you directly involved in Science education?

Answer Options
a. Yes
b. No
Response
Percent
60.9%
39.1%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
1536
987
2523
0
4. The Next Generation Science Standards are well-organized and easy to read.
Answer Options
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
e. Strongly Disagree
Response
Percent
Response
Count
20.1%
42.9%
23.7%
10.5%
2.9%
376
804
444
196
55
answered question
skipped question
1875
648
5. Please comment about the organization of the Next Generation Science Standards.
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
727
727
1796
6. The Next Generation Science Standards currently show all middle school (grades 6-8) standards
Response
Percent
Answer Options
band.
Grade 8.
41.0%
59.0%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
768
1107
1875
648
7. Please comment about your response to the middle school standards.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
802
802
1721
8. The breadth and depth of content of the Next Generation Science Standards will prepare studen
Answer Options
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
Response
Percent
25.3%
43.5%
21.4%
7.3%
2.4%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
458
786
387
132
44
1807
716
9. Please comment about the breadth and depth of content of the Next Generation Science Standa
Answer Options
Response
Count
answered question
skipped question
660
660
1863
10. What are the major strengths of the Next Generation Science Standards?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
941
941
1582
11. What are concerns you have about the Next Generation Science Standards?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
938
938
1585
12. Thank you for completing the basic Science Standards Survey. Click Submit if you would like to
Response
Percent
Answer Options
Submit
Continue
85.6%
14.4%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
1435
242
1677
846
13. On which grade range would you like to comment?

Answer Options
a. K-2
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
K-2
Response
Percent
8.5%
9.2%
17.4%
30.0%
10.9%
23.9%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
25
27
51
88
32
70
293
2230
14. PS1 Discipline sub-ideas

Answer Options
PS1A Structure and Properties of Matter
PS1B Chemical Reactions
PS1C Nuclear Processes
Keep as is
Change the
wording
17
17
15
5
5
3
answered question
skipped question
15. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1A Structure and Properties of Matter? (Indicat
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
16. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1B Chemical Reactions? (Indicate if your feedb
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
17. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1C Nuclear Processes? (Indicate if your feedbac
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
7
2516

Answer Options
PS2A Forces and Motion
PS2B Types of Interactions
PS2C Stability and Instability in Physical Systems
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
16
16
5
5
4
answered question
skipped question
19. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2A Forces and Motion? (Indicate if your feedba
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
20. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2B Types of Interactions? (Indicate if your feed
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
21. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2C Stability and Instability in Physical Systems
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518

Answer Options
PS3A Definitions of Energy
PS3B Conservation of Energy and Energy Transfer
PS3C Relationship Between Energy and Forces
PS3D Energy and Chemical Processes in Everyday Life
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
15
15
15
4
4
4
4
answered question
skipped question
23. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3A Definitions of Energy? (Indicate if your feed
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
24. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3B Conservation of Energy and Energy Transfer
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
25. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3C Relationship Between Energy and Forces? (I
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
26. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3D Energy and Chemical Processes in Everyday
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519

Answer Options
PS4A Wave Properties
PS4B Electromagnetic Radiation
PS4C Information Technologies and Instrumentation
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
14
14
3
5
5
answered question
skipped question
28. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4A Wave Properties (Indicate if your feedback
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
29. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4B Electromagnetic Radiation (Indicate if your
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
30. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4C Information Technologies and Instrumentati
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
31. LS1 Discipline sub-ideas

Answer Options
LS1A Structure and Function
LS1B Growth and Development of Organisms
Organisms
LS1D Information Processing
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
15
14
13
2
2
3
3
answered question
skipped question
32. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1A Structure and Function (Indicate if your feed
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
33. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1B Growth and Development of Organisms (Ind
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
34. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1C Organization for Matter and Energy Flow in
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
35. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1D Information Processing (Indicate if your fee
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521

Answer Options
LS2A Interdependent Relationships in Ecosystems
LS2B Cycles of Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems
LS2C Ecosystem Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience
LS2D Social Interactions and Group Behavior
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
13
14
14
3
3
4
2
answered question
skipped question
37. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2A Interdependent Relationships in Ecosystems
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
38. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2B Cycles of Matter and Energy Transfer in Eco
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
39. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2C Ecosystem Dynamics, Functioning, and Resi
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
40. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2D Social Interactions and Group Behavior (Ind
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520

Answer Options
LS3A Inheritance of Traits
LS3B Variation of Traits
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
15
2
2
answered question
skipped question
42. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3A Inheritance of Traits (Indicate if your feedba
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
43. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3B Variation of Traits (Indicate if your feedback
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
LS4A Evidence of Common Ancestry

LS4B Natural Selection
LS4C Adaptation
LS4D Biodiversity and Humans
16
16
16
16
2
3
2
2
answered question
skipped question
45. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4A Evidence of Common Ancestry (Indicate if yo
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
46. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4B Natural Selection (Indicate if your feedback
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
47. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4C Adaptation (Indicate if your feedback is spe
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
48. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4D Biodiversity and Humans (Indicate if your fe
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
49. ESS1 Discipline sub-ideas

Answer Options
ESS1A The Universe and Its Stars
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
ESS1B Earth and the Solar System

ESS1C The History of Planet Earth
16
16
3
3
answered question
skipped question
50. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1A The Universe and Its Stars (Indicate if your
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
51. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1B Earth and the Solar System (Indicate if you
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
52. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C The History of Planet Earth (Indicate if you
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
53. ESS2 Discipline sub-ideas

Answer Options
ESS2A Earth Materials and Systems
Interactions
ESS2C The Roles of Water in Earths Surface Processes
ESS2D Weather and Climate
ESS2E Biogeology
Keep as is
Change the
wording
14
15
14
14
14
3
2
3
2
3
answered question
skipped question
54. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2A Earth Materials and Systems (Indicate if yo
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
55. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2B Plate Tectonics and Large - Scale System In
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
56. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2C The Roles of Water in Earths Surface Proc
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
57. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2D Weather and Climate (Indicate if your feed
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
58. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2E Biogeology (Indicate if your feedback is sp
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
59. ESS3 Earth and Human Activity

Answer Options
ESS3A Natural Resources
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
ESS3B Natural Hazards

ESS3C Human Impacts on Earth Systems
ESS3D Global Climate Change
16
16
16
2
2
1
answered question
skipped question
60. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3A Natural Resources (Indicate if your feedba
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
61. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3B Natural Hazards (Indicate if your feedback
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
62. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3C Human Impacts on Earth Systems (Indicate
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
63. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3D Global Climate Change (Indicate if your fee
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
64. Would you like to return to other grade range options?

Answer Options
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes
No, Finish Survey
21.7%
78.3%
5
18
answered question
skipped question
23
2500
3-5
3-5
65. PS1 Matter and Its Interactions

Eliminate
2
2
3
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
24
24
21
Answer Options
24
2499
66. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1A Str

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
67. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 B Ch

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
68. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 C Nu

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
69. PS2 Motion and Stability: Forces and Interactions

Eliminate
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
22
22
22
Answer Options
22
2501
70. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2A For

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
71. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2B Typ

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
72. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2C Sta

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
73. PS3 Energy

Eliminate
2
2
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
21
21
21
21
Answer Options
21
2502
74. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3A De

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
75. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3B Co

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
76. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3C Re

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
77. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3D En

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
78. PS4 Waves and their Applications in Technologies for I

Eliminate
2
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
21
21
21
Answer Options
21
2502
79. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4A Wa

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
80. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4B Ele
Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
81. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4C Inf

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
82. LS1 From Molecules to Organisms: Structures and Pro

Eliminate
2
2
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
19
19
19
18
Answer Options
LS1C Organization for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms
19
2504
83. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1A Str

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
84. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1B Gro

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
85. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1C Org
Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
86. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1D Inf

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
87. LS2 Ecosystems: Interactions, Energy, and Dynamics

Eliminate
1
2
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
19
18
19
18
Answer Options
19
2504
88. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2A Int

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
89. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2B Cyc

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
90. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2C Eco
Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
91. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2D So

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
92. LS3 Heredity: Inheritance and Variation of Traits

Eliminate
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
19
19
Answer Options
19
2504
93. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3A Inh

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
94. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3B Var

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
95. LS4 Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity

Eliminate
Response
Count
Answer Options
3
2
3
3
answered question
skipped question
21
21
21
21

LS4C Adaptation
21
2502
96. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4A Evi

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
97. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4B Na

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
98. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4C Ad

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
99. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4D Bio

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
100. ESS1 Earths Place in the Universe

Eliminate
Response
Count
20
Answer Options
1
2
answered question
skipped question
20
21

21
2502
101. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1A T

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
102. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1B E

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
103. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C T

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
104. ESS2 Earths Systems

Eliminate
1
2
1
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
18
19
18
18
19
Answer Options
ESS2B Plate Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
19
2504
105. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2A E
Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
106. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2B P

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
107. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2C T

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
108. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2D

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
109. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2E B

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi

Eliminate
Response
Count
20
Answer Options
2
3
4
answered question
skipped question
20
21
21

21
2502
111. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3A N

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
112. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3B N

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
113. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3C H

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
114. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3D

Answer Options
answered questi
skipped questi
115. Would you like to return to other grade range option

Answer Options
Yes
No
tter and Its Interactions
tions
re and Properties of Matter

cal Reactions
r Processes
Keep as is
Change the
wording
20
22
17
2
1
1
Eliminate
1
0
4
answered question
skipped question
f any changes, do you recommend for PS1A Structure and Properties of Matter (Indicate if your feedback is s
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
f any changes, do you recommend for PS1 B Chemical Reactions (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a gra
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
f any changes, do you recommend for PS1 C Nuclear Processes (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grad
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
tion and Stability: Forces and Interactions
tions
and Motion
of Interactions
y and Instability in Physical Systems
Keep as is
Change the
wording
20
17
13
1
3
3
Eliminate
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
f any changes, do you recommend for PS2A Forces and Motion? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grad
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
f any changes, do you recommend for PS2B Types of Interactions? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a g
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
f any changes, do you recommend for PS2C Stability and Instability in Physical Systems? (Indicate if your fee
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
ergy
tions
ons of Energy
vation of Energy and Energy Transfer
nship Between Energy and Forces
and Chemical Processes in Everyday Life
Keep as is
Change the
wording
21
21
21
20
0
0
0
1
Eliminate
0
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
f any changes, do you recommend for PS3A Definitions of Energy? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a g
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
f any changes, do you recommend for PS3B Conservation of Energy and Energy Transfer? (Indicate if your fee
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
f any changes, do you recommend for PS3C Relationship Between Energy and Forces? (Indicate if your feedba
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
f any changes, do you recommend for PS3D Energy and Chemical Processes in Everyday Life? (Indicate if you
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
ves and their Applications in Technologies for Information Transfer
tions
roperties
magnetic Radiation
ation Technologies and Instrumentation
Keep as is
Change the
wording
17
16
14
2
2
4
Eliminate
1
2
2
answered question
skipped question
f any changes, do you recommend for PS4A Wave Properties? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
f any changes, do you recommend for PS4B Electromagnetic Radiation? (Indicate if your feedback is specific t
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
f any changes, do you recommend for PS4C Information Technologies and Instrumentation? (Indicate if your f
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
m Molecules to Organisms: Structures and Processes
tions
re and Function
and Development of Organisms
zation for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms
ation Processing
Keep as is
Change the
wording
17
17
14
15
2
2
5
3
Eliminate
0
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
f any changes, do you recommend for LS1A Structure and Function? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
f any changes, do you recommend for LS1B Growth and Development of Organisms? (Indicate if your feedbac
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
f any changes, do you recommend for LS1C Organization for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms? (Indicate
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
f any changes, do you recommend for LS1D Information Processing? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
systems: Interactions, Energy, and Dynamics
tions
pendent Relationships in Ecosystems

of Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems
tem Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience
nteractions and Group Behavior
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
15
14
15
2
3
4
3
Eliminate
0
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
f any changes, do you recommend for LS2A Interdependent Relationships in Ecosystems? (Indicate if your fee
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
f any changes, do you recommend for LS2B Cycles of Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems? (Indicate if y
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
f any changes, do you recommend for LS2C Ecosystem Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience? (Indicate if yo
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
f any changes, do you recommend for LS2D Social Interactions and Group Behavior? (Indicate if your feedbac
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
edity: Inheritance and Variation of Traits
tions
ance of Traits
on of Traits
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
16
1
1
Eliminate
2
2
answered question
skipped question
f any changes, do you recommend for LS3A Inheritance of Traits? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a gr
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
f any changes, do you recommend for LS3B Variation of Traits? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grad
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
logical Evolution: Unity and Diversity
tions
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
ce of Common Ancestry
Selection
tion
ersity and Humans
13
15
17
16
3
2
1
2
2
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
f any changes, do you recommend for LS4A Evidence of Common Ancestry? (Indicate if your feedback is spec
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
f any changes, do you recommend for LS4B Natural Selection? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
f any changes, do you recommend for LS4C Adaptation? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
f any changes, do you recommend for LS4D Biodiversity and Humans? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Earths Place in the Universe
tions
niverse and Its Stars
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
17
and the Solar System

istory of Planet Earth
17
16
1
2
0
0
answered question
skipped question
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1A The Universe and Its Stars? (Indicate if your feedback is specifi
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1B Earth and the Solar System? (Indicate if your feedback is speci
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C The History of Planet Earth? (Indicate if your feedback is specifi
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Earths Systems
tions
Materials and Systems

Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interactions
oles of Water in Earths Surface Processes
her and Climate
ology
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
15
16
17
13
3
3
2
1
4
Eliminate
0
0
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2A Earth Materials and Systems? (Indicate if your feedback is spec
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2B Plate Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interactions? (Indicat
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2C The Roles of Water in Earths Surface Processes? (Indicate if yo
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2D Weather and Climate? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2E Biogeology? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade lev
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Earth and Human Activity
tions
al Resources
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
15
al Hazards
n Impacts on Earth Systems
l Climate Change
14
14
14
1
2
2
0
1
1
answered question
skipped question
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3A Natural Resources? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a gr
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3B Natural Hazards? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grad
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3C Human Impacts on Earth Systems? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3D Global Climate Change? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
Response
Count
tions
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
you like to return to other grade range options?
tions
Response
Percent
Response
Count
17.4%
82.6%
4
19
answered question
skipped question
23
2500
6-8
6-8

Response
Count
23
23
22
Answer Options
23
2500
117. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1A Structure and Pr
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
118. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 B Chemical Reactio
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
119. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 C Nuclear Process
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
21
20
17
Answer Options
21
2502
121. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2A Forces and Motio
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
122. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2B Types of Interact
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
123. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2C Stability and Inst
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
124. PS3 Energy

Response
Count
21
21
21
21
Answer Options
21
2502
125. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3A Definitions of Ene
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
126. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3B Conservation of E

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
127. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3C Relationship Betw
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
128. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3D Energy and Chem
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
129. PS4 Waves and their Applications in Technologies for Information Tr

Response
Count
20
20
20
Answer Options
20
2503
130. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4A Wave Properties?
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
131. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4B Electromagnetic
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
132. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4C Information Tech
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
133. LS1 From Molecules to Organisms: Structures and Processes

Response
Count
19
19
19
19
Answer Options
Organisms
19
2504
134. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1A Structure and Fu
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
135. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1B Growth and Deve
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
136. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1C Organization for
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
137. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1D Information Proc
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
18
18
18
18
Answer Options
Ecosystems
18
2505
139. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2A Interdependent R

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
140. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2B Cycles of Matter
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
141. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2C Ecosystem Dynam
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
142. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2D Social Interaction
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
19
19
Answer Options
19
2504
144. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3A Inheritance of Tra
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
145. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3B Variation of Trait
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
Answer Options
18
17
18
18

LS4C Adaptation
18
2505
147. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4A Evidence of Comm
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
148. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4B Natural Selection
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
149. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4C Adaptation?

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
150. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4D Biodiversity and
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
19
Answer Options
18
18

19
2504
152. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1A The Universe an
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
153. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1B Earth and the S
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
154. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C The History of P
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
18
18
19
19
19
Answer Options
Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
19
2504
156. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2A Earth Materials
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
157. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2B Plate Tectonics
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
158. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2C The Roles of Wa
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
159. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2D Weather and Cli
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
160. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2E Biogeology?

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
16
Answer Options
15
17
17

17
2506
162. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3A Natural Resourc
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
163. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3B Natural Hazards
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
164. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3C Human Impacts
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
165. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3D Global Climate C
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Answer Options
Yes
No
answered question
skipped question
9-12
9-12
167. PS1 Matter and Its Int

Keep as is
Change the
wording
29
28
21
2
4
5
Eliminate
1
0
4
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
32
32
30
PS1A Structure and Properties

32
2491
mend for PS1A Structure and Properties of Matter?
168. What, if any changes,
Response
Count
6
Answer Options
6
2517
mend for PS1 B Chemical Reactions?
Response
Count
7
Answer Options
7
2516
mend for PS1 C Nuclear Processes?
Response
Count
8
Answer Options
Answer Options
8
2515
d Interactions
171. PS2 Motion and Stabil
Keep as is
Change the
wording
28
22
22
0
5
3
Eliminate
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
28
27
26
Answer Options

PS2C Stability and Instability in
28
2495
mend for PS2A Forces and Motion?
Response
Count
5
Answer Options
5
2518
mend for PS2B Types of Interactions?
Response
Count
6
Answer Options
6
2517
mend for PS2C Stability and Instability in Physical Systems?
Response
Count
7
Answer Options
7
2516
175. PS3 Energy

Keep as is
Change the
wording
28
28
28
26
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
mend for PS3A Definitions of Energy?

Response
Count
4
4
2519
Eliminate
Response
Count
29
29
29
28
Answer Options

PS3B Conservation of Energy a
PS3C Relationship Between En
PS3D Energy and Chemical Pro
29
2494

Answer Options
mend for PS3B Conservation of Energy and Energy Transfer?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
mend for PS3C Relationship Between Energy and Forces?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
mend for PS3D Energy and Chemical Processes in Everyday Life?
Response
Count
5
Answer Options
5
2518
n Technologies for Information Transfer

Keep as is
Change the
wording
25
24
21
2
3
3
Eliminate
0
1
4
answered question
skipped question
mend for PS4A Wave Properties?

Response
Count
3
180. PS4 Waves and their A

Response
Count
27
28
28
Answer Options

PS4B Electromagnetic Radiatio
PS4C Information Technologies
28
2495

Answer Options
3
2520
mend for PS4B Electromagnetic Radiation?
Response
Count
3
Answer Options
3
2520
mend for PS4C Information Technologies and Instrumentation?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
Structures and Processes
184. LS1 From Molecules to
Keep as is
Change the
wording
27
26
26
19
1
1
0
3
Eliminate
0
1
2
5
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
28
28
28
27

LS1B Growth and Developmen
Organisms
28
2495
mend for LS1A Structure and Function?

Response
Count
4

Answer Options
4
2519
mend for LS1B Growth and Development of Organisms?

Response
Count
5
Answer Options

Answer Options
5
2518
mend for LS1C Organization for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
mend for LS1D Information Processing?
Response
Count
6
Answer Options
6
2517
gy, and Dynamics
189. LS2 Ecosystems: Inter
Keep as is
Change the
wording
26
25
26
26
1
2
0
0
Eliminate
Response
Count
0
0
1
1
answered question
skipped question
27
27
27
27
LS2A Interdependent Relations

Ecosystems
LS2C Ecosystem Dynamics, Fu
LS2D Social Interactions and G
27
2496
mend for LS2A Interdependent Relationships in Ecosystems?

Response
Count
4

Answer Options
4
2519
mend for LS2B Cycles of Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems?

Response
Count
4
Answer Options

Answer Options
4
2519
mend for LS2C Ecosystem Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience?
Response
Count
3
Answer Options
3
2520
mend for LS2D Social Interactions and Group Behavior?
Response
Count
3
Answer Options
3
2520
tion of Traits
194. LS3 Heredity: Inherita
Keep as is
Change the
wording
25
26
1
1
Eliminate
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
26
27

27
2496
mend for LS3A Inheritance of Traits?
Response
Count
5
Answer Options
5
2518
mend for LS3B Variation of Traits?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
Answer Options
4
2519
Diversity
197. LS4 Biological Evolutio

Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
Response
Count
Answer Options
25
25
29
27
2
4
0
1
3
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
30
29
29
30
LS4A Evidence of Common Anc

LS4C Adaptation
30
2493
mend for LS4A Evidence of Common Ancestry?
Response
Count
5
Answer Options
5
2518
mend for LS4B Natural Selection?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
mend for LS4C Adaptation?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
mend for LS4D Biodiversity and Humans?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
202. ESS1 Earths Place in t

Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
Response
Count
24
28
Answer Options
ESS1A The Universe and Its St
28
25
0
2
0
1
answered question
skipped question
28
28
ESS1B Earth and the Solar Sys

ESS1C The History of Planet Ea
28
2495
mend for ESS1A The Universe and Its Stars?
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
mend for ESS1B Earth and the Solar System?
Response
Count
3
Answer Options
3
2520
mend for ESS1C The History of Planet Earth?
Response
Count
3
Answer Options
3
2520

Keep as is
Change the
wording
23
25
25
25
21
3
1
1
1
3
Eliminate
0
0
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
mend for ESS2A Earth Materials and Systems?
Response
Count
26
26
26
26
26
Answer Options
ESS2A Earth Materials and Sys

Interactions
ESS2C The Roles of Water in Ea
ESS2E Biogeology
26
2497
Response
Count
4
Answer Options
4
2519
mend for ESS2B Plate Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interactions?
Response
Count
3
Answer Options
3
2520
mend for ESS2C The Roles of Water in Earths Surface Processes?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
Response
Count
Answer Options
3
2520
mend for ESS2E Biogeology?
Response
Count
5

Answer Options
mend for ESS2D Weather and Climate?
Answer Options
5
2518
212. ESS3 Earth and Human

Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
Response
Count
25
26
Answer Options
24
25
24
1
0
1
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
mend for ESS3A Natural Resources?

Response
Count
4

Answer Options
4
2519
mend for ESS3C Human Impacts on Earth Systems?

Response
Count

Answer Options
4
2519
mend for ESS3D Global Climate Change?

Response
Count
4
27
2496
4
2519
Response
Count

ESS3C Human Impacts on Eart
Answer Options
mend for ESS3B Natural Hazards?
26
26
27

Answer Options
4
2519
ade range options?
217. Would you like to retu
Response
Percent
Response
Count
15.4%
84.6%
6
33
Answer Options
Yes
No
answered question
skipped question
39
2484
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
54
54
45
8
9
9

Eliminate
0
0
8
answered question
skipped question
168. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1A Structure and Properties of Matter?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
169. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 B Chemical Reactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
170. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 C Nuclear Processes?
Response
Count
Answer Options
11
answered question
skipped question
11
2512
Answer Options

Keep as is
Change the
wording
49
46
44
7
8
4
Eliminate
0
2
7
answered question
skipped question
172. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2A Forces and Motion?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
173. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2B Types of Interactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
174. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2C Stability and Instability in Physical Systems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
175. PS3 Energy
Answer Options

Keep as is
Change the
wording
49
48
48
45
5
5
5
6
0
0
1
3
answered question
skipped question
176. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3A Definitions of Energy?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Eliminate
177. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3B Conservation of Energy and Energy Transfer?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
178. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3C Relationship Between Energy and Forces?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
179. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3D Energy and Chemical Processes in Everyday Life?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
180. PS4 Waves and their Applications in Technologies for Information Transfer
Answer Options

Keep as is
Change the
wording
46
44
38
4
6
8
2
2
4
answered question
skipped question
181. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4A Wave Properties?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
4
2519
182. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4B Electromagnetic Radiation?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
183. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4C Information Technologies and Instrumentation?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
Answer Options

Organisms
Keep as is
Change the
wording
45
45
45
36
3
3
3
7
Eliminate
0
0
0
6
answered question
skipped question
185. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1A Structure and Function?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
186. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1B Growth and Development of Organisms?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
187. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1C Organization for Matter and Energy Flow in Organism
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
188. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1D Information Processing?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
7
2516
Answer Options

Ecosystems
Keep as is
Change the
wording
43
44
42
38
2
1
3
3
Eliminate
2
2
3
8
answered question
skipped question
190. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2A Interdependent Relationships in Ecosystems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
191. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2B Cycles of Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
192. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2C Ecosystem Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
193. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2D Social Interactions and Group Behavior?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Answer Options

Keep as is
Change the
wording
46
44
3
4
Eliminate
0
0
answered question
skipped question
195. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3A Inheritance of Traits?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
196. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3B Variation of Traits?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate

LS4C Adaptation
47
47
47
46
4
2
3
3
0
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
198. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4A Evidence of Common Ancestry?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
199. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4B Natural Selection?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
201. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4D Biodiversity and Humans?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
40

41
42
1
2
6
5
answered question
skipped question
203. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1A The Universe and Its Stars?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
204. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1B Earth and the Solar System?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
205. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C The History of Planet Earth?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Answer Options

Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
Keep as is
Change the
wording
40
40
38
38
37
4
3
5
5
2
Eliminate
6
7
6
6
10
answered question
skipped question
207. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2A Earth Materials and Systems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
208. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2B Plate Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interaction
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
209. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2C The Roles of Water in Earths Surface Processes?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
210. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2D Weather and Climate?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
41

40
41
39
4
3
5
5
6
7
answered question
skipped question
213. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3A Natural Resources?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
214. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3B Natural Hazards?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
215. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3C Human Impacts on Earth Systems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
216. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3D Global Climate Change?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
Answer Options
Yes
No
Response
Percent
Response
Count
8.3%
91.7%
6
66
answered question
skipped question
72
2451
K-12
K-12

Response
Count
62
63
62
Answer Options
64
2459
219. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1A Structure and Pr
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
220. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 B Chemical Reacti
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
221. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 C Nuclear Process
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
56
56
55
Answer Options
56
2467
223. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2A Forces and Motio
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
224. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2B Types of Interact
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
225. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2C Stability and Inst
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
226. PS3 Energy

Response
Count
54
53
54
54
Answer Options
56
2467
227. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3A Definitions of En

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
228. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3B Conservation of

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
229. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3C Relationship Bet
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
230. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3D Energy and Chem
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
231. PS4 Waves and their Applications in Technologies for Information Tr

Response
Count
52
52
50
Answer Options
52
2471
232. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4A Wave Properties
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
233. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4B Electromagnetic
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
234. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4C Information Tech
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
48
48
48
49
Answer Options
Organisms
50
2473
236. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1A Structure and Fu
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
237. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1B Growth and Deve
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
238. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1C Organization for
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
239. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1D Information Proc
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
47
47
48
49
Answer Options
Ecosystems
49
2474
241. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2A Interdependent R

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
242. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2B Cycles of Matter
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
243. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2C Ecosystem Dynam
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
244. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2D Social Interaction
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
49
48
Answer Options
49
2474
246. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3A Inheritance of Tra
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
247. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3B Variation of Trait
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
Answer Options
51
49
50
50

LS4C Adaptation
52
2471
249. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4A Evidence of Comm
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
250. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4B Natural Selection
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
252. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4D Biodiversity and
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
47
Answer Options
48
49

49
2474
254. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1A The Universe an
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
255. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1B Earth and the S
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
256. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C The History of P
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
50
50
49
49
49
Answer Options
Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
51
2472
258. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2A Earth Materials
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
259. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2B Plate Tectonics
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
260. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2C The Roles of Wa
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
261. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2D Weather and Cl
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Response
Count
49
Answer Options
49
50
51

51
2472
264. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3A Natural Resourc
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
265. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3B Natural Hazards
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
266. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3C Human Impacts
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
267. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3D Global Climate C
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question

Answer Options
Yes
No
answered question
skipped question
TOTALS
GRAND
TOTALS
Keep as is
4741
TOTALS
Keep as is
Change the
wording
23
22
20
2
3
3
Eliminate
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
Keep as is
25
25
25
143
143
118
25
2498
404
mmend for PS1A Structure and Properties of Matter?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
mmend for PS1 B Chemical Reactions?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for PS1 C Nuclear Processes?

Response
Count
4
4
2519
TOTALS
nd Interactions
Keep as is
Change the
wording
23
21
20
1
3
3
Eliminate
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
Keep as is
24
24
24
136
122
115
24
2499
373
mmend for PS2A Forces and Motion?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for PS2B Types of Interactions?

Response
Count
5
5
2518
mmend for PS2C Stability and Instability in Physical Systems?

Response
Count
5
5
2518
TOTALS
Keep as is
Change the
wording
23
23
23
20
1
1
1
1
Eliminate
0
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
Keep as is
24
24
24
23
136
135
135
126
24
2499
532
mmend for PS3A Definitions of Energy?

Response
Count
1
1
2522
mmend for PS3B Conservation of Energy and Energy Transfer?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for PS3C Relationship Between Energy and Forces?

Response
Count
1
1
2522
mmend for PS3D Energy and Chemical Processes in Everyday Life?

Response
Count
4
4
2519
TOTALS
n Technologies for Information Transfer

Keep as is
Change the
wording
20
20
19
2
2
2
Eliminate
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
Keep as is
23
23
23
124
118
106
23
2500
348
mmend for PS4A Wave Properties?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for PS4B Electromagnetic Radiation?
Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for PS4C Information Technologies and Instrumentation?

Response
Count
4
4
2519
TOTALS
Structures and Processes

Keep as is
Change the
wording
22
22
22
20
1
1
1
1
Eliminate
0
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
Keep as is
23
23
23
23
126
125
121
103
23
2500
475
mmend for LS1A Structure and Function?

Response
Count
1
1
2522
mmend for LS1B Growth and Development of Organisms?

Response
Count
1
1
2522
mmend for LS1C Organization for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms?
Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for LS1D Information Processing?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
TOTALS
gy, and Dynamics

Keep as is
Change the
wording
21
21
22
20
1
1
1
1
Eliminate
Response
Count
Keep as is
22
22
23
23
121
118
118
113
0
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
23
2500
470
mmend for LS2A Interdependent Relationships in Ecosystems?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for LS2B Cycles of Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for LS2C Ecosystem Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience?
Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for LS2D Social Interactions and Group Behavior?

Response
Count
4
4
2519
TOTALS
ation of Traits
Keep as is
Change the
wording
22
21
1
2
Eliminate
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
Keep as is
23
23
124
122
23
2500
246
mmend for LS3A Inheritance of Traits?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
mmend for LS3B Variation of Traits?

Response
Count
4
4
2519
TOTALS
Diversity
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
Response
Count
Keep as is
22
22
22
22
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
24
24
24
24
24
2499
123
125
131
127
506
mmend for LS4A Evidence of Common Ancestry?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for LS4B Natural Selection?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for LS4C Adaptation?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for LS4D Biodiversity and Humans?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
TOTALS
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
Response
Count
Keep as is
22
23
119
22
23
1
1
0
0
answered question
skipped question
23
24
24
2499
124
122
365
mmend for ESS1A The Universe and Its Stars?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for ESS1B Earth and the Solar System?

Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for ESS1C The History of Planet Earth?

Response
Count
1
1
2522
TOTALS
Keep as is
Change the
wording
20
20
20
19
20
2
2
1
2
2
Eliminate
0
0
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
mmend for ESS2A Earth Materials and Systems?
Response
Count
Keep as is
22
22
21
21
22
112
115
113
113
105
23
2500
558
Response
Count
4
4
2519
mmend for ESS2B Plate Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interactions?
Response
Count
2
2
2521
mmend for ESS2C The Roles of Water in Earths Surface Processes?

Response
Count
1
1
2522
mmend for ESS2D Weather and Climate?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
mmend for ESS2E Biogeology?

Response
Count
5
5
2518
TOTALS
Keep as is
Change the
wording
Eliminate
Response
Count
Keep as is
21
22
118
21
21
21
1
1
1
0
1
1
answered question
skipped question
22
23
23
23
2500
115
117
114
464
mmend for ESS3A Natural Resources?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
mmend for ESS3B Natural Hazards?

Response
Count
1
1
2522
mmend for ESS3C Human Impacts on Earth Systems?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
mmend for ESS3D Global Climate Change?

Response
Count
3
3
2520
rade range options?

Response
Percent
Response
Count
17.9%
82.1%
5
23
answered question
skipped question
28
2495
Change the
wording
480
Eliminate
286
Change the
wording
86%
86%
74%
90%
82%
80%
19
22
21
Eliminate
11%
13%
13%
4
2
21
answered question
62
27
Change the
wording
Eliminate
14
24
17
55
9%
16%
12%
1
3
12
answered question
16
2%
1%
13%
1%
2%
8%
Change the
wording
91%
91%
91%
86%
10
10
10
13
43
Eliminate
7%
7%
7%
9%
3
3
4
8
answered question
18
2%
2%
3%
5%
Change the
wording
87%
82%
75%
13
18
22
53
Eliminate
9%
13%
15%
6
8
14
answered question
28
4%
6%
10%
Change the
wording
92%
91%
88%
76%
9
9
12
17
47
Eliminate
7%
7%
9%
13%
2
3
4
16
answered question
25
1%
2%
3%
12%
Change the
wording
91%
89%
87%
84%
9
10
12
9
40
Eliminate
7%
8%
9%
7%
3
4
5
13
answered question
25
2%
3%
4%
10%
Change the
wording
91%
90%
8
10
Eliminate
6%
7%
4
4
answered question
18
Change the
wording
Eliminate
3%
3%
85%
89%
92%
89%
87%
13
12
7
9
9%
9%
5%
6%
8
3
4
7
answered question
41
22
Change the
wording
Eliminate
6%
10
6%
2%
3%
5%
7%
91%
87%
84%
85%
85%
85%
78%
6
10
4%
7%
7
8
answered question
24
25
Change the
wording
Eliminate
15
11
12
11
14
63
11%
8%
9%
8%
10%
7
9
8
9
16
answered question
49
5%
6%
5%
7%
6%
7%
12%
Change the
wording
89%
Eliminate
5%
6%
87%
85%
82%
9
8
10
34
7%
6%
7%
8
12
15
answered question
43
6%
9%
11%
Response
Count
166
167
160
168
Response
Count
151
149
144
151
Response
Count
149
148
149
147
151
Response
Count
143
144
142
144
Response
Count
137
137
137
136
139
Response
Count
133
132
135
135
136
Response
Count
136
136
12478
Response
Count
144
140
142
143
145
Response
Count
137
137
140
141
Response
Count
134
135
133
133
135
135
Response
Count
133
132
137
139
139

Do you currently live in Iowa?
Answer Options
a. Yes
b. No
Response
Percent
97.9%
2.1%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
2471
52
2523
0
GO BACK TO MAIN PAGE
Do you currently live in Iowa?
Iowa?
a. Yes
b. No

Which stakeholder group do you primarily represent as you complete this survey?
Answer Options
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
f. Student
g. Community member
h. Business
Response
Percent
50.7%
4.3%
1.3%
3.5%
25.7%
2.4%
6.7%
0.9%
4.4%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
1280
108
34
88
649
61
168
23
112
2523
0
Which stakeholder group do you primarily represent

as you complete
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
c. Area Education Agency

Personnel
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
f. Student
g. Community member
h. Business
i. Other (Pleas e specify)
ily represent
as you complete this survey?
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
Personnel
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
f. Student
g. Community member
h. Business
i. Other (Pleas e specify)

Are you directly involved in Science education?
Answer Options
a. Yes
b. No
Response
Percent
60.9%
39.1%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
1536
987
2523
0
Are you directly involved in Science education?
education?
a. Yes
b. No

The Next Generation Science Standards are well-organized and easy to read.
Answer Options
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
Response
Percent
20.1%
42.9%
23.7%
10.5%
2.9%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
376
804
444
196
55
1875
648
The Next Generation Science Standards are well-organized and easy t
a. Strongly
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Dis agree
e. Strongly
re well-organized and easy to read.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Dis agree
e. Strongly Dis agree
Please comment about the organization of the Next Generation Science Standards.
Answer Options
Response Count
answered question
skipped question
727
727
1796
Do you currently
live in Iowa?
Which stakeholder
group do you primarily
represent as you
complete this survey?
Response to Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
non formal educator inva. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
The best interests of st a.
a.
a.
Local School Board Me b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
College of Education st a.
a.
a.
ISU Extension in partne a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a, c, d (retired) and g
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
g. Community member
b.
g. Community member
b.
retired teacher/AEA conb.
d. Higher Education
b.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
b.
a. Teacher
b.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
g. Community member
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
Basically at one point b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
g. Community member
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
f. Student
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Literacy Coach
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
Literacy Coach
a.
Nonformal education a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Work in STEM job
b.
a.
a.
Parent,Environmental E a.
a.
Naturalist
a.
naturalist
a.
naturalist, County Cons a.
County Conservation Ena.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Non-formal Educator
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

grandparent
b.
g. Community member
b.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
h. Business
b.
g. Community member
a.
e. Parent
a.
concerned adult, no chi b.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
Retired now but I have tb.
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
h. Business
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
Parent and educator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
b.
g. Community member
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
b.
homeschooling mom a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
b. Administrator
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
e. Parent
b.
g. Community member
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
g. Community member
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
a.
Substittute teacher, holb.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
f. Student
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
b. Administrator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
Teacher and Parent an a.
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
f. Student
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
Teacher and parent
Non-formal educator
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
h. Business
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Museum & Aquarium edu
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Science Instructional C a.
a.
Museum and Aquarium a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
County Environmental a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Environmental Educato a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
Personnel
a.
a.
a.
b.
Personnel
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
citizen of the Earth an a.
Someone who works a sb.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Personnel
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Personnel
b.
a.
a.
Personnel
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. Administrator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
educational consultant a.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
i
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
b. Administrator
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
In the education progra b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Going to school for Ele b.
Going to school to teac a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
a.
b. Administrator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b.
e. Parent
b.
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
Teacher's Aide and Parea.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
b. Administrator
b.
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
I am a homosexual mal b. No
iiuujj
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
I am a parent of four chb.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
school district curricul a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
parent & teacher
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
b. No
b. Administrator
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
I am both a teacher anda. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
g. Community member
a. Yes
The Next Generation

Science Standards are
well-organized and
easy to read.
Please comment about the

organization of the Next
Generation Science
Standards.
b. Agree
I think NGSS is a more realistic representation of science practices and how math, sci
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
Integrating science-based information about climate change into the organization is a

The NGSS are not easy to read, but their complexity appropriately reflects the comple
I found them clear and easy to understand.
The NGSS are easy to use. They include connections to ELA Common Core Standards
They appear to be better organized than the previous standards.
The standards provide a heavy guideline. Teachers need to determine the extent to w
Like the way the over lap with high school, Scaffolding. Also gives 5 main areas.
Something needs to be decided for Iowa.
The Next Generation are not leveled according to grade. It would be easier if the sta
user friendly
I like the way that they articulate cross-connections with math and reading, and they
The organization if fine, but there are a lot of specifics to dive into with each standard
Well organized and easy to understand.
They are untested and subpar as a standard as a whole
The many layers and connections make them a challenge to read.
Universal for all.
The first three sections are very easy to understand and give us an example. I think t
I really like that each standard is broken down into grade levels or bands and that top
Difficult to find and understand. Needs to be shortened/condensed and simplified in o
Not easy to access.
Very user friendly. Able to choose standard based on age group and topic easily.
They are an improvement over Iowa Core in that they cover all areas of science in on
It would be beneficial to see the science standards in terms of a continuous growth o
I like the organization because the practices, disciplinary core ideas (content) and cro
They are technical. Elementary teachers are intimidated by their complexity unless t
They need to be broken down into specific bullets/numbered criteria.
hard to follow
They are NOT parent friendly, they are written in "teacher talk" - and while the profes
I think that many people may confuse the performance expectations with the standa
After reading the standards I believe they are not easy to read. I read through all the
The explanation of the different versions is poor.
They are very thorough; for the most part, I can find what I need
All concepts should be in one section for specific grades. I should not have to go to m
There is a lot open to interpretation and can be confusing as there is a lot of material
The integration idea of linking practices and crosscutting ideas with concepts can be
As with most standards, it looks pretty busy and would require unpacking before they
Not prevelent
I appreciate the layout indicating cross-curricular concepts that are addressed and th
Simple to understand and organized in a fashion I currently use.
Very organized and teachers have found them easier to implement than the Iowa Cor
I found them confusing to navigate and not very streamlined. Too many extraneous n
Nice to have specifics of what to cover in certain areas and how links it to the standa
I think that the NGSS are organized in a way that is easy to navigate. It is also great t
I like that everything is in one location but putting standards, science and engineerin
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
Standards are organized by subject area and are broken down well.
Standards are organized in subject area, and are broken down well.
The divisions of areas make sense, along with the flow of each area from lower eleme
I have never heard of this until now.
It's ok. At times it seems a bit wordy
Doesn't match up well with current course requirements by college - for example: ph
I like that you can easily see how the NGSS links in with the Iowa Core. On the websi
The Next Generation Science Standards are a very large document. At times, I find it
It is my hopes that they will be incorporated on the same document as the Core. It m
I've been a science teacher for 22 years. NGSS is the best I've experienced.
From the teacher perspective I can find what I am looking for easily and if I have que
I find them difficult to understand and apply in the classroom. They need to be more
Organization looks good, has readability standard been applied to assure that it is no
The NGSS correspond well to science as it is actually practiced, based on my experie
don't know them
I appreciate the way they are all organized under 'Big Ideas' that tie the learning toge
Scientists want organization, but very few are willing to take the time to actually orga
I do not believe that they are well organized and easy to read.
Could be better
science needs to be more embedded in the elementary curriculum as well.
After viewing the NCSS on line, it appears to be easy to follow, but not having actuall
There are some that seem TOO specific about what needs to be learned
I like that they state the standard then explain it in more detail.
They are easy to read
Relative organization is straight forward but uses enough educational jargon to lose m
Reads like a novel and far to many aspects to consider, when trying to read curriculu
They are organized well but at times they are hard to read/interpret.
There is a lot to decipher. Teachers will need Professional Learning to understand the
They are organized well.
I like how they are grouped in ranges of grades.
It's all cluttered and full of codes like P-1 S 4-1 that don't mean anything to anyone e
They are well laid out and organized, but fairly extensive and overwhelming to a new
The organization seems to fit the purpose they were set out for.
They are clear but I am answering this from a mathematics teacher and parent stand
No comment
A lot of linking
More information about how the standards spiral.
Where is the health aspect of science, it all seems so technical especially for the you
They are general enough to be used and specific enough to be useful.
It is sometimes difficult to understand what is meant by constructing a model. Do we
I was able to understand the organization and the standards, but I found myself movi
The NGSS is extremely well organized. Content is easily located and relevant practic
I think they are well organized.
Laid out well and easy to understand/read.
Allows educators to understand curriculum at each grade level assuring fewer gaps in
I think they are similar to the Core expectations. I am not sure that we have enough r
It would be nice to have some common vocabulary highlighted to create consistency
The standards must be easily understood so they can be easily communicated to stu
There seems to be a lot of wording that could cause some confusion
The nextgenscience.org web site was helpful by providing multiple ways to view the
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
As an elementary teacher, I am not familiar with this wording.

I would like to be clear what content knowledge and/or skills are expected to be MAS
The standard is clearly layed out with examples of how far each standard is expected
They are well-organized.
Just like Common Core, there are limitations for smarter students. It feels like the pro
I have been using the NGSS for two years as the basis for my 5th grade program. Th
Well organized and to the point.
I want to easily be able to find what my students are supposed to learn as well as wh
I like the way the standards are organized. It makes it easy to write units that cover
As a scientist, they are easy to read and understand.
With the mapping of the genome for many life forms (human, insects and animal) the
Organized in two ways. Gives explanations and examples
I appreciate the critical thinking elements.
To take this survey, there are way too many links that don't even explain what it is!?
I like how it is divided by topic and it is easy to see the continuity of each topic over t
Organize to detail
I have not used them
From what I saw, they are multi-level and hard to follow, but I may be looking at the w
Organization and content is good
Lots of information for a parent to read through, and for a career I am heavily involve
Scope and sequence is easily fitted for each grade as long as there is teacher collabo
It is done well, but will need frequent and repeated clear communication to the public
too many - not specific enough
It is fairly easy to follow the descriptions when viewing by DCI.
The biggest problem with using the standards is that they have not been officially ad
no comment
They are easier to find what you are looking for than other standard for science I hav
NGSS is outlines plainly.
well thought out
These are excellent--the clarification statements in a different color are very helpful a
As with any document about the Iowa Core, you basically need to be a lawyer or in g
It may be easier to read for the higher educated people say a PH.D. Sorry, I only hav
wordy
The standards and definitely written different, but once you have taken the time to lo
It connects the math, ELA, and science standards and the color coding is great!
I read the PDF for 1st grade. I loved the examples that were given to go with the sta
They are organized by subject area, but I think it would be more useful if it was organ
Great job setting boundaries for assessment and including process skills incorporated
Too many layers. The standards are very difficult to follow.
For those in teachers it is easy to comprehend and learn how it is organized. For pare
They make logical sense and are easy to understand.
They are very easy to follow and use when planning science lessons.
I used them for a science inquiry course for my Master's Degree and the layout was v
The NGSS outline a direction in which these standards have connections with the "ad
Clear......scope and sequence build
STEM related and well organized for continual student growth
They are well organized and provide a platform for any and all to be exposed to.
They are easy to understand and include examples to help with the interpretation.
They should provide teachers and learners guidance in becoming Scientifically Litera
They are slightly confusing in the layout/format.
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
It is sometimes difficult to understand how to meet the standard. It has taken a lot of
Schools are incredibly unsure of what exactly they are assessing. Are the DCI's the ta
Hard to determine if we are held to the DCI's or the PE
Standards seem to be relatively well organized.
I think it is a great idea as a student who has been very interested in engineering, bu
They are very clear to read and understand.
Fantastic! Although the standards looked overwhelming, it only took our AEA science
The organization is a bit confusing because it is almost overly cross referenced. I thin
The structure and wording of the Performance Expectations is too vague and open to
There is a lot of fluff on the page.
I believe teaching common core math is already disservice to children, as much of th
I am strongly in favor of putting science back into the schools, and I think the standa
Ok..not very detailed.
It took about 10 minutes for our AEA reps to explain how they were set up. Very easy
Very logically laid out.
I appreciate how the standards include 3 dimensions to create the standard - Practice
standards seem to be missing pieces for high school levels
They are a bit confusing to understand, but with training are very approachable.
I love that they are organized by Grade and topic!
Overwhelming at first. The fact that they need so much commentary to understand
I like the connections to ELA & Math. It is very clear and easy to follow.
I have not read them.
They are well organized, but not easy to read (unless you are a scientist)
They are new to me, but feel they will be easy to use.
Too vague, content sequencing is choppy & inefficient, with gaps that will cause reme
Pretty straight forward.
Not sit down and fly through material, but understandable
To complicated to understand. To long to read it all. A lot of double talk, to many fac
It's good.
They are fairly easy to understand once someone explains them.
I'm an old dog and this is a new trick
For those with a teaching background and/or experience in curriculum development t
The material that I have read through has been very thorough and helpful. Well Orga
Well organized. Easy to understand.
Appears to be fairly thorough. I didn't notice a line item to Definitions and methods o
If you're not a scientist, the standards are hard to follow and understand. It would be
I like how the NGSS have specific examples of how I can help my students reach this
Extremely broad on standards and then specific content to cover, and I cover more th
They may be well organized but they are not as complete for all areas of learning for
Many undergraduate students arrive in my environmental science classes frankly - ill
As far as standards go, these are among the easier ones to understand from a non-fo
Well written, easy to read.
Let School Districts decide themselves.
They are easy to follow and allow for maximum comprehension of a variety of topics.
Missing basic biology concepts
These standards are a step forward. It is important that natural resources are returne
I had difficulty figuring out how to ONLY look at first grade standards.
None
Some of the activities in the later activities are geared towards a certain season. Nee
It is nice that something is being developed for both parents and teachers. It is hard
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
There is a great deal of redundancy in explaining core concepts. The document could
Really like that they describe DOING science, rather than just content. This what we n
What I read didn't seem to emphasize getting students to ask question.
I love that it's searchable and can be organized different ways. So I know what's exp
Good
These seem to be clear
For a lay (non-educator) audience, it takes time to come up to speed with the format
I do not know what they are.
Although the Next Generation Science Standards are well organized, they are difficu
simple, easy to understand
Specific to grade level
I had no trouble finding a few select issues to see what was being done.
Vague and open to many interpretations. Generalizations such as Global Climate Cha
I like the fact they are online and can be viewed/organized in different ways (topics o
Seems very broad and ambiguous
The will just take time to get to used to and dig deeper into.
It's clearly organized into science practices, core content, and cross-cutting concepts
I like the NGSS and how it gives ideas under each standard.
I like how they are organized, and they are easy to understand.
It would easier to understand if the standards weren't so wordy. Make it simple.
I appreciate the detail, but as a non-science trained person, I depend on the designer
very well organized
1) The implementation is political, not educational 2) The curriculum focuses almost
I believe they are specific yet not controling
Organize by grade level spans
I wouldn't call them "easy" to read for most students. Even as an adult I find myself
but could I think they are well organized, but I believe teachers may need to have tra
The amount of variation in determining the standards addressed throughout a course
Not enough time to review thoroughly
Simply not presented well
The learning targets are easy to read and understand but finding them on the websit
Love the continuum, emphasis on scientific method, and distinct standards.
I think the standards are well organized, but I don't necessarily think that they are ea
For writing science standards which should be clear and presented in an orderly way,
It is difficult to follow the organizational flow of the standards. The website is "down"
I think linking the practices, cross-cutting concepts, and dci's are essential.
I think the standards need to be friendly to read. If you always have clarification stat
haven't read them, don't know where they are located
The ties to other standards both in and out of the science curriculum is very helpful t
The organization has setup the order of subjects in a different way than before. It set
It is specific--much more specific than the Iowa Core.
It's a lot more specific and has measurable outcomes than the Iowa core does.
If you have to have a document that teaches you how to even READ the standards it
Follow textbooks as well as provide opportunities for projects and differentiation.
The NGSS are extremely well organized, with thoughtful sequential (grade by grade)
Very well-organized but they are not easy to read nor is there enough explanation of
You're not going to get a lot of people actually reading all that copy.
Compared to other standards that I have seen, NGSS standards have much better org
There is a lot to look at on one page. Sometimes it is overwhelming when viewing.
I was able to quickly look at them and could figure out how to use them.
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
I don't know what it is and I haven't read them, so I don't know number 4
Used a large amount of key words to ignite the readers interest but what is the true m
Incomplete
It is generally easy to find what I'm looking for by doing a search, but there is so muc
It reads like a lot of legalese, which is probably intentional given the unfortunate natu
The organization makes sense, but these are not written in parent-friendly and stude
Though the topical breakdown may be clear to an educator designing curricula, to th
I'd say the standards are semi-organized, although I'm not sure if there really is a sig
Honestly, my favorite set of standards, both for readability and content, are the old B
As Iowa moves to adopt these standards as the Iowa Core - which seems inevitable, t
I am not familiar with the Next Generation Science Standards so I am having a hard t
No comment
Organization is thorough and makes connections clear.
The number of pages to read is overwhelming
It would be more beneficial for educators if the standards were broken down by grade
The wording is clear, and the color coding helps me keep track of my curriculum and
Easy to use
I have read the NGSS many times and I love the organization of it and how it is color
The standards are very wordy and could be greatly simplified.
Any generalized national standard is not good for local districts.
NGSS is set up to browse/search the standards using three different focus areas. Eas
Too many words. Standards and benchmarks should be written in simple general la
Very confusing
The amount of information is overwhelming.
They seem to be laid out logically, with progressively more complex ideas and progre
They are very organized, but technical to the extent of losing students if they are not
I looked over them and found that the cell, organism reproduction (genetics included
I don't understand the need or purpose of the "clarification statements".
I find the links further explaining the standards easy to understand
NGSS and the Framework are very long and complex. There is too much ancillary ma
It takes time to learn, but well put together.
Once an explanation of the structure is provided, it is easy to understand and read th
They are clear on the intent. However, like many national standards they contain mu
The information is easy to understand and explains not only what the skill is but how
Organization is not intuitive, but once learned, are easy to follow.
They need to be understandable to varying degrees of education. With the way thes
I am competent enough to locate and identify the standards needed to align my curr
I would hope that the people that are putting the standards together understand stud
I think the standards are well-organized there is a system there that is easy to follow
The standards are well organized, but there is so much information, it is sometimes u
I agree with organized but tough to read - decipher. It will help when they are "unpac
Very cluttered and hard to find what you are looking for
The standards are in a sequential order that makes sense, however they need to be b
I feel it is well-organized, however the language is difficult to understand as a middle
It would be nice to have more specific examples of projects and such that students to
The standards are very wordy and hard to follow if you lack a science background.
Having the standards organized by separate grade levels for elementary will help des
The text organization makes it easy to understand the expectations. The sections bel
There is a lot on a single page which can be overwhelming at first. It would be very h
They are arranged as lofty performance goals without concrete statements regarding
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
Wording is somewhat difficult to interpret at times. Then organized into subcategorie

Seem to be performance vs content. Would like a combo with connections
It is what it is
Listed by type of science and subcategories for specific topics.
Every time new information comes out I find it easier to understand and easier to env
I'm getting used to it
The standards are organized but at the bottom of the page there are extra standards
The actual standards are not easy to understand, but the examples tend to help.
I don't they are clear and easy to understand
I would like to se a more specific list of what chemistry topics fulfill what standards.
I like the way they are organized
The comments on "what it is NOT" are helpful.
No Comment
Worded very well and has enough guidance to pick it up fairly quickly
Once I learned the format, I have found them easy to read.
I found it hard to find the standards document. Once I did find it, I found the standard
It's nice to see the information in different columns.
I am still learning and studying it.
They are organized okay
Sometimes they almost seem too detailed.
It allows the user to know what knowledge the students are walking into the classroo
My state of mind has a lot to do with rather I find it easy or difficult.
They are organized but kind of overwhelming
I am a fairly new teacher, so it seems kind of busy and micromanaging
The standards are laid out in way that is easy to understand. They include the big ide
They are well-written and easy for educators to understand and implement.
I don't have the knowledge for the standards to be able to make an educated vote o
They are very clear about assessment and the various content areas.
I like that the standards are written to connect the many disciplines of science and no
I believe they are in a more user friendly format than ICC.
It is average at best.
It takes a while to understand the organization of the standards. I like the new sectio
Needs to be all in one place
Thorough, but overwhelming
I think the organization of Next Generation Science Standards is an excellent way for
I think that the standards are well-organized, but they are not always easy to read/un
topics are well defined and organized
Arrangement by topic is clear and descriptions of specific areas are, too.
Broken down easily.
I think they are very overwhelming and take a while to understand.
I like the overall set up. Still somewhat difficult though.
Well organized but not so easy to read
unclear on which class will teach which standard...example 6-8 grades would teach th
It takes a long time to understand how they are organized. Once you understand the
very complex
When I first looked at the standards, I was overwhelmed. It really looks like there is a
I believe there is not enough information in the standard to explain what needs to be
The color coding helps. I like the clarification statements and examples for each.
Once educators become familiar with the organization of the NGSS, they can be extre
There are a lot of them and very specific.
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
They have a chart explaining how to read it. That means it's hard to read.
Somewhat. Found that they were repeated, which caused confusion.
hard to read, too specific
Organized well but difficult to read
Organized ok, but EXTREMLY hard to read. How wrote these standards? (An English
The standard show the specific skills in an easy to follow format.
The overall structure is "organized," but reading and applying it are very difficult.
The language used is full of educational terms and statements are long and complica
I suppose it's inevitable due to the number of things the standards are trying to acco
The standards are so well researched and supported that there is almost too much in
These are in NO way teacher-friendly. Schools are not equipped to deal with these ne
Easy to navigate, yes.
we need standards to help give students, regardless of location of schools, equal opp
Well organized - NOT easy to read
There are so many facets to the standards it will be very difficult to attain mastery ev
The interactive website is extremely helpful in identifying the DCI, Practices, and Cro
Fairly well organized, but there is some ambiguity in some of the standards.
From a parent standpoint, lots of lingo that is not really understood.
We do not work as closely with NGSS as formal education would.
Words need to be in simple terms and not so long and wordy
They are fairly easy to understand, but some improvements could be made.
I need to see more about these standards.
wordy
They are hard to unpack, as there are multiple pieces that need to be analyzed all to
Training would save time instead of search and find method of discovery.
It calls them "standards" but no where in the document does it say Standard 1, Stand
As a stand alone without comparisons to the old Iowa Core it is manageable.
It is difficult to understand exactly what we are assessing. What are the tangible goa
There is a lot focusing on environmental
I like how the online version of the standards are searchable and interactive
Generally great layout, and easy to apply subsets.
The 3 dimensional approach is extremely useful, and encourages to formal educators
I think they can be a little overwhelming at first, but once the system is taught to edu
Clearly written with stated performance objectives. Cleanly scaffolded k-12. Well-de
As a parent/educator, I like the layout of the NGSS.
I teach 5th grade and like the fact that the standards specifically address what I am e
I like the supporting documents at accompany the standards.
They are readable.
They take some practice but once you have spent some time with them, they are pre
They make sense and are user friendly especially after a little bit of guidance.
It takes time to really understand all of the components, but it has a lot of valuable re
It is clearly laid out.
The layout is easier to follow and the portion that says what the assessment boundar
I like the color coding and how each part of the PE can be connected to the foundatio
They are difficult to follow, but after EXTENSIVE professional development with our A
. They have a stronger focus on science skills instead of just science content. .
They are too jumbled and don't show direct strands for specific sciences well.
The website is easily navigable.
I personally like the color coding part of the organization. There is alot of information
As a parent, I want a simplified explanation regarding expectations and changes from
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
Although I have been teaching science for 14 years, I still have some trouble compre
Although I love the Core Ideas, as you continue to drill deeper the language becomes
A lot of information. Will take some time to understand the expectations.
Hard to read and understand???
I would prefer to have them organized by grade level instead of in a 6-8 strand.
The next generation science standards are well organized and easy to read. One pro
I feel that quite of few the standards for middle school are not taking into account th
I believe that they are not so difficult to read, but because of the different categoriza
Once famililar with the standards, they are easy to navigate.
The fact that they are by grade level K-5 is nice, teachers ask for that when we discu
Very difficult to understand. Very wordy, can have many interpretations.
Let go for it and keep up with the rest of the world.
Well organized, yes. Easy to read?-- not from a layman's perspective. The language i
The cross-cutting concepts make connections to other content areas; thus, making th
I like how it easily shows how each concept is built upon as the students get older
I really like that teachers can follow exactly what is expected that the student's know
Written by people who know science.
It should spiral back to a greater extent to give students a depth of content knowledg
I find the organization easy to follow.
They appear well-organized, but reading is a bit difficult- at least online. The popups
There is too much information to try to understand and incorporate included in each
Cross-cutting concepts add rigor and relevance! They will allow teachers to facilitate
not a cohesive flow and lacks inclusion of much of the "basics" needed to teach the s
I liked that I could access it in 3 different ways, and searching by grade level was ext
I like the way the NGSS's are put together. The DCI's and PE's are well thought out, b
I do not like the idea of searching for one idea and then clicking to access more detai
LOVE THEM!!! The three dimensions with the cross-cutting concepts and science and
I think they are organized well, but are hard to understand the specific content that I
They are easy to read -- but how easy are they to effectively implement? How effecti
Takes a bit to get used to, but once you understand the format they are fine.
The NGSS needs to have a stronger emphasis on environmental education.
I found it quick and easy to find the standards for the topics I teach in 7th and 8th gra
The standards themselves are organized well, however, I think it is difficult to unders
Very topically organized
I am a huge proponent of the NGSS and I do believe their language, organization, gen
easy to track if a person knows exactly what they are looking for, hard to navigate if
Can be confusing at first
The kindergarten level looked practical. A few areas are difficult to assess as kinderg
Astronomy standards should be pulled out of Earth science realm and on their own as
Well organized and easy to read. More emphasis placed on assessment cut offs.
This informs my about what my child should be learning.
They are well organized, I did not all of them to be easy to read.
NGSS teaches kids that humans cause global warming and that evolution is the way
I think that the Next Generation Science Standards are easy to follow. I appreciate th
These standards are very specific, which is wonderful when infusing inquiry-based lea
I believe the standards are organized well, and are broad enough to allow school dist
The easy to read part is the part I have an issue with. Easy to read for who? Teacher
Well organized
Unless you are an educator, the format of these standards will be incredibly confusin
Easier for K-5, but putting 6th-8th together makes it difficult for K-6 elementary buildi
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
The standards are written in progressions K-12 that help teachers determine where th
The two different views, topic and DCI, is helpful in some ways but can also make thi
I have not read them yet.
Filter/navigation is easy to use.
It is clear that a lot of thought and work have gone into these standards.
Need to include climate change
I like that they are divided up by class and level.
I like how they include an engineering component.
I am happy with how it is organized.
Too complex of presentation - Information overload.
I'm sorry, I couldn't get through it. Science is so exciting and the standards are not.
The standards might be somewhat easy to read, but this emphasis being placed on p
I like that they are specific yet still give some wiggle room.
There is online help to read the standards.
Very easy to follow.
The list is clear enough, though I wonder whether all readers know the meaning of so
I do not think that the next generation Science Standards will represent all groups an
Too conplex
They need to be more clear
Love the color code!
I appreciate that they are arranged online by both topics and grade levels and that I
The number of standards are overwhelming but they are not difficult to understand.
a vast improvement over 1996.
They are too wordy. They need to be stated more simply.
I believe they are in an organized and workable order.
The web site is not terribly user-friendly to navigate, and it's hard to sit down and get
The wording does get to be a little complex at times and this might lead to misinterp
Spending time with the breakdown one can see the organization of the NGSS, but it d
The standards seem very narrow -yet deep. I'm not sure that is the best things for fo
The three dimensions add aspects we have never had before.
Organization is fine, sometimes uncertainty about what they are meaning is more of
Teachers, as well as the public, do need to become familiar with the format of NGSS,
For the average American, they will be difficult to understand and they will represent
Outstanding organization, better than math or LA
Question number is not worded fairly - NGSS is well organized but it takes some educ
It pulls out the particular standards and performance expectations, with boundaries f
I appreciate that the NGSS are organized in three ways and understand the intent be
I don't understand the question and its meaning
Although I feel that at the heart of these standards the intentions are good, they miss
I did need instruction from a science teacher on how to read them.
I have found it difficult to use them as a guide because the wording/arrangement is n
There is a lot of information to comprehend in the layout. If there were an overall sum
Never even heard of them... so I cannot really decide what they are or how I feel abo
I like all the connections that are made to math and literacy.
I agree, the standards are organized well. I do like how there are examples listed belo
Once you understand the format, for instance going to their website and accessing th
I like having the foundation boxes below the performance expectations. They help to
When working with them and my staff we feel that this is the best direction to head w
easy to understand, logical sequence
They are difficult to decipher. They are also very broad.
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
One major advantage is they are written by grade level and not grade span
I like the detailed organization, it makes it easy to understand what I need to teach
It is organized to make it easier to unpack the standards.
Too large of grade band for middle school (grades 6-8)
The standards are nicely organized into content bands. The groupings have so much
Organized maybe, easy to read, NO.
The crosscutting concepts are very helpful in working with teachers in other disciplin
Very organized and detailed. They include many of the reading and writing standard
Each discipline has its own history and organization to support how it is organized. Sc
The information provided is too high level and vague. The information provided does
I like the interaction and pop up boxes and the cross references.
Very detailed and specific
I think the NGSS are well organized, but at times the clarification statements leave m
I FUCKING OPPOSE THIS
It would be nice if the Standards would place physics and chemistry into 2 separate l
vocabulary is hard to understand especially at the lower levels
This would help to align our science topics to the Iowa Assessments.
I like the Topical Arrangement. The other arrangements are difficult for me to follow:
I like the detail and the cross curricular emphasis and the incorporation of engineerin
Too vague for the MS level.
It seems as if there was major goal in developing these standards and having them b
a little lengthy in reading. Shorten the sentences so its easier to read. Also, group the
I like how the standards are organized by life, earth, and physical science. Within eac
Our district doesn't have curriculum to match the standards.
I like how they progress from early learning to high school left to right.
I would like to see a compacted version. I personally find them very hard to "dissect"
While a little redundant, they do a good job of clearly stating the expected outcomes
The NGSS are well organized and thorough. They provide a framework for kids to lea
Organization creates difficulty for smaller schools to cover every standard with cours
In the 15 years I've been teaching (both in and out of Iowa), the NGSS represents an
Get back to the basics!!
This would help with aligning what is taught in the classroom to what is assessed on
Wonderful arrangement of science topics that give assessment boundaries that will m
They are very easy to navigate.
We, the State of Iowa, need to adopt these.
I really like the way the standards are organized and the clearly defined parameters.
They are good and I agree with many parts of them but I do feel they leave some scie
The parameters given help to make them user friendly. There are many great tools to
Can seem overwhelming at first. One concern I have is that people sometimes go dir
They are very comprehensive, connected to ELA and Math Core, and present a mana
Completely Confusing to read.
Grade by grade breakdown is the biggest current problem with the science standards
It is not very clear as to what should be taught at which specific grade level.
It makes sense to organize them according to general areas, then allow those standa
Wording is too general, ideas not specific enough.
Nice to see that the categories are consistent from K-12.
I find it very difficult to understand what exactly I am being asked to teach and how t
Currently, we use the FOSS kits and I feel that the TOPICS chosen by Next Generation
If I need directions on how to read the standards, than they are not organized well.
The wording of the Standards are very confusing
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
They are very wordy.

They need to be easier to read
No comment.
I believe the 6-8 standards should be separated out into separate grade levels
It's overwhelming. As a teacher I'd like to go to a document that lists out what is esse
It is very difficult to ascertain what is essential.
well done
They are well organized and easy to read, but they are written in such a vague mann
I'm not sure how you make it any more streamlined... but there is an awful lot of info
I am not very familiar with the Next Generation Science Standards
I appreciate the clarification statements that go with each performance expectation.
Looking at them initially, it was overwhelming and messy. I have no desire to even at
It is very easy to read as its the same organization from one topic to the next. One th
The grade spans are not very helpful at the elementary level.
It is very difficult to determine the standards, and therefore the essential learnings, fo
I like that you can sort to look at a specific topic. There is so much info packed into s
Too lengthy
Each area of the NGSS is very elaborately laid out, which is good, but it would be nice
The breakdown by grade level and spiral use of the crosscutting comments help mak
Well-articulated through the grades. Though densely written (as all quality standards
They provide helpful statements to clarify the standards.
I appreciate the grade level indicators instead of the multi-grade level span.
Very organized but an overwhelming about of information.
I like Clarification statements that define the standards in terms of actual tasks. I am
After several readings and using various resources, it became easier to understand th
Well-organized, but often difficult to understand.
I don't care for it personally.
I have not spent adequate time reviewing these as I am still double-checking the Iow
Very detailed.
No comment
difficult in the beginning but once it is understood, it can be followed
NGSS are way off course for preparing students for college science courses. NGSS pro
The 3 dimensional learning brings balance to classroom instruction
VERN
Please adopt in their current format
This is hard. They are organized, if you know exactly what you are looking for. They
I think some primary teachers will need lots of PD to truly understand the concepts th
The sections which I observed appeared to be organized in an easy-to-follow format.
I like the tie to other CCSS with ELA and Math.
organized okay
They are organized, but many of the statements are left to interpretation as to what
I think there could be an online format with a table of contents linked to each section
The color coding system allows me to easily see the core ideas and crosscutting conc
Complicated
Need to be grade specific and easy to understand
I have spent a lot of time looking at the NGSS it is a fairly easy format to follow.
The format of the standards allows for teaching to see connected concepts and appli
I do find the structure of the standards do not readily match courses commonly taugh
Next Gen is better than the Iowa Core science.
I don't believe that the standard is made clear for everyone reading the documents.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
I especially like the "Clarification Statements" that give me more details about what i
I dislike the organization and I oppose it in all forms
gfdgfdgdf
Teachers will definitely need careful professional development to become accustome
Can be hard to simplify into general terms.
They are organized but I find them difficult to read. When the clarification statement
They are confusing to follow and ambigous
The organization is extremely clear and the provided ways of organizing the data by
Completely different from past practice of focusing on one area of science each year
Easy to read, yes. Easy to interpret, perhaps not
Hard to incorporate all standards into a Physical science, biology, chemistry - three y
Dense, very thick, not user friendly. I like the "cross-cutting" idea, but the standards
Give explanation of student expectation and are rigours for Science
I think the alignment is solid based on grade levels.
I like how they can be organized 2 different ways.
They are much more clearly written than the current Iowa Core Science Standards.
The grade level bands allow districts to make local decisions about topics and it allow
The performance assessments are easy to understand with the inclusion of the clarifi
They are well organized by topic and clearly state exactly what students need to kno
Have not seen any information
I feel the science standards are not stated very clearly. They are not real specific abo
These are good!!! Let's not make this harder than it needs to be!!!
I like how they are arranged and then they breakdown
It is much more clear than the Iowa Core regarding what should be taught and what s
All Standards should be written grade specific and more specific with what should be
I appreciate clarifying statements in the standards which clearly communicate what s
I wish all the concepts, cross cutting & nature of science, could be found in one place
I like how the scientific skills are incorporated as cross cutting standards instead of b
As opposed to IC, NGSS lays out science using clear and concise approaches; core ide
Better than the Iowa Core since the layout for each subject is consistent.
Cut to the chase-use less words and target what should be learned and assessed; all
I like the way the standards are organized by area and then set up into table within th
Some orientation is required to understand the structure of the document, but once t
At first glance, they are difficult to understand. But, after receiving some training and
I think they do a nice job of spelling out what is expected.
The Next Generation Science Standards provide clarity regarding depth of content fo
I believe the standards are set up in a way that is very easy for teachers to access an
Very broad and sweeping - how do you propose to ensure ALL students will be profici
Much more organized then the Iowa Core. Easy to get to what you want.
very easy to use compared to the Iowa Core
I like the fact that human impact is addressed.
The language can be vague at times
Really like the organization and the fact that they provide a guideline as to how far to
Iowa Core is more user friendly
Iowa Core is organized better.
Too "cookie cutter". Does not allow for flexibility in the class room
NGSS is well-annotated.
Compared to the Iowa Core Curriculum, this is much more difficult to understand and
It would be nice if you could have the standards clearly placed into courses for the hi
It is a very well thought out and planned set of standards. Although the standards in
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
I feel it gives a clear and concise objective for teachers and students to teach and lea
I like how the Next Generation Science Standards are organized to give a continuous
Once the standards tab is accessed, it is simple enough to navigate through standard
Reading it can be difficult, but it is very simple once explained! People who think it is
They are well organized, but with the infusion of the engineering they are some what
I think that it is a lot more difficult to find the specific standard and the grade/subject
I am familiar with the framework now and am able to understand it. At first it was a b
did not understand most of them
The format is user friendly and color coded. I do enjoy how easy they are to peruse.
It appears they follow a logical sequence, each level building upon the previous level
I believe they are in a logical order. Groupings of concepts make sense.
The fact that the same standards are present for grades K-12 is a strong indication of
A lot of wording and abbreviations to follow
If you are a little educated on how to read the NGSS (which could be lead by AEA or S
The Next Generation Science Standards were easy to follow and read.
They are complicated - but they have to be if they are intended to ensure teachers ch
the document is organized in such a way that science teachers and school curriculum
They seem to be very detailed and I like the links on the website. This makes it easy
Once you learn how to properly read them, they are fairly easy to navigate, but it tak
easy to read
They are difficult to read and unorganized.
There are parts that could be put together better. It would be nice to have standards
I agree, but find that there is so much it takes a great deal of time and the amount to
The format of the standards are not near as simple to follow as the Iowa core.
Seem well organized and in a very logical order of understanding.
There is a lot of cross over information between many areas that it does require focu
my issues are not related to the formatting
We were able to build our curriculum with these standards in a much faster way.
They are easy to sort and organize.
The basic standards are....but then reading below (Cross Cutting Concepts, etc.), it ge
They are a bit wordy, but I think the content is good.
Too much writing and complex to read and understand
I am able to navigate them because I've had a science teacher explain how to do so.
It is easy to look at what needs to be taught at each grade level and also see the pro
much clearer than the current core and I like the cross cutting concepts
Difficult to follow especially with the overlapping topics.
I love the cross cutting concepts.
I understand it, but my non science colleagues have said it is confusing.
They are not easy to read. There are multiple ways to teach the content and I can see
I like that it has so many things together and makes it clear with the color coding.
Just need more explanation on their organization to assist in fully understanding them
missing human body systems under life science?
The NGSS do not offer a clear way of determining which section is the actual "standa
They are very organized but not easy to read by a non-educator. I assume some edu
Having them laid out and color coded is incredibly easy to follow. It is also all in one
Too many colors and appears it will take much time for teachers to become accustom
The organization of the standards is strong, particularly in the connections between t
They seems to be set up so that my child will have a quality science instruction. As a
NGSS has filled in SO MANY of the gaps that the current Iowa standards have across t
The searchable online format makes it very easy to find specific standards, and conn
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly
b. Agree
a. Strongly
a. Strongly
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly
b. Agree
a. Strongly
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly
a. Strongly
b. Agree
a. Strongly
b. Agree
a. Strongly
a. Strongly
a. Strongly
c. Neutral
a. Strongly
a. Strongly
a. Strongly
a. Strongly
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
Agree
It can be confusing as to what exactly the standards are. Is the performance expect
Overall they are very well organized for people to learn from
Seem logical and intuitive.
These standards point to performance criteria; outlines connects with ELA and Math s
The three components (practices, disciplinary core ideas, and corsscutting concepts)
Easy to search
Very well organized. Like the assessment boundary feature.
Takes a little time to figure out, but once you've got it, it makes perfect sense.
They are well organized. The connections to other content areas are very helpful and
The subdivision into DCI, CCC, and SEI really help navigate the standards
As a science teacher I recognize that the standards are easy for me to read because
Fantastic organization and support for teachers, parents and students.
I think there needs to more clarification on the standards. Some are open to interpre
The idea is good, but the science standards assume that the standards will be met in
I appreciate that the standards clearly state the goal of preparing students for post s
I really like how there are performance expectations, and these are unpacked to the D
The ability to look at the standards both horizontally and vertically is easy to follow.
The common DCI throughout K-12, help create a district-wide vision for science instru
It would be nice to have examples of authentic assessments and STEM tasks for thes
I especially appreciate the clarification statements and assessment boundaries. The
I appreciate that the NGSS are consistent with their organization. They all are focused
This is much easier to read compared to the current standards.
The standards pose a very high level, but the sample test question is very low level
Each standard is listed under one of the major topics of earth science, life science, ph
It makes sense.
It takes a little time to understand the organization framework, but once one sees the
We need to embrace this new direction!
ractices and how math, science and engineering are interwoven
ge into the organization is an important dimension. I strongly support this information staying in the new standards.
priately reflects the complexity of desired student outcomes and effective teaching.
LA Common Core Standards and the Math Standards. Awesome!
o determine the extent to which they change instruction and resources to ensure that they are providing students with the
o gives 5 main areas.
t would be easier if the standards were graded, even through they might be covered in more than one grade.
math and reading, and they break down silos of content so students see science across the curriculum
ive into with each standard.
ve us an example. I think the engineering and design section could use a little more concrete ideas.
evels or bands and that topics meant to be covered for that standard. I also appreciate that assessment boundaries are lis
ndensed and simplified in order to make things easier. Check out Iowa Core- do something more streamline and organized
group and topic easily.

er all areas of science in one year: Physical, Life, and Earth as well as Inquiry/ Engineering principles. They also are better
s of a continuous growth of the different branches of science.
ore ideas (content) and cross cutting concepts are arranged in a way that makes sense. Teacher do not have to find ways
y their complexity unless their area of specialty is science.Because they provide the foundation, Next Generation needs to
talk" - and while the professional parents may be comfortable with them, there are MANY parents who won't say so-but the
pectations with the standards themselves because of the physical layout of the standards page. Otherwise the layout/orga
ead. I read through all the elementary standards and they are not clear at all. The middle school and high school are a litt
should not have to go to multiple sections to figure out what you expect my 2nd grader to know. There are 10 sections to
as there is a lot of material under one topic
deas with concepts can be a challenge to initially understand in terms of the organization but it is a critical aspect of the st
uire unpacking before they could be efficiently used.
that are addressed and that they are organized by conceptual topics.
mplement than the Iowa Core.

ed. Too many extraneous numbers and citations (I think that they are probably helpful to the creators of the Standards, but
d how links it to the standards in other areas such as math and english
o navigate. It is also great to see how all the standards are interrelated with disciplinary core ideas, cross cutting concepts,
ds, science and engineering practices, disciplinary core ideas, AND cross cutting concepts onto one page....its too much.
each area from lower elementary through H.S.
y college - for example: physical science standards fall under the courses "environmental science, chemistry, physics"
e Iowa Core. On the website I find it easy to find the standard and read the expectations. There is not an overwhelming am
ocument. At times, I find it difficult to wrap my mind around how they all go together in a specific course or courses due to
document as the Core. It makes it much easier to locate and follow.
I've experienced.
for easily and if I have questions there are references within the NGSS to reference in order to answer those questions.
om. They need to be more clear about what the expectations look like in a classroom setting.
pplied to assure that it is not overly academically written, thus confusing to most people?
iced, based on my experience in research. The iterative, collaborative and STEM nature of the NGSS also encourage higher
s' that tie the learning together over grade levels.

ke the time to actually organize it. The fact is, scientists in academia don't have enough time to do so. With all the other t
rriculum as well.
low, but not having actually taught it and/or witnessed it I can't make an assumption.
to be learned
educational jargon to lose many people.

hen trying to read curriculum. Length and wordiness does not make it user friendly.
Learning to understand them.
mean anything to anyone except the people who wrote it. We want our teachers to teach, but it seems to me they're going
nd overwhelming to a new viewer.
s teacher and parent standpoint. I think the math and science standards should be written from a STEM point of view. Inste
nical especially for the younger students.

o be useful.
onstructing a model. Do we have a set definition of that expectation?
ds, but I found myself moving between pages to find the information I was looking for.
ocated and relevant practices are linked.
evel assuring fewer gaps in overall beginning science knowledge, especially at the elementary level
sure that we have enough resources as a librarian, for lower level readers... If we implement these types of standards wher
hted to create consistency throughout Iowa
asily communicated to students.
multiple ways to view the standards.
lls are expected to be MASTERED at each individual grade level. The performance standards are open to a wide range of in
each standard is expected to go my letting the teacher know certain things are not yet expected at this stage.
udents. It feels like the program is meant to make the class wait for any students who are slower to pick up various topics
my 5th grade program. They are very clear and make implementation easy. Of all the standards presented to us for Readi
osed to learn as well as what the grade level below me and above me are supposed to learn.
y to write units that cover each of the sets of standards.
an, insects and animal) the impact echos through education, research and industry. All students must be prepared to unde
t even explain what it is!?

ntinuity of each topic over the different grade groups.
ut I may be looking at the wrong thing.
career I am heavily involved in the behavioral sciences, so the concepts are not difficult, but could be for other parents or c
as there is teacher collaboration.
ommunication to the public and educators alike to understand it with consistent vocabulary--noting that it (by its own word
have not been officially adopted so we can confidently go ahead with science teaching.
standard for science I have read. They group and then have sub groups for areas with in. It also has a focus on Engineerin
ent color are very helpful as a teacher, as are the boxes below and the cross-curricular and cross-grade level connections.
need to be a lawyer or in government to make sense of it.
y a PH.D. Sorry, I only have a MBA. This is not easy to read and understand.
u have taken the time to look through them they are understandable. I can see how they do not appear that way to someo
color coding is great!
re given to go with the standards. This is very helpful. But, I missed them for the engineering standard.
more useful if it was organized by course.
process skills incorporated in the content
ow it is organized. For parents, there may be issues as they have no knowledge in educational teaching. I think their need
egree and the layout was very user friendly.

e connections with the "adult". Also, I like the focus on student performance and NOT curriculum.
d all to be exposed to.

p with the interpretation.
coming Scientifically Literate Citizens for our future generations.
ndard. It has taken a lot of time to interpret the standards. Now that we have worked with them quite a bit I feel more com
essing. Are the DCI's the targets to assess? The Croscutting Concepts? The performance expectations? Or maybe the engin
terested in engineering, but very limited compared to those interested in the medical field.
only took our AEA science consultants TEN minutes to explain the NGSS to our coaching team so we could understand the
erly cross referenced. I think teachers get confused trying to understand the NGSS, they think that performance expectatio
s is too vague and open to interpretation. Many are worded poorly and or imply a single simple assessment would be capa
e to children, as much of this doesn't translate to college math expectations or real-world logical problem solving and feel th
ols, and I think the standards would move us in that direction.
hey were set up. Very easy to understand!
eate the standard - Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Disciplinary Core Ideas. This allows the standards to embed the i
re very approachable.
ommentary to understand how to use them is definitely a deterrent to the faint of heart.
asy to follow.
are a scientist)
h gaps that will cause remedial teaching in latter grades as standards assume coverage there when there isn't
of double talk, to many facts, figures and more. Simplify it, cut to the point and put the plan into an outline, or overview fo
n curriculum development they seem to be clear. Otherwise it takes some work (and assistance) to get started on them.
ugh and helpful. Well Organized.
Definitions and methods of science or Origins theories, though.

nd understand. It would be better for me as a parent to be able to look at a particular grade level and see all of the perform
elp my students reach this standard. I also like how they show cross curricular standards are being met.
cover, and I cover more than the standards.
for all areas of learning for each grade level.
science classes frankly - illiterate in terms of scientific principles, the ability to evaluate claims based on physical evidence
o understand from a non-formal educator perspective.
nsion of a variety of topics.
tural resources are returned to the curriculum.
ards a certain season. Need to make sure to point out these later activities so we can touch on in the appropriate season.
ts and teachers. It is hard to say how user friendly the document is until we have used it. Hopefully it will initially be a dra
cepts. The document could deliver just as much real information without repeating ideas/concepts over and over, making i
ust content. This what we need the next generation to be able to do if we are going to keep pace with other countries.
ask question.
ays. So I know what's expected of my kids--what they are supposed to be learning. It gives me ideas on how to best help
p to speed with the format, but once it is understood it is intuitive and clear.
organized, they are difficult to understand. As an elementary science teacher, I was trained as a generalist and find these
s being done.
such as Global Climate Change are offensive and will raise controversy since it is such a political issue such an inaccurate s
in different ways (topics or DCIs). I also like that viewers have the option to highlight the practices, core ideas, or crosscu
and cross-cutting concepts.
wordy. Make it simple.

n, I depend on the designers having worked with actual science teachers in designing the organization.
curriculum focuses almost solely on global warming which becomes more and more discredited as we learn how certain po
n as an adult I find myself saying "What?" at the end of some of the standards. Too high vocabulary levels turn off people's
chers may need to have training to understand how to best implement of the standards.
ressed throughout a course leads to a high likelyhood of different districts not touching on all standards in a manner that st
finding them on the website is difficult.

istinct standards.
arily think that they are easy to read.
esented in an orderly way, the science standards written the way they are missed the entire point.
rds. The website is "down" a fair amount of time to allow for adequate reading of the materials.
ci's are essential.
ways have clarification statements, then the original should be reworded so there isn't confusion.
curriculum is very helpful to determine the best way to incorporate those topics into lessons.
ent way than before. It sets up the classroom and lessons to be more engaging and helps provide a guide line of what is ex
the Iowa core does.

ven READ the standards it is far too convoluted. Excessively wordy and complicated.
cts and differentiation.
equential (grade by grade) learning. The standards build on one another, inspiring interest and curiosity for young children,
ere enough explanation of how to read them.
dards have much better organization and details (such as "Clarification Statements" and "Assessment Boundaries") that rea
whelming when viewing.
w to use them.
know number 4
erest but what is the true meaning of this? It wasn't easy to find.
search, but there is so much information.

given the unfortunate nature of the world today.
n parent-friendly and student-friendly language.
r designing curricula, to the casual observer or parent, the structure and text included seems daunting and difficult to visua
sure if there really is a significantly better way of organizing them. Within a unit, the top material is relatively easy to read
and content, are the old Benchmarks for Science Literacy (1993.) But I think the Next Gen standards are probably next in
- which seems inevitable, the standards need to be written in such a way that they match what is already being used. We
rds so I am having a hard time understanding what I am seeing when I look for second grade standards.
were broken down by grade level.

rack of my curriculum and my goals for lessons very easily.
on of it and how it is color coded based on cross curricular performance expectations.
different focus areas. Easy to understand with good examples to aid in understanding the standards.
ritten in simple general language and to the point.
e complex ideas and progressively demanding expectations.

ng students if they are not top notch learners. The children are not always that disciplined in the K-5 to pick up on the mor
duction (genetics included), energy and photosynthesis make sense. The language is less vague (thank you) and more to
n statements".
re is too much ancillary material. The writing is confusing at times.
to understand and read the document.

standards they contain multiple action verbs. There should be only a single, measurable verb. There should be only one thi
ly what the skill is but how it should be taught and the boundaries.
ucation. With the way these are currently written I wonder if someone, who has had very little to no education other than a
ds needed to align my curriculum and Iowa Core. However, they do not make the content user friendly or have a linear pro
s together understand students and working with today's students.
there that is easy to follow but easy to read I do not agree with. The standards are not written in a manner that is easy for
ormation, it is sometimes unclear how to meet all the different parts of a standard. Now that we know what we need to tea
help when they are "unpacked" and we are given more direction as how to meet the standards.
however they need to be broken down and made more user friendly for teachers, in terms of being able to take the standa
to understand as a middle school teacher trying to implement them so students can try to meet the standards.
s and such that students to do with more specific targets for each standard.
k a science background.
or elementary will help design K-5 Science curriculum.
ectations. The sections below the standards assists in understanding the core ideas to give direction to instruction.
at first. It would be very helpful to have a training class on how to read the NGSS.
crete statements regarding content knowledge requirements
organized into subcategories that are at times no easier to interpret. At times too specific on some areas of biology while c
with connections
nderstand and easier to envision using them in class
e there are extra standards listed which make it difficult to follow because I prefer to link what I do to the standards instead
examples tend to help.
ics fulfill what standards.
irly quickly
find it, I found the standards easy to ready, but it was difficult to follow the content areas that they were linked to. I prefer t
e walking into the classroom with and what they should already know. Teachers can avoid overlapping concepts easier.
cromanaging
nd. They include the big ideas that children need to understand, as well as the concepts that are related to other fields. Th
d and implement.
o make an educated vote or opinion.
tent areas.
isciplines of science and not divided into the traditional bins of biology/chemistry/physics.
dards. I like the new section on the evidence statements.
rds is an excellent way for kids to engage and excel in science. We take science classes, but as a student at Excelsior Midd
not always easy to read/understand.
areas are, too.
e 6-8 grades would teach this standard...but in what order

Once you understand the layout, they are much easier to read and understand.
It really looks like there is a lot on the page and really took some time to decipher how it all came together.
o explain what needs to be covered in each.
nd examples for each.
he NGSS, they can be extremely valuable in lesson design and student concept development.
t's hard to read.

confusion.
se standards? (An English PhD?)
ing it are very difficult.

ents are long and complicated. If this language is difficult for educators to interpret, I can't imagine how difficult the langu
andards are trying to accomplish at once, but it did take me some time to figure out where to find things. And I have a Ph.
here is almost too much information on each page of standards.
ipped to deal with these new demands. People who are teachers, not phd.'s need to be writing standards.
ation of schools, equal opportunities. We are very concerned about home schooled children. Seems like their parents can
ifficult to attain mastery even with the priority standards that we have chosen.
the DCI, Practices, and Crosscutting Concepts that are the focus for each of the Standards.
of the standards.
ts could be made.
need to be analyzed all together. DCI's are standards but does everyone view them this way?
d of discovery.
es it say Standard 1, Standard 2 . . . We are assuming that the DCIs are considered the Standards.
it is manageable.
What are the tangible goals that are going to be seen on State assessments? The Performance Expectations? The DCIs?
le and interactive
urages to formal educators to incorporate place based learning and think about connecting rather than segregating science
the system is taught to educators, they are easier to read, and make good sense.
ly scaffolded k-12. Well-developed with other content areas in mind, encouraging cross-curricular, 'real world' implimentat
ifically address what I am expected to teach at this level.
me with them, they are pretty straight-forward.

ttle bit of guidance.
ut it has a lot of valuable resources.
at the assessment boundary will be helpful.

connected to the foundation boxes
al development with our AEA over these, I feel I understand them better.
ust science content. .
ecific sciences well.
There is alot of information; so, the standards can be a bit intimidating at first.
ectations and changes from current standards. Information on the changes is especially difficult to find.
have some trouble comprehending exactly what the standard is describing.

per the language becomes less understandable and the strength of having a strong standard is diminished by the sheer am
e expectations.
ad of in a 6-8 strand.
and easy to read. One problem is they show middle school as 6-8 instead of individual grade standards.
e not taking into account the level of 6th grade science students. For some students this is their first time in a science class
of the different categorizations, it becomes too detailed and cumbersome.
ask for that when we discuss the Iowa Core Science Standards. The color coding is helpful, although could be costly in print
nterpretations.
erspective. The language is very academic and many parts are worded very conceptual. I was hoping to see more concrete
tent areas; thus, making them seem more relevant to the work.
s the students get older
ed that the student's know and what they should be able to do through the specific performance expectations. I also like h
depth of content knowledge and understanding.
t least online. The popups at least are somewhat distracting.

orporate included in each standard.
allow teachers to facilitate exploration of the big ideas in science that transcend subject areas and allow for interdisciplinar
sics" needed to teach the standards
ing by grade level was extremely helpful.
PE's are well thought out, but yet leave local control on how to present them.
cking to access more detail about that idea. I would much prefer that all of the concepts in regard to a specific objective b
concepts and science and engineering practices get at the content more than any other set of standards out there.
the specific content that I am responsible to teach.
ly implement? How effectively presented is Disciplinary Core idea LS4B when about 50% of the people think that Evolution
mat they are fine.
mental education.
cs I teach in 7th and 8th grade.
hink it is difficult to understand what it is exactly that needs to be taught within each standard.
anguage, organization, general accessibility for all levels of users and students. I also enjoy the lack of ambiguity in them.
ing for, hard to navigate if you are doing general searching. I am not sure of a NGSS count of expected outcomes but the d
fficult to assess as kindergarten students can't read and few resources are usable for them to obtain information on their o
e realm and on their own as space science, or a new name should be made.
n assessment cut offs.
d that evolution is the way we became those humans that change the earth's temperature. In face, one school board in Wes
sy to follow. I appreciate the connections to other standards (in reading, math, writing) listed below in each standard.
n infusing inquiry-based learning into our current curriculum. I am in a school that is going to problem/project-based learnin
enough to allow school districts some room to work within them but tight enough to ensure all Iowa children would be appro
y to read for who? Teachers? Administrators? Parents? Students?
will be incredibly confusing.Even as an educator, I find the organization to be haphazard.

lt for K-6 elementary building.
achers determine where their grade level fits and what is required of that level student.
ways but can also make things more confusing.
ese standards.
nd the standards are not.

mphasis being placed on political correctness with regards to what should be taught is dumbing down our kids. Scientific l
ers know the meaning of some of the categories. It would be nice if everyone's science education DID guarantee that they
will represent all groups and beliefs equally. And they also will not highlight nor benefit the individualism of the students.
nd grade levels and that I can select both if needed for a search. I use the app often.
ot difficult to understand.
's hard to sit down and get a quick understanding of what any particular level of science education might look like (for exa
his might lead to misinterpretation.
zation of the NGSS, but it does take a committed indifidual to do this
hat is the best things for fourth grade brains.
ey are meaning is more of a concern

r with the format of NGSS, We have had very positive feedback once teaches know how to read the standards. Teachers are
and and they will represent a shift in thinking for teachers in their approach to science, however, once the organizational st
zed but it takes some education on the navigation to travel through the tri-fold organization
ctations, with boundaries for students. It outlines practices, concepts that go across different areas, and it outlines connec
d understand the intent behind this. Unfortunately, some folks will identify this as a weakness of the standards leading to c
entions are good, they miss the mark by being to ambiguous and open to personal interpretation.
e wording/arrangement is not very user friendly, especially at an elementary level.

If there were an overall summary for each grade level that would improve the ease of understanding.
they are or how I feel about them.
re are examples listed below each standard for further clarification.

ir website and accessing the video or the how to read document, it is very logically organized and gives much information
expectations. They help to clarify the meaning of the performance expectations without having to go to a different docume
he best direction to head with the science standards for Iowa students.
d not grade span

and what I need to teach
he groupings have so much information that it is difficult to do a quick view to assess what should be taught. The middle sc
teachers in other disciplines when create cross curricular projects. The clarification statements and assessment boundarie
ading and writing standards that many are trying to tie into their curriculum.
port how it is organized. Science is different than math. The NGSS is written to be respectful to the history of science conte
information provided doesn't provide clear examples of what the new proposal looks like versus how what the current app
cation statements leave me more confused than to begin with.
chemistry into 2 separate lists instead of lumping them together in the category of "Physical Science."
e difficult for me to follow: too much on each page. I also do not like having several different divisions depending on what is
ncorporation of engineering into these standards.
andards and having them being well organized and easy to access/ read.
sier to read. Also, group the 7th and 8th grade standards together
hysical science. Within each strand there are sub categories as well.
left to right.
them very hard to "dissect" and haven't really had much education in how to do that.
ng the expected outcomes for each grade level.
a framework for kids to learn inquiry skills, gain concepts, and practice problem solving.
every standard with course offerings each year.
), the NGSS represents an important, logical step for a quality science education. If emphasizes conceptual development i
om to what is assessed on the Iowa Assessments.

ment boundaries that will make easy and convenient alignment of K-12 science teaching.
early defined parameters. The clarification statements and assessment boundary statements are VERY helpful.
o feel they leave some science concepts out that I believe are important in the Life Sciences areas.
ere are many great tools to help plan curriculum and sequencing.
t people sometimes go directly to the standards docs. These need to be read in concert with the Framework.
Core, and present a manageable amount of content per grade level.
with the science standards. The more structured the standards the better.
ecific grade level.
as, then allow those standards to be read in different ways.
g asked to teach and how to teach it. I need examples!!!!!

chosen by Next Generation are much more conducive and exciting to our age group. They have much more relevance!
y are not organized well.
eparate grade levels

nt that lists out what is essential and not essential to teach.
tten in such a vague manner that interpretation is difficult. The high school standards also make a huge assumption that a
there is an awful lot of information for each standard. In some ways, this is helpful. But I think people will need to be traine
performance expectation. I also find it useful that connections to other curricular areas are included.
I have no desire to even attempt to go through all of that information. I wish the layout was geared more towards the "non
ne topic to the next. One thing that is difficult is the engineering design topics. As a science teacher I had a hard time unde
e the essential learnings, for each area.

so much info packed into such a small space.
s good, but it would be nice to have a short, summed-up area to reference when teachers don't have a lot of time to read t
utting comments help make sure everything is covered yet interelated
en (as all quality standards typically are), the color-coding and additional comments regarding the meaning of the standard
-grade level span.
terms of actual tasks. I am not sure if these are meant to be included in the final draft.
me easier to understand the organization of the document.
ill double-checking the Iowa Core requirements.
science courses. NGSS promotes governmental ideas and pedagogy. Even if they are NOT science based.
you are looking for. They can be easy to read, again, if you know exactly what you are looking for. But, there is a lot of de
understand the concepts that are being taught and why it is important. Many are used to teaching topics (butterflies and p
n an easy-to-follow format.
interpretation as to what include in each.

ents linked to each section. That way you can click on the section and be directly taken to it, instead of scrolling through.
deas and crosscutting concepts. This is very helpful for planning and assessing what the students' know and are able to do
easy format to follow.

nected concepts and application skills that can be used to teach the important Big Ideas.
h courses commonly taught in our schools. That in itself is not a concern for me, and is readily rectified by using an online
e reading the documents. Is it the performance indicators? I also think they are very dense and imagine small schools with
e more details about what is intended and options for how I might meet those standards. I also appreciate the "Assessment
ment to become accustomed to reading these standards as they are quite different than other models
the clarification statements are as long or much longer than the performance expectations, I think there is a problem. Sev
of organizing the data by either discipline or grade level are exceptional.
area of science each year by grade level.
iology, chemistry - three year program

g" idea, but the standards are documented in a way that obscures this deeper connection among content.
Core Science Standards.

ns about topics and it allows for integration with IOWA CORE standards!
h the inclusion of the clarification statements as well as the tool tips that appear when you hover over it. I appreciate the c
what students need to know and be able to do.
ey are not real specific about what should be taught.
hould be taught and what students should be expected to be able to do.

pecific with what should be taught. Reading and math are easy to read for a teacher. Write more like the reading and math
learly communicate what should be accomplished at a particular level. I do not appreciate the blending of science and eng
ould be found in one place.
ting standards instead of being "implied." These skills are the heart of science and will help students become better at ana
oncise approaches; core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and practices. This approach creates a scaffolded framework leading
t is consistent.
learned and assessed; all looks well in text, but visualize the action that must take place because of what is in text
n set up into table within that area. The connections given make it easy to see how these standards lend themselves to oth
f the document, but once that is done it is very cohesive.
eceiving some training and being involved in projects utilizing NGSS, the organization became clear and the reasons for its
arding depth of content for each grade level and specific concepts.
y for teachers to access and give teachers ideas of how far to go and what can be left out.
ALL students will be proficient in them if not all schools have same requirements for science class offerings?
what you want.
a guideline as to how far to into the standard to teach. I feel this ensures teachers are not overwhelming the students and
difficult to understand and follow.

aced into courses for the high school in a user friendly manner. That way there would be continuity from district to district
Although the standards include a lot of new thing, cross cutting concepts, connections to other standards, that are not usu
d students to teach and learn in the field of science, and it gets everyone in the science education on the same page.
nized to give a continuous flow of what students need in order to be scientifically literate. The cross curricular links allow f
navigate through standards, however, it would seem practical to have the ability to compare a single discipline at differen
ned! People who think it is overly complicated need a professional development session with it. Its organization works muc
eering they are some what cumbersome to read.
dard and the grade/subject it applies to.
erstand it. At first it was a bit confusing.
w easy they are to peruse.

ng upon the previous level. It appears students are required to make connections across topics and grade levels.
make sense.
12 is a strong indication of what is most important. In addition, the progression of each standard will help with implementa
h could be lead by AEA or Science Department Chair), the standards are more rigorous and clear than the current Iowa Cor
w and read.
nded to ensure teachers change the way they teach.
hers and school curriculum specialists will be able to crosswalk their current science curriculum with the new standards
ebsite. This makes it easy to get more information on each standard.
easy to navigate, but it takes a long time to get to that point.
be nice to have standards grouped by subjects, like biology and chemistry, at the high school level.
of time and the amount to cover is beyond what a year can hold even with layering of concepts wherever possible.
w as the Iowa core.
as that it does require focused attention to details to understand the layers of what is being expected.
in a much faster way.
utting Concepts, etc.), it gets confusing, and a little much (I usually look at them in the DCI arrangement)
cher explain how to do so.

level and also see the progression from grade to grade.
ting concepts
t is confusing.
h the content and I can see missing needed information in order to make the standard. Students could be taught to make t
ar with the color coding.
in fully understanding them.
ection is the actual "standard," per se. This is extremely frustrating, as the performance expectations are very specific and
ucator. I assume some educators will need training as well.
follow. It is also all in one manageable page, which is convenient.
chers to become accustomed to...training
the connections between the performance tasks and the Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Disciplinary Core Ideas. I'v
ty science instruction. As a parent I can follow the expectations and assessment boundaries that should be taught.
wa standards have across the grade level bands.
ecific standards, and connections between standards.
Is the performance expectations or DCI? Also, do the Performance Expectations need to be done like they read in the docu
nnects with ELA and Math standards; explicitly builds the crossover in science concepts; grade levels K-5 is grade leveled.
and corsscutting concepts) are a little confusing at first, but with a little explanation they all make sense!
makes perfect sense.

areas are very helpful and should allow great flexibility in designing projects to meet standards across multiple content are
e the standards
sy for me to read because I've spent a lot of time with them! However, I love how they are written as action statements--th
nd students.
Some are open to interpretation which leads to inconsistency.
he standards will be met in the other grades. If this does not occur the system falls apart. In the elementary grades such a
eparing students for post secondary education/employment. The connections across the themes (science, math, environm
hese are unpacked to the DCI's, Crosscutting concepts and Science and Engineering practices. In the past we had to gues
ertically is easy to follow.
de vision for science instruction
ts and STEM tasks for these standards.
sessment boundaries. The cross-cutting concepts and overlaps with the CCSS are also a great resource!
zation. They all are focused on crosscutting concepts, core ideas, and science and engineering. It is valuable to have a list
question is very low level

rth science, life science, physical science. They also include engineering and technology standards which correspond with
work, but once one sees the value in cross-cutting concepts, science and engineering practices, and content, the nature of
g in the new standards.
re providing students with the learning that they need.
e than one grade.
assessment boundaries are listed as well.

more streamline and organized.
rinciples. They also are better in the environmental science area. The scaffolding from year to year makes MUCH more sen
acher do not have to find ways to put put things together in a way that makes sense. Economy and efficiency
tion, Next Generation needs to be user friendly to them.
arents who won't say so-but they don't know what they mean.
age. Otherwise the layout/organization makes sense to me.
school and high school are a little clearer, but not much.
know. There are 10 sections to review in order to find out what my K-2 is expected to know.
ut it is a critical aspect of the standards
e creators of the Standards, but perhaps another version for a layman would be easier to navigate). The preamble page ha
e ideas, cross cutting concepts, and engineering practices.

nto one page....its too much.
ience, chemistry, physics"

here is not an overwhelming amount of information on the page but the point is still easily seen.
pecific course or courses due to how spread out the information is. However, they are easy to read. The appendices are he
to answer those questions.
he NGSS also encourage higher-order thinking and necessary 21st century soft skills.
me to do so. With all the other things required of them (getting funding, teaching, advising grad students, being on commit
t it seems to me they're going to be spending the first year or two trying to figure out what they're supposed to teach.
rom a STEM point of view. Instead of Iowa Core math and Iowa core science standards, why not have Iowa Core STEM stand
these types of standards where will the money come from?
are open to a wide range of interpretation. Keep in mind, elementary teachers do not have the same background in scienc
ected at this stage.
lower to pick up various topics.

dards presented to us for Reading/Language Arts, Math, Social Studies, these are definitely the most straight-forward and p
ents must be prepared to understand the basic science and/or integrate the new knowledge into their personal and profess
t could be for other parents or community members who may not have experience with a lot of the concepts
--noting that it (by its own words) is not a specific layout for curriculum or assessment.
also has a focus on Engineering which aligns with inquiry based science education.
cross-grade level connections. It is apparent that a lot of work has been put into these. I also appreciate the grade-level s
o not appear that way to someone who may not be an educator or administrator.
ng standard.
nal teaching. I think their needs to be a separate document made for parents in particular so they can understand the scie
hem quite a bit I feel more comfortable.

pectations? Or maybe the engineering skills. Also, there is not a quality coding system for the DCIs. They use bullet points
am so we could understand the format. In ten minutes we gained a great deal of understanding and we feel comfortable ex
nk that performance expectations are standards related to what to teach and thus don't bother to look at the disciplinary co
mple assessment would be capable of determining proficiency.
gical problem solving and feel the standards will create the same gap in science and technology subjects.
ws the standards to embed the ideas of inquiry into each standard instead of having them listed as seperate entities.
re when there isn't
n into an outline, or overview form and go from there. Turn the outline into a simple easy to follow set of Standards. Like te
nce) to get started on them.
level and see all of the performance expectations and topics of study.
being met.
ms based on physical evidence, and valid data. This curriculum would be valuable to correct those deficiencies.
on in the appropriate season.

Hopefully it will initially be a draft and up for changes if necessary.
ncepts over and over, making it tedious to read. It seems to assume the readers are dimwitted.
pace with other countries.
s me ideas on how to best help them.
d as a generalist and find these standards above the level of my training. If we were to go to these standards, a great deal
itical issue such an inaccurate science. See the book An Inconvenient Truth and accuracy of predictions as well as falsifica
ractices, core ideas, or crosscutting concepts. The fact that related materials and appendices are one click away is also ver
ganization.
ited as we learn how certain politically motivated "scientists" lied about the data to achieve the desired result; far too man
abulary levels turn off people's brains before they've even tried to make sense of the standard.
l standards in a manner that students will have an opportunity to master them.
rovide a guide line of what is expected for the students to accomplish.
nd curiosity for young children, then building on those core ideas through time.
sessment Boundaries") that really improve the experience for the teacher (which ultimately improves the experience for th
ms daunting and difficult to visualize at a macro level

aterial is relatively easy to read, but some of the performance expectations are more statements (ex. sunlight warms the E
standards are probably next in line on my list of favorites!
what is already being used. We have too many different formats out there that teachers are working with. This might not b
e standards.
n the K-5 to pick up on the more technical uses of this knowledge.

vague (thank you) and more to the point of what needs to be focused on.
b. There should be only one thing per benchmark.
tle to no education other than a basic high school diploma that did not emphasize in science, would be able to understand
ser friendly or have a linear progression of content or the method they use to show connections between engineering and c
en in a manner that is easy for middle school students to understand.

t we know what we need to teach, we need to know how to do it so the students build on content and practice. How can we
of being able to take the standards and break them down into to the point that they can be understood and easily taught to
meet the standards.
direction to instruction.
n some areas of biology while completely ignoring other valuable topics.
at I do to the standards instead of having the opinion of someone else given to me. Many of the cross standards provided a
at they were linked to. I prefer the way our Iowa Core is set up by content area with standards listed below.
overlapping concepts easier.
are related to other fields. The NGSS also includes tie in with CCSS. This format is great for teachers who have limited tim
t as a student at Excelsior Middle School I feel as though it may not deserve the credit it deserves.
came together.
imagine how difficult the language is for parents and the public to understand.
to find things. And I have a Ph.D. in biology and experience in education - I'd hate to be a parent with a lower level of prep
ting standards.
n. Seems like their parents can do whatever, irregardless of effects on their children.
ance Expectations? The DCIs?
rather than segregating sciences. Place based, cross curricular problem based programming is the most exciting thing to c
ricular, 'real world' implimentation
cult to find.
d is diminished by the sheer amount of language attached to each standard. Keep it simple!
e standards.
heir first time in a science classroom, in their educational careers. I also feel that some of the standards are too strict, and
lthough could be costly in printing.
as hoping to see more concrete language in layman's terms.
ance expectations. I also like how clear the topic is and how the cross cutting concept applies.
as and allow for interdisciplinary learning.
regard to a specific objective be on one page.

t of standards out there.
the people think that Evolution is something you do or do not believe in (like a belief in angels or an afterlife) and not a fac
the lack of ambiguity in them.

f expected outcomes but the document as a whole is wordy and overwhelming in length.
o obtain information on their own. Many group projects will be needed to complete the standards.
n face, one school board in West VA changes the man-caused global warming teaching standards not because it hurts kids,
d below in each standard.
o problem/project-based learning, so I am a bit concerned that these specific standards will limit the types of projects that t
all Iowa children would be approximately on the same page at each grade no matter what school district they came from or
bing down our kids. Scientific literacy will depend on our kids being able to think for themselves, and by either limiting or g
cation DID guarantee that they knew the meanings of all the terms.
ndividualism of the students.
ucation might look like (for example, for a 4th grade teacher who needs to put together a scope and sequence for the year
ead the standards. Teachers are impressed with how much information is on one page.
ever, once the organizational structure is explained, they are more easily understood.
nt areas, and it outlines connections to ELA. You also can highlight particular areas to focus only on certain area of the stan
ess of the standards leading to confusion and frustration.
ed and gives much information on one page

ving to go to a different document. I especially like the online version that allows the user to view a color-coded version of
hould be taught. The middle school band contains far more information than can be sensibly taught in a 3 year time frame
ents and assessment boundaries are especially helpful/appreciated.
l to the history of science content.

ersus how what the current approach looks like. Also, no information is provided about how these proposed standards my im
divisions depending on what is being viewed. For example, having PS1-1, PS1-2 as well as PS1.A, PS1.B and so on. Pick on
sizes conceptual development intertwined with engineering and literacy---which is what all 21st century scientists need. I'm
ts are VERY helpful.
h the Framework.
ave much more relevance!
make a huge assumption that all base knowledge is taught in middle school. Some concepts are simply too difficult to be t
nk people will need to be trained in how to read them properly, since there is a lot to wade through to see what matters.
geared more towards the "non-science layperson", like a parent who already has too much on his or her plate.
teacher I had a hard time understanding some of the word usage in the actual standard. I am just use to teaching the scien
on't have a lot of time to read through all that is written there.
ng the meaning of the standards is very helpful.
science based.
king for. But, there is a lot of detail, and if you are not familiar with the way NGSS is supposed to work, the connections bet
eaching topics (butterflies and penguins) and not concepts (structures and processes)
, instead of scrolling through.

udents' know and are able to do.
dily rectified by using an online app to allow searching and organizing.
I really appreciate the clarification statements, the
and imagine small schools with few science staff will have a tough time prioritizing and creating learning targets in kid frie
so appreciate the "Assessment Boundary" statements that remind me where to stop and which things are beyond the scop
I think there is a problem. Several performance expectations need clarification statements. That's not good.
mong content.
hover over it. I appreciate the cross cutting concepts as well because they can apply to all areas. The DCIs are easy to und
more like the reading and math.

the blending of science and engineering as if they are the same thing! Understanding the difference and importance of eac
students become better at analysis, testing and supporting information.

a scaffolded framework leading to increased rigor and relevance for learners.
ecause of what is in text

andards lend themselves to other areas of the curriculum.
me clear and the reasons for its organization well understood.
class offerings?
overwhelming the students and presenting more information than beyond capacity to comprehend at that grade level.
ntinuity from district to district and state to state.

ther standards, that are not usually included in standards it is very well organized.
ucation on the same page.

he cross curricular links allow for easy access to other content areas.
e a single discipline at different levels: i.e. three columns to see a physical science standard for grade school, for middle sc
h it. Its organization works much better for teachers than the Iowa Core.
pics and grade levels.
dard will help with implementation.
clear than the current Iowa Core standards.
lum with the new standards
epts wherever possible.
arrangement)
dents could be taught to make that standard without enough background information to know the science behind why they
pectations are very specific and difficult to assess, but they appear to be the "standards."
and Disciplinary Core Ideas. I've also found the connections between the performance tasks & the Iowa Core ELA & Math s
s that should be taught.
done like they read in the document or can you mix and match Science processes with DCI - I am presuming the latter.
de levels K-5 is grade leveled.

make sense!
ards across multiple content areas.
written as action statements--the standard has become the target.
n the elementary grades such an emphasis is on Math and Reading that Science often gets left out and only done sporadica
emes (science, math, environment) are also clear.
es. In the past we had to guess at what direction the core ideas should take us.
at resource!
ng. It is valuable to have a list of expectations for each standard and examples of what assessments can be used. Lastly, h
ndards which correspond with our goals in stem education.
ces, and content, the nature of the organizational structure becomes clear and very valuable.
r to year makes MUCH more sense than current standards.
my and efficiency
vigate). The preamble page has extremely long paragraphs.
to read. The appendices are helpful.
rad students, being on committees...), teachers don't have the time to organize science standards. Until more funding is g
they're supposed to teach.
not have Iowa Core STEM standards that integrate the whole picture. That would allow for more hands on real application.
the same background in science as a teacher with a science endoresement. We are not reading these with the same "eyes
the most straight-forward and practical.
into their personal and professional life.
t of the concepts
so appreciate the grade-level synopsis before each set of grade level standards.
so they can understand the science standards and not be so scared.
he DCIs. They use bullet points instead of numbers.
ing and we feel comfortable explaining it to our own building teachers now! NGSS will help us so much as we start our wor
her to look at the disciplinary core ideas for the content they need. I think it could improve on the flow from DCI's to cross-c
ogy subjects.
ted as seperate entities.
follow set of Standards. Like teaching science make it "fun", "hands on" and more. I am not a reader, I am a hands on lea
t those deficiencies.
o these standards, a great deal of additional training would be needed for many elementary teachers. I would not want to
of predictions as well as falsification of temperature data of University of Edinburgh.

es are one click away is also very nice.
the desired result; far too many scientists to ignore have serious doubts about the theory as it stands; Iowa's education sy
improves the experience for the student).
ments (ex. sunlight warms the Earth's surface) than standards. Also, too many references to the (probably) relevant parts of
working with. This might not be a big deal for high school or middle school teachers who are only teaching science, but it
e, would be able to understand and decipher what is going on in their child's learning. If parents do not understand they ca
ons between engineering and cross curricular content is ineffective. This is not a good method of communication of learni
ntent and practice. How can we adapt these standards for students who need more accommodations and clarification?
understood and easily taught to students.
f the cross standards provided are, in my opinion, are weakly connected and are better addressed through independent act
ds listed below.
r teachers who have limited time to teach science as it shows other disciplines in which it can be incorporated.
arent with a lower level of preparation trying to look at this! (Full disclosure - I am also a parent of a middle school and a h
g is the most exciting thing to come out of the NGSS.
e standards are too strict, and as the classroom teacher I feel the creativity has been taken away from how I currently teac
els or an afterlife) and not a fact of biological science? We have members of congress who serve on the Science and Educa
dards not because it hurts kids, but because it hurts WV's coal companies. Absurd!
imit the types of projects that take place.

chool district they came from or moved to.
elves, and by either limiting or giving no access to all valid theories, we are doing them a disservice in that area.
cope and sequence for the year and doesn't know where to start).
only on certain area of the standards.
o view a color-coded version of the performance expectation so the user can see the thinking behind the construction of th
y taught in a 3 year time frame. It is difficult to "see" the vertical alignment of the standards.
these proposed standards my impact students with IEP's or other accommodations.
PS1.A, PS1.B and so on. Pick one - then use that form for the disciplinary core idea, descirbing the student expectations un
21st century scientists need. I'm continually puzzled as to why they've not bee adopted immediately; I have yet to have a
s are simply too difficult to be taught at that level, so these must be taught at the high school level. Curriculum directors,
hrough to see what matters.
on his or her plate.

m just use to teaching the scientific method.
ed to work, the connections between each of the sections, I think they can be daunting to "unpack".
the clarification statements, the assessment boundaries, and the crosscutting concepts areas.
ating learning targets in kid friendly language.
hich things are beyond the scope of this standard.
. That's not good.
reas. The DCIs are easy to understand and apply in the classroom.
fference and importance of each is crucial for the scientifically literate citizen. There is a strong technology bias in our soc
ehend at that grade level.
d for grade school, for middle school, and finally that same discipline standards at the high school level. In that way, it is ap
w the science behind why they do what they do. The evidence statements help this but has not been done for the middle
& the Iowa Core ELA & Math standards to be useful in developing interdisciplinary connections. What the NGSS are asking
- I am presuming the latter.
eft out and only done sporadically which will not have them ready for the next level of Science. So the system will ultimate
essments can be used. Lastly, having grade specific expectations makes it more consistent across the state than our curren
ndards. Until more funding is given to teachers so they don't have to do all the fundraising themselves, organization will n
more hands on real application. Then students could choose to take the STEM path in high school or the regular math and sc
ding these with the same "eyes" as a middle school or high school science teacher.
us so much as we start our work creating UbD (Understanding By Design) units in our district!
n the flow from DCI's to cross-cutting concepts and science and engineering practices, from which the performance expect
t a reader, I am a hands on learner. I like things simple and easy to follow. What I have seen so far is a mixed up mess to
teachers. I would not want to resort to relying on a text as the only thing I know about a topic.
s it stands; Iowa's education system, once the best in the nation should not adopt fad science
the (probably) relevant parts of other documents/frameworks impede readability.
e only teaching science, but it would be helpful for those who are elementary teachers.
ents do not understand they cannot help their child and if they cannot help their child their child will not have the reinforce
hod of communication of learning goal for parents and teachers to use as a common language to determine the learning ex
modations and clarification?
essed through independent activities.
an be incorporated.
rent of a middle school and a high school child.)
away from how I currently teach Iowa Core. I feel as if I am being painted into a corner with these standards, a robotic lear
serve on the Science and Education Committee who do not accept the facts of evolution as explained by a Theory of Natur
sservice in that area.
g behind the construction of the PE.
ng the student expectations under those.
mediately; I have yet to have a conversation with someone who can tell me explicitly what is wrong with these standards. F
ol level. Curriculum directors, etc. don't seem to understand why we can't just start doing inquiry and experiments. That
rong technology bias in our society which leads to underfunding of basic science research, which is extremely counterprodu
chool level. In that way, it is apparent as to how the standards progress
s not been done for the middle schools yet.
ons. What the NGSS are asking students to know and be able to do is not always obvious at first glance, but when scrutini
ce. So the system will ultimately fail.
across the state than our current standards.
themselves, organization will never get better.
hool or the regular math and science path. By having both students will have a choice and we meet both.
which the performance expectations draw from, rather than starting at the performance expectations and working down t
en so far is a mixed up mess to me when I read it. Sorry just my 2 cents.
child will not have the reinforcement need from home that makes learning possible. Educators are not the only one respon
ge to determine the learning expectations of the the child.
these standards, a robotic learning system that I feel is not conducive for middle school learning.
explained by a Theory of Natural Selection. We have politicians, nearly all Republicans, who are so rabidly anti-science tha
s wrong with these standards. For the sake of our children's science education, please adopt them.
nquiry and experiments. That would be great, but the knowledge base isn't there. There is also such a large amount of co
which is extremely counterproductive in achieving our societal goals. I also dislike the absence of Nature of Science standa
t first glance, but when scrutinized I've found the expectations clear.
we meet both.
pectations and working down to the columns.
ors are not the only one responsible for their childs ability to learn. Learning has to take place at home as well and this wi
o are so rabidly anti-science that they think creationist views should be taught in our public schools and who accept the ide
also such a large amount of content that I'm not sure how there is enough time to cover it all when we only require two sp
nce of Nature of Science standards, which research makes clear are extremely important for citizens to understand. That b
ace at home as well and this will not happen if the parents do not understand.
schools and who accept the idea of a 6000-year old earth. No wonder the state of science education in the US is in shambl
all when we only require two specific science courses. (Their third year is their choice, so we can't guarantee all students w
citizens to understand. That being said, the NGSS is an improvement over what we currently use, even though the numbe
ducation in the US is in shambles, when so many of our political leaders are proud to admit that they never took science in
e can't guarantee all students would get curriculum left to those classes.)
ly use, even though the number of standards is overwhelming.
that they never took science in college (and were likely asleep in science class in High School). How effectively is Disc. co
ol). How effectively is Disc. core idea ESSIC (History of Planet Earth) presented when so-called intelligent adults believe th
led intelligent adults believe the Earth is about 6000 years old.

The Next Generation Science Standards currently show all middle school (grades
6-8) standards in a single grade band. How should Iowa approach the middle
school standards?
Response
Response
Answer Options
Percent
Count
band.
41.0%
768
Grade 8.
59.0%
1107
answered question
1875
skipped question
648
The Next Generation Science Standards currently show all middle school (grades 6-8) standards in a single grade band. How should Iowa approach the
a. Keep them together in a

single middle school grade
band.
b. Assign specific standards
to Grade 6, Grade 7, and
Grade 8.
s in a single grade band. How should Iowa approach the middle school standards?
Please comment about your response to the middle school standards.
Answer Options
Response Count
answered question
skipped question
802
802
1721
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Which stakeholder group do you

primarily represent as you
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
Response to
Other
Are you
directly
involved in
Science
education?
non formal educa.

a.
The best intere a.
a.
Local School B b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
College of Educa.
a.
a.
ISU Extension i a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
g. Community member
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a, c, d (retired b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
retired teacher b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
paraprofessionaa.
b.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
h. Business
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Literacy Coach a.
a.
a.
a.
Retired scienceb.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
Work in STEM j b.
a.
a.
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

g. Community member
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
d. Higher Education
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
e. Parent
h. Business
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
b. Administrator
Parent,Environ a. Yes
Naturalist
a. Yes
a. Yes
naturalist
a. Yes
naturalist, Cou a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
County Conserva. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Non-formal Edua. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
b. No
grandparent
b. No
b. No
b. No
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
concerned adultb. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Retired now butb. No
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
f. Student
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
b. Administrator
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Parent and edu a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
homeschoolin a.
a.
a.
a.
Teacher Associ a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
Substittute tea b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Teacher and P a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Grandparent a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
f. Student
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a.
a.
Teacher and paa.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Non-formal edua.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Museum & Aquar
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Science Instruca.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Both teacher a a.
a.
a.
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Environmental a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Non-formal educ
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
nonformal educa
a.
a.
Public Works O a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
Personnel
Personnel
Personnel
Personnel
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
Grandparent anb. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
citizen of the a. Yes
Someone who wo
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
educational co a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
Personnel
Personnel
Personnel
Personnel
a.
a.
In the educatio b.
Going to schoolb.
Going to schoola.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
Teacher's Aide a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
I am a homosexb.
iiuujj
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
para educator b.
a.
I am a parent ob.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
school district a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
parent & teach a.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
Support scienc a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
I am both a teaa.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e.
a.
a.
g.
Parent
Teacher
Teacher
Community member
b.
b.
a.
a.
No
No
Yes
Yes
The Next Generation Science Standards

currently show all middle school (grades 6-8)
standards in a single grade band. How should
Iowa approach the middle school standards?
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
Please comment about your

response to the middle
school standards.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I actually would defer to what teachers think, but if the
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Although children vary in their ability to comprehend c
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The problem with having grade 6-8 students in a single
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It's just easier to know grade-level what is expected to
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b It allows teachers/schools to be more flexible and utiliz
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b If Iowa is able to have an assessment (not necessarily
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Like the grade span, it give options to schools on how t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b We are a multiage school and it would benefit us to kee
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Please decide on something
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be easier to identify standards for each grade
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr assign standards to specific grades
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The middle school philosophy is about creativity and st
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Keeping them together allows for greater flexibility, bu
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr We ended up splitting the standards up ourselves amo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Our middle school includes grades 7 and 8. Our 6th gr
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b By keeping them as a single middle school grade band
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr An important part of statewide standards is ensuring a
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allow districts and schools to meet those middle schoo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The single grade band seems to allow for individual ad
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Students could elect to study the standard areas in diff
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Leaving the standards as a middle school band allows t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Separate them like the other grades are.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Elementary is assigned to individual grades, would be
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr From a teacher perspective, it would be easier if the st
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They ARE broken up to into 3 years of suggested prog
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Some school districts are not aligned with the above ch
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Would recommend earth, life and physical at each grad
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If they are together,each school can pick which year th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Too much time deciding WHO will teach what, and not
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think that middle school ages are full of students rang
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be a good idea to have an overall idea for mid
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Let local schools decide how to approach the standards
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think that probably gives teachers more flexibility to p
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a high school teacher, I have concerns that if the m
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr All grades should be assigned standards K-12. Are all s
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows schools flexibility to articulate the sequence
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This would enable better local control.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I like having a say in what I teach and being able to ma
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Individual school districts should have the power to dec
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If students transferred from school to school, the stude
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The three levels on bleed together so much. 8th grade
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Giving specific standards for each grade level will help
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They appear age appropriate yet it will take a number
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr When reviewing the results of standardized tests, dete
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think it would be more beneficial to do specific grade
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They seem to encompass the variety of concepts that
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Gives districts flexibility in how to address them.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As in HS there are certain areas that middle school stu
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I am personally not a middle school expert, but the big
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I am not a middle school science teacher.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Would be easier as a teacher to address standards spe
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Would be easier as a teacher to address standards spe
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Science Gizmos appear to be a good educational tool f
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I like the band as it offers flexibility in class scheduling
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr it will be easier to determine how well they interpret th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I wish at the middle level it was assigned what each gr
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think it is best do have specific standards for each gra
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If we are to align them, I think they should be aligned b
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Each district has to decide where to address those stan
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Not all schools have 6/7/8 in the same building.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think spiraling curriculum is important so either way i
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think that the bands should represent classes taught.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr My daughter complained that there was too much revie
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Grade level designations should assure that the approp
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I agree with Bruner that science is learned iteratively, m
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allow schools to come up with a plan to cover those sta
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Some 6th grades are still in an elementary setting. Th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They need to be separate not together to show more a
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Specific standards would make a framework for steady
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I don't have much experience in this, but I say, specific
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I don't agree that NGSS are either rigorous or the best
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Such a different time in development in these age grou
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Middle school standards in a single band are fine - I wo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr as a parent I feel that if it is not broken down into grad
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Show research-based learning progression expectation
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Middle school students learn at different rates and hav
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be helpful if those middle school standards cou
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I don't mind the single strand, but if state/national asse
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assigning standards to different grade levels specifical
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I would like to see them assigned the specific grade. I f
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assigning specific standards to each grade will unify cu
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Possibly have appropriate benchmarks as checkpoints
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think they should be specific for each grade to be abl
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Very broad but that is O.K. since it allows many ways to
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They are already arduous and ambiguous.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Kids at this level are extremely diverse in terms of thei
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If districts are not set up with a "Middle School", comm
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows flexibility for the school.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr OUr school has a jr. high approach rather than the midd
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr 8th graders have a much higher comprehension of all s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This would make alignment easier!
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Keeping them grade specific will help in the selection o
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think this allows for better pacing guides and less gap
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Specific standards will help guide the schools/teachers
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Large learning curve from 6th to 8th grade.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b It allows schools to adjust their curriculum to their staff
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think if we keep them together then the districts can
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There can be a lot of differences among students at tho
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr A break down would make it more specific as to what is
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There can be a great difference in students in those gra
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Having a focus for each year makes it easier to insure
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping the standards together rather than separated
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr grade level standards would permit more effective mea
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I am a proponent of removing the content specific "silo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I am not sure. With schools making so many cuts, class
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I believe every standard should be in bands rather than
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr To better remedy gaps in education, the standards sho
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think the things we test on, (Standards) should be sep
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The Specific standards should be separated.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There are different bands of science so it only makes s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think each individual grade should know their specific
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I don't teach this grade level, and I don't think it's prud
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping the standards together allows local districts to
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think each school district should be able to determine
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Using a range of grade levels instead of grade specific
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There is a lot of science curriculum to teach. I think it
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Vertical planning between grade levels is better when t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It is more likely to be covered if it is assigned to a singl
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think that it would be better to separate the standard
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If my children move districts, I want to be sure they ha
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The depth and breath of science and technology the ge
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Keep consistent across state
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They should work as one unit with layered levels of sop
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Each child should have expectations matching that of t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Since these standards will set the groundwork for more
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I like the assignment of grade level standards. This me
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Focus more on age appropriate criteria
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Middle school kids undergo huge transformations in the
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Split them into grade sections
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It may be better, as students transition from one distric
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This would be easier just in case the collaboration piec
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b We currently teach 6th grade earth science, 7th life sci
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Banding offers accountability with local control.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr A reason for a standardized curriculum is for the benefi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr don't teach middle school
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Iowa students that move throughout the year from sch
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Mobile families with school-aged children would benefi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Specific standards will address the problem of some co
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The key is that not all children/people learn alike, some
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Please take into consideration the stages of maturity a
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr So we can track growth per grade level.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Unless you are planning on teaching the middle school
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b All of the high school standards are together. Middle sc
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It will be an easier transition if specific standards are a
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In an increasingly mobile society, all curriculum should
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If the standards aren't specifically tied to grade levels,
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together allows school to utilize their tea
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a classroom teacher, it is always easier to know spe
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This approach allows for flexibility in different middle s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If standards are not assigned to a single grade, I fear th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allows more flexibility
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr too easy to miss something
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This will help with students who move from school to s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If the goal is to make it so all students learn the same t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows schools to teach strands as the need instea
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This gives more flexibility for course offerings when it i
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I feel children all learn at different rates. The single ba
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b A single grade band allows local flexibility in planning c
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If we are still going to have standardized tests to meas
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Maybe group them 6-7 and 7-8 to give some direction
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b It should be kept as a band so districts may choose wh
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Learning takes place at different times for different stu
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b At the Middle School level, students are working on pro
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them in one band helps those teachers who te
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In depth analysis requires separate tracks for grade lev
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Hard to plan for continued progress at high school whe
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They could be a single band but I think that having spe
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I could do either of these options. If they separate it th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr different school systems have different definitions of w
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Many schools have differentiated their curriculum to m
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think this would help with students who move and no
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together allows for more individual distri
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I believe they give good background to things in biolog
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I'm not sure how to approach this, but I feel that teach
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think this will help ensure that teachers are teaching
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them as a grade band is appropriate assuming
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allow greater latitude in the school system to distribute
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They look quite similar to standards we have used in th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If we express the need for children to work through eve
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Kids at that age are quite different developmentally.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr 2 years between 6th & 8th grade can be a big differenc
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I am torn on this one. However, for consistency, it wou
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Each school helps develop their own curriculum and to
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr if students move they could miss information, if teache
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If there is a band assigned, it would be helpful to know
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them in a single band allows schools to decide
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Give local school districts the option to address the mid
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I believe grade specific will be more effective for state
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It is important to see how students are progressng thro
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Since the middle school years are so chaotic for many
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Standard flexibility generally results in better teaching
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Grade specific
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Keeping the same standard per grade will ease issue o
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together will give teachers more flexibili
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Too many students move to different school districts - i
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Science is a building process. Younger students learn t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This would help when students are transferring from pl
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b give teachers flexibility
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Different ages learn different things. This could work bo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Since these are "Standards" it seems appropriate to all
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Middle school standards should remain in a band becau
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b keep them together, due to students who are in advan
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The learning ability of a 6th grader is much different th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Gives the teaches flexibilty.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b With the varying maturity rates of kids, it would be bet
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There is a large difference in cognitive ability from 6th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I don't teach 6-8 but I have been with those teachers a
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Easier to keep it specific so when kids transfer between
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr A 6th grader does not have the maturity that an 8th gr
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Grouping them together indicates to students and pare
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr My biggest concern with not assigning them to a specifi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think it would be easier to split into single grade span
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Let the school districts decide for themselves how to h
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Let school districts decide.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Again lacking in basic ecology
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Specific standards should be assigned to each grade le
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think it is easier to organize it by grade level so teach
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr None
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I am not sure...
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together leaves school districts flexibility
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I agree that the standards should be delivered with as
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Individual districts can best determine how they want t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Students need to keep building on the same concept se
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr My daughter just had her choir concert. She is in 6th g
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I am not sure which way is best
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b and work these into the humanities it important to dem
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Leaving them together, in my opinion, allows greater fl
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think we can expect more from students.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Without assigning specific standards to each grade lev
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I teach elementary. No opinion about Middle School
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They are in one grade band because middle school scie
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I like targets to be as specific as possible.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr We need to differentiate between grade levels so stude
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b In our state there are many different configurations of
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Gives more direction to a teacher coming in to know w
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As a current middle school science teacher, I feel as if
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Leaving them in a single band allow schools the flexibi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I do not work with middle schoolers right now. Howeve
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b We teach multiple science content at middle school an
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It is VERY helpful to a teacher to have standards specifi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It is better for each grade level to know what they are
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I do not know enough about the flexibility of middle sch
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Easier for teachers if grade level specific
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This would give some flexibility.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr We need clarity and consistency across school districts
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr it is a political agenda to lump together all students; in
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Not all schools operate as 6-8 Buildings. Many elemen
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think to keep from doubling or tripling up specific stan
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Cognitive differences preclude abstract thinking for mo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Individually schools can decide how to divide the stand
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I am currently in a situation where the 6th grade is in a
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think the assignment of certain standards to specific g
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assigning standards to specific grades allows students
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I remember my middle school years as being especially
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This will reduce confusion, give more direction, and allo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Although my primary reason for selecting grade specifi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr all grades learn at different levels, they can't all do the
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Teachers in individual schools/districts should be grown
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In order to show growth there needs to be a break out
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Specific grades requirements would help students who
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b At my previous school district we kept them in a single
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows districts to differentiate courses and spiral s
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b A single band allows for differentiation.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr After teaching in a country where each grade level had
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr A 6th grader may be capable of 8th grade work. Vice v
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Middle schools can be so diverse, I think we can leave
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows for progress at different rates
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr By keeping them in a single strand I think that standard
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr each age level progresses differently, standards should
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Each school might have a different way or order to tea
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Being more specific to grade levels would help the teac
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This would students who switch school districts during
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think this way will be easier for the students in middle
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Classes shouldn't be lumped together. 6th graders aren
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Many 6th grades are not even in middle school. Differe
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They should keep them together in a single middle sch
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Seems like there'd be more opportunity for catch-up (o
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I believe the decision should be left to the school distri
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Many students find themselves moving from one schoo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I do not teach Middle School, but this makes the most s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr i Don't teach middle school as I don't teach middle sch
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Teachers should have the flexibility to grade how they
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It's hard for kids to switch schools midyear and be lear
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b There are plenty of resources if any particular student
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Middle school is forgotten about for the most part... it n
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allowing the standards to be in one band would allow d
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr 6-8 are not the same, too large a range
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together as mid school allows for grade
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Middle school students have such diverse interests and
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel it would be hard on science teachers in every gra
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Easier for teachers to manage, which in turn helps to p
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr MS students see great diversity in their approach towa
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b From middle school onward, it's better not to be too fin
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I believe keeping them in a middle school band provide
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Again, why not keep the same format as what is alread
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think that these standards should be separate so teac
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assigning to grade level leaves less to chance
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think that local school districts should be able to decid
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Children's minds do a lot of growing in middle school. 6
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b If student does not meet standard should be held back
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As a high school science teacher I have found that my
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Courses are taught in the 6th, 7th, and 8th grades so it
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr By keeping them in a band, we still will have inconsiste
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Because some of our school are set up as middle schoo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Keep it simple
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There are many school configurations for this age grou
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This is a time to push the basics and start at a very bas
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It's all about Government controll
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I teach 7th grade Life Science. Our 6th is Phys. Scienc
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I like that schools have the flexibility to design units th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Don't know. People move so it should be a state wide d
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Some 6th grades are still part of elementary schools
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Too much to do in 3 years, but teachers at least deserv
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The expectations for what will be taught in each grade
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The regular English sections of the Common Core State
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping the 6-8 standards together in a band allows fo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Our middle school goes from 5th to 8th grade. There a
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Some of the standards that are assigned to my grade l
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr To better meet the needs of an increasingly transient s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Trying to understand what is ask for each grade level.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Less overlapping the better
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Each grade is so different so specified standards would
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It just makes sense to separate them, in order for them
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b It will take a lot of time to do more of the project based
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Give the schools the control on how they are implemen
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b There is variance to how schools are currently deliverin
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b By keeping them together we were able to create our k
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be nice to know the specific requirements per
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr depending on grade some standards maybe more imor
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I believe teachers need more guidance regarding organ
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr We need to define vertical articulation by grade
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Make it less confusing
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Not a middle school teacher
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Not sure which option is best regarding question #6 sin
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Middle school students do not traditionally retain anyth
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I teach high school so I really have no preference, but w
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I would assume that depending on the middle school, s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The more specific the better.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr different topics different standards
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think trying to assign specific requirements for each m
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr 1. We live in a mobile society and students will miss co
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Having the standards in a single band allows each scho
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b If you assign grade spans, this will help with the issue o
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They are well written, but it almost seems like they are
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Band but separated in the band.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think it needs to be more defined so teachers are teac
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In schools where a teacher has a specific grade level th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I liked seeing other states that kept these levels bande
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I likem banded but it is also nice to see what each grad
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The last two years, our science department 4-8 has be
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I currently teach 7th grade Life Science and 8th grade
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Each grade would be able to expand upon the knowled
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b There needs to be some flexibility for districts to determ
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I don't have the knowledge for the standards to be abl
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This would assure all Iowa students would have the sam
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As stated above, I think it is important to show how con
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Schools would have the flexibility to teach the standard
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They should look ahead to their learning future and loo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This will allow more flexibility at the middle school so t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b In my conversations with science teachers, there is con
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Middle School is a great time to prepare for our future a
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think that each grade should be assigned specific stan
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr there are many differences in childrens levels of abilitie
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assigning specific standards will ensure kids receive in
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I like that 7th grade science is Life Science in our distri
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If each grade level has their own to teach all will be co
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Most logical for teachers to plan for.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Move in and move out students will receive consistent
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr make specific standards so that move ins will fit into an
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This is very important to move-in/move-out students.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think it gives flexibility depending on what schools wa
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr too much to cover in MS
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I don't teach middle school. My focus is elementary. Th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Districts should be able to develop their own articulatio
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Some topics aren't covered until 8th grade, but studen
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them as a grade span helps allow for flexibility
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think that each grade should be tested over certain th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b With the break-down for teaching science in the middle
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b local control
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As long as keeping them together allows school district
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Local control is the best option, it allows flexibility in w
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If your going to do it, you might as well give specific st
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There are such developmental leaps occurring in those
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows for local decision making in deciding topics
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allow for local control of this issue.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b If we are forced to adopt these, at least allow the teach
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Clarity assists teachers in knowing where exactly the c
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b teachers and districts should have the ability to plan cu
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr everything else is split - a child moving from district to
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr 7th grade is a when life science should be introduced.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b By keeping it as a grade span, this would give local dis
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Either one can be accomplished well, but keeping them
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Being specific to a grade level allows evaluation of wer
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Children do a lot of maturing and changing during this
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Since our museum & aquarium education programs an
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b do not make standards more complicated. adding laye
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Then it won't be so open ended.. It can be very overwh
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think they are pretty well organized but should be sep
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I need to see them.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b by assigning them to one certain grade level, you are l
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If students move schools, each school will be in the sam
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Science teaching will not change until the assessment
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It helps when a student moves to have a set of standar
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The state does not know, nor should they dictate, when
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Suggestions for integrated curriculum, as many middle
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think individual districts should be able to decide the
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b It allows for flexibility between schools.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Allows for vertical alignment
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keep them all in one middle school band and leave it u
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Assigning specific bands to specific grades may require
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b To give students an overview of the crosscutting and in
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Being the sole science teacher of a small school distric
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b A single grade band allows districts the flexibility to be
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a parent/educator, I feel it's in the best interest of t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel it is important to assign specific standards to eac
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them in a band is helpful because we are able
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Easy to glance at when discussing curriculum.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I appreciate the flexibility to address the middle school
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I would like to see content required in the courses inste
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It will be easier when students transfer from district to
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I could go either way and I see the benefit for both. Bu
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Having specific standards for middle school will help w
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think the standards should be stay grade banded with
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think they should be separated, as 6th graders may n
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be easier to address them and explain them to
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together would allow a bit more flexibilit
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They should be distinct and separate.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr At our school the 6th grade is not in the middle school
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr this way it will keep schools across the state on the sam
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I really don't care how they are organized.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b All standards for all children is an excellent plan. Allow
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In school where the 6th grade is separated from the 7t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b If they are kept in a band districts must ensure that the
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Would clarify expectations.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I would like more user-friendly terminology with examp
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Middle school should have specific standards for each o
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This would assure across Iowa what grade level is teac
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I believe it is best to keep them together, then school d
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Teachers WANT to know specific standards for grade le
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I would keep them together which will allow schools to
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b allows for flexibility in a school district
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I don't understand why you even offered two choices. I
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr These need to be flexible, not rigid and not allowing fo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would provide more clarity if they were grade specifi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think this can help students who transfer schools with
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It is true that middle school is one band, but as a midd
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Am currently working on aligning our curriculum with th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be good for students who move from school to
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It seems too common for teachers in different grades t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Schools should have the ability to meet the needs of th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr While it may make more sense to keep them in a band
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The middle school standards provide teachers and lead
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b allows spiral learning
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel it would be beneficial to have them laid out by gr
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I feel as though middle school standards should not be
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Educators need the flexibility to introduce and/or to rev
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr With the number of students who move between distri
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Depending on the structure of the middle school scienc
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr We currently have a PS-6 grade building and then stud
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel like this would help with current issues middle sch
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think there developmental difference in what a 6th gr
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Much easier for classes to be specific to one science co
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This makes it easier for children that move districts the
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be better to have the separate because somet
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Having them grouped together makes it rather difficult
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I believe they can be separated into grade bands easily
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Each school or district should be best able to align lear
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Our text allows us to mix up different disciplines for ea
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together as a band always teachers and
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Kids are all different and learn at different levels, and t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Hard to decide as the only 6th grade teacher and the o
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Without assigning specific standards to the individual g
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Instructional order should be uniform and scaffold up fr
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If standards are not assigned then schools repeat many
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I want to know what my child should be learning.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keep the middle school grade band, it gives some flexi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The adoption of national science standards would mea
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I do not teach 6th-8th grade science, however I do teac
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In my district, grades 6 & 8 are integrated science and
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Progress is easier for individual teachers in individual b
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think each grade could benefit from more specificity i
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Science should be more integrated. Keeping the bands
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Teachers need the this grade does this and that grade
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Some districts assign a curricular area to a grade (i.e. 6
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b And ensure that districts are covering these standards
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The offering of a middle school band provides schools w
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allows for flexibility by districts and teachers, to better
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Standards should be a local community decision. Not s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Difficult to implement in a K-6 building when 6-8 are lu
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Spiraling curriculum in MS is best for students.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I teach 6th grade science and at this time, it is very diffi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Dividing by grade makes it easier for non formal educa
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Separation might be helpful since some districts still ha
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Could go either way... Either teach the band at applicab
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Keep separate so you can evaluate progress over the 3
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b There needs to be a way to ensure that there is a time
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As long as the program has nothing to do with Commo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows some flexibiity for teachers within a school
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b We will need to accelerate quickly.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Some schools use a 5-6 grade middle school concept a
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This single bank gives more flexibility for development
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They would be easier to track if split by grade.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Project-based learning theory would suggest the single
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr 6 graders are much different than 8th graders.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They need to build each year a multidisciplinary approa
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Will it really make a difference which way you go? And
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There is a great deal of difference between the mental
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Each grade should have different standards to show th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I teach first and second grade and I like that the standa
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I do not feel strongly about this, though since some stu
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assign specific standard to each individual grade becau
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr To prevent gaps
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It should be a stepping stone such as math.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Only if the middle school teachers are vertically workin
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Working with more than one middle school, I know that
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This will make courses easier to design around the stan
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b don't hog-tie teachers.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There is still too much variability about what is learned
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr When students move from one district to another this w
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I'm an elementary educator, so I haven't thought too m
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Our school for now teaches life science and earth scien
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows schools to have choice in when and where t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Our school has Internediate school for 4th - 6th grade.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I am not in favor of standards. It seems to take away f
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This way children could transfer to other Iowa schools a
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The maturity level and learning ability of 6th graders is
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr From my own teaching experience, I have had students
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This will allow teachers and administrators to keep con
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As long as all students have the opportunity to have al
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel there should be a progression of skills to be taugh
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As a teacher, I find it beneficial to be able to have the s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Having standards grouped in a grade band provides a l
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Modeling after the common core would be a good mov
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Do to our make up of 6th grade being in the elementar
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think we should all stay together
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Please allow districts to decide what would be best suit
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If my children were to open enroll in another district du
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This would allow middle schools to align with the arran
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In this day and age students move around a lot. It is ve
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel it would make more sense to separate the grades
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There are several reaons to be grade specific. One is d
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Standards
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b If this is kept in a grade band, all state required standa
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr People may think Iowa students remain in the same dis
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr if you have specific standards for each grade level, it a
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think the single band approach allows for more flexibi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The expectations would be very different for the grade
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Mobility is a reality and if each district decides on its ow
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be nice to have very clear definition of what I
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeps local control about when and how to get the stan
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr They should definitely be more grade specific in middle
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I am torn on this comment, because assigning specific
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a middle school science teacher I really wouldn't mi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a middle school teacher, we are often required to fig
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think that keeping them as one band allows districts t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Districts need grade level guidance K-8 not just K-5. Th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I would like to keep 7 and 8 together, but keep 6 separ
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b More clarity is needed in many areas especially in rega
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Some middle school are divided 6-8, some 7-8. Perhap
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Separating them allows for more clarity and helps teac
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Since middle schools have science content that varies
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think this format offers more flexibility for districts to
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b There is a big difference between knowing content kno
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I waffle back & forth with this issue. I have taught a lon
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They should be put in a grade band, because this allow
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr See #5.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Would clarify what should be taught in elementary and
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think this gives school flexibility in classes and produc
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b With the standards being arranged in a band it allows fl
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think it needs to be clearly defined so other grades ar
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would be nice to teach all of the standards in a year
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This would allow individual districts to assign standards
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think this because of the students that move form dis
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together allows districts to decide where
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Students that move during those grades could have ho
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This gives districts more flexibility.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think that laying out the standards in a grade levels w
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr We need specific learning progressions for specific grad
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think it more clearly defines a progression when they
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Kids work at different paces. Some kids will get things
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr With each grade having a set of standards, it makes fo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel students who move to new districts within their m
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Many schools have 7 and 8 as a middle school so they
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping the standards in a band allows schools to adap
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I am ok with either way. I teach 6-8th grade science an
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b It is OK to do that but teachers are going to need curric
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Schools need the flexibility to address the standards. I
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Some schools have elementary K-6 and others have m
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I only work with elementary so my choice above really
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Not sure if the adv or disadv of either way
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The standards are for the age group and allow flexibilit
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This will allow flexibility to smaller schools that may be
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I do not teach at these levels so I do not know which is
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel that 6th graders should have earth science, 7th g
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them in a band together allows each district th
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b In our school we group to ability, thus keeping them to
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Would give more direction and uniformity across Iowa s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This allows teachers to know more specifically what the
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This allows teachers to specifically teach something m
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I'm not sure what would be most beneficial
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think each grade should have their own specific requi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr We have students coming from different schools and th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If you band the middle school standards together there
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Vertical alignment is progressing, but if grade levels ar
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If they are laid out for specific grade levels they are mo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b this gives flexibility with scheduling and students who
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If a student moves from one district to another, he/she
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I would like local school districts to be able to decide w
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I don't teach at this grade level, but it just seems that i
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together gives middle school teachers m
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a former middle school teacher. It was easier to tea
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b By middle school, students are at different levels, so ve
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Schools should still be given local control to determine
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b With budgets tight and electives getting cut keeping a
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Specific grade level standards are needed to help teac
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It is easier to do curriculum scope and sequence when
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think the flexibility would be nice.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If the standards are met, then enrichments could be ad
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b These standards are well written and inclusive.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The idea to keep them together as a band makes it mo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping the standards together in a 6-8 grade-band at
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b School districts can divide the standards among the th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The world of m.s. science is different than elementary.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I have taught 6th, 7th, and 8th grade. I prefer having P
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I am not sure how other middle school science program
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This approach demands that science teachers collabor
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b There should be this flow between grade levels.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr When students transfer districts, the grade bands woul
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It is much easier to ensure that if students leave one Io
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Many school districts are set-up with 6th grade not incl
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If they have specific standards, it is most likely that the
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Each grade level should have their own standards
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Easier to follow if divided
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Most middle schools do not do "General Science" in all
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Let the schools decide what to do with them...Keep the
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr We are fine working with bands, but direction is always
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I teach in a K-6 building. It would be nice to know exac
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr VERN
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I can support either option
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I don't know that I have a preference. On one hand, it'
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Specific grade level standards will provide consistency
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If expectations are clear for each grade level then teac
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In middle school, students still complete science cours
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This aligns to other CCSS standards Allows for separat
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In order get a truly reliable curriculum across the state
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If you break down the standards for each grade, you w
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I believe that each school district should determine how
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think this would be easier for schools and their sched
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a 7th grade teacher, it would make more sense for m
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr When a student moves from one Iowa district to anothe
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b It is more beneficial for each district to be able to assig
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The single grade band allows more flexibility at the loc
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If each grade has it's own standards, it will be easier fo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Why wouldn't grade specific standards be better? Mat
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Same as ELA and math.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Although other teachers tend to disagree with me on th
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I have no commitment to this FUCKING broken system
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr fdgfdgfdgfdg
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This provides them oat flexibility and allows schools to
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b While it would be nice to have a set goal for each grad
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I like the grade spans, it gives schools a little more flex
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr When a child moves from one district to another Iowa d
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It just makes things easier and helps students who mov
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr An important concept in STEM education is looking at t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b MS students don't necessarily have life science each ye
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Teachers / schools should have some flexibility as to th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b For smaller districts, the grade span allows flexibility in
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Grade level expectations are easier to follow and would
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Easier for schools who teaches different subjects. 7th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together gives local school districts more
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr For better consistency in teaching the rigor of middle s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I teach middle school, and I think the distinction betwe
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If specific content is assigned to specific grades then th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This would allow greater flexibility in teaching at the m
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Yes and no. Again, do the broad bands allow for integr
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assigning specific standards to a grade band makes it
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Students across Iowa should be learning the same mat
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As an 8th grade teacher, if you were to specifically stat
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b At our school, we have taken that single band and divid
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Middle school is the time to prepare students for HS an
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I feel that is it is broken up by grade level that all topic
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As a member of a teaching team I would like to continu
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Let us choose! Why do we have to change everything?
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Being a high school science teacher I would like to kno
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them as a grade band allows schools to organ
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If we want students to be able to transfer from one sch
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Part of the purpose of the NGSS seems to be clarify how
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If we had them by year, when students move, they wo
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I like them being a band so local control can assign wh
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together might allow for flexibility in pro
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think allowing schools the autonomy to select what w
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In our district grade 6 is in a different building so speci
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr too often districts fall into the "who" is teaching and wh
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Do not reinvent the wheel. Just adopt the NGSS as the
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If the intention is to assess students at each of these g
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together would better allow schools to in
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think it should be flexible to work towards the strengt
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Our school does life science 7th earth science 8th so if
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This would be better for students moving from district
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Separating the standards into different great bands jus
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b That allows different districts to adjust to their teacher
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As a current middle school science teacher I feel group
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I think it is easier as a teacher to know what things sho
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr In our school we divided up the standards amongst the
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Not all schools have a Middle School 6-8.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together allows more local control over w
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It is important for teachers to have an understanding o
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b No comment.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If they are not grade specific, the rigor will not be appr
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Make sure the science areas are covered that need to b
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would make it easier for students that move from dis
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The material needs to be broken down into the grades
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Although I don't feel strongly about this, I think this wo
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Middle School teachers go everywhere when it comes t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them as a single band will help keep flexibility
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping the middle school standards in a continuous b
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping standards in a single band implies that schools
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Schools teach the sciences in different orders for midd
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The NGSS breaks them out by grade, the Iowa Core is t
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If part of the intent of the Iowa Core is to make sure th
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think grouping them gives a little more control to the
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b i guess they are okay
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Development including neurological development betw
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b 6th-8th grades are closely related on learning levels. I
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assigning the standards to specific grades helps transi
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr There is quite a change from the 6th to the 8th grade a
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them in a single grade band allows smaller dis
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b If students learn topically, they often forget. If they dea
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Would allow for adjustment of curriculum year to year
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Maintaining a 6-8 band will provide districts with choice
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr easier to follow if they are specific to grade level and y
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b We take an "integrated approach" to science and there
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr By separating the standards they are easier to follow.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Putting them in a range gives teachers an excuse not t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping the standards in one band allows for accelerat
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Not all Iowa middle schools are organized in the same
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr If you don't make them specific, so teachers will only te
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Some schools flip flop how they teach life science and
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr transfer students and redundancy elimination
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This would make sure that students who move betwee
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I find there is so much it takes a great deal of time to s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a parent and a teacher having the standards laid ou
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Set standards for wag grade level will help parents kno
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This will allow flexibility of curriculum in when it is to b
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr if the intent to standardize learning outcomes for stude
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I will easily give us guidance as to what the outcomes
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As Iowans move their middle school child should have
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr I had a student transfer out of district to another Iowa
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allowing them to be applied in a band gives schools an
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I don't teach Middle School, so really have no experien
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Putting standards together in a single strand makes it d
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Other standards are laid out by grade level, so it would
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Not all schools follow the grade sequences that NGSS p
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This gives middle school teachers the freedom they de
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Assigning the standard per grade level would be a disa
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b It means that kids aren't in a box.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I like the freedom of the bands for middle school. That
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr understand local control but some schools place all ear
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b A 3 year grade band is narrow enough. Specifying stan
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b We currently organize our standards by classes, not gra
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them separate, the standards can be taught u
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Many districts have divided th see grade bands
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr As a middle school teacher, I would rather know the sp
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I would oppose assigning standards to particular grade
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This will allow the school to determine the courses.
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This will allow for flexibility with how middle school cou
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b What does research and best practice say is more appr
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The current standards are in grade bands and as a pare
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b A middle school band allows more flexibility, and the N
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This provides some leeway for districts to make the sta
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together will allow schools to have a sm
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Each level of school should show growth. The standard
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr When students move between district across Iowa ther
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b If this is not left in a grade band it may create the need
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As long as all the standards are met by 8th grade, we s
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Assigning specific standards to each grade allows stud
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together keeps more local control over w
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This allows middle schools to develop curriculum that i
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This would allow districts to assign them to specific gra
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them together in middle school allows the sch
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Why limit the ability of teachers to be flexible and allow
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Allow for teachers and districts to differentiate 6-8 as t
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Each school needs to be able to determine how best to
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I think districts would have some trouble with certificat
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b They are really not that different than the current Iowa
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b As a parent, I feel grades 6-8 are an excellent age to ex
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b This will allow schools to spiral curriculum or have spec
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr For students who move between districts in Iowa, this a
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them as a band allows for districts to continue
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b The grade bands allow flexibility at the district-level to
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Keeping them in one grade band allows some flexibility
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Schools must assign standards to each grade so all ma
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b I believe that each district should be allowed to decide
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr This will make it much easier for teachers to know wha
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr The standards should be assigned based on cognitive d
b.
b.
a.
b.
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr It would make sense for them to be split up by grade li
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr Easier for teachers to organize curriculum and avoid ga
Keep them together in a single middle school grade b Each district should have the freedom to assign standa
Assign specific standards to Grade 6, Grade 7, and Gr students could transfer from district to district and not
o what teachers think, but if they are in a band that might give school districts more flexibility adopting them, but the down
in their ability to comprehend content and also vary in which teaching strategies and methods work most effectively I belie
g grade 6-8 students in a single grade band is that significant developmental (both cognitive and emotional) differences ex
grade-level what is expected to be taught so separating standards would make things clear.
ols to be more flexible and utilize project based learning better.
an assessment (not necessarily a standardized test) that realistically assesses students at the end of 8th grade, I believe th
give options to schools on how they want to teach it.
ol and it would benefit us to keep the band together so we could rotate skills.
entify standards for each grade which would work for texts and meeting goals for each grade level.
ecific grades
osophy is about creativity and students who are working within teams. I think all the standards are important, but can be m
allows for greater flexibility, but assigning specific standards helps continuity across the state. I see benefits to both.
he standards up ourselves among the grade levels. 6th-Earth Science, 7th-Life Science, 8th-Physical Science
des grades 7 and 8. Our 6th grade is not considered middle school.
ingle middle school grade band, you allow each school district to determine when and how it works best for them to introd
atewide standards is ensuring a consistent curriculum between schools. Grade specific standards will help with alignment
ols to meet those middle school standards as best fits their needs, as long as they are met somewhere in Grades 6-8. Som
seems to allow for individual advancement among the students.
study the standard areas in different grades if that option was opened up. They may have a strength they want to start w
as a middle school band allows these standards to be adopted with minimal upheaval to the curriculum in place. I have be
other grades are.
to individual grades, would be easier if middle school standards were also.
ctive, it would be easier if the standards were broken down by grade level so you don't have to search and find the age app
into 3 years of suggested progression, building upon each other. So I clearly see what I am to cover in 6th and what will b
re not aligned with the above choices. It would be better to keep them in middle school as a whole.
h, life and physical at each grade level in a conceptual developmentally appropriate manner.
ch school can pick which year they are going to teach which standards. The same problems will arise that we have now. A s
g WHO will teach what, and not accoutability
ool ages are full of students ranging at different levels from elementary school - I don't think that it is necessary or fair to ha
to have an overall idea for middle school, however each grade should then be broken down.
e how to approach the standards in each grade level.
ves teachers more flexibility to pull out pieces and cover throughout that age range. However, having said that I know they
er, I have concerns that if the middle grades are not assigned standards at specific levels, they won't get covered in a logic
signed standards K-12. Are all students expected to study all science standards in high school? Do they not have the optio
ibility to articulate the sequence they wish to have.
er local control.
hat I teach and being able to make it work for our school
ts should have the power to decide how they will go about making sure all DCI are covered in the middle school years
from school to school, the students would not have gaps or repeats if each grade had required standards.
ed together so much. 8th graders need to have higher standards to be prepared for High School
ds for each grade level will help teachers know what standards they are responsible for. It will allow for students to focus on
priate yet it will take a number of years implementing this curriculum with fidelity for the students (and teachers) to develo
sults of standardized tests, determining gaps and adding to the curriculum would be applicable in multiple strands.
e beneficial to do specific grade bands as not all districts are banded 6-8
ss the variety of concepts that are addressed in middle school science. Some are vague (a "student can ask questions abo
y in how to address them.
ain areas that middle school students in each grade should have exposure to for preparation for HS sciences so that all scho
middle school expert, but the big ideas should be brought in during 6th grade and mastered by 8th.
ol science teacher.
acher to address standards specific to grade level.
acher to address standards specific to grade level
to be a good educational tool for learning some concepts, as our student has been very engaged by some of these as he w
rs flexibility in class scheduling to allow multi-age students to be in class together.
rmine how well they interpret the information.
el it was assigned what each grade should teach. Sixth grade is in a different building than our 7th and 8th our district still
e specific standards for each grade so the standards can be cohesive from year to year.
I think they should be aligned by grade to simplify things for when students move from school to school.
ide where to address those standards. It doesn't solve the "I moved and now am learning what I learned last year" kids. A
7/8 in the same building.
um is important so either way is suitable as long as it spirals
hould represent classes taught. For example each student would take a physical science class, life science, and earth and
d that there was too much review every year in middle school science. They had heard it all before and were ready for the
ns should assure that the appropriate sequence is taught and it is clear who is to be teaching what. Leaving at the middle s
t science is learned iteratively, meaning that students will need exposure to the same material in increasingly abstract way
up with a plan to cover those standards through the three grade levels
ill in an elementary setting. They are in their own small school district and share with surrounding communities or then mo
ate not together to show more accurate learning
d make a framework for steady advancement of science knowledge through middle school.
rience in this, but I say, specific standards give instructors guidelines for how/what they should be teaching.
are either rigorous or the best we can do for our students. They are unproven and have no data that they will improve scie
development in these age groups. Should be split up
s in a single band are fine - I would hope to see practice following this to include mixed-age classes (instead of "6th Grade
it is not broken down into grade level requirements it will be overlooked on tight budgets.
earning progression expectations
learn at different rates and have different interest levels. Each level should be pushed within its own limits, but not as a wh
ose middle school standards could have levels 6, 7 or 8 so it would allow for clear vertical alignment.
strand, but if state/national assessments are assuming they know certain standards by certain grades, then specific standa
different grade levels specifically will make it easier to ensure that they are covered because middle school students are d
m assigned the specific grade. I feel like there can be a big difference between 6th & 8th grade to have them lumped togeth
dards to each grade will unify curriculum across the state.
ate benchmarks as checkpoints along the way.
pecific for each grade to be able to clarify.
O.K. since it allows many ways to cover material.
us and ambiguous.
tremely diverse in terms of their education level and capacity. Some 6th graders are learning at the 8th grade level and so
p with a "Middle School", communication may be difficult and some standards may get lost in the shuffle.
r the school.
h approach rather than the middle school concept so that is why I chose separate
ch higher comprehension of all subjects than 6th graders. It makes no sense to even consider grouping them together. Eith
ment easier!
ecific will help in the selection of curriculum materials
etter pacing guides and less gaps in the middle school education.
help guide the schools/teachers.
om 6th to 8th grade.
ust their curriculum to their staff.

together then the districts can decide how to handle them.
fferences among students at those grade levels.
ake it more specific as to what is taught at each level. Would make it more uniform for students who move or change distri
fference in students in those grade levels.
h year makes it easier to insure that students that move will be instructed on all of the standards.
together rather than separated allows for more flexibility in a school's curriculum, especially for smaller districts.
would permit more effective measurement of outcomes.
moving the content specific "silos" from science education. All of the sciences rely on one another and attempting to teach
ools making so many cuts, classes may be combined. It may be easier to make it a band.
d should be in bands rather than in limiting grade specifics.
in education, the standards should be set K-8 and allow students flexibility in science education in high school. This assures
st on, (Standards) should be separated out as they are for Iowa assessments.
should be separated.
ds of science so it only makes sense to me that the standards are written in those bands.
grade should know their specific standards
level, and I don't think it's prudent for me to answer this question. However, your skewed survey required me to answer it
together allows local districts to organize them in ways that fit their local curriculum.
rict should be able to determine how best to put the grade bands together.
levels instead of grade specific expectations is how gaps created in student learning.
e curriculum to teach. I think it would be helpful to have each grade level know what their learning expectations will be. Th
en grade levels is better when the standards and concepts are specified.
overed if it is assigned to a single grade.
better to separate the standards for each grade level because not all schools collaborate across the grade levels to make s
tricts, I want to be sure they have the same expectations.
f science and technology the general public needs to understand to make knowledgeable and informed decision in their pe
ne unit with layered levels of sophistication

expectations matching that of their kids their own age.
will set the groundwork for more vigorous HS standards, it seems important to make sure there is consistency within each g
grade level standards. This method would make it easier to teach.
ropriate criteria
ergo huge transformations in their learning ability and style, so I think the standards should address those differences.
dents transition from one district to another, the basic concepts in each grade should remain the same from school to scho
st in case the collaboration piece is not in place.
grade earth science, 7th life science, and 8th grade physical science. I am sure other MS do the same. Our students then g
ability with local control.
ized curriculum is for the benefit of students that move. If the standards are grade specific, there is less likelihood of stude
ve throughout the year from school to school would benefit from a common Grade 6 curriculum, a common Grade 7 curricu
hool-aged children would benefit from teaching specific standards in certain grades. There would be fewer gaps and overla
address the problem of some concepts being missed or repeated unnecessarily. It also gives each level ways to extend prio
hildren/people learn alike, some are visual learners, some are aural, etc. additionally some children learn at an accelerated
eration the stages of maturity and development of the students and the variety of backgrounds, disabilities, and cultures w
per grade level.
g on teaching the middle school grades as one multi-aged group the standards required for each grade should be arranged
andards are together. Middle school should be as well. This allows the teachers more flexibility that concepts are taught in
sition if specific standards are applied.
le society, all curriculum should be standardized nationwide PK-8 so that students who move from one school to another ha
specifically tied to grade levels, they will not be met. Teachers will hope the next teacher gets to teach the more difficult st
allows school to utilize their teachers strengths and create the curriculum in a way that will best help students learn and g
, it is always easier to know specifically which concepts I should cover in my grade. Otherwise, it makes extra work for sch
r flexibility in different middle school settings.
igned to a single grade, I fear that by the time a student is in 8th grade that the teacher will need to pick up the slack from
ents who move from school to school.

so all students learn the same thing, then there are definite developmentally appropriate places when content should be t
each strands as the need instead of just in one grade, and teachers can scaffold instruction.
ty for course offerings when it isn't aligned to a specific grade level.
at different rates. The single band lends itself to children learning at their own pace.
ows local flexibility in planning curriculum. With that flexibility it will be easier to set up interdisciplinary curriculum, for ins
ave standardized tests to measure our students, we need to align our standards to the tests. My preference would be to h
and 7-8 to give some direction but also autonomy.
and so districts may choose where to place them to meet students needs.
different times for different students. It makes sense, then, to have standards over a longer period of time (e.g. middle sc
vel, students are working on projects, involving multi-grade levels. These standards are important to all students at this lev
and helps those teachers who teach all middle school grades be more effective in their teaching.
es separate tracks for grade levels
ued progress at high school when it is so open ended at the middle school level.
band but I think that having specific standards for each of the grade levels will make assessment monitoring more consiste
se options. If they separate it the drafters should be aware of age appropriate material. Otherwise leave it up to the middl
s have different definitions of what "middle school" means. Not all buildings are 6-8.
erentiated their curriculum to meet the needs of their students.
with students who move and not repeating/missing standards
allows for more individual district control concerning when certain topics are taught.
d background to things in biology, chemistry, and physics, but still don't see how it helps with most forms of engineering.
proach this, but I feel that teachers need more clarity on what is expected at their grade level. If it is banded together and y
ure that teachers are teaching what they are supposed to in each grade rather than leaving it up to the districts/buildings
de band is appropriate assuming teachers are capable of structuring and organizing them in a developmentally appropriate
n the school system to distribute the content across the grades as fits their student needs.
to standards we have used in the past...
for children to work through every concept from the ground up and not to stress about the 'end result', then we need to do
te different developmentally.
8th grade can be a big difference in maturity of not only the student but the student's brain. The standards shouldn't be lu
However, for consistency, it would be beneficial if the standards were grade-specific in the middle school. It would save dis
lop their own curriculum and to restrict them more could be too demanding. Teachers are professionals and should be allo
ould miss information, if teachers change it is harder to make sure all standards are covered
ned, it would be helpful to know what kinds of materials/curriculum is out there to support all grades in the band. Also, if th
e band allows schools to decide which standards are taught at each level. For example, earth science in 6th, life science in
ts the option to address the middle school standards in the way that best meets their needs. More importantly, flexibility a
will be more effective for state wide implementation.
ow students are progressng through each year
l years are so chaotic for many pre-pubescent students, and because GT and SPED students need curricular accommodatio
erally results in better teaching
dard per grade will ease issue of content sequencing.

will give teachers more flexibility
ve to different school districts - it would be better if the grade levels were the same to make sure they are not missing elem
ocess. Younger students learn the foundation of information about science, do simple hands on stuff and more. Then as th
tudents are transferring from place to place.
fferent things. This could work both ways and challenge students more. It's unfortunate we used to rank highest in the natio
ards" it seems appropriate to allow for flexibility in placing particular topics where they fit best in local (district) curriculum.
s should remain in a band because there can be a lot of overlap and building upon these complicated standards, some may
ue to students who are in advanced science classes or attend schools that combine grades.
a 6th grader is much different than that of a 7th grader.
ity rates of kids, it would be better to repeat information to enhance understanding rather than move on to new informatio
nce in cognitive ability from 6th to 8th grade, so there needs to be different standards for different grade levels.
ave been with those teachers at science curriculum meetings. It would be nicer and more user friendly if NGSS were split u
c so when kids transfer between schools, they are able to get the same information
have the maturity that an 8th grader has, therefore, learns at a different level. The middle school years are challenging as m
r indicates to students and parents that all are important concepts. Ideas and data are not prioritized. Eventually, students
h not assigning them to a specific age is for children who move from district to district and might repeat or miss a standard
er to split into single grade spans.
decide for themselves how to handle this. Their lower and higher grades will dictate this middle school area.
uld be assigned to each grade level because students level of maturity changes with each grade.
ganize it by grade level so teachers know who is responsible for what content.
leaves school districts flexibility in how they cover the material over the MS years.
rds should be delivered with as little segmentation as feasible, to enhance the understanding that science/technology is a f
best determine how they want to present.
building on the same concept several years in a row until it's learned.
er choir concert. She is in 6th grade, but the concert was all three grades together. There's a big difference between a 6th
e humanities it important to demonstrate to non science types the logic and importance of sciece and these standards
in my opinion, allows greater flexibility to cover topics at different points throughout middle school
more from students.
ific standards to each grade level, you are defeating the purpose of standardizing standards. Students who move may mis
opinion about Middle School
band because middle school science content is taught in different ways in different states. State may do Earth, Life, Physi
pecific as possible.
e between grade levels so students are challenged to grow more to keep up with other countries.
many different configurations of middle schools, and the transition to high school can drastically different as well. The math
a teacher coming in to know what needs to be taught when.
ool science teacher, I feel as if our district (currently one teacher for each grade level science course) will be able to distin
e band allow schools the flexibility to decide if a particular progression will be assigned to a single grade level or if a schoo
dle schoolers right now. However, knowing the mind set and how much adolescents in middle school change in just those fe
nce content at middle school and I think it is unnecessary to try and break them apart.
eacher to have standards specified to your grade level. If they are specified, it even helps knowing what you need to prepa
de level to know what they are expected to teach.
bout the flexibility of middle school set-up to say which would work best in the most situations. My thought is, if they're in
ade level specific
nsistency across school districts
o lump together all students; in the new world order of education the goal is to make all people identical - not good for pro
as 6-8 Buildings. Many elementary schools still operate K-6.
ubling or tripling up specific standards need to be assigned.
reclude abstract thinking for most 6th graders.
n decide how to divide the standards among the middle school science teachers and using the strengths of the educators.
ation where the 6th grade is in a different location than 7th and 8th grade. This makes vertical planning very difficult and le
of certain standards to specific grades should be left to the individual schools. However, I do not believe the standards sho
specific grades allows students to change schools between grades and to not repeat learning experiences (or conversely, l
school years as being especially crucial in determining which subjects did or did not interest me, as well as helping me dev
on, give more direction, and allow educators to focus on more efficient ways to administor engaging student activities.
eason for selecting grade specific is because children in Iowa move, I have three other reasons...1) NGSS has an integrated
rent levels, they can't all do the same thing.
chools/districts should be grown-up enough to meet, discuss, and decide who, how, and when the standards should be intr
h there needs to be a break out by grade.
ments would help students who must transfer between districts.
district we kept them in a single grade band and had integrated science for 6th, 7th, and 8th. I felt the students were well
differentiate courses and spiral standards.
r differentiation.
ntry where each grade level had specific standards, it was nice knowing all kids were on the same page when it came to wh
apable of 8th grade work. Vice versa. Keeping each grade level separate allows for individual learning and adjustments. Lum
so diverse, I think we can leave them as per how the NGSS people felt was important. This allows for more local control, wh
at different rates
ngle strand I think that standards could be missed. Also, some concepts lend themselves better for older kids, so those sh
ses differently, standards should be written accordingly, with some areas overlapping
e a different way or order to teach these topics that work for them. Instead of making them change it around just to make
grade levels would help the teachers in the grades stay the same track and it would be easier to navigate through the stan
o switch school districts during middle school. Sometimes students will have to repeat a whole year of life science, earth s
easier for the students in middle school and won't limit the teachers to teaching only a certain thing in one grade level
mped together. 6th graders aren't learning what 7th and 8th graders are learning. Each grade should have their own curric
ot even in middle school. Different topics are covered in each level.
together in a single middle school band, but allow individual districts and individual PLCs to determine how that would loo
more opportunity for catch-up (or extra challenge) if you bundle the kids in a three-year band.
hould be left to the school district about which science standards to teach in which grade level at the middle school level, s
mselves moving from one school district to another within the school year (sometimes more than once). When each distric
chool, but this makes the most sense in my mind.
hool as I don't teach middle school.
he flexibility to grade how they see fit
ch schools midyear and be learning life science in one and switch to Earth science in another school. Or get two years of li
ources if any particular student wants to branch out into more detailed education for their grade. This age bracket will do n
en about for the most part... it needs to be addressed on its own for different grade levels.
to be in one band would allow districts the flexibility to decide at what grade level to teach the standards.
oo large a range
as mid school allows for grade level differentiation and flux for each individual learner.
have such diverse interests and passions. It is wonderful to be able to teach a variety of sciences at each grade level, kno
on science teachers in every grade to have to teach the exact same things to accommodate the kids who didn't get the info
manage, which in turn helps to provide better instruction.
diversity in their approach toward mathematics, accelerated math curricula and the beginning of segmentation toward Phy
ward, it's better not to be too fine grained. One reasoning is that students are different and the coarser banding allows the
in a middle school band provides more flexibility for local schools and districts to decide on how to best align their curricula
e same format as what is already being used for Iowa Core?
ards should be separate so teachers are not reteaching the same thing over and over.
l leaves less to chance
districts should be able to decide what they want to teach and when. In making these decisions they should take into acco
ot of growing in middle school. 6th graders are much different from 8th graders. One would hate to limit the development
et standard should be held back until they meet the standards
e teacher I have found that my students don't really retain much information from middle school to high school, so If the gr
he 6th, 7th, and 8th grades so it only seems natural that the standards would be set up that way.
and, we still will have inconsistencies between districts as to what is taught in each grade level. This will lead to mobile st
chool are set up as middle school and some are not, having the standards as a single grade band allows schools to use them
configurations for this age group. It will help instructors if the standards are defined at grade level, rather than them havin
he basics and start at a very basic level. Some students are lost at the beginning and will not grab the concepts. Others wi
cience. Our 6th is Phys. Science and 8th is Earth Science. Focusing on these 3 areas works very well in order to concentra
the flexibility to design units that best fit the learning needs of their students and to utilize the resources they have by div
ve so it should be a state wide decision.
ill part of elementary schools
ars, but teachers at least deserve to know what the target is.
hat will be taught in each grade will be more clear if they are grade-specific and less likely a gap in communication will cau
tions of the Common Core State Standards are by grade in grades 6-8; however, the reading and writing in social studies, s
rds together in a band allows for flexibility with the material. Teachers can take some ownership in what they teach; they c
from 5th to 8th grade. There are many changes at each grade level. Too much is too much and we already have that. Th
that are assigned to my grade level are too difficult for them to comprehend.
ds of an increasingly transient society we need to make sure the curriculum across the state is better aligned. This should
hat is ask for each grade level.
nt so specified standards would make sense

eparate them, in order for them to be more user friendly.
to do more of the project based assessment that is recommended with the NGSS and less material will be covered. It will
ntrol on how they are implemented.
w schools are currently delivering middle school science, some are separated so that Life is taught in 6th, Earth in 7th, and
her we were able to create our key concepts based on the curriculum we were using. It made it easier to start implementat
w the specific requirements per grade so that if students move around the district or different districts they will most likely
me standards maybe more imortant for students to fully understand these concepts and therefore will own them. This wou
more guidance regarding organization of content.
cal articulation by grade
s best regarding question #6 since I do not teach middle school and have not looked at those standards in detail. I would th
do not traditionally retain anything they have learned when they arrive at High School. I taught 7th grade life science and
really have no preference, but we do teach middle school as life science, earth science, etc.
pending on the middle school, science content is shuffled in different ways grades 6-8.
t standards
specific requirements for each middle school grade is a bit much. We should have one goal for students in middle school, w
ociety and students will miss content when they move unless standards are assigned. 2. Certain content is more appropria
n a single band allows each school district some flexibility in grade level curriculum.
ns, this will help with the issue of students receiving the same content when moving to different districts within the state, b
but it almost seems like they are getting away from lab activities and involve more reading and writing.
ore defined so teachers are teaching the correct standards that flow into the next grade level. It needs to be defined so ea
her has a specific grade level they need to know more exact expectations for that level. For teachers that have multiple g
es that kept these levels banded but separates what each grade level should do in each band.
also nice to see what each grade is expected to teach.
science department 4-8 has been using both the Iowa Core and the NGSS for our curriculum. We have already assigned st
ade Life Science and 8th grade Earth science. Some of my fellow teachers are very passionate that 6th 7th and 8th grade
ble to expand upon the knowledge of the previous grade and go further.
e flexibility for districts to determine what standards fit best with 6-8 graders in their district.
dge for the standards to be able to make an educated vote.
wa students would have the same standards at the same grade. If they moved, they would not miss anything.
k it is important to show how concepts have connections in many disciplines rather than separating them by traditional disc
e flexibility to teach the standards where they think they are appropriate.
d to their learning future and look back at their present knowledge.
xibility at the middle school so that teacher preference and strengths can be taken into account.
th science teachers, there is concern about focusing on just one area (life, physical, earth) in each year, because that confi
t time to prepare for our future ahead of us. I tis great to know what is expected and to go at our own pace and not as a tim
should be assigned specific standards in order to be sure that the standards are each taught and meet expectations. The
nces in childrens levels of abilities at any age and breaking the standards down will help show where we should expect child
dards will ensure kids receive instruction in all required areas even if they move schools from one in which 6th grade is elem
ence is Life Science in our district, if they stay together then we don't have to be the same as every school district
their own to teach all will be covered.
s to plan for.
students will receive consistent education.
s so that move ins will fit into any schools curriculum
o move-in/move-out students. We need a way of knowing which information they have been taught.
y depending on what schools want to teach and when.
hool. My focus is elementary. Therefore, I am just basing my answer on elementary experience. In that case, I think it is bet
to develop their own articulation of concepts using NGSS as a guide.
ered until 8th grade, but students are tested on them in 6th grade.
de span helps allow for flexibility in sequencing
should be tested over certain things the year that they learn them.
r teaching science in the middle school at our district, it helps to make sure all the areas are met, as they aren't for any sp
m together allows school districts to decide at which grade levels the different standards can be covered.
t option, it allows flexibility in when the standards are taught and at what grade level.
ou might as well give specific standards to each grade. Then hopefully all criteria will be taught and not the same ones tou
mental leaps occurring in those grades that lumping the standards into a collective pool for all three grades wouldn't allow
cision making in deciding topics to be taught at grade levels. Many districts teach topics by grade. For example, physical i
f this issue.
pt these, at least allow the teachers to cover the content in grades 6-8 as they see fit or as their expertise allows.
in knowing where exactly the content should be placed.
hould have the ability to plan curriculum in the way they determine to be best for their students. It wouldn't hurt to band e
- a child moving from district to district might find it helpful
science should be introduced. The concepts for 8th grade are too hard and not concrete enough for the 7th graders to un
e span, this would give local districts some flexibility in how they structure their middle school science program. I can also
mplished well, but keeping them together will create some micromanagement issues in order to assure that all standards a
e level allows evaluation of were problems areas are if the are keep broad than the short fall can only be traced to a grade
uring and changing during this period of time. It will be important to make sure that they are doing well in each grade as t
quarium education programs and curriculum is mainly about biological sciences, not each standard corresponds with what w
more complicated. adding layers adds costs and should be avoided

n ended.. It can be very overwhelming
well organized but should be separated into grade levels.
ne certain grade level, you are limiting a school's ability to design the scope and sequence they think most beneficial to stu
ls, each school will be in the same place for the same grade level. If schools choose to set their own curriculum, 6th grade
ot change until the assessment matches the standards. There is too much at stake. We have gone about it backwards for th
moves to have a set of standards to expect that students have mastered. It also helps to plan grade appropriate statewide
w, nor should they dictate, when each individual school district must teach a certain specific topic or subject.
ted curriculum, as many middle school teachers are not science specific teachers, so they struggle with scope and sequen
ts should be able to decide the order of instruction.
etween schools.
iddle school band and leave it up the district to divide up the standards, so they can go themed base if they want or integr
s to specific grades may require the purchase of materials that the district cannot afford.
erview of the crosscutting and interconnectedness of all the science I feel that keeping them all together works better. Se
teacher of a small school district, I like having all the middle school grades together.
ows districts the flexibility to best implement the standards in a way that best transitions their students to their h.s. environ
feel it's in the best interest of the Department of Education to see that progression of skills that students build upon each
assign specific standards to each grade level so that no one "assumes" something is being taught. This is particularly impo
d is helpful because we are able to spiral our curriculum.
discussing curriculum.
ty to address the middle school standards where they fit each middle school's curriculum and progressions best.
ent required in the courses instead of having a set requirement for each grade level. That would allow for a little flexibility
tudents transfer from district to district. It will also be easier when the students come from the middle school to high schoo
nd I see the benefit for both. But if the high school is banded then the middle schools should be. Some districts probably h
ds for middle school will help with students getting equal opportunity when they transfer districts and fewer holes in under
ould be stay grade banded with the anticipation that time will be given to science teachers to get together and discuss a s
eparated, as 6th graders may not have the same understandings as an 8th grader.
dress them and explain them to parents and students if there were specific standards for each grade level.
would allow a bit more flexibility for each individual school.
and separate.
rade is not in the middle school they are housed in the elementary.
hools across the state on the same page of what standards should be at what grade level
hey are organized.
dren is an excellent plan. Allowing teachers to use all three years to accomplish that task for each child seems the best wa
grade is separated from the 7th and 8th grades, it may be difficult to communicate between staff to determine what will b
nd districts must ensure that the standards are all covered as a progression. ie-vertical alingment
riendly terminology with examples of each standard for just my grade level.
ave specific standards for each of the grades. The development
from 6th through 8th is significant and each grade sho
ss Iowa what grade level is teaching what standards. We currently have a mix of the three science areas and it is not divide
ep them together, then school districts are able to make decisions as to when the different standards will be taught in cons
w specific standards for grade levels even if they teach multiple grades.
ther which will allow schools to have local control of how the standards are implemented across the grade levels.
a school district
you even offered two choices. If you keep them together, will the child only take only one science class in three years?! I w
le, not rigid and not allowing for outside factors such as socioeconomic variables, etc.
larity if they were grade specific; however, I can also see the point of having them in a grade band as there are a variety o
dents who transfer schools within Iowa as well as help schools so that teachers don't have to figure that out for themselve
hool is one band, but as a middle school professional it might be better to see exactly what should be assigned at each lev
n aligning our curriculum with the standards and am finding the lack of specifics an area of muddy water.
udents who move from school to school.
or teachers in different grades to pursue their own interests without much concern or certainty for what has and has not be
e ability to meet the needs of their students based on staffing and equipment available. Since these grades do not require
e sense to keep them in a band, it would require most districts to re-think, re-design how they teach science in the middle
dards provide teachers and leaders with will articulated content standard while emphasizing the more important aspects o
cial to have them laid out by grade level, as then if/when students move they won't be repeating standards or missing out
school standards should not be grade specific, not all schools will teach the same thing in each grade. They may teach the
xibility to introduce and/or to revisit specific standards across the middle school years as needed to directly address studen
dents who move between districts, it would be much better if there was continuity between the districts.
ture of the middle school science teams, keeping them in bands helps accommodate all schools.
-6 grade building and then students go to jr. high. It will be easier to know what to teach if they are separated by grade.
p with current issues middle school science teachers already encounter. This will help with the discrepancies we face.
ental difference in what a 6th grader comprehends versus what an 8th grader understands.
to be specific to one science content.
children that move districts they will be taught a specific standards across iowa for each grade level
ve the separate because sometimes schools switch the order somewhat and students that move are at a disadvantage.
ogether makes it rather difficult when you have different people teaching different grade levels. If it was each grade indiv
eparated into grade bands easily.
should be best able to align learning in the MS grades. Specific standards for each grade level might be presumptuous.
ix up different disciplines for each grade level, which would make it difficult to have specific standards for each grade.
as a band always teachers and schools some fleixbability in curriculum appropriate for their school
d learn at different levels, and tossing them all together and expecting them all to learn at the exact level is like making th
nly 6th grade teacher and the other science teacher teaches 7th and 8th. You have 2 individuals making the decision as to
ific standards to the individual grades, students all across Iowa are
uld be uniform and scaffold up from basic concepts
igned then schools repeat many and miss many thinking others are covering it, or didn't cover it.
y child should be learning.
grade band, it gives some flexibility for local input.
al science standards would mean states have again been seduced by promises of unproven and controversial nation-wide e
grade science, however I do teach 5th grade and like how they are setup for elementary. I think they should continue in the
& 8 are integrated science and grade 7 is life science. This seems a bit ridiculous and should either change to be all integr
dividual teachers in individual buildings if grade based norms are available. Also, it is nice to know what students are expe
d benefit from more specificity in what students should be able to do by the time they move on to the next grade. This is w
e integrated. Keeping the bands together makes it easier to integrate. Plus it allows teachers/districts more independence
grade does this and that grade does this. A district can also chose to teach them all in one class but they should still be or
curricular area to a grade (i.e. 6th - earth science, 7th - life science, 8th - physical science) and other districts use an integ
s are covering these standards even when these classes may exist in different buildings.
e school band provides schools with the flexibility to meet the needs of their students, while capitalizing on the strengths o
districts and teachers, to better match up needs, resources, and other possibilities
ocal community decision. Not state wide nor federally mandated. Any parent and student not satisfied with the local stand
n a K-6 building when 6-8 are lumped together.
MS is best for students.
ce and at this time, it is very difficult to know what areas I should teach because or 7,8th grades are in a diffierent building
es it easier for non formal educators that see a variety of groups.
lpful since some districts still have sixth grade in elementary school and 7th and 8th at a junior high. Without separation,
ither teach the band at applicable and progressive levels as applies to each grade. Or assign specific standards to each gr
an evaluate progress over the 3 year period way (scaling up)
y to ensure that there is a timeline for teaching the standards, specifically to ensure that students that are transient betwe
has nothing to do with Common Core and the teachers are going to be held accountable, I am okay with it.
iity for teachers within a school system to address the topics in an order they feel is best within their curriculum
ate quickly.
6 grade middle school concept and a 7th-8th jr. high concept.
more flexibility for development of curriculum.
o track if split by grade.
theory would suggest the single grade band approach.
erent than 8th graders.
h year a multidisciplinary approach to maximize how to apply what is learned
erence which way you go? And more importantly, will it do any good?
difference between the mental development of a sixth grader and an eighth grader. Sixth grade needs to be about review
e different standards to show that the students are meeting the standards And to show growth from one grade to the next.
grade and I like that the standards are in grade bands. If I taught upper grades I would like to appreciate that too.
bout this, though since some students grasp concepts earlier than others, but the aggregated approach is best. I would def
d to each individual grade because if they are all lumped to together that will not account for individual growth and maturit
stone such as math.

ol teachers are vertically working together to solidify all standards are being covered appropriately.
n one middle school, I know that they each tailor their science curriculum to the needs of their students and faculty. What is
easier to design around the standards as well as holding teachers accountable for the standards they need to include in the
variability about what is learned where. If a school district does Earth Science curriculum in 6th grade while another school
om one district to another this will help them to be in the same place. Currently some students get two years of somethin
cator, so I haven't thought too much about the middle school standards.
ches life science and earth science to 7th and 8th the same subject in rotating years.
ave choice in when and where the standards are taught.
diate school for 4th - 6th grade. That seems to work better for the kids than having 6th - 8th grade together.
ndards. It seems to take away from the diversity of teaching and it seems to imply that teachers are not trained and discip
transfer to other Iowa schools and not miss any content.
learning ability of 6th graders is not the same as that of an 8th grader. I think the learning levels should be planned accord
experience, I have had students move into our district who have covered our grade level material in a previous grade leve
and administrators to keep control at the local level as to the progression they desire in meeting the standards by the end
have the opportunity to have all the science by end of 8th grade, it does not matter to me.
progression of skills to be taught and measured in each of these grades. It would be easy to be too complacent -- "they w
eneficial to be able to have the standards available across the grade bands, because I can include items from each area (Ea
ped in a grade band provides a lot of gray areas. Assigning specific standards to grades ensures standards will be covered.
mon core would be a good move here. My middle school staff have adjusted and now appreciate the specificity.
th grade being in the elementary and 7th and 8th as the junior high, Keeping them separate can be beneficial.
ay together
decide what would be best suited for each grade level within their own district.
open enroll in another district during their middle school years, they might miss out on some critical concepts to be sucessf
e schools to align with the arrangement of the high school classes.
dents move around a lot. It is very easy for students to miss a concept because it was not taught in a previous school but a
re sense to separate the grades so there would be less confusion on what should be taught at each grade level.
ns to be grade specific. One is due to mobility of society and students leaving or entering districts. If grade specific, those s
band, all state required standardized tests must allow for this. Tests should be customized to reflect the needs of that dist
students remain in the same district for their entire K-12 experience. This is not true. Grade-banded standards contribute
ndards for each grade level, it allows educators to notice the gaps easier within their curriculum
approach allows for more flexibility in implementation across all 3 years and reduces the level of grade specific prescription
d be very different for the grade where they are taught. I.e. an 8th grader can deliver work at a much higher level and und
if each district decides on its own when to teach certain skills then there will be students who will either double up on skill
e very clear definition of what I am to teach my 7th graders
ut when and how to get the standards. Many communities are trying new STEM programs. Having the constraint of having
be more grade specific in middle school. The state wide testing for each grade level should focus on those standards and n
ent, because assigning specific standards takes away local control of curriculum. however, unless vertical alignment takes
nce teacher I really wouldn't mind either way. I would like specific standards so that I know when students move into my di
cher, we are often required to figure this out ourselves and rarely with admin support or input. I would rather be guided to
m as one band allows districts to place the specific science class at any grade level.
vel guidance K-8 not just K-5. Three districts could be in compliance of the standards but focus differently in grades 6-8. A s
nd 8 together, but keep 6 separate because of our intermediate school setting.
n many areas especially in regards to how this proposal will impact students with special needs or accomodation needs.
e divided 6-8, some 7-8. Perhaps a division of 6, 7-8 should be considered?
for more clarity and helps teachers recognize and drill down to what is important at various grade levels.
ave science content that varies between the different grades, I think it makes sense to keep it as a grade band.
s more flexibility for districts to structure their middle school curriculum in a way that fits their needs.
e between knowing content knowledge and being scientifically literate. Middle school should make a larger push towards k
th this issue. I have taught a long time, so like the flexibility of a single band. However, it might be nice for new teachers to
grade band, because this allows the best flexibility and use of staff in this area and how the district wants to break these s
uld be taught in elementary and JH if your district has 6th grade in elementary.
flexibility in classes and producing a science program for these three grades, so when a student enters high school they w
ng arranged in a band it allows flexibility within the school district for coverage of standards.
early defined so other grades are not thinking the others did it.
h all of the standards in a year so that the students can hear it more than one time during middle school. Although it would
dual districts to assign standards to the different grades depending on how their current curriculum is structured.
he students that move form district to district it would hopefully minimize gaps in their learning in science. Also, it could po
allows districts to decide where the content will be taught.
ring those grades could have holes in their science instruction unless they are put together by grades.
e flexibility.
he standards in a grade levels will help kids.
ng progressions for specific grades. If they are banded, this would allow teachers to "pick and choose" which ones they ha
efines a progression when they are delineated by level.
aces. Some kids will get things right away, others may take a little longer to absorb. It doesn't mean they are slower, it is
g a set of standards, it makes for easy alignment and can help to eliminate reteaching of the same material
ve to new districts within their middle school years would be better served having the same standards presented in each g
nd 8 as a middle school so they should be banded together.
in a band allows schools to adapt and adjust their curriculum locally for the benefit of their students.
. I teach 6-8th grade science and would like it if the standards were defined for each grade level, but if they aren't I'm ok w
eachers are going to need curriculum to teach those standards at the appropriate levels.
ility to address the standards. I know of some teachers in smaller schools that teach one sequence to 7 and 8 one year and
mentary K-6 and others have middle school 5-8. I think it best to be specific and assign standards to specific grade levels s
ntary so my choice above really shouldn't be counted.
isadv of either way
he age group and allow flexibility in how they are applied in middle school.
to smaller schools that may be required to do a two year rotation of materials due to lower school attendance.
levels so I do not know which is best for this level
hould have earth science, 7th graders should have physical science, and 8th graders have biological science. By having th
d together allows each district the ability to cover the standards with what works best for their district. On the other hand t
to ability, thus keeping them together seems like the better choice for us. I am NOT however a teacher in that age group.
ion and uniformity across Iowa schools. Although, I do not like the idea that teachers are being directed what to teach with
know more specifically what they need to teach.
specifically teach something more.
d be most beneficial
ld have their own specific requirements.
ng from different schools and they may have missed some of the standards because all schools do not teach them at the s
school standards together there may be an unintentional gap. Especially when kids move in and out of districts. Unless the
ogressing, but if grade levels are not assigned, students run the risk of repeating or missing content if they move between
pecific grade levels they are more likely not to be missed or taught repeatedly.
h scheduling and students who change districts.
m one district to another, he/she may miss some critical content if it being taught at different levels in different districts. W
districts to be able to decide when and where the standards fit best.
de level, but it just seems that it would be most useful to break the standards down into specific grade levels.
gives middle school teachers more freedom to teach these concepts when they feel it is the right time - it allows for indivi
ool teacher. It was easier to teach the 8th grade physical science as it does involve calculations and math. That was alot m
ents are at different levels, so very scheduling and logistics it may be helpful to give schools some control over when it is ta
given local control to determine when each topic best fits their curriculum.
electives getting cut keeping a single band gives school more flexibility in how and when standards get taught.
ndards are needed to help teachers collaborate and teach consistently across the state.
ulum scope and sequence when standards are aligned by grade level.
uld be nice.
t, then enrichments could be added.at each level depending on the needs/interests of the student.
ell written and inclusive.
together as a band makes it more flexible for districts who use topic specific classes i.e. earth science -7th physical science
together in a 6-8 grade-band at the state level allows for greater local control in determining the organization of the standa
de the standards among the three years of middle school.
ce is different than elementary. They are more individualized and structured by quarters or trimesters. Elementary scienc
and 8th grade. I prefer having Physical Science in 8th grade rather than 6th because I found 6th graders lacking the neede
r middle school science programs are set up, but we have specific sciences for each grade level. We do not have integrate
s that science teachers collaborate with each other to ensure that students are learning the same standards across the sam
w between grade levels.
districts, the grade bands would make moving easier.
ure that if students leave one Iowa school and go to another that they will not miss out on anything. Also, if they move ou
re set-up with 6th grade not included in the Middle School, this would make this "band" tricky to collaborate and organize a
andards, it is most likely that they will follow them better.
d have their own standards
not do "General Science" in all three grades. Many schools focus on one branch of science per grade.
what to do with them...Keep the government out of the school system as much as possible.
h bands, but direction is always useful
. It would be nice to know exactly what standards I need to have covered.
e a preference. On one hand, it's nice to have the freedom to teach various standards at various grades, depending on the
ndards will provide consistency and clarity across districts. This is particularly important due to high mobility rates.
r for each grade level then teachers will have more clarity about the content to teach and there will likely be less overlap in
nts still complete science course work based on grade. It seems like it would be the easiest way to ensure that all student
SS standards Allows for separate grade level proficiency expectations
able curriculum across the state, it would make sense to help districts determine what should be taught at each grade leve
tandards for each grade, you won't bore the students with the same information year after year.
ool district should determine how this information best first their system. Keeping it as a single grade band allows schools
sier for schools and their scheduling differences, the way students accelerate, etc.
it would make more sense for me to know exactly what my students are responsible for in 7th grade.
from one Iowa district to another, having grade-aligned curriculum helps reduce gaps and overlaps in that child's educatio
each district to be able to assign specific topics to grade levels on their own. It is also helpful to leave it as a band in order
allows more flexibility at the local level as how to organize course offerings, 6th grade structure and supports, and other m
wn standards, it will be easier for schools to know what to teach.
ecific standards be better? Math and reading have grade level benchmarks so keeping the same pattern with science is in
s tend to disagree with me on this one (mainly because it would mean that they will have to learn/teach new content), I thi
to this FUCKING broken system
flexibility and allows schools to organize the standards in a way that best matches their programming while still providing
o have a set goal for each grade to help with transfers, It is nice to have the freedom to fit the goals to the strengths of yo
t gives schools a little more flexibility in how and where they want to teach the concepts.
m one district to another Iowa district, having grade-aligned curriculum helps prevent gaps and overlaps in that child's edu
sier and helps students who move around.
n STEM education is looking at things holistically rather than in isolated disciplines, and keeping science and engineering a
ssarily have life science each year or physical science each year - or in the same order from one school to the next. But, t
ld have some flexibility as to the "story line" created to help students learn and integrate science, but I think each of the o
e grade span allows flexibility in scheduling middle school students and rotate curriculum on a 2-year cycle
ns are easier to follow and would eliminate potential problems with students that move from one district to another.
teaches different subjects. 7th life science and 8th Earth or physical. Some schools do it opposite
gives local school districts more freedom to implement.
n teaching the rigor of middle school science, standards should be grade level.
and I think the distinction between different grade levels is important. 6th graders are very different from 8th graders.
signed to specific grades then the teachers know exactly what they need to teach. Also it would be consistent throughout t
r flexibility in teaching at the middle school level and grouping students.
the broad bands allow for integration across curricular areas? This is a difficult question to answer with a definitive yes/no!
dards to a grade band makes it simpler for students who may move between school districts.
hould be learning the same material in each grade level. This way, they are not missing any content if they switch schools
r, if you were to specifically state which ones should be covered in 8th grade then we would probably have to move EVERY
taken that single band and divided it up by grade level, focusing during each grade on what we felt was most developmen
me to prepare students for HS and college rigor.
up by grade level that all topics are more likely to be covered. There is also a chance that they same topic may be covere
hing team I would like to continue be flexible in what I teach at my grade level. I don't want specific standards assigned to
we have to change everything? Just get them to us so we can start implementation!
ence teacher I would like to know exactly what standards were met and what grade level they were mastered so I know wh
de band allows schools to organize their curriculum in a way that best fits the strengths of those teaching the classes as we
be able to transfer from one school to another and not miss something or get overlap. The way they are written, it doesn't
he NGSS seems to be clarify how concepts should build on previous knowledge. With this in mind, outlining the conceptua
, when students move, they would have covered the same content.
d so local control can assign where these units make sense. However, being in a test driven world it has been very difficult
might allow for flexibility in programming, course offering, and sequencing of curriculum. This would require increases sup
the autonomy to select what will be covered in each grade level is a good move to best fit the abilities of the teachers in t
s in a different building so specific standards for specific grades would be easier to coordinate.
nto the "who" is teaching and what that individual prefers...the standard should be determined on development of that grad
eel. Just adopt the NGSS as they are.
ess students at each of these grade levels in science, it will be impossible to properly align the assessment if the standard
would better allow schools to integrate NGSS withing their current course offerings at the 6-8 level.
ble to work towards the strengths of Staff if needed. Also depending on 9-12 course alignment, certain topics might be be
ence 7th earth science 8th so if assigned to specific not all standards would be met each year
r students moving from district to district in Iowa.
ds into different great bands just adds unneeded complexity.
stricts to adjust to their teachers' expertise.
ool science teacher I feel grouping the strand together is important. Teachers should be able to determine the best seque
eacher to know what things should be covered each year. As a teacher that has taught at a couple schools, it is easier if th
d up the standards amongst the 6, 7, 8 grade teachers. This works ok but its hard to determine what skills are grade and a
Middle School 6-8.
allows more local control over what is taught at each grade level.
hers to have an understanding of the materials that have been presented to the students from previous years to help plan c
ecific, the rigor will not be appropriate for the standards

areas are covered that need to be covered in each grade level so that teachers aren't teaching the same things in grades 6
for students that move from district to district. We have a growing population that is constantly flowing and we lose those
be broken down into the grades not a grade level span.
ongly about this, I think this would help students who have to transfer to another school, it would keep them from missing
go everywhere when it comes to teaching certain materials, preferably their strengths. Having a specific standards in sep
le band will help keep flexibility within school districts when it comes to what grade will learn what content.
ool standards in a continuous band allows individual school districts to select whether the students study life, earth, or phy
single band implies that schools have the freedom to implement standards in any order (i.e. the subjects can be arranged
nces in different orders for middle schoolers; you would have to create standards for EACH area of science at EACH grade le
out by grade, the Iowa Core is the one who grade bands them...I think your question is worded wrong.
he Iowa Core is to make sure that as kids move in and out of districts they are receiving the same instruction, it is pretty im
ives a little more control to the school. Teachers have fore flexibility on where/when objectives will be taught.
neurological development between 6th graders and 8th graders is vast.

ely related on learning levels. I believe it is best to keep them banded together. Not only are they related on learning leve
s to specific grades helps transient students who move from district to district.
from the 6th to the 8th grade as the students mature and grow. That is why I think they can't be on the same grade band.
e grade band allows smaller districts more flexibility.
ly, they often forget. If they deal with multiple topics, especially if they are related, and build on that information each yea
ment of curriculum year to year to fit a particular class.
will provide districts with choice in implementation to either spiral the standards or assign them to individual grades as the
are specific to grade level and you know exactly what is expected in that grade level
approach" to science and therefore we would rather they be a signle middle school grade band to allow us to use a more i
dards they are easier to follow.
e gives teachers an excuse not to deal with them.
in one band allows for acceleration.
ools are organized in the same grade bands, In our district grade 6 is not in the middle school building. In the past when s
specific, so teachers will only teach what they want/like and many standards get left out.
how they teach life science and earth science, so it is less confusing to have the standards as one grade band.
edundancy elimination
hat students who move between districts would be taught all the standards.
t takes a great deal of time to sort out teaching wise and the amount to cover is beyond what a year can hold even with la
her having the standards laid out by grade level is more useful and accessible.
grade level will help parents know where their child is education wise.
of curriculum in when it is to be taught. That will allow each school to address the standards as to how they will fit best in
dize learning outcomes for students, then they should be aligned to grade levels as well
dance as to what the outcomes truly are for each grade.

middle school child should have the opportunity to learn science in an integrated fashion so not to duplicate experiences.
out of district to another Iowa school. She said they were learning about chemical reactions in 6th grade, something our s
plied in a band gives schools and districts more flexibility to integrate the standards into their programs.
hool, so really have no experience to support my opinion....but I feel individual schools should have the right to organize th
her in a single strand makes it difficult to get everything covered--need to be assigned specifically
d out by grade level, so it would be good to keep that consistency.
he grade sequences that NGSS picks.
ol teachers the freedom they deserve to honor the wide disparities in abstract thinking skills development.
per grade level would be a disadvantage as banding allows secondary teachers to align content at each grade level accord
e bands for middle school. That way the teachers can decide who covers what and when.
ol but some schools place all earth science in one grade; others all biological science in one grade; etc. Transferring means
narrow enough. Specifying standards for each grade really restricts school districts and classroom teachers' ability to adju
our standards by classes, not grade levels.
, the standards can be taught under specific classes, not grade specific levels.
ided th see grade bands
cher, I would rather know the specific standards I am responsible for teaching. I would also like detailed information about
ng standards to particular grades at the middle school level. The design of the standards allows for either setting up conte
ol to determine the courses.
ility with how middle school courses are taught.
d best practice say is more appropriate: an integrated model or to remain with a traditional content specific model?
are in grade bands and as a parent I still see the same concepts and skills being taught in multiple grade levels.
llows more flexibility, and the NGSS emphasizes science concepts over disciplinary differences, so specific standards for ea
way for districts to make the standards fit their current curriculum with less need to revamp a lot of it.
will allow schools to have a small amount of freedom to determining how the curriculum is implemented
ould show growth. The standards need to build upon one another, even if it is minimal growth. Three years a a lot of growth
etween district across Iowa there would be consistency; less variables for districts to interpret across grade levels.
ade band it may create the need for a complete revision of science materials at every school in Iowa. This would be a huge
ards are met by 8th grade, we should not try to dictate which areas are taught in each grade. If students move into a new
dards to each grade allows students exposure to all of the middle school standards, even if they move between districts.
keeps more local control over when to teach what.
ools to develop curriculum that integrates science. They are also free to use the suggested 6,7,8 standard assignments tha
ts to assign them to specific grade levels as appropriate
in middle school allows the schools local control to teach which standards at which grade level. The problem being testing
teachers to be flexible and allow students to meet standards at different times and in different ways??? KEEP THEM TOGE
districts to differentiate 6-8 as they see fit.
e able to determine how best to assign standards and where overlap of standards between grade levels is appropriate.
ave some trouble with certification issues. Sixth grade teachers can teach multiple subjects. 7-12 certified teachers are lim
different than the current Iowa Core. My main concern is trying to get them all accomplished if the earlier material is not m
es 6-8 are an excellent age to explore new ideas, and it might make more sense to keep them together and offer the theme
o spiral curriculum or have specific topics for each year.
between districts in Iowa, this approach would reduce gaps and repetitions in their learning.
d allows for districts to continue with local control.
flexibility at the district-level to meet the needs of their students.
ade band allows some flexibility to school districts - teachers can decide which curriculum is taught at which grade level ra
andards to each grade so all material is covered. How can we expect our students to do well on standardized tests when th
rict should be allowed to decide if they want to have the intermediate grades be 'integrated science' (teach a little of earth
easier for teachers to know what they should teach at each level.
e assigned based on cognitive developmental level
r them to be split up by grade like K-5

rganize curriculum and avoid gaps in teaching.
ve the freedom to assign standards to different grades.
from district to district and not miss anything
ty adopting them, but the down side is if a student moves to a new school they might miss something if the schools do not
ds work most effectively I believe that it is appropriate to keep all middle school grades in a single band. Teachers will kno
e and emotional) differences exist within that range (even within a particular grade!). My fear is that by including all the st
e end of 8th grade, I believe that a single grade band is okay; however, if a district does no review/benchmark checking to
ards are important, but can be mixed together on a school level to match the passions and learning of teachers and studen
ate. I see benefits to both.
-Physical Science
t works best for them to introduce the topics. To assume every district has instructors with the same interests, knowledge
dards will help with alignment of statewide tests and support students who are transient.
somewhere in Grades 6-8. Some districts are K-5, 6-7,8-9; others are K-6, 7-8, others are K-5,6-8. One model will not fit ALL
a strength they want to start with or a particular area of interest. Once they get involved they could develop a stronger int
curriculum in place. I have been through several curriculum rewrites and it is difficult to rearrange curriculum and yet hav
to search and find the age appropriate content.

to cover in 6th and what will be covered in 7th and 8th.
will arise that we have now. A student moving between districts could have multiple years of one area and totally skip anot
that it is necessary or fair to have specific "grade" standards at this age group, as some student will be coming from radica
er, having said that I know they are wanting to standardize nationwide and having it by grade would mean a student could
ey won't get covered in a logical order
ool? Do they not have the option to choose classes anymore?
in the middle school years

ed standards.
ll allow for students to focus on fewer standards each year which should help them develop a deeper understanding.
udents (and teachers) to develop the skill sets that are required. I don't believe that the majority of teachers have been te
ble in multiple strands.
"student can ask questions about data": any student can ask a question about data, but it might not represent their knowle
for HS sciences so that all schools are on the same page with what is being covered.
gaged by some of these as he works with a partner on solving the problems. It is also more feasible since Davis County ha
our 7th and 8th our district still needs to have time to sort out who is teaching what. This could take years to decide. If it sa
ool to school.
what I learned last year" kids. Also, some of the content in the band is complicated for 6th graders.
ass, life science, and earth and space class going over the specific standards for each section.
ll before and were ready for the next thing.
g what. Leaving at the middle school grade band is ambiguous and may not hold instructors as accountable.
rial in increasingly abstract ways. Additionally, it does not matter when students acquire the knowledge (within the three-y
unding communities or then move into a 7th/8th grade jr. high setting. WIth expectations known to each level, they could
ould be teaching.
data that they will improve science education for kids. Our kids are the GUINEA PIGS.
classes (instead of "6th Grade Science," offer "Life Science," "Physical Science," etc. at differentiated levels of depth. The
n its own limits, but not as a whole group.
ain grades, then specific standards should be assigned. I don't mind letting schools having control of what grade standards
e middle school students are divided into different buildings in different districts in IA. For example, some schools are K-6, 7
de to have them lumped together.
ng at the 8th grade level and some are not even at grade level. Allow teachers/students to move on to the next level if kno
in the shuffle.
er grouping them together. Either the 6th graders will be trying to grasp concepts above their level, or the 8th graders will
ents who move or change districts.
for smaller districts.
nother and attempting to teach Biology without first having some introduction to Chemistry is not rational.
tion in high school. This assures students moving to various districts but still within Iowa are gaining the proper knowledge.
survey required me to answer it.
earning expectations will be. This is the type of curriculum that allows for students to take things to a very deep level, so th
ross the grade levels to make sure that everything has been covered. It would also help insure that students moving from
nd informed decision in their personal and professional life has greatly expanded during the last 2 decades. A foundation fo
ere is consistency within each grade - kind of like pre-algebra, algebra, etc. in math.
address those differences.
n the same from school to school

the same. Our students then get more depth in each topic.
there is less likelihood of students missing out on curriculum.
um, a common Grade 7 curriculum, and a common Grade 8 curriculum.

would be fewer gaps and overlaps in the learning of children who change schools.
each level ways to extend prior learning.
children learn at an accelerated rate compared to their peers, so rather than just an age/grade standard alone their should
nds, disabilities, and cultures when assigning standards to different grade levels.
each grade should be arranged in a more specific order to better organize how the ideas are taught.
lity that concepts are taught in middle school somewhere and not forcing all schools to make 6th grade look identical in all
e from one school to another have continuity of curriculum.
ts to teach the more difficult standards.

best help students learn and grasp each concept. If the strongest physical science teacher is an 8th grade teacher, teach
ise, it makes extra work for school districts to assign specific standards to specific grade levels.
l need to pick up the slack from the previous two years. If you can't put them in a grade, then at least dedicate an amount
aces when content should be taught in order to give students the best chance to understand and retain the information an
rdisciplinary curriculum, for instance, tying science concepts to math concepts.

s. My preference would be to have separate standards for 6th, 7th, and 8th, and then have our standardized tests align to
r period of time (e.g. middle school) instead of a designated grade level (e.g 6th grade. This concept makes sense, doesn'
portant to all students at this level and will allow more indepth study and exploration.
ment monitoring more consistent and make sure that students who move from district to district remain more or less on tra
herwise leave it up to the middle school teachers to separate as they feel fit.
h most forms of engineering.

el. If it is banded together and your district science teachers aren't clear on who is teaching what it could be a problem. Ho
it up to the districts/buildings to decide.
a developmentally appropriate and recursive manner.
end result', then we need to do the same with our expectation of standards. Many children will use the problem-solving tec
. The standards shouldn't be lumped together for all 3 of these years.

middle school. It would save districts time in implementing the standards, because a significant investment of time and res
rofessionals and should be allowed some leverage to complete their jobs best according to their situations.
l grades in the band. Also, if the grade band stands, districts need time for the 6-8 teachers to meet and figure out a scop
th science in 6th, life science in 7th, and physical science in 8th.
s. More importantly, flexibility allows districts to use their personnel's strengths and teaching experience to best advantage
need curricular accommodations in any level, having a built-in continuum makes sense to me.
sure they are not missing elements.
s on stuff and more. Then as they grow and develop the information they learn builds upon itself. For example a 6th grade
sed to rank highest in the nation in education, we've messed with the system enough, that we are reinventing the wheel
est in local (district) curriculum.
mplicated standards, some may need to be repeated to assist students in gaining understanding.
han move on to new information risking leaving slow developers behind.

fferent grade levels.
ser friendly if NGSS were split up individually for grades 6-8 because not all grades are taught by the same science teache
chool years are challenging as maturity of each child varies considerably. Most science at this age group needs to be hands
prioritized. Eventually, students will work through and acquire this information based on critical thinking processes.
might repeat or miss a standard completely if the individual districts have different times each is taught.
ddle school area.
g that science/technology is a fabric, rather than a set of specific facts.
a big difference between a 6th grader and an 8th grader--not just physical development, but mental development too.
ciece and these standards
. Students who move may miss whole sets of standards and hit others two or even three times.
State may do Earth, Life, Physical (6, 7 or 8) one topic at each grade level.
State may do Earth, Life, Physical at every gr
ally different as well. The math and and reading programs that exist across state may be contributing to fact that we don't
ce course) will be able to distinguish who should teach which standards

single grade level or if a school wants to use a more integrated approach.
e school change in just those few years, it should almost be three separate areas. Also, it allows for more specific differenti
nowing what you need to prepare your students to be able to do the following year and what they should already know com
ons. My thought is, if they're in one grade band, maybe as students' readiness varied, they could receive the appropriate le
ople identical - not good for progress nor for progressives
he strengths of the educators.

cal planning very difficult and leads to coverage gaps.
o not believe the standards should be split into grades, because all standards are interdependent and interrelated.
g experiences (or conversely, lose the opportunity to learn about a standard). It just makes more sense to me.
t me, as well as helping me develop study skills that I still use in college. Therefore I think it would be valuable to create st
engaging student activities.
ns...1) NGSS has an integrated progression that logically and sequentially moves students from 6th-8th grade; 2) integratin
en the standards should be introduced, mastered, and remediated (if necessary).
h. I felt the students were well prepared before they came to my 9th grade class.
same page when it came to what they knew.

l learning and adjustments. Lumping that big a range of academic levels does not help the students and their families iden
llows for more local control, which is a hot topic in Iowa.
etter for older kids, so those should be put in the 8th grade band. This would also allow for the science standards to be ma
change it around just to make all of Iowa them same, we should let them use the way that works best for them. Giving tea
er to navigate through the standards for the specific grade.
ole year of life science, earth science, etc.
ain thing in one grade level
de should have their own curriculum, preferably created by the teachers because they know their students and how best to
o determine how that would look for students.
vel at the middle school level, so I appreciate the idea that the standards for middle level are kept together in a single midd
than once). When each district chooses for themselves which standards are taught at which grade, this inevitably creates
er school. Or get two years of life science and no Earth science if they move schools in the summer.
rade. This age bracket will do nicely. this will also save taxpayers dollars so they won't have to hire new directors for each g
the standards.
iences at each grade level, knowing that amongst them, each student's interests will be satisfied. Middle school is all abou
the kids who didn't get the information in 6th grade. This knowledge builds on previous knowledge, so if you don't have th
ng of segmentation toward Physics, Chemistry, Math, Computer Science and more. The three grade levels span far too grea
he coarser banding allows the material to be addressed based on how quickly and well different groups can learn material
how to best align their curricula to the standards.
sions they should take into account the demographics of the students in the district and what resources are available locall
hate to limit the development of their curiosity by not tailoring their education.
chool to high school, so If the grade band was given as 6-8 performance expectations then maybe they would see concepts
evel. This will lead to mobile students potentially missing chunks of critical content. Math and ELA have specific content tie
band allows schools to use them to fit their specific situation and allows for more school/teacher choice.
de level, rather than them having to decide if a standard fits their building population.
t grab the concepts. Others will be beyond this stage. I do believe that all students should have the opportunity to be exp
very well in order to concentrate and make sense of what we are doing. This helps students organize their thoughts. I als
the resources they have by dividing the standards across grade bands.
gap in communication will cause students to miss content. Also, if the standards are grade-specific it will be similar acros
g and writing in social studies, science, and technical subjects are by band (6-8). It becomes necessary to refer back to reg
rship in what they teach; they can decide the grade level at which the material should be taught.
h and we already have that. The common core has already caused enough stress and problems in each household. I do no
is better aligned. This should establish clear learning expectations for each grade and more. This would also be beneficia
material will be covered. It will be hard to meet all the requirements when expected to have students develop models and
taught in 6th, Earth in 7th, and Physical in 8th while other schools teach integrated science. By keeping the standards in si
e it easier to start implementation of the standards than completely starting over.
nt districts they will most likely not miss a topic. If a school district is allowed to choose what is taught each grade level the
refore will own them. This would help as they enter high school and would cut down on reteaching specific standard which
e standards in detail. I would think that having all standards, middle and high school, in the same format would help.
ught 7th grade life science and 10th grade Biology and have discovered that they remember almost nothing from their mid
or students in middle school, which is, getting them ready for high school. I do not think we need three separate sets of sp
rtain content is more appropriate for 6th grade and likewise, 8th. (etc). 3. It makes it easier to meet literacy and even math
rent districts within the state, but it will not remedy the issue of students receiving the same content when moving from ou
nd writing.
el. It needs to be defined so each grade level knows exactly what they are suppose to do.
r teachers that have multiple grade levels it would be helpful to have this guidance for setting curriculum guides.
m. We have already assigned standards to grade level based on building knowledge.

ate that 6th 7th and 8th grade should each learn a little of Physical, Life, and Earth Science in each grade, instead of front
not miss anything.

arating them by traditional disciplines. When students see how all of the sciences are inter-related they will have a greater
n each year, because that configuration does not allow for reinforcement of concepts over time. Assigning specific standard
t our own pace and not as a time line for our Middle School career.
t and meet expectations. The standards should be assigned in a logical sequence and based on developmental readiness
w where we should expect children at each level to typically achieve
m one in which 6th grade is elementary to one in which 6th grade is at a middle school.
as every school district
ce. In that case, I think it is better to specify grades
e met, as they aren't for any specific grade level in the middle school.
n be covered.
ught and not the same ones touched on in grades ,6,7 and 8 and some left out.
all three grades wouldn't allow for proper differentiation.
grade. For example, physical in 6th, Life in 7th, Earth in 8th, etc.
heir expertise allows.
ents. It wouldn't hurt to band elementary too. Good teachers need that freedom and do not need unrelenting supervision
nough for the 7th graders to understand.

ool science program. I can also see the value in breaking it out by grade spans. This might help ensure that all middle schoo
er to assure that all standards are met. By assigning standards to grades, there will be no questions on who covers what an
ll can only be traced to a grade level
re doing well in each grade as they prepare for high school so any problems can be address immediately.
andard corresponds with what we can best offer those particular grade levels.
hey think most beneficial to students

heir own curriculum, 6th grade life science may show up as 7th grade life science for a student moving districts between 6
e gone about it backwards for the 35 years I have been teaching Science. Specific Standards matched with Assessments th
lan grade appropriate statewide assessments that are aligned to standards that students have learned.
c topic or subject.
truggle with scope and sequence of standards 6-8. Also so that there isn't overlap.
med base if they want or integrated approach

all together works better.
Separating them could also help to establish the depth and breadth that needs to be covered c
eir students to their h.s. environments.

that students build upon each year. There are skills that need to be met/mastered before one can understand/grasp a new
aught. This is particularly important to busy teachers who do not have a lot of time to spend collaborating with co-worker
nd progressions best.
would allow for a little flexibility per district
the middle school to high school.
d be. Some districts probably had their K12 curriculum set already and would like some flexibility with this.
stricts and fewer holes in understanding.
to get together and discuss a sequence for their school.
ach grade level.
or each child seems the best way to accommodate the different needs of students.
n staff to determine what will be covered where and when.
significant and each grade should have their own standards

cience areas and it is not divided very well. I think we should do Earth, Life and Physical Science one per grade level. The g
standards will be taught in consideration with their faculty.
ross the grade levels.
cience class in three years?! I would expect a science class each year of middle school, which means I would expect there
de band as there are a variety of integrated approaches out there. I believe districts will be able to address all standards th
o figure that out for themselves.
should be assigned at each level. At the time time, however, it might be better to continue with the single grade band and
muddy water.
nty for what has and has not been presented to the students previously or what they will be expected to move on to next a
nce these grades do not require subject endorsement to teach science I feel they should evaluate this on a local level.
ey teach science in the middle grades. It would most likely require an integrated approach. This may be beneficial in the lo
g the more important aspects of science and engineering practices allowing students to 'do' science.
eating standards or missing out on ones they haven't had.

ach grade. They may teach them in a different order.
eded to directly address students' needs and to insure that students gain full understanding of concepts
the districts.
they are separated by grade.

he discrepancies we face.
move are at a disadvantage.

vels. If it was each grade individually then there would be no question as to what is taught at each grade level.
el might be presumptuous.
standards for each grade.
he exact level is like making them in to little robots.

duals making the decision as to what to teach. If students move from school to school it would benefit them if each grade
and controversial nation-wide education solutions that we didnt participate in. This would be another inappropriate step
hink they should continue in the same format.
d either change to be all integrated or all sectioned out (6-earth, 7-life, 8-physical...or something like that). It would be nice
o know what students are expected to know when they arrive in your classroom even if you don't vertically integrate with o
on to the next grade. This is where we lose many students, and we want to ensure they are ready to advance.
rs/districts more independence when deciding what to teach.
class but they should still be organized as such.
and other districts use an integrated approach and incorporate all the curricular area each year. So, I would be opposed to
capitalizing on the strengths of their teachers.
ot satisfied with the local standards can advocate for different standards or transfer to another school that more closely ali
ades are in a diffierent building. I am afraid there will be gaps. I would appreciate a list for just 6th.
nior high. Without separation, teachers will need to decide when to hit each standard. Collaboration between teachers is h
gn specific standards to each grade so each topic can be covered well.
udents that are transient between districts don't miss out on continued learning/assessment. You almost need to have the
am okay with it.
thin their curriculum
grade needs to be about reviewing concepts already learned and then digger deeper into them by allowing the students to
wth from one grade to the next.
e to appreciate that too.
d approach is best. I would defer to experts on this.
r individual growth and maturity. Not all the children are not the same. And will not account for the amount of learning, the
eir students and faculty. What is taught in 6th grade in one school is not necessarily what you see in another. Still, if the ma
ards they need to include in their curriculum. This will take away the thoughts of "the next grade will cover it".
6th grade while another school does it 7th grade, if a student were to be in each district for consecutive years, they would
ents get two years of something and miss out on another item.
grade together.
chers are not trained and disciplined enough to know what to teach and how to teach.
evels should be planned accordingly.

aterial in a previous grade level. If there were grade specific standards this could help alleviate this problem. Also, if the sta
eting the standards by the end of the eighth grade. Additionally, coordination with high school science teachers can be ke
o be too complacent -- "they will learn it next year" -- train of thought.

nclude items from each area (Earth, Physcial, and Life) into more than one year of science. However, I think it is beneficial
ures standards will be covered.
eciate the specificity.
e can be beneficial.
critical concepts to be sucessful in high school
aught in a previous school but already taught in a new school. Assigning standards to a particular grade level would help dim
at each grade level.
stricts. If grade specific, those students would have less gaps in their education. Secondly, looking at assessments in the fu
to reflect the needs of that district and its students.

e-banded standards contribute to gaps in students' education if those students move to other districts in IOWA and sometim
el of grade specific prescription

at a much higher level and understand greater detail than a 6th grader.
ho will either double up on skills or miss skills when they move from district to district
Having the constraint of having specific standards may reduce this instruction.
ocus on those standards and not standards that have never been addressed at that point in a child's educational career.
unless vertical alignment takes place, what happens is a picking and choosing of standards that will leave a good number o
when students move into my district we are covering the material that they would have gotten in their old district, but if th
ut. I would rather be guided to what is expected than to create it myself.
us differently in grades 6-8. A student could do grade 6 in one district with a very strong Earth Science focus, move down t
eds or accomodation needs.
s grade levels.
it as a grade band.
d make a larger push towards knowing science as a process and a way of thinking instead of primarily memorizing facts. Y
ght be nice for new teachers to have assigned standards per grade.
e district wants to break these standards apart and assign them so they are covered in middle school.
udent enters high school they will have met these standards. If you confine it to a grade level, you confine a class to the st
middle school. Although it would be nice, it would mean you would have to hurry through lessons and Units to accomplish th
iculum is structured.
ning in science. Also, it could potentially reflect more accurate scores with Iowa Assessments, if they are aligned.
nd choose" which ones they have for their grade level. Furthermore, this would ensure that all 6th graders across Iowa hav
sn't mean they are slower, it is strictly each person is different .

same material
standards presented in each grade level to avoid overlapping concepts.
evel, but if they aren't I'm ok with dividing them up on my own.
quence to 7 and 8 one year and different sequence to them the next year. This can help cut down on prep and expense for
ndards to specific grade levels so students who move schools are ensured all the standards consistently.
school attendance.
biological science. By having them focus on one type of science for the whole year, they have a better opportunity to mak
eir district. On the other hand this could cause problems as students move to neighboring districts they may need to sit wi
er a teacher in that age group.

ing directed what to teach with little diversity for the needs of students. Teachers working directly with students in a distric
ools do not teach them at the same level

and out of districts. Unless the state plans to mandate an end of year test to 8th graders.
content if they move between districts in middle school.
t levels in different districts. While local control is important, isn't it more important that a student receives a full science e
ecific grade levels.

e right time - it allows for individualized instructional delivery, based on the needs of specific students, and allows teachers
ons and math. That was alot more difficult to teach to 7th grade. So I taught 6th grade earth science and 7th life science.
some control over when it is taught.
andards get taught.
th science -7th physical science-8th however, more guidance will make it easier to make sure everything is taught. It also e
g the organization of the standards through the grades which may vary from district to district depending on various factors
trimesters. Elementary science is often year-long.

d 6th graders lacking the needed math skills. If my students will be at a disadvantage for Iowa Assessments, that is somet
evel. We do not have integrated science.
same standards across the same grade level, and that the content build on itself each year.
nything. Also, if they move out of state, the new teachers will know EXACTLY what the students have had. We can ensure
y to collaborate and organize and grade specific would make things easier to hold students/teachers accountable.
ious grades, depending on the curriculum set up of the school. I can't imagine if a school was set up to teach a certain sub
e to high mobility rates.
here will likely be less overlap in instruction.
way to ensure that all students received all instruction. This will be a greater challenge if it's bunched together.
d be taught at each grade level. If a student lives in one area and then moves, he/she may encounter the same curriculum
gle grade band allows schools to either separate the information into content specific courses or allow each grade level to
verlaps in that child's educational experience.

ul to leave it as a band in order for districts to easily begin implementing the standards instead of starting over with new cu
ture and supports, and other middle school issues. Being more specific offers little to no additional benefit to students in e
same pattern with science is in alignment.
learn/teach new content), I think that it is important to have specific standards set for specific grade levels. In our district,
gramming while still providing similar expectations for all students.

he goals to the strengths of your personnel. Also allows schools to have course specific or integrated curriculum.
and overlaps in that child's educational experience.
ping science and engineering at specific grade levels can encourage that. Keeping them together would be to isolate the co
m one school to the next. But, they should obtain all of that information at some point in MS.
cience, but I think each of the overarching standards should be taught to all students.
n a 2-year cycle
one district to another.
different from 8th graders.

ould be consistent throughout the state so if a student moves to a different district they would not get repeated content or
answer with a definitive yes/no!
content if they switch schools during grades 6-8.

probably have to move EVERYTHING around. Some things can be achieved in any one of the three grades and should be
we felt was most developmentally appropriate for students. We also then, have some standards that we are all using (so t
they same topic may be covered 3 years in a row.

specific standards assigned to me.
ey were mastered so I know what I'm getting in 10th grade.

hose teaching the classes as well as the needs of the community. On the other side, specific standards to grades would allo
way they are written, it doesn't matter what grade level you teach them in
mind, outlining the conceptual pathway in grades 6, 7, and 8 is reasonable.
n world it has been very difficult as a middle school teacher to meet the expectations put on us by people that do not under
his would require increases supports to ensure we enact the curriculum as intended.
the abilities of the teachers in that district.
ed on development of that grade level
the assessment if the standards are in a grade band.
ent, certain topics might be better in 8th grade prior to the entry level science course in HS.
le to determine the best sequence for teaching the individual strands (Earth Science, Physical Science, Life Science). Assig
couple schools, it is easier if there is a set list of things to teach. Otherwise you come into a new school and have no idea w
mine what skills are grade and age appropriate.
m previous years to help plan curriculum and help students work from prior knowledge to achieve academic success
ng the same things in grades 6-8.

ntly flowing and we lose those kids if one school covers that in 6th grade, but their new school covers that in 7th grade and
would keep them from missing content.

ving a specific standards in separate grades will provide a growth and development process to be prepared for High School
n what content.
tudents study life, earth, or physical sciences in a single year, or in a blended curriculum where the students study all three
. the subjects can be arranged in any order, depending on the school). That being said, it seems confusing as to whether o
rea of science at EACH grade level, which is ridiculous.
ded wrong.
same instruction, it is pretty important that we assign specific standards. It would also allow for more collaboration betwe
ves will be taught.
re they related on learning levels, the types of science they are learning are closely related.
n't be on the same grade band.
d on that information each year, they are more likely to be able to use that foundation as they approach high school learni
hem to individual grades as the district deems appropriate.
and to allow us to use a more integrated approach (each year students learn physical, life and earth science concepts and
ool building. In the past when state standards have been released in middle school bands we have spent much time negoti
s one grade band.
at a year can hold even with layering of concepts wherever possible. That said. it is good to allow district to decide what is
ds as to how they will fit best in their community.
not to duplicate experiences.

s in 6th grade, something our students don't learn about until 8th grade.
eir programs.
d have the right to organize their curriculum as they want
development.
ntent at each grade level according to their expertise (secondary science has specific content endorsements). Research sup
grade; etc. Transferring means 6th 7th, 8th graders have gaps or duplicate topics
ssroom teachers' ability to adjust or adapt for various situations.
ike detailed information about each standard. The standards are too general in my opinion.
ows for either setting up content-specific classes (Physical Science, Earth Science, Life Science) or classes in which the dis
content specific model?

ultiple grade levels.
ces, so specific standards for each grade would be redundant.
implemented
h. Three years a a lot of growth opportunity.
et across grade levels.
l in Iowa. This would be a huge unfunded mandate.
e. If students move into a new school system this could cause problems, I know, but we need to give teachers and school
hey move between districts.
,7,8 standard assignments that have already been suggested by the NGSS.
vel. The problem being testing a student on a standard in 6th grade that they have not yet been taught because the stand
ent ways??? KEEP THEM TOGETHER.
grade levels is appropriate.

s. 7-12 certified teachers are limited in what they can teach based on their specialty areas.
ed if the earlier material is not mastered. If they are not ready for what I am going to teach them, then I will not be able to g
m together and offer the themes across the grades.
s taught at which grade level rather than being required to teach certain concepts at specific times.
l on standardized tests when they have only been taught one-third of the standards in 6th grade?
science' (teach a little of earth, life, and physical science each year) or 'focused science (teach the three disciplines in sep
something if the schools do not have same standards

a single band. Teachers will know how to flexibly implement the teaching of the new standards in ways that work for all stud
ar is that by including all the standards in a 6-8 grade range that 6th and 7th grade teachers may wrongly think that any o
review/benchmark checking to help students who might move in and have a gap, then Iowa must go with grade standards
earning of teachers and students into rich project-based learning.
the same interests, knowledge, skills and resources at each grade level is at best, naive, at worst, ignorant.
5,6-8. One model will not fit ALL districts.
ey could develop a stronger interest in the other standard areas.

arrange curriculum and yet have all students learn all topics during the rearrangement.
f one area and totally skip another. If each area is assigned a year, no matter what school students attend, they will be tau
dent will be coming from radically different backgrounds. As long as they end up near the same level of understanding the
de would mean a student could move school to school and not miss anything and pick right back up where they left off.
a deeper understanding.
jority of teachers have been teaching conceptually or following true inquiry.
ight not represent their knowledge), but most are fairly specific. I don't know how specific is too specific, however, because
feasible since Davis County has acquired more I-PADS for student use.
uld take years to decide. If it said, there would be nothing to work out. Also, standardized tests in science might go better
as accountable.
knowledge (within the three-year time period allotted), provided that all students grow in scientific literacy.
nown to each level, they could then make further adjustments to be sure the expectations were met.
erentiated levels of depth. The NGSS would be a wonderful opportunity for Waukee to reintroduce advanced-level science c
ontrol of what grade standards are taught so they can utilize teachers strengths.
xample, some schools are K-6, 7-12 or K-5, 6-7, 8-9, 10-12. It could be hard for teachers to collaborate if they are not in the
move on to the next level if knowledge has a good foundation.
ir level, or the 8th graders will be board while things are 'dumbed down' for 6th graders.
is not rational.
gaining the proper knowledge.
hings to a very deep level, so there is never the worry that we are not going to reach the needs of high achieving students.
ure that students moving from school to school would get the same standards.
last 2 decades. A foundation for this knowledge can not be acquired by a large majority of young students in 1 school year
de standard alone their should be accommodation for those who learn at a quicker pace to be moved up to the next level t
e 6th grade look identical in all places.
is an 8th grade teacher, teach physical science in eighth grade etc.
en at least dedicate an amount of time for each standard.
d and retain the information and thereby come away from middle school with the same background knowledge to build on
our standardized tests align to the NGSS.
s concept makes sense, doesn't it?
strict remain more or less on track.
what it could be a problem. However, if districts have good communication and they can make the band work - that's grea
will use the problem-solving techniques and practical thinking they should learn in science, so focus should not be on the 'c
ant investment of time and resources would need to go into developing a scope and sequence for grades 6-8 using the new
their situations.
s to meet and figure out a scope and sequence to make sure the standards are being addressed.
g experience to best advantage.
itself. For example a 6th grader can learn the basic parts of a food chain. They can then apply that knowledge and go look
we are reinventing the wheel
ht by the same science teacher. In our case, grade 6 is in a different building than 7 and 8 so it makes it more difficult for t
s age group needs to be hands on, not text book driven. That is not really built into the "Standards".
cal thinking processes.
ch is taught.
ut mental development too.
Earth, Life, Physical at every grade level.
Some states like Iowa, with local control, the approach is up to the school.
Wo
ntributing to fact that we don't have a uniform method for all Iowa students to move from grades 6 to 9. This variety cont
ows for more specific differentiation between grade levels.
t they should already know coming into your grade.
could receive the appropriate level material that matched their "maturity" at a given time?
dent and interrelated.

more sense to me.
t would be valuable to create standards and assessments for each grade level, to help catch any struggling students before
rom 6th-8th grade; 2) integrating science content (life, physical, earth/space) is more in-line with the integrative philosoph
students and their families identify where the 6th grader should be, or could be, when mixed with 8th graders.
the science standards to be matched up with other state standards better in language and math.
works best for them. Giving teachers autonomy is always a good thing because they can think outside the box and innovat
their students and how best to teach them.
e kept together in a single middle school grade band. I believe the district and school building level can make the most inf
h grade, this inevitably creates gaps and overlaps in student learning. Although teachers don't like the idea very much (bec
to hire new directors for each grade.
isfied. Middle school is all about exploration.

owledge, so if you don't have the students all start with a strong foundation, the advanced topics aren't going to make sens
e grade levels span far too great a student's lifespan to be able to appropriately distribute/collect curricula
rent groups can learn material as well as based on what resources are available.
at resources are available locally.
maybe they would see concepts more than once and have better retention.
nd ELA have specific content tied to each grade level and I believe science should follow that same path.
cher choice.
have the opportunity to be exposed to the same basics and not just the gifted.
ts organize their thoughts. I also do not rely on what may or may not have been covered in the grade before me. I know w
-specific it will be similar across the state and student mobility will not be as much of an issue.
necessary to refer back to regular English breakdown, so that sixth graders aren't doing eighth-grade level work.
ems in each household. I do not think that we need any more children on medication to handle the stress.
e. This would also be beneficial for teachers to plan accordingly to build upon prior knowledge and possibly develop proble
students develop models and create various artifacts to prove their understanding. Lower level students will have a hard
By keeping the standards in single grade band this gives the schools the flexibility to choose the organization that works b
at is taught each grade level the progression sometimes is determined by what the senior teacher wants to teach.
eaching specific standard which will allow HS teachers to then dive deeper into the science concepts.
same format would help.

r almost nothing from their middle school experiences.
need three separate sets of specific standards for each grade.

to meet literacy and even math standards if teachers across the state are using the same standards. 4. Assigning the stand
e content when moving from out-of-state. Therefore, I would prefer the district have the ability to choose which standards a
ng curriculum guides.
in each grade, instead of front loading certain grades with certain material. I just go with the flow and would teach prefer
related they will have a greater appreciation for the work of scientists and be more excited about learning. However, I dou
me. Assigning specific standards does have the benefit of standardizing content across the state, which helps students who
d on developmental readiness of students.
t need unrelenting supervision.
elp ensure that all middle schools have a 6th grade science program, in addition to the 7th and 8th grade programs, which
uestions on who covers what and when.
immediately.
ent moving districts between 6th and 7th grade. Now the student repeats a similar year of science.
matched with Assessments that see if they "got it" would only make sense. I don't have much faith that it will happen - so
ve learned.
adth that needs to be covered consistently throughout the state, so there are benefits either way.
ne can understand/grasp a new skill/concept.

d collaborating with co-workers, making sure of what is being taught at each grade.
ibility with this.
ence one per grade level. The grade level should be considered because of the middle school brain and what it is capable o
ch means I would expect there to be increasing complexity and challenge to the standards from one grade level to the next
able to address all standards through vertical conversations.
with the single grade band and have recommendations about what grade should do specific performance expectation/stan
expected to move on to next and what background they need to move forward. I think this is worse in science than in mat
luate this on a local level.
This may be beneficial in the long term, but it may also cause many districts to shy away from support of NGSS because of
of concepts
at each grade level.
ould benefit them if each grade level taught the same standards.
be another inappropriate step towards giving up local control. Wise up!
thing like that). It would be nice to have this decision made at the state level so that all schools are teaching the same cur
don't vertically integrate with other teachers in the district
e ready to advance.
year. So, I would be opposed to assigning standards for each grade level. Also, some science teachers have a K-6 endorsem
her school that more closely aligns with the standards wanted.
aboration between teachers is hard enough within buildings, let alone between buildings.
. You almost need to have the standards viewable for each student by schools.
em by allowing the students to apply those concepts. Introducing new material and giving our kids the opportunity to appl
for the amount of learning, the 8th grade students have had more experience and more learning than a 6th grade student
u see in another. Still, if the majority of middle school teachers want it divided up, I would support that.
grade will cover it".
consecutive years, they would have the same curriculum twice.
ate this problem. Also, if the state would redo assessments there could be a better match of curriculum taught and state as
ool science teachers can be kept at the local level so progressions can continue in grades 9-12.
However, I think it is beneficial for students to have a main focus for the year, such as Life, Earth, and Physical Science.
cular grade level would help diminish this aspect.
ooking at assessments in the future- if all students at a specific grade level have the same performance expectations asses
er districts in IOWA and sometimes buildings in same district! Grade specific standards would prevent this.
n a child's educational career.

that will leave a good number of them untouched.
ten in their old district, but if the standards are kept as a middle school grade band- I'm ok with splitting up the standards o
th Science focus, move down the road to another district and in grade 7 and get Earth Science major focus again. And each
f primarily memorizing facts. Yes, the content knowledge is important in conjunction with the scientific process, but it does
el, you confine a class to the standards. Not all schools will be able to be confined in this way.
sons and Units to accomplish this.
s, if they are aligned.
all 6th graders across Iowa have have the same science content and skills rather than some getting life science in 6th, wh
down on prep and expense for school and teachers.

consistently.
ve a better opportunity to make better connections with the content. Having a little here and there does not provide enou
istricts they may need to sit with nonage students to demonstrate the standards.
irectly with students in a district, understand the needs of those students, not some group at a national or state level
tudent receives a full science education?
c students, and allows teachers to meet those students where they are in the learning process.
h science and 7th life science.
re everything is taught. It also encourages a more integrated curriculum between the sciences which is what science truly
ct depending on various factors including teacher availability and student readiness.
wa Assessments, that is something to consider.
ents have had. We can ensure accountability for continuous student learning if we do this.
teachers accountable.
as set up to teach a certain subject in a specific grade, but if the standards were written for a different grade, maybe that
t's bunched together.
encounter the same curriculum. It makes it a lot easier to know what is expected at each grade level.
es or allow each grade level to present a few concepts from each area.
ead of starting over with new curriculum right when the NGSS are adopted.
ditional benefit to students in exchange for more delays, more costs in development, and less local control.
ific grade levels. In our district, and probably in many others as well, we have a lot of students who who move in or out du
ntegrated curriculum.
ether would be to isolate the content into areas such as life, physical, or earth science which is counter-intuitive to best pra
uld not get repeated content or miss content.
he three grades and should be left to the discretion of the schools and the administration in each one.
dards that we are all using (so that important concepts or ideas are hit in every grade.
standards to grades would allow students who move frequently between districts to minimize the gaps that are present in
us by people that do not understand how the Iowa Core Science Standards and the Iowa Assessment flow together. Last w
al Science, Life Science). Assigning the standards to the grades would take this option away from the teachers who work d
new school and have no idea what has and has not been covered.
chieve academic success
ool covers that in 7th grade and then they miss a topic.
to be prepared for High School Science.
ere the students study all three disciplines during the course of one year, with standards building on each other over three
eems confusing as to whether or not one single course must touch on all these standards.
w for more collaboration between districts and more reliable testing results.
ey approach high school learning.
nd earth science concepts and skills) where we have more scope and sequence.
e have spent much time negotiating which standards are delegated to which grade levels. This is work that if done for us, w
allow district to decide what is taught when.
nt endorsements). Research supports the value of deep content knowledge especially when addressing science concepts.
nce) or classes in which the disciplines are mixed but the concepts progress logically (see Appendix K). By assigning specifi
ed to give teachers and school systems some ability to choose their own schedules.
been taught because the standards are not taught at the same grade level for each district. Thus being said, it is more im
hem, then I will not be able to get in all of the material that I will be trying to teach and it will not connect in a way that wil
ach the three disciplines in separate years).
ds in ways that work for all students.

s may wrongly think that any of the standards can be addressed in 6th grade.
a must go with grade standards.
worst, ignorant.
tudents attend, they will be taught every area.
ame level of understanding the standards I think it should be sufficient for Iowa's needs.
back up where they left off.
s too specific, however, because otherwise some valuable concepts might not be covered.
ests in science might go better for 6th grade as there would be assigned things they should know, not the large realm of 6-
cientific literacy.
oduce advanced-level science courses at the middle school level within this model.
ollaborate if they are not in the same building as the other middle level science teachers.
eds of high achieving students.
young students in 1 school year.
be moved up to the next level to challenge them and keep their interest peaked - the same for math, language, arts et al
kground knowledge to build on in high school.
ake the band work - that's great.
so focus should not be on the 'correct answer' to a type of problem they may never come across as adults. I help my child
nce for grades 6-8 using the new standards. It would also support our students who are so transient. As they move from dis
pply that knowledge and go looking for food chains that are around them in their school yard, back yard, school building or
o it makes it more difficult for those teachers to communicate and make sure the students are being taught all they need t
proach is up to the school.
Would advocate for Earth Life Physical at every grade level because it is best for students. Som
rades 6 to 9. This variety continues into high school. Each district has a unique history and rationale for the programs the
h any struggling students before they reach the high school level.
with the integrative philosophy of the Governor's STEM initiative; 3) being able to provide state-wide grade-level specific p
d with 8th graders.
ink outside the box and innovate more than when everything is predefined for them.
ng level can make the most informed decision about what their middle level students are developmentally and emotionally
n't like the idea very much (because it means that they have to learn, prepare, and teach new content), having specific sta
opics aren't going to make sense.
ollect curricula
at same path.
the grade before me. I know what has been covered and how well. For a middle school student, a clear delineated focus o
ghth-grade level work.
ndle the stress.
dge and possibly develop problem-based learning opportunities that collaborate with teachers among different grade levels
level students will have a hard time meeting these standards.
se the organization that works best for their students.
acher wants to teach.
tandards. 4. Assigning the standards is NOT the same as assigning teaching methods. Teachers still have the local control a
ity to choose which standards are met at each grade level. If the standards are specific to grade level, then the state must
he flow and would teach prefer to teach what i am teaching now, but would be willing to do that if it was what is BEST for st
about learning. However, I doubt that entrenched educators or school systems will do very well at adapting to boundaryles
state, which helps students who move have fewer gaps in their science education, but has the disadvantage of large gaps
and 8th grade programs, which I believe most districts have in place.
uch faith that it will happen - sorry, wish I did.
ol brain and what it is capable of handling. I think Life science should be 6th grade because it is easier and a transition year
rom one grade level to the next.
performance expectation/standard.
is worse in science than in mathematics.
m support of NGSS because of the shift in course design.
ools are teaching the same curriculum at the same level.
teachers have a K-6 endorsement while others have a 7-12 endorsement.
our kids the opportunity to apply these concepts as they go should be what happens in 7th and 8th grade, with far greater
rning than a 6th grade student.
upport that.
curriculum taught and state assessments if the standards are grade specific. Collaborative work amongst grade level teac
Earth, and Physical Science.
erformance expectations assessments can be created based on that and for once there might be an assessment created th
ld prevent this.
with splitting up the standards on my own.
nce major focus again. And each district could be in compliance but the student moved from A and B. And worse yet what i
he scientific process, but it does not necessarily make one scientifically literate. Being scientifically literate helps the stude
e getting life science in 6th, while others get earth or some mixture. Teachers still have direct control over how they teach
nd there does not provide enough continuity in their understanding.
at a national or state level
ces which is what science truly represents
a different grade, maybe that would cause problems.
rade level.
Although, maybe it would be nice to have specific standards writte
ss local control.
nts who who move in or out during the school year. When different districts teach different things at different grade levels,
h is counter-intuitive to best practices. Likewise, assigning standards to individual grades helps students who may transfer
ize the gaps that are present in their learning.
sessment flow together. Last week we were asked to analyze the test questions and found that out of the 6th grade test th
y from the teachers who work directly with the students.
ilding on each other over three years.
his is work that if done for us, would allow more time to unwrap the standards and develop rich units of instruction.
addressing science concepts.
ppendix K). By assigning specific standards to each grade, this flexibility is removed, leaving schools less able to modify th
. Thus being said, it is more important that districts make the decision based on what is best for their students and not be
ill not connect in a way that will be beneficial.
know, not the large realm of 6-8 Science.
for math, language, arts et al
cross as adults. I help my child study outside of school and she gets good grades and tests high, but most of our study focu
ransient. As they move from district to district, we can ensure science concepts are taught and assessed consistently. Fina
, back yard, school building or connected to the school building and more. Then they can learn the basic parts of a food w
are being taught all they need to be taught.
ause it is best for students. Some concepts in each topic are more appropriate for grade 6, some grade 8. The NGSS are w
rationale for the programs they offer. I think that allowing local control has its merits because this allows each school to w
state-wide grade-level specific professional development for content and practices is powerful.
evelopmentally and emotionally able to learn more successfully at each grade level in their respective communities. My on
ew content), having specific standards assigned to specific grades is better for student learning in the long run.
dent, a clear delineated focus of study is crucial; review throughout the year is crucial; building on prior knowledge of the s
rs among different grade levels.
ers still have the local control about how to meet the standards assigned at that grade level.
rade level, then the state must allow districts time to make the transition.
hat if it was what is BEST for student learning.
well at adapting to boundaryless science.
he disadvantage of large gaps in time (e.g. earth science in 6th and not again until 9th) that may make deep understandin
t is easier and a transition year, the easier curriculum would help those students coming from the elementary. I feel Earth
and 8th grade, with far greater emphasis on the life sciences than what is being taught now. Chemistry and physics educat
work amongst grade level teaches could even be done throughout the state if each grade level were teaching toward the s
ht be an assessment created that actually tests what is taught at that grade level.
A and B. And worse yet what if the same student moved to a third district for 8th grade and low and behold they focus on
tifically literate helps the student bring out the best in all of us, which is using our imagination and curiousity to discover th
ct control over how they teach, but what they teach (and at what developmental level) needs to be specifically established
o have specific standards written for specific ages, based on their developmental learning.
hings at different grade levels, this creates many opportunities for gaps in student learning.
lps students who may transfer schools.
that out of the 6th grade test there are only 8 questions that are addressed in 6th grade and the rest are in 7th and 8th gra
rich units of instruction.
g schools less able to modify the science sequence to students' needs.
st for their students and not be dictated by high stakes testing data.
high, but most of our study focus is not answering the assigned problems, but whether she actually understands the conce
and assessed consistently. Finally, whether Iowa Assessments or Smarter Balanced Assessments are used, having grade-le
earn the basic parts of a food web and apply that to the food chains they just made. Do any of them connect creating a we
some grade 8. The NGSS are written with the notion of conceptual development as an important factor.
use this allows each school to work toward implementing the standards within their existing paradigm. In addition, if the s
respective communities. My only concern is the fairness of assessing each science standard in middle school on the Iowa s
ning in the long run.
ding on prior knowledge of the subject is crucial. There are no excuses for students or teachers when one specific area of s
t may make deep understanding more difficult to achieve.
m the elementary. I feel Earth Science belongs in 7th grade, because of the subject difficulties and Physical science MUST
Chemistry and physics education should also start earlier than they currently do, in 7th or 8th grade as opposed to 9th or
evel were teaching toward the same set of standards
d low and behold they focus on Earth Science in grade 8. Now the student attending three Iowa districts gets Earth Science
on and curiousity to discover the natural world that we live in. Shaping what students know and see is not as important as
ds to be specifically established.
d the rest are in 7th and 8th grade. The questions are large in scope such as forms of energy transformation, rocks and mi
actually understands the concepts being taught and how she would go about studying and teaching herself. These skills ar
ments are used, having grade-level defined science standards would seem to make the most sense to measure science achi
of them connect creating a web? This can be done on a local easy to see, touch and more level. Then in 7th grade review
ortant factor.
g paradigm. In addition, if the state develops a middle school assessment that can be delivered state-wide, students can sh
d in middle school on the Iowa standardized tests--what if the Iowa standardized tests contains questions a certain middle s
ers when one specific area of science with clear standards is applied throughout the state.
ies and Physical science MUST stay in 8th grade. It is hard for middle school students to grasp even at 13-14 years of age.
8th grade as opposed to 9th or 10th. Teaching children about technology is important, but it shouldn't be the end-all. Goo
owa districts gets Earth Science three times but is short changed in life and physical sciences. How can we say we care abo
w and see is not as important as shaping how they use what they know and see.
y transformation, rocks and minerals, etc. Not topics that can be addressed in 5 min. My administrator is adamant that w
eaching herself. These skills are not discussed in class nor in the printed material, so the word 'homework' takes on a nega
sense to measure science achievement in those grade levels.
level. Then in 7th grade review all that was learned in 6th. Then expand that into the community, echo systems around th
ered state-wide, students can show growth over all three years as they move toward demonstrating the 6-8 standards, rega
ns questions a certain middle school grade level has not yet covered in that grade level? Will the Iowa standardized test ju
sp even at 13-14 years of age.
t shouldn't be the end-all. Good, hard science is lost in today's curricula.
s. How can we say we care about each student is this could happen? By the way it does happen with the 2008 Iowa Core S
dministrator is adamant that we need to make up for that by also teaching these other concepts to make up for their lack o
ord 'homework' takes on a negative connotation for many children and parents. Homework becomes answering a page of
munity, echo systems around them. Start by having the look at and build food chains of maybe the prairie they are studyin
strating the 6-8 standards, regardless of the sequence the standards are presented. This is not to say that this configuratio
Will the Iowa standardized test just be a standard/same science test for all grade levels 6-8 so that each year, growth can ac
pen with the 2008 Iowa Core Science more than you would think. And all because of grade span standards.
epts to make up for their lack of knowledge. This is frustrating because the Iowa Standards relate to the test by over the y
becomes answering a page of questions, when further discussion reveals that many children don't understand how topics
ybe the prairie they are studying, or local woodland, etc. Keep it on a local level close to home where the students can go
not to say that this configuration is without problems. I am not opposed to addressing those problems with grade-level spe
o that each year, growth can accurately be measured from year to year regarding science in the middle school grades?
span standards.
relate to the test by over the years improving a student's performance on the test.
n don't understand how topics relate into everyday life and how exciting learning can be, instead of just answering the test
me where the students can go visit and have a hands on, eyes on learning of food chains and webs. Then have them see i
e problems with grade-level specific standards. I would be especially interested in this approach if it was presented as a pr
n the middle school grades?
stead of just answering the test questions correctly. Expecting a 6th grader to wrap their mind around 8th grade concepts
nd webs. Then have them see if any of those food chain's link together into food webs. This could be done with other echo
oach if it was presented as a progression, teaching the concepts that create a foundation first, and building upon that found
nd around 8th grade concepts isn't always viable and will discourage some from staying engaged in classes, therefore test
could be done with other echo systems or bi-omens they are study that are "close to home". Then keep building on that i
st, and building upon that foundation in grade 8.
gaged in classes, therefore testing lower on 'standards'. If everything is built around 'standard' questions, memorization ta
". Then keep building on that in 8th grade but to into bi-omens or habitats away from home, like the ocean, dearest, rain-f
ard' questions, memorization takes the place of discovery and imagination and determination to learn and understand new
e, like the ocean, dearest, rain-forest, arctic and more. At each grade level as a high end learning the students can look at
n to learn and understand new concepts.
rning the students can look at each "habitat" or bi-omen they looked at and studied and see if any of them interconnect to
e if any of them interconnect to create a larger "food web". Building each grade, by grade, adding to their knowledge, not
adding to their knowledge, not tossing them all together and hoping the 6th graders can keep up with the 8th and more. E
ep up with the 8th and more. Each level had a different learning capability.

The breadth and depth of content of the Next Generation Science Standards will
prepare students to be ready for college, careers, and other post-secondary
options.
Response
Response
Answer Options
Percent
Count
a. Strongly Agree
25.3%
458
b. Agree
43.5%
786
c. Neutral
21.4%
387
d. Disagree
7.3%
132
2.4%
44
answered question
1807
skipped question
716
The breadth and depth of content of the Next Generation Science Standards will prepare students to be ready for college, careers, and other p
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
students to be ready for college, careers, and other post-secondary options.
Please comment about the breadth and depth of content of the Next Generation
Science Standards.
Answer Options
Response Count
answered question
skipped question
660
660
1863
Which stakeholder
Do you
group do you primarily Response to
currently live in
represent as you
Other
Iowa?
Are you
directly
involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
non formal educa. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a.
The best interesa.
a.
Local School B b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
College of Educ a.
a.
a.
ISU Extension i a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a, c, d (retired) b.
a.
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
retired teacher b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
Basically at oneb.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
g. Community member
b.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
g. Community member
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
Work in STEM job.
e. Parent
a.
e. Parent
a.
Parent,Environma.
naturalist
a.
a.
a. Teacher
b.
County Conserva.
d. Higher Education
a.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
Non-formal Edu a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
d. Higher Education
a.
g. Community member
b.
a. Teacher
b.
a. Teacher
a.
grandparent
b.
g. Community member
b.
e. Parent
b.
h. Business
b.
g. Community member
b.
e. Parent
b.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

Retired now but b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
g. Community member
b.
e. Parent
b.
d. Higher Education
a.
e. Parent
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
Parent and educa.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
e. Parent
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
homeschooling a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
b. Administrator
b.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Substittute teacb.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Teacher and Pa a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
d. Higher Education
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
h. Business
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Non-formal edu a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Museum & Aquar
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Science Instruc a.
a.
a.
health educatora.
a.
Museum and Aqu
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
County Environ a.
environmental ea.
environmental ea.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Both teacher ana.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
g. Community member
b. No
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Environmental a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Public Works Oua. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
citizen of the E a. Yes
Someone who wo
b. No
g. Community member
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
g. Community member
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a.
Teacher and para.
e. Parent
a.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
a.
b. Administrator
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
e. Parent
b.
b. Administrator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
educational cona.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
b.
e. Parent
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
b.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
e. Parent
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
b. Administrator
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
In the educatio b. No
Going to school b. No
Going to school a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
b. Administrator
b. No
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
b. No
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a.
I am a homosexb.
iiuujj
a.
d. Higher Education
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
b.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
b. Administrator
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
d. Higher Education
b.
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
a. Teacher
a.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
I am a parent ofb.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
parent & teachea.
b.
a.
a.
a.
Support sciencea.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
The breadth and depth of content

of the Next Generation Science
Standards will prepare students
to be ready for college, careers,
and other post-secondary
options.
Please comment about the

breadth and depth of content of
the Next Generation Science
Standards.
a. Strongly Agree
NGSS is research-based on how children/students learn and a more au
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
No specific comments.
Only if teachers stop covering so much content and focus on fundament
The standards allow the tasks and projects students complete to be gen
Perhaps it is more about emphasizing critical thinking skills and less abo
Part of me is concerned that the breadth will cause many teachers to ig
I like that the students will have to apply concepts and that it has math
The standards help students to learn how to use lab equipment, do rese
NGSS includes engineering, cross curricular applications, which are esse
We live in an era when the students have all the knowledge of a k-12 ed
It appears highly unlikely to accomplish all of the life science standards
They are pretty wordy!
I appreciate the latitude given to teachers to decide detailed lessons wh
Collaboration is needed to meet the standards. Hands-on, while learnin
Th NGSS is good, but far from perfect. There are areas that have been c
That is not the job of school or science is to get them college or career r
Many colleges use the traditional course names IE: chemistry or physiol
They are very thorough.
If teachers really do receive the autonomy to teach the standards witho
I did not read all levels to feel I can adequately answer this question. I r
The standards include engineering practices, core discipline ideas, and t
In depth but confusing to understand. Not able to quickly and easily che
These standards are not as vague as the old standards. Really gives spe
The Next Generation Science Standards will provide a well-rounded scie
All the disciplines are covered each year rather than focusing on just on
The depth and breadth are great - however they are unrealistic with the
The performance expectations change what students are expected to kn
Is the human body covered in elementary school, as in CC SS?
If a student takes the science suggested - especially for secondary the s
They are TOO focused on college bound students.
The depth of the concepts is, what I feel, the most important part of the
Totally disagree. Not enough of the natural sciences, i.e., biology, chem
Some of the standards are more shallow than I currently teach. Also, b
I like the effort to make Science more hands-on and investigative.
Very thorough, possibly too much breadth for non-college bound studen
In K-2 you are expecting kids to be able to learn math, language arts, sp
NGSS deal more with getting students to think and problem solve. It is n
The NGSS are rigorous and the emphasis on relationships, concepts, and
Sometimes breadth can take away from depth. Depending on the group
Students are not aware of what exact standards they are learning
I believe that the NGSS promote problem solving skills that will be bene
The breadth and depth is certainly consistent with a regular chemistry c
Will be hard to cover all in secondary as written but the depth is good.
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
I did not read the NGSS for very long, but there appear to be a variety o
I like that it does cover specific areas and things that need to be include
I feel our students do not have the opportunity to learn about the natura
The NGSS is written to assist in creating scientifically literate students. A
I believe the content required for students to know does do this. I would
Engineering is covered in the 5th grade standards, very cross-curricular.
Addresses many different subject areas. Can incorporate STEAM into sta
H.S. Some of the standards seemed very advanced, at a college level, e
I don't know anything about it.
Agree, but sometimes too much is too much.
Breadth is there, but not sure depth is there because so many things are
This can only happen if educators are given the materials and training n
Whoever wrote these standards wants to indoctrinate our students to be
Teachers have an impossible task to try doing both. The main concepts
I think some of the standards are vague.
If students are required to take Chemistry in high school to attend a 4 y
I think NGSS emphasizes more thinking and problem solving and less m
The topics covered will make students more scientifically literate than s
In some areas they are not strong enough and in other areas, they go in
appear to be broad in scope, the delivery method is what will determine
The Cross-Cutting Concepts are effective in encouraging students to app
I feel this will allow our students to truly investigate their learning on a d
These standards are mediocre, at best and will not prepare students for
We are not preparing our children well for work environment. Esp indust
Depth over breadth should be the focus
Many students don't need the depth and breadth of science that is requ
I agree that students need to be ready for the next generation, however
I think any good science curriculum will link the content to other areas.
Like always, if all standards have to be taught, the depth will be negativ
Student come to school to gain knowledge. It is our duty as educators to
I feel like they are more specific and more in depth on what to teach an
Should include some cross curricular thoughts.
If teachers didn't have to spend so much time having to decipher and m
The standards alone will not prepare students. This will depend on the u
They seem to be skill based, rather than completely content based. The
I think the concepts are good although not every student is going on to
I think the cross-cutting concepts are very valuable for all students. Th
I think science digs deep but I think it could better be connected to mat
Unreasonable to cover the breadth and depth in a genuine way.
I think they lack basic understanding of the common science subjects w
THese are rigorous standards
These standards seem to require a level of mathematics that isn't curre
NGSS is intended for "science literacy" and should meet the needs of al
I think these standards are more specific and will be more aligned to ST
I think the standards were well developed and thought out.
I believe this will essentially lie within the ability of the teacher in the cl
I do think it has breadth and depth, however I believe it will expose them
There needs to be a variety of topics but students need the chance to s
It's a good balance of breadth and depth. The NGSS avoided the "mile w
I have been teaching Next Generation Science for the last four years. In
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
I think everything helps prepare students for life after high school
There are many more technical and mathematical skills that will be lack
As always, you cannot make generalized statements about student prep
it is very rigorous - maybe too much so. Looking through the standards
I think that the breadth and depth of content is good. It is enough to be
In theory it will work. behavior kids slow the path of eager to learn stud
We are long past the time education can use a 2 track system of college
Less is more
Don't really have an answer for this as it hasn't been explained well.
It's hard to comment specifically having only read the summaries, but it
na
Don't know
I don't see a lot of new areas covered in these standards; these standar
The standards are goods but have to have qualified teachers
I don't know if this is where it belongs, and I understand that this probab
This all depends on the school and educator.
Although these concepts contain depth, I do not believe all MS students
Breadth looks to be a lot to expose students to with deep understanding
encourages higher order thinking, use of resources, research and presen
I feel there is still too much breadth. If done well, going in depth into to
Breadth and depth also requires teacher preparation and proper funding
Not all science areas are covered k-4. There are many holes.
could be much more demanding for the top level students
Evidenced based science - emphasizing critical thinking is the key - scie
Take caution about having too much content for the amount of time ava
The NGSS are more focused than the current Iowa standards. However s
The cross curricular quality of the standards is exceptional.
The variety of post high school experiences each student will have is to
The concept may be written down on your piece of paper, but getting q
depends on what they are studying
Much more depth with specific outcomes.
These standards move away from simply asking students to regurgitate
It is well planned and deep.
The new standards sacrifice some breadth in order to cover essential to
They address both content and process skills including 21st century skil
I believe that if you could teach it all it could. If you cover everything re
I would say the breadth is still a little too large.
It is well researched and provides students with a wealth of experiences
I trust the 50+scientists and educators who wrote these standards.
I agree, but NGSS will help students prepare for college, career and o
Same comment made on #7.
I sometimes feel that we are forcing college level learning down onto hi
Both depth and breadth appear are ok, the challenge is making sure the
I think it is very similar to the standards I have seen before, nothing too
There is too much emphasis on Earth Science and, as a result, have dec
If there was enough time to teach them all Yes, students would be prepa
I think it is great to require biology, chemistry, and physics because it ca
NGSS does a better job than Iowa Core because it is clear about what is
This is assumptive in the sense that the rigor of the assessment approp
Again, the standards create a culture of memorization, instead of discov
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
Excellent.
All of these standards - whether generally accepted science or political
They are well balanced so students will get content, practices, and foun
I feel like the breadth of the NGSS has been narrowed down a bit to be m
Teaching simple basics does not prepare one for college or after high sc
It appears that they will be ready, but it all depends on if the content is
They are infinitely better than the Iowa Core for science.
I believe this will increase my children's ability to be successful in colleg
Have not read them.
They are very deep but seem to jump over the mastery of content and s
I agree
Chemistry & physics is practically non-existent. How will children be pre
It emphasizes certain THEORIES as facts and promotes the liberal agend
I think they will help cover engineering and technology, but also other s
Right now students are "behind" in science. Playing catch up for those
I feel a great deal of thought went into developing the NGSS. Hopefully
The NGSS covers a wide variety of topics - some are a bit out stretching
Seems like the general topics are covered, could have more in engineer
The material that I have read through, mainly for the elementary and m
Provide a good basic science education
I would need a more thorough explanation on the topics before I could a
The breadth and depth of content seems to be sufficient for a well-round
You can't have breathe and depth in a high school course that will prepa
The standards are so full of big words...what direction do they really giv
To reiterate - I am getting these ill-prepared students now. It is my reaso
The fact that the standards are outcome based will lead to students mo
The depth of content requires critical thinking and encourages students
as long school districts have the flexibility and power to offer appropriat
Needs more depth in population dynamics, evolution, conservation , spe
It is time to modernize the science curriculum. Science never stands st
None
Assessing and accountability may be more of an issue
I disagree simply because the document was too voluminous for me to r
See earlier comments - too many kids can't DO science - these require t
If the schools can get the kids to learn the breadth and depth of the con
We need all people to understand science.
I strongly agree with the emphasis on teaching critical thinking skills ov
There must be a practical application to everyday life in the instruction.
Very good
The Science standards are not going to have that strong of an influence
It is great to have standards, but I don't like the word "will" in the statem
Depth needs to include topics such as intelligent design to increase dep
The content goes above and beyond what we can expect for college rea
I believe at the high school level, the standards are so broad, that the to
I appreciate the Assessment Boundaries of the NGSS to help teachers se
There is a focus on key concepts - combined with science practices that
It goes towards critical thinking and problem solving which will allow the
The depth is non-existent. A mile wide and an inch deep. What is this T
NGSS suits each corresponding grade level very accurately. I appreciate
They go deeper than before. Each grade level has picked up more deta
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
Not qualified to judge myself, must credit the experts who created the N
So many topics and not enough time to go deep enough to prepare them
It would be nice to have them in separate grade levels
Concept based!
no learning is accomplished by the low standards as set out; Iowa can a
It is concise but yet detailed at the same time.
There is very little emphasis on the Nature of Science - what science is a
Make reasonable for each grade level
I think the breadth and depth of the NGSS is better than what we are cu
1. Grade to grade progression of these standards are poor. These standa
Being a current university student, I am impressed with the breadth and
It will only give them the agenda that NGSS has set out to indoctrinate o
The breadth and depth will prepare ALL students for college and career.
I have not heard of this before.
When the standards are graded by independent agencies as a C, that's
The high school standards are actually freshman college standards in m
Many science educators are disappointed in the standards as written. C
I think these standards are a bit heavy in earth science and low in physi
I think there is too much to really cover all the topics needed. Unless th
once again, haven't seen them, don't know where to find them
For the most part, these standards will give a good background for colle
There is a large scope of science material in NGSS, including earth scien
They have them cover a lot of material and have performance expectat
Interdisciplinary, scientifically sound, & entirely sane
While hands on activities are valuable, the standards seem to focus on t
These standards are lower than what Iowa used to have. These standard
They allow me to specifically prepare students for their future because o
By using cross-cutting concepts, the NGSS tie science to other subject a
The standard should rigorously prepare students for life in a 20th centur
I agree the Next Generation Science Standards, when taught with an inq
The concepts that are included in NGSS are ones that are developmenta
There is a huge focus on inquiry and digging deep into investigation and
Haven't read them, don't know.
The unorganized website made it difficult to find any opinion of what the
can't tell about the depth
Depth: the content is not a superficial glance over of science. Each stra
While it feels like all the basics are covered, it doesn't look like there's m
I understand the need for "breadth" and "depth" but you also need to th
TOpics seem to have been researched in detail enough to show the dep
It's a good start and there need to be standards, but preparation for the
As is always the problem, there is FAR too much content included in the
I believe that if helpful professional development had occured for the pr
I have not studied these standards so I will not comment.
The information provided is overly detailed from a parent perspective. E
Chemistry and physics are not included in any depth in these standards
With an emphasis on how to use the knowledge rather than simply if on
Does an excellent job of explaining to which level we expect students to
The NGSS was written as performance based expectations and therefore
In some respects I think NGSS focus too much on minutiae and overlook
The technology and design component of the standards will help Iowa s
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
They are a bit deep for 3,4, and 5 grades

It is not laid out well
College and career readiness will depend on the implementation of the
There seems to be a very well rounded and diverse set of science topics
Iowa Core aka common core needs to be eliminated from Iowa Educatio
The breadth and depth of content is based on starting out with prior kno
The breadth and depth is always a "hoped for", "best case scenario" typ
I think that the Next Gen Standards seem to have a great deal of breadt
The standards are too broad-based. There needs to be more content in
The way the standards are written, I would say yes. Trying to actually im
The breadth and depth is sufficient.
The NGSS fit with the STEM approach of having students learn the mate
A lot of emphasis is put on engineering practices and I am not sure that
That will depend upon the child's desire and field of study once at the h
The focus needs to be more narrow for the standards.
Although the standards are full of excellent sounding jargon and demon
Surpasses our current standards and are more clear.
Our careers and technology change so fast I do not know if these standa
But with this they are set at unreasonable levels for a middle school stu
Only if the teachers know how to teach them.
Need to be unpacked. . .needs to be more direct
Very broad and interdisciplinary and can be applied to concepts that are
The NGSS is a great road map for the path to knowledge for students to
There are a lot of standards and DCI strands to meet. I am currently stri
If using an inquiry method approach then they are fine.
The NGSS greatly emphasizes deep scientific thought that is currently la
The key concepts, core ideas, and engineering practices all on one page
I think the depth of the expectations are raising the bar and will better p
Educators will definitely have more time in the elementary setting to "d
NGSS are well-intentioned and ask teachers to aspire to a high level of i
Completely ignores some topics of biology that colleges would expect st
need to keep some "content" standards as well as performance standar
I'd like more specifics on the exact concepts (a list) of what needs to be
ok
These standards are setting the minimum expectations. I'm hoping the
Breadth of content is fine. Depth is a problem because the standards as
They are almost too much in depth
They are in depth at the high school level.
what is breadth and depth
I think the content is great and moving in the right direction. The only is
The depth of the standards is great. I agree that our students require a
I believe the depth and breadth of the NGSS are sufficient.
I have not read clear through all of it to comment on this. I have not rea
The expectations by the time students are in high school require them t
There will never be enough time to complete everything with my studen
Depth is enough but not sure that there is enough breadth
I am really not sure at this point...I strongly believe that HOWEVER you
Instead of covering multiple concepts year after year, students will be a
It is more rigorous than the Iowa Core.
These standards are very robust and a great improvement on the Iowa C
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
I think that students will have a broader exposure with these standards
a wide variety of subjects.
I feel there are science standards that have been left off of the list inclu
Colleges need to be on board with then changes in K-12 standards
I am disappointed there are not more human growth systems emphasize
I am concerned about the depth at the primary elementary especially, a
if we hold our children to higher standards higher standards will be achi
Breadth and depth of content is good. But to prepare kids for careers, sc
The engineering portion will be helpful as a lot of jobs will need that skil
need to make each grade level reponsible for certain strands of a topic
They are very in depth. I really like the guidance they offer to me as a s
Very in depth for each standard. Loved the information given for cross-c
I believe that the standards focus on only part of the topics like Newton'
There are many standards that fall into levels three and four of Webb's D
There are those who will comment that things such as classification and
It's great that it allows for a lot of variance; I think this still relates to ho
students can't get a clear understanding with so much information to co
Way to much information to be covered in one year to get a clear under
Way too much information to cover. Students can't get a clear understa
As we aligned the Iowa Core and NGSS we found it to be aligned nicely
It's doable from a teaching perspective, but as a learner, I'm not sure if
All important topics are covered.
Content is fine - but can we get it into the students' heads?
The standards aim high! The standards require students to synthesize in
Schools do NOT have the money or equipment to cover these standards
I think there needs to be more emphasis on hands-on, student led instru
Too wide - not getting the basics to build towards scientific inquiry
Too much, when we are also responsible for ELA standards.
If we implement the NGSS with fidelity in the state of Iowa as they are c
I feel, along with common core and the Iowa standards, the breadth and
Most Students do not go on to college, The work place will teach only w
In looking over the biological, environmental, and ecological areas it see
it may, but local school boards ought to be making these decisions.
I would love to have standards for AP classes, which would help prepare
I do not know these new standards
The previous national standards did a better job of covering material. N
Maybe, but until assessment matches the Standards the stakeholders a
They have pared down some of the content to give more time to create
I'm not sure how EVERYTHING listed can be covered with the classes tau
DCIs were heavy in information technology DCIs and very few DCIs relat
Once everything is in place and standards are being taught at all levels
It does not go into the content depth necessary for students to be succe
Need to broaden and condense environmental
I strongly agree with this because of the cross cutting concepts, 8 scien
They are too rigorous for 6th grade, especially considering that in our di
Very comprehensive, assuming that they are implemented accurately.
Should include human growth and development
As important as science standards are, they are not the determining fac
Through NGSS specific STEM skills are developed rather than simply pus
From what I have seen of the middle school standards, I feel the conten
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
If properly implemented these standards promote rigor and deep levels

It is important to limit the breadth of content and go deeper into the con
The standards should prepare students for the next level.
Yes. The requirements help students become better inquiry thinkers an
I feel that the colleges need to improve their alignment of curriculum be
I like how it gives you perimeters in the clarification/assessment section
I think NGSS will be better than what we are currently using.
The breadth although a little large will help students understand a wide
These are EXTREMELY difficult performance standards that I do not agre
I think there are many important concepts for future life left out of the N
Depth of content is something that the Iowa Core currently doesn't offer
They also have a heavy emphasis on engineering and other STEM relate
Our current standards are the same thing. They are just laid out differen
Just stating the standards will not make teachers able to teach science t
It remains to be seen if the changes will achieve the desired result. I th
I often read about the concerns of businesses when it comes to how pre
Not sure...do not know enough about them. Attempt to standardize nat
Standards do not teach the kids they just tell teachers what need to be
While the science curriculum does get increasingly tougher, I feel like th
too broad and too advanced for most students I teach
I feel we may be giving up some of the depth in order to cover the brea
I believe that the content in the next generation science standards will p
Currently, I don't see much science being taught to my elementary aged
I don't think all high school students need nuclear chemistry or reaction
They do go more in depth, rather than breadth, which is useful as it is im
There are many ideas covered in NGSS, but not too much that the stude
The breadth and content prepares students, giving them skills, knowled
The breadth and depth of content goes into the need to prepare all stud
The engineering strand and cross-cutting concepts are a definite plus ov
Students decide how ready they are for college. What we make them d
I believe it is too early in the process to give any kind of direct correlatio
love how it connects real world skills - more than just gotta know it facts
I agree that the standards will prepare students for advanced post-seco
I have read standards created elsewhere which lead much better toward
The focus on inquiry throughout each performance expectation far exce
I really like that it looks at what the child should know but also how they
Very rigorous and will require a significant increase in content knowledg
Too much breadth. To get depth, high school content should spiral back
It's not just a list of information that students needs to memorize. It's c
I have not read all of the content, so cannot really comment on it, but th
Breadth and depth of content seems to be addressed but I still feel it is
Content will always be there. In fact, content in science will only continu
The emphasis on cross-cutting concepts and science/engineering practi
the large amount of Earth Science is not cohesive to college planning si
This ensures all areas of science are covered.
The NGSS with the Science and Engineering concept will once again allo
The breadth and depth will help those students who pursue a career in s
We are being asked to teach more in ALL subject areas--it's hard to give
I taught science (college-level) for 40 years or so and was continually am
Problem-solving, and critical-thinking are all vital in the breadth and dep
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
Repeated exposure while going deeper into the topic will increase learn
Not a mile wide, inch deep sort of thing. Much more specific in content.
I like that they added an engineering or applied science section.
The interest and quality of instruction will have more impact than any st
It is my belief that they are pleasantly concise and specific.
These standards are over-reaching in amount and assumed content. Stu
There doesn't seem to be enough time in 4 years of high school to take
It's about the thinking and the skills, rather than knowing everything.
The skills that they emphasize should prepare students for college and a
if there is adequate knowledge retained from middle school years.
There are certain biases that do not allow for other fundamental theorie
They currently support science skills and knowledge necessary for adva
Some of the standards are too broad which leaves doesn't allow for muc
A stronger emphasis at lower levels (pre-middle school) is a must! NGS
Seems good if it is enforced
it is the experiences they have in the classroom that will prepare studen
The needed content is covered.
Much of what is propose for children flies in the face of established learn
The breadth and depth of the content provided in the NGSS provides op
These standards ensure that students have solid knowledge of their pla
Of course it will help them.
Much more specific than Iowa CORE
That depends on the teacher and the rigor that is enforced.
It is too vague on subjects needed to cover all these standards. If this is
Standards should be a local community decision. Not state wide nor fed
I think the standards will prepare students.
The inclusion of engineering and combination of content with science &
Raising standards is fine, but the real work comes in helping students m
I have not looked at all of the standards, just those where there opportu
Too early to determine whether this will have an impact
It is too difficult to tell if one district will approach the same as another.
They make students do thinks that they will be thankful for later in their
Breadth and depth of content that is included in the Standards, but som
Don't change a thing
Too narrow.
How does that go: you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him
The standards are great for math and technology. They are pitifully lack
The breadth and depth look good to me. I am a college-level professor
the breadth and depth of content of the Next Generation Science Stand
It all depends on the students' effort.
I work with 5th - 8th grade Science standards.
I really like that the standards focus on both skills and content!
More importantly, well educated citizens.
lots of content in there. does that 'coverage' prepare kids for college?
As a teacher, I don't believe that the breadth of the standards is overwh
The NGSS are much more comprehensive than the Iowa Core.
Oops. I already commented on this earlier so I won't restate it again So
This has much more science depth than the current Iowa Core.
It will help students to go deeper into a topic and hopefully better under
The development of the standards were for depth of concepts that allow
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
We have to ensure that the curriculum materials and resources in our 6Teaching science all year long would help with preparation for college. A
The NGSS focuses more on depth of content that previous standards rat
Like the development over grade levels and the specific instructions of
not every student will complete every standard especially on the higher
The standards include a wide range of areas and the are areas have per
The standards reflect what I hear from professionals in the field, have ex
When you look at the framework and expectations at each level the dep
They look very rigorous to me.
I agree these standards will prepare students well, but feel there are mo
The progressions of all dimensions including content are well laid out an
Even though the amount of performance expectations was decreased 3
Establishing NGSS will give teachers a set of guidelines and goals but it
especially if they are going into college for science, technology, enginee
I think the breadth is OK. It is hard to really tease out the depth compon
The engineering portion of the curriculum is lacking significantly, which
Absolutely agree that these are much better in breadth and depth than
Not sure any standards can get them prepared. The standards are like a
I think a lot of times the standards hinder teachers. Exploring real world
Whether a child is ready for college, careers, or post-secondary work de
Depends on what they plan to do in college, and if colleges alter their e
I think the NGSStandards are sufficient.
Many connections are provided for writing, modeling, engineering, math
The NGSS are much better than the 2008 Iowa Core Science.
It's good, but the language of the standards is not kid friendly, which wo
Not enough information to determine what the pros and cons are for thi
Again, very detailed and in-depth, My only concern would be novice tea
I am concerned that there isn't much on the human body for middle sch
I think some of the topics are too broad & too deep. We can choose one
They are much more targeted on getting our students to being prepared
No thank you...
Wide range of content areas represented; strong process skills included
These standards are rigorous and promote the idea that students learn
They are standards. Students, parents, and teachers prepare students f
In some areas it seems to be too broad which doesn't allow time for dep
I feel force and motion is lacking in the standards. Could use more stand
If implemented properly students will have to complete complex perform
If teachers are made to follow them.
I worry a little bit about some of the Earth Science expectations for high
We need our kids to have these skills to be competitive in college and c
More emphasis should be placed on emerging science. Specifically adva
I have been intimately involved in NGSS since they came out and was o
Designed for 4 years, district won't require 4 years, "All Students All Sta
This depends on what the student is wanting to go into. Teach basics an
I think in some areas they are impossible to cover in required classes su
These are well written and need to be adopted.
I believe they will cover a majority of what they need to know but I belie
Including the engineering standards will help with critical thinking. The w
This will take significant investment in teacher professional learning and
All science areas, including connections to technology and engineering
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
Science needs a greater focus in the education world. Students are luck
Seems to be sn sccurate statement.
Science covers a broad area so the standards need to do so as well. Dep
Comprehensive and well integrated
In some cases, I think the standards are asking us to cover too much ma
Too much is required...skill and content! How are teachers going to be tr
Some of the science is false information. They should totaly drop evolut
It depends more on how well the teacher gets the information across
I am not sure what this means.
As long as teachers are able to understand what needs to be taught
What the NGSS wants teachers to talk about it very rigorous and real wo
I love the inclusion of engineering and literacy standards and the assess
It is a concern to me that my current district science materials do not fit
good
Much of the content is essential, but the depth for the high school stand
There is a LOT of very relevant, in-depth content here. I hope that teach
There were some topics that are not found in the core and some topics
With the breadth of required topics, it will be very difficult for teachers t
Students need the basics of many topics but the depth and breadth of t
Provides more specific details of what the student needs to demonstrate
College and Career Readiness expects students to be able to investigate
I agree that some important scientific areas are not covered by the stan
I participated in the Mickelson Exxon Mobil Teacher Academy this past s
Challenging in the amount of time required for much of it.
After having taught several of NGSS units, I have found that the crosscu
The breadth of the NGSS isn't as wide as in other standards allowing ou
The concepts expected of 5th grade students, for instance, are not alwa
There seems to be consensus that it was indeed, developed in conjunct
The hands on activities/models students would be constructing might no
They are unique and current.
No comment
All of the human body systems should be covered in high school biology
The dumbing down of our students, so all can reach a level of competen
By integrating cross-cutting relationship and science and engineering pr
VERN
I believe that the breadth and depth is much stronger than the current I
I agree, all of the DCI and PE's would prepare someone post-secondary.
Science education currently provides a low level of understanding or is i
I am certain that previous science curriculum writers thought the same
I am concerned the content does not include the concept of intelligent d
These Science Standards do not focus narrowly on a topic (like penguins
One concern I have is that it seems to be heavily weighted toward engin
I believe that the NGSS standards focus more on creating models and un
I think it's ok
I agree with this statement, however I am concerned that at the elemen
The breadth and depth are appropriate, but the NGSS cannot be implem
NGSS provides more real world application and critical thinking. These s
I think especially if one reads "A Framework for K-12 Science Education:
Standards are not a guarantee of learning.
Rigor is evident.
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
I am very impressed with the breadth and depth of the content of NGSS
the length and breadth of my cock is FUCKING BIG
fdgfdg
The attention given to practices, concepts and core ideas is critical to te
Love how it connects many areas together.
I think overall the breadth and depth of content of the NGSS is OK. . . n
NGSS breadth and depth are appropriate, but impossible to implement w
It looks like we are making things a mile wide and an inch deep every y
I see a laundry list approach for some of the standards. I think that NGS
I believe for the first three science courses it is a good program -- stude
The fundamental issue with NGSS is that it ultimately asks high school s
They are rigorous enough to meet the demands for post-secondary opti
I think most aspects of science are covered.
I think there are few things missing from the content that students need
The content seems generally good, but I wish they would identify some
The focus covers all areas...not just content, but also the cause/effect/im
The Next Generation Science Standards do an excellent job of integratin
They cover a wide range of topics for science, including Earth Science w
These standards teach kids to think critically and help them to learn val
Haven't seen much evidence yet.
I feel that if you have less topics to cover you will be able to cover them
I feel like they are somewhat limiting and don't allow for the depth of in
We have explored them for two years- they are good.
I like the depth and rigor of the standards especially towards post high s
The depth will but the breadth will not necessarily do so. Achieving both
If people follow it and put equal emphasis on skills as content.
About equal to Iowa Core. Does seem to ask for more inquiry-based app
It would definitely prepare them but the time needed to fulfill these stan
Not enough depth on some subjects
Depth is more important than breadth. Especially when it is in the area
I think there is too much there to go very deep.
This is a much needed improvement
In some cases the depth is probably extreme given they are intended fo
NGSS does a good job of addressing the science that everyone should k
More money to have a current curriculum would be nice. our current boo
The NGSS allow for instructors to show distinct progressions across the
I believe the standards do a good job of picking out the most important
The amount of material is daunting - how do we cover the gaps that are
Some of the standards are very complex and some of them are very non
The Next Generation Science Standards gives enough information abou
I think there are gaps in content.
They are too specific.
There are some chemistry standards missing that are important, they ne
I don't know until we adopt them and compare to the Iowa Core Curricu
I feel that the educators across the state and country need to be better
If you could cover it all, you would be very prepared for post secondary
I feel that the NGSS will provide students the necessary experiences to
The Next Generation Science Standards clearly delineate what is expect
I don't think that there is enough emphasis on basic, fundamental skills.
NGSS covers content in a way that is appropriate for students. Past stan
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
d. Disagree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
c. Neutral
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
b. Agree
b. Agree
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
I feel NGSS promote more application and concept based science instru
all students are different in learning ability
NGSS is very closely related to the content areas of post-secondary edu
The chosen content, the number of topic strands, and the depth of the c
Engineering portion is essential for rigor and relevance
The sample assessments in the performance expectations imply the com
These standards are more rigorous and clear than the Iowa Core standa
There is some content that is overly emphasized in elementary - like ea
Standards are broad and still leave flexibility up to the districts in specifi
There is probably more here than any teacher can get through on a stud
The standards extensively cover everything a student would need to kn
adequate
I think this will better prepare students for all post-secondary options.
Breadth is tooooo much
The concepts and skills addressed are similar to past models.
As a parent with a BS degree I feel that these standards will provide a g
It is more important that we teach students to become life long learners
I don't think the depth of content knowledge in chemistry, physics and b
As it builds their knowledge, they should be better prepared for college
The new standards focus more on broad concepts than on minutiae, allo
I love the focus on authentic learning in the NGSS, but I'm not sure som
There is not enough time in a day to cover 90 minutes of reading plus 6
There are no standards to address the areas of health, such as body sys
Many standards are vary while others are too narrow
Iowa BIG uses them.
I appreciate the general depth of the ngss, but some of the standards ar
I believe that the depth is OK but the breadth is off base. There are a lot
These standards will make kids think and act on their thinking. THAT is
most science topics seem to be covered except human body in K-5
The intended breadth and depth of content appear to be adequate, but
Students need to learn skills and not just content.
I think the standards need to be very specific about what needs to be ta
The depth of the NGSS is excellent. Meeting the expectations of most p
Compared to how I see the Iowa Core, these are expecting evidence bas
These standards are expecting much more than the Iowa Core. They are
My only concern is this is a large number of topics to cover. Will it be m
The depth of content in NGSS is its strongest selling point. Iowa's curre
It is much better than previous standards. It probably still has a little to
Students do need to understand the extent of immersion they will encou
No matter which stets of standards - quality instruction is key in the rea
The content is good, however, there is still too much to teach in the tim
Fewer topics, but greater depth. I think better understanding of key con
I have compared specific standards between the Iowa Core and NGSS in
Some content goes too deep, but OVERALL, the NGSS is good preparatio
NGSS include content, skills, and nature of science. At first glance, they
They are much more rigorous what we currently have. If implemented w
I would like to see examples of curriculum and activities that would help
The standards ALLOW breadth and depth but it will still be up to individu
Knowledge will no longer be "an inch deep and a mile wide"
I would like to know who decides what is essential to know for college, c
d. Disagree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
c. Neutral
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
a. Strongly Agree
Again, it all depends on how much of the background they have when g
The standards make the goal/outcomes clear that having students ready
When students master the performance expectations, they will have a v
My goodness, yes! NGSS offers so much more to elementary students th
Any student that has 4 years of a quality program in science using the N
The content covers a vast amount of skills required for students' future
At the middle school level, the standards adequately prepare them for t
These standards are more concise in nature and will go in a deeper conc
Again, the posted standard and the sample test question do NOT agree
The next generation standards allow me to connect science content to t
Need to prepare our students as best as possible for future careers in sc
The addition of engineering concepts has strengthened the standards, a
Our students will be competing with those from other states who have h
n/students learn and a more authentic representation of science practices
content and focus on fundamental ideas in science. In the end, science standards are only as good as the science teachers
ects students complete to be genuine and meaningful.
ritical thinking skills and less about memorization of content.
h will cause many teachers to ignore the depth of the content.
y concepts and that it has math components. Have found some missing areas that are needed, such as motion and chemi
ow to use lab equipment, do research and be prepared to explain and support how they did experiments/research.
cular applications, which are essential in make connections for students. many schools have little time in the schedule to te
ve all the knowledge of a k-12 education in terms of content in their hands. The old standards kept inquiry as a separate p
all of the life science standards for example during 1 year of biology. Many of the students we have coming into biology d
ers to decide detailed lessons while encouraging inquiry-based learning.

andards. Hands-on, while learning. High interest.
There are areas that have been cut that leave students "out in the cold" as far as certain content, but overall I like the app
is to get them college or career ready
e names IE: chemistry or physiology or physics. The NGSS allows that, but puts too much emphasis on Earth science.
my to teach the standards without interference from school boards and non-educators, the children could benefit from the
quately answer this question. I read the areas that pertained to the level I teach.
ctices, core discipline ideas, and the cross cutting concepts. I have not seen another set of curriculum standards that includ
Not able to quickly and easily check on standards.
e old standards. Really gives specifics about what students should be learning.
s will provide a well-rounded science education and is accessible to all types of learners.
ar rather than focusing on just one. Engineering and STEM concepts are covered. There is more application of concepts wit
ever they are unrealistic with the amount of time allotted in the school day and the lack of parent emphasis on an educatio
what students are expected to know and be able to do. This significant change is a step in the right direction to prepare stu
ary school, as in CC SS?
d - especially for secondary the students should be ready for all post high school options. The situations may also arise tha
el, the most important part of the NGSS. There are constant themes among the DCI, crosscutting concepts, and practices. W
ural sciences, i.e., biology, chemistry and physics. Too much emphasis on environment and the world around us and.
w than I currently teach. Also, broad concepts are expected to be understood without knowing the underlying details. Tha
ands-on and investigative.
dth for non-college bound students
to learn math, language arts, spelling, social studies, reading, science and be able to learn social skills and not get frustra
o think and problem solve. It is not just memorizing information.
is on relationships, concepts, and integration of practices with concepts will prepare students well for post-secondary optio
m depth. Depending on the group of students you are working with, it would be hard to get all the content covered.
tandards they are learning
m solving skills that will be beneficial to students across curricular areas while promoting a deep understanding of science
sistent with a regular chemistry classroom/curriculum. The honors chemistry curriculum has more depth and breadth as co
s written but the depth is good.
ut there appear to be a variety of topics. I do not know how these will be implemented in a curriculum, but I think that the
nd things that need to be included in the curriculum while still provided teachers the ability to be flexibility in teaching styl
ortunity to learn about the natural world around them, including Iowa's beautiful prairies, wetlands, woodlands and oak sav
g scientifically literate students. As a proponent of the NGSS, I have found that the standards are not only to prepare studen
nts to know does do this. I would also say it does depend on the way students are taught that will ultimately determine the
standards, very cross-curricular. Easy to incorporate STEAM activities.
. Can incorporate STEAM into standards which will apply to college, careers and post-secondary options
ry advanced, at a college level, especially for students who are not planning to pursue that field of study or have learning
here because so many things are so broad.

iven the materials and training needed to utilize the NGSS to their full potential. As a first year elementary educator I am
to indoctrinate our students to believe that human activity is the most significant cause of global warming, when the major
doing both. The main concepts or priority standards need to have the depth.
try in high school to attend a 4 year school I believe we should have standards for AP courses.
and problem solving and less memorization.
more scientifically literate than students currently. There are topics that are not covered by NGSS that teacher may deem i
gh and in other areas, they go into too much depth for a high school student. They expect building upon previous knowled
ry method is what will determine the mastery of the concepts.
ve in encouraging students to apply knowledge broadly, in multiple classes and in new contexts. The DCI hit the essential c
y investigate their learning on a deeper level which will enhance understanding and interest.
and will not prepare students for any sort of STEM careers. One size fits all standards are NOT the best we can do for our st
for work environment. Esp industry in science
d breadth of science that is required. More of our students should be prepared with the proper science content for a techn
for the next generation, however, what about basics.......health, weather, etc.
link the content to other areas. I question that some of the science standards would be of depth since for example there a
taught, the depth will be negatively affected.
dge. It is our duty as educators to present all the facts - not just the facts we think the students want.
ore in depth on what to teach and what they should learn.
h time having to decipher and more tim to plan actual curriculum without all the roadblocks of aligning it to NGSS.
udents. This will depend on the understanding of the teachers as to what the standards mean.
n completely content based. The skills are more important.
not every student is going on to college. That notion might need to be kept in mind.
ery valuable for all students. These concepts allow for very rich depth of content.
ould better be connected to math or technology.
depth in a genuine way.
the common science subjects we teach now. Yes, they are more technical however the common sense science topics will t
l of mathematics that isn't currently the norm for Iowa students. Without complementary requirements in math (higher ou
and should meet the needs of all General science courses. AP/Honors programs would be unaffected, although alignment
fic and will be more aligned to STEM.
ed and thought out.
he ability of the teacher in the classroom to assure breadth and depth of content through lessons and instruction.
wever I believe it will expose them to different topics but not necessarily prepare them for college or career.
ut students need the chance to study deeply within the given topics.
h. The NGSS avoided the "mile wide and an inch deep" problem of some previous efforts.
Science for the last four years. In all of my 30 years of teaching, I have never seen such deep science understanding. It is a
ts for life after high school

thematical skills that will be lacking around chemistry and physics that students will need to excel.
d statements about student preparedness for college. If the students make an honest attempt to meet the standards as pr
. Looking through the standards for my grade level, they appear to be demanding tasks as opposed to knowledge.
ntent is good. It is enough to be a good guide, but not too detailed.
w the path of eager to learn students.lower the distractions in class to help everyone get better. kids need to be ready for
n use a 2 track system of college, no college. We have all too many college graduates that are unemployable for lack of te
it hasn't been explained well.

g only read the summaries, but it looks like the concepts in biology, chemistry, physics and earth science is covered. More t
n these standards; these standards appear to me to be what has been taught in the past. I'd like to see current topics inclu
ave qualified teachers
and I understand that this probably falls under technology integration, but I believe that understanding coding/programmin
, I do not believe all MS students are ready to understand and retain these concepts even though they may be presented c
dents to with deep understanding.
of resources, research and presentation of findings
done well, going in depth into topics students should be able to carry patterns and trends into their future courses. In DCI
r preparation and proper funding for materials as well as time alloted in a curricular day
here are many holes.
e top level students
g critical thinking is the key - science should be continually questioning its theories and laws
ntent for the amount of time available. You cannot fit two tons in a one ton truck.
urrent Iowa standards. However some of the parts are oddly specific and I feel they could be broadened a little. They are ve
dards is exceptional.
nces each student will have is too much to be sure EVERYTHING is covered. People are so afraid of tracking, and I'm not sa
our piece of paper, but getting qualified and quality educators who want to teach these harder courses in the areas of scien
ly asking students to regurgitate information that can be found on the internet with a few clicks. By high school students a
dth in order to cover essential topics in more depth. I especially like the focus on energy flows.
skills including 21st century skills
could. If you cover everything required it will be with too little depth.
ents with a wealth of experiences.

who wrote these standards.
prepare for college, career and other post-secondary options by simply focusing on inquiry. Because, let's face it. Inquiry i
lege level learning down onto high school when that specialization should be more at the next level and we should be focu
the challenge is making sure they are being taught with fidelity. Organizing the standards into specific courses would seem
s I have seen before, nothing too new.
cience and, as a result, have decreased the content load in the other physical sciences. Chemistry and Physics are signific
m all Yes, students would be prepared for college. Unfortunately, there are way to many standards to adequately allow for t
mistry, and physics because it can really help narrow down what the student wants to study in college. Also, I think the de
because it is clear about what is expected of students.
e rigor of the assessment appropriately addresses the depth of the standard sufficiently.
f memorization, instead of discovery and drive to enjoy learning new and many times, difficult concepts involved in science
lly accepted science or political ideology, are telling our students what they're supposed to know, not allowing them to do
get content, practices, and foundational beyond science concepts
been narrowed down a bit to be more manageable as compared to our current Iowa Core Science Standards. However, I als
e one for college or after high school careers. It gives a foundation but you need to work with the child to BUILD on that fo
t all depends on if the content is taught and implemented when it should be.
Core for science.
s ability to be successful in college and life.
ver the mastery of content and skills required prior to being able to achieving the higher order thinking tasks.
existent. How will children be prepped for a STEM carrier in these fields if first exposure is in college?
No anatomy & phys
s and promotes the liberal agenda over true scientific facts, study and research.
and technology, but also other sciences - life sciences and social sciences more.
nce. Playing catch up for those in the system is going to be hard. The concept is great of what these standards are trying
developing the NGSS. Hopefully this effort will pay off. My fear is that we are circling the wagons too late and at what cost?
cs - some are a bit out stretching and would find hard to implement because of lack of student interest in some of the topic
ed, could have more in engineering.
mainly for the elementary and middle school aged children will benefit students in the future and allow them to have a bas
ion on the topics before I could answer this question intelligently. And my concerns over the lack of specificity of definition
ms to be sufficient for a well-rounded science education.
high school course that will prepare them unless it is an ap course.
what direction do they really give the teacher or the school review committees to know they are being met? Standardized
ared students now. It is my reasoned judgment, having taught at the post-secondary level since 1993 - that a change occu
e based will lead to students more ready to enter science based fields/colleges. I also like that the materials include all the
hinking and encourages students to be problem solvers.
ity and power to offer appropriately to their students, I'm not worried about this.
mics, evolution, conservation , species diversity.
iculum. Science never stands still.
ore of an issue
nt was too voluminous for me to read in its entirety. I cannot speak to the breadth and depth of the content.
can't DO science - these require them to really be able to apply science concepts and practice.
the breadth and depth of the content outlined--then I'd totally agree. Knowing my ADD son--... he would be very challenge
eaching critical thinking skills over rote memorization

o everyday life in the instruction. We can not develop standards that only look at moving students to college.
have that strong of an influence on preparing students for college.

t like the word "will" in the statement. I'm not sure our instructors at the small rural school where my child attends even un
ntelligent design to increase depth and encourage out of the box thinking so students are not limited in their thinking an op
hat we can expect for college readiness. Adult non-scientists who I have asked to look at the content (core ideas) are intim
andards are so broad, that the topic used to teach the standard will be inconsistent across districts depending on teachers
s of the NGSS to help teachers see when content is developmentally inappropriate for certain grade levels.
bined with science practices that are even more important for a scientifically literate population.
oblem solving which will allow them to do well later in life. However, this is NOT how a number of college classes are taught
and an inch deep. What is this Texas?
evel very accurately. I appreciate how in depth it is, as it guides my instruction.
de level has picked up more details to teach.
dit the experts who created the NGSS .

go deep enough to prepare them for college.
ate grade levels
standards as set out; Iowa can and should do better by letting its communities and educators develop the superior standar
ure of Science - what science is and isn't.
SS is better than what we are currently working with in Iowa.

standards are poor. These standards assume material has been covered in earlier grades, but is not. 2. Key scientific term
m impressed with the breadth and depth of the NGS standards. They adequately cover the topics necessary to be successfu
NGSS has set out to indoctrinate our children with
students for college and career...in some cases, they might even be a bit too rigorous for ALL students. For students who d
ependent agencies as a C, that's not quality.

freshman college standards in many instances. They set up a lot of gen. ed. students for failure. Community colleges will g
ed in the standards as written. Concern is expressed that you have moved backwards in expectations. Weaving social studi
in earth science and low in physics, but overall the rigor is appropriate.
all the topics needed. Unless the state is going to require a chemical, biological and physical science to be taught. In ord
now where to find them
give a good background for college level material. However, if the standards take away elective classes for science, this w
ial in NGSS, including earth science, which would be beneficial for all students to have.
and have performance expectations to measure that the students are learning the topics
entirely sane
the standards seem to focus on these activities to the extreme, which leads one to wonder whether rich and appropriate co
wa used to have. These standards are a one size fits all approach to education and children do not learn best in acookie cu
tudents for their future because of the explicit wording and workmanship.
GSS tie science to other subject areas in a way that brings all the subjects to life, and inspires in students a passion to learn
students for life in a 20th century world. This should include (1) a firm understanding of the fundamental physical principle
andards, when taught with an inquiry-based, hands-on, and problem-solving approach, can effectively prepare students for
S are ones that are developmentally appropriate for middle school students and are chosen to help create a foundation of u
gging deep into investigation and creating their own experiments.
ult to find any opinion of what the breadth depth concept does to our children. Solely from the context of this question, I ca
glance over of science. Each strand has multiple standards. Breadth: Most aspects of science are considered. A middle s
ered, it doesn't look like there's much room for advanced courses in a topic. Basically, the bar feels a little low.
d "depth" but you also need to think about the amount of standards you are expecting an educator to teach and assess in a
n detail enough to show the depth. Ultimately the text and teacher experience will be the true measures of the breadth an
tandards, but preparation for the future depends on implementation as well as ideas. I suspect in practice the answer will b
oo much content included in the Next Gen standards to actually be taught in depth in PreK-12 schools. But I think the conte
elopment had occured for the present Iowa Core science standards, teachers would have been able to take them as deep a
will not comment.
iled from a parent perspective. Evolution taught as the only theory to be taught is a very disappointing approach and runs
in any depth in these standards and the absence of math is appalling. These standards will NOT prepare our students in Io
owledge rather than simply if one possesses the knowledge, I would hope the children would be confident enough to use it
which level we expect students to be at.
based expectations and therefore the "standard" is a minimum requirement. The NGSS is also great at including "creating
o much on minutiae and overlook broader concepts. At the secondary level we are not trying to create scientists, we have u
of the standards will help Iowa students to focus on career ready skills.
nd on the implementation of the standards. If they are implemented with fidelity, a good outcome will result. However, co
and diverse set of science topics. I do feel that without the reading and writing basics, the students will not get the full ben
e eliminated from Iowa Education system!!
sed on starting out with prior knowledge and experiences. Children do not come to Kindergarten with equal experiences an
ped for", "best case scenario" type of area. In talking with teachers as we have aligned our curriculum, conversations run t
em to have a great deal of breadth with important concepts represented in all of the elementary grades. The depth seems
ere needs to be more content in chemistry and physics.
ould say yes. Trying to actually implement all of them in a classroom during a school year will be quite difficult to accompli
f having students learn the material and apply it in a variety of ways. These standards look not only on what students nee
practices and I am not sure that I agree completely with the degree to which the NGSS puts on engineering. Many big idea
e and field of study once at the high school level. Plain and simple, once they are in high school no amount of forced educa
the standards.
lent sounding jargon and demonstrate exceptional skill at dodging the actual guidelines. They say students should model
e more clear.
fast I do not know if these standards will prepare our students.
ble levels for a middle school student to accomplish. I'm ok with preparing them, but the standards are not set as steps to p
n be applied to concepts that are valid in a contemporary context and beyond just science.
ath to knowledge for students to progress far enough to be our future innovators in the world.
ands to meet. I am currently striving to teach to the NGSS, but will not be able to meet all standards by the end of the yea
en they are fine.
entific thought that is currently lacking in too many science programs across the state.
neering practices all on one page allows the instructor to develop the breadth and depth of content. Since using NGSS I hav
e raising the bar and will better prepare the type of thinking that is expected post secondary.
e in the elementary setting to "dig in" and get more depth on science subjects.
hers to aspire to a high level of instruction but they do not meet student needs. Student "Will" will prepare them to be rea
ogy that colleges would expect students to have had some exposure to. Does not align with what the expectations of a col
s as well as performance standards. Part of unpacking is to combine both.
cepts (a list) of what needs to be taught.
um expectations. I'm hoping the college bound students get more than the items covered in the standards. These standar
roblem because the standards assume that students have retained knowledge for the previous year. I have given several
in the right direction. The only issue I have found with it is sometimes the resources to improve on these standards are som
gree that our students require a deeper understanding of these standards. My question is: Can we teach this many stand
NGSS are sufficient.
comment on this. I have not read how deep it is in each level.
are in high school require them to think in depth and to be able to state and defend a position backed by evidence. This is
mplete everything with my students, but I feel the depth of what we are supposed to teach is stated very clearly.
e is enough breadth
ngly believe that HOWEVER you phrase the standards or implement them, the same type of student will continue to do exc
ear after year, students will be able to get a deeper understanding of a few concepts, and see their relation to on another.
great improvement on the Iowa Core Science Standards.
r exposure with these standards and be better prepared to make the connections that we ask them to make in a higher ed
have been left off of the list including preparation for post-secondary schooling in the medical field.
changes in K-12 standards
uman growth systems emphasized. It is lumped under all living systems, which is fine. However, I know most of my teach
primary elementary especially, as their curriculum is typicially more heavily focused on reading and math skills, leaving les
rds higher standards will be achieved
But to prepare kids for careers, science needs to be woven into all studies so they can understand interactions and make co
as a lot of jobs will need that skill.
ble for certain strands of a topic
guidance they offer to me as a science teacher.
the information given for cross-curricular and standards that correlate between reading and math.
nly part of the topics like Newton's second law while leaving out the other laws of motion.
levels three and four of Webb's Depth of Knowledge chart, which encourages deeper thinking. I would actually need more
things such as classification and human anatomy are left out. The NGSS provides teachers and students an opportunity to
nce; I think this still relates to how each teacher implements each requirement.
g with so much information to cover
in one year to get a clear understanding of the concepts. Ridiculous
udents can't get a clear understanding with so much information to cover.
we found it to be aligned nicely in the elementary bands.
, but as a learner, I'm not sure if they will understand the value until later on in college, etc.
he students' heads?
require students to synthesize information for a specific purpose rather than just memorize it.
uipment to cover these standards. There will be little to not preparation for teachers as usual with change.
s on hands-on, student led instruction. Careers need to be a much stronger focus.
d towards scientific inquiry
e for ELA standards.
in the state of Iowa as they are currently written, there will be no challenge that a graduating high school senior cannot su
Iowa standards, the breadth and depth are wonderful concepts, but to "breadth" it in 180 days means the "depth" will suff
The work place will teach only what is needed and trying to make every student fully literate in science is a waste of their
ental, and ecological areas it seems somewhat locked into specific grade levels, and not exactly those grades where we ha
o be making these decisions.
asses, which would help prepare students even further. Being on the same page in upper level classes is key to universal s
etter job of covering material. NGSS covers topics that are extremely specific ex) understanding cell phone transmission.
he Standards the stakeholders are going to do what they have to do.
tent to give more time to create rigorous and relevant instruction so that students can deepen their understanding. There
n be covered with the classes taught in smaller schools.
ogy DCIs and very few DCIs related to motion.
rds are being taught at all levels the breadth of standards should be more manageable, currently they are to broad.
ecessary for students to be successful in AP science courses.
e cross cutting concepts, 8 science practices and connection to the common core in math and literacy
pecially considering that in our district all IEP students are currently being placed in the regular science classrooms.
ey are implemented accurately.
they are not the determining factors for college, and job success. We are here as professionals, and did not have these sta
developed rather than simply pushing students into STEM majors in the post secondary education. With out the specific sk
hool standards, I feel the content is appropriate for the grade level, and follows a logical progression to prepare students fo
ds promote rigor and deep levels learning.

ntent and go deeper into the concepts to make sure students get a clear, concise understanding of the subject matter. Wh
for the next level.
ecome better inquiry thinkers and problem solvers.
their alignment of curriculum because it is difficult to know if we are preparing our students for college. Each college teac
clarification/assessment sections.
e are currently using.
help students understand a wide variety of science. The depth of the content in NGSS, I strongly feel with improve student
ance standards that I do not agree EVERY child will be able to meet proficiency on. I understand the idea is to give them rig
pts for future life left out of the NGSS (most specifically human body and health).
Iowa Core currently doesn't offer so it would be great to be on the same page across Iowa.
ngineering and other STEM related fields.
ng. They are just laid out differently. NGSS doesn't appear to have any more rigor or drive than what is currently being used
teachers able to teach science topics appropriately.
l achieve the desired result. I think the expansion of advanced science education to include all children and not only high a
nesses when it comes to how prepared our students are to do the jobs required. The standards seem to give the students a
hem. Attempt to standardize nation-wide.
st tell teachers what need to be taught.
ncreasingly tougher, I feel like there is a huge gap between elementary science curriculum and middle school and another
udents I teach
depth in order to cover the breadth.
eneration science standards will prepare students for college and careers
ng taught to my elementary aged students. I think the NGSS will push the system to ackowledge the importance of science
ed nuclear chemistry or reaction kinetics for general college prep.
breadth, which is useful as it is impossible to cover the breadth of life and physical sciences. I think it will lend to deeper un
, but not too much that the students won't be able to grasp the concepts. The standards can be explored and presented in
ents, giving them skills, knowledge, and abilites to perform and excel in today'academic and career opportunities.
into the need to prepare all students, to give them basic yet potentially the skill, knowledge, and ability to perform and ex
ng concepts are a definite plus over the current ICC.
college. What we make them do probably is not going to stick with them for very long. Most students take Biology as a s
give any kind of direct correlation between high school standards and post secondary success. I believe the NGSS will giv
more than just gotta know it facts
students for advanced post-secondary options. However, how are the standards to be applied to the 'average' or 'below av
e which lead much better towards post high school education.
erformance expectation far exceed the set of inquiry standards we currently have.
d should know but also how they should know it and what they should be able to do with it. They aren't two or three compl
ant increase in content knowledge my many middle educators which is needed.
chool content should spiral back to some of the things middle school students were introduced to. It is assumed students le
dents needs to memorize. It's cross cutting concepts and much more.
nnot really comment on it, but the overview of life sciencess I read seems appropriate.
be addressed but I still feel it is rather confusing in the format of the document.
ntent in science will only continue to increase as we (as a world-wide society), but if we prepare students to work with the
s and science/engineering practices allows for a more in-depth study of science ideas and less emphasis on the teaching o
t cohesive to college planning since it is a "specialty" or elective course, not taken by a large number
ering concept will once again allow our students to be competitive with students from other states and nations.
students who pursue a career in science. I think the depth is beyond that needed for the students who will not pursue a ca
LL subject areas--it's hard to give adequate time for deep learning in each content.
ears or so and was continually amazed by how misinformed many students were about the facts of science that have been
re all vital in the breadth and depth of context the NGSS bring. These skills are all necessary in preparation of students for
into the topic will increase learning.

. Much more specific in content.
r applied science section.
will have more impact than any standard
concise and specific.
mount and assumed content. Students preparing for college do not need the same material as those with other post-secon
in 4 years of high school to take classes in depth if you are required to have the breadth of science too.
ther than knowing everything.
repare students for college and and careers. I do not agree with some of the emphasis with the content.
d from middle school years.
ow for other fundamental theories of origins and the history of the earth. Students should be given a broader base of learn
d knowledge necessary for advancement and achievement in later education and life in general.
hich leaves doesn't allow for much learning beyond the introductory phase of the content.
e-middle school) is a must! NGSS is very rigorous.
assroom that will prepare students for future. Time for labs, problem solving, etc. The standards do not guarantee, but ins
es in the face of established learning theory and brain development research. The reality is that the standards creators hav
rovided in the NGSS provides opportunity for rigor and definitely addresses the content listed.
have solid knowledge of their place in the world and how the world works, but it also gives them a base in how new technol
gor that is enforced.

over all these standards. If this is what is needed then 4 years of science should be a requirement, not a suggestion. Also m
decision. Not state wide nor federally mandated. Any parent and student not satisfied with the local standards can advoca
nation of content with science & engineering practices will help students develop critical thinking skills.
ork comes in helping students meet those standards. This is where I would like to see more professional development and
s, just those where there opportunities to educate about human impacts on our natural resources and what standards migh
have an impact
l approach the same as another. On paper it may mean one thing but in reality something else.
y will be thankful for later in their education
cluded in the Standards, but some important content areas are missing.
e to water but you can't make him drink? Science didn't get exciting and compelling for me until I was out of Iowa State.
echnology. They are pitifully lacking for chemistry, physics, and the natural sciences.
e. I am a college-level professor (though not in the sciences), and I would want entering students to know the topics on the
e Next Generation Science Standards will NOT prepare student for college, careers, and other post-secondary options becau
both skills and content!
rage' prepare kids for college?

eadth of the standards is overwhelming. As for depth, I feel that it is encouraged by learning activities/projects/simulations
ve than the Iowa Core.
lier so I won't restate it again Sorry.
n the current Iowa Core.
topic and hopefully better understand and apply the concepts.
e for depth of concepts that allow for application of those concepts as well as building the Science and Engineering Practice
materials and resources in our 6-8 buildings will allow a teacher to meet the breadth and depth of the content within NGSS
lp with preparation for college. Also teaching science through scientific method and not necessarily a textbook would also
ntent that previous standards rather than breadth. Unfortunately, previous standards focused on so many items that it was
s and the specific instructions of what it looks like when students are successful.
standard especially on the higher end due to course electives
areas and the are areas have performance expectations that students need to show proficiency in the different standards.
professionals in the field, have experienced as an educator, and have communicated to my by our local school board and c
xpectations at each level the depth is much greater than the Iowa Core. The incorporation of the science practice standard
udents well, but feel there are more topics that are just as important that students should be aware of also. It provides a go
uding content are well laid out and if students were proficient in assessments based on the performance expectations they
e expectations was decreased 30% by the final version, they are very dense. This means that to truly allow students time
set of guidelines and goals but it is ALWAYS up to the students to act on any goals.
for science, technology, engineering, or mathematics
eally tease out the depth component. Depth tends to be much more subjective than breadth. I often feel we underestimat
um is lacking significantly, which is where the majority of the career opportunities are expected in the future. The science f
etter in breadth and depth than our current science standards
repared. The standards are like a building code they are understandings all students should know but they are just a base.
er teachers. Exploring real world (PBL) experiences are much more content specific and rigorous than standards. Many of
reers, or post-secondary work depends on the child and the environment in which the child learns. The instruction that occ
lege, and if colleges alter their expecations.
ng, modeling, engineering, math, reading, etc. this allows the teacher to expand lessons greatly to meet the needs of all s
08 Iowa Core Science.
ards is not kid friendly, which would be useful.
hat the pros and cons are for this edcucational approach and there is little information about jow it is determined this appr
nly concern would be novice teachers -- make sure they have mentor help in understanding and implementing
n the human body for middle school. This is the time when most students have the most questions about this and they wou
& too deep. We can choose one or the other, not both. There just isn't enough time in middle school.
g our students to being prepared for the future.
ed; strong process skills included.

ote the idea that students learn best when they are provided to do what scientists actually do. The three dimensions--disc
and teachers prepare students for college. Standards are guides or requirements. Meeting a standard does not mean a s
which doesn't allow time for depth and in other areas the standards leave out topics that are typically covered.
standards. Could use more standards relating to this
ave to complete complex performance tasks that require cross-curricular skills.
rth Science expectations for high school level students. With a year of Physical Science and a year of Biology required, any
o be competitive in college and careers post secondary.
merging science. Specifically advancements in science, new disciplines (i.e.. Bioinformatics), and opportunities in the private
S since they came out and was on the NGSS committee in 2013 for Iowa. They eliminate the mile wide and inch deep philo
uire 4 years, "All Students All Standards" means all the standards SQUEEZED into 3 years, with some horribly development
anting to go into. Teach basics and then start introducing various avenues.
le to cover in required classes such as physical science. Not all students take advanced classes and so for the 9-12 you are
hat they need to know but I believe are a little weak in the breadth of what they cover. To me they are greatly scaled back
l help with critical thinking. The way the standards scaffold is nice with the larger topics being touched on in each content
teacher professional learning and ongoing support.
s to technology and engineering practices - along with key ideas/concepts
ducation world. Students are lucky to get one or two days a week of science. With a more rigorous set of standards teachers
ndards need to do so as well. Depth is a little harder to judge, as the depth would change based on grade level.
e asking us to cover too much material. It is difficult to find time to do innovative and creative projects in which students ha
! How are teachers going to be trained? Are we going to implement these at elementary and have them follow students up
n. They should totaly drop evolution, adaptation, and survival of the fittest. IT IS FLAT OUR WRONG God created all things i
er gets the information across
and what needs to be taught

about it very rigorous and real world related but it hard to from point A or point Z without explaining everything else to the
iteracy standards and the assessment boundaries.
strict science materials do not fit these standards. Where will that new content come from? Will my district have the financ
e depth for the high school standards assumes students have the base knowledge from middle school. This is not always t
h content here. I hope that teachers are given enough time to go through it, and enough time to adequately develop lesson
und in the core and some topics that are missing. The human body topics are missing and I think that is very important for
will be very difficult for teachers to add much for depth and still touch each required topic area.
s but the depth and breadth of the Earth Science is too deep and wide. The standards in Earth Science make it feel like th
he student needs to demonstrate rather than an 1" thick and 1 mile wide, or accentuating one topic over another
students to be able to investigate fewer concepts at a deeper level, which is the premise of the organization of the NGSS.
reas are not covered by the standards, but this will be true of any set of standards adopted by the state.
obil Teacher Academy this past summer with teachers from all over the country. The academy was focused on science, ma
ired for much of it.
its, I have found that the crosscutting that I can do allows for greater breadth and depth than the Iowa Core. I also can do
as in other standards allowing our students to receive a deeper understanding of fundamental science ideas.
udents, for instance, are not always at their developmental level (too hard) nor do they have the prerequisite knowledge fo
as indeed, developed in conjunction with business, post-secondary input, and scientists.
s would be constructing might not translate well to instruction in the college setting.
be covered in high school biology so all students have access to the material.
all can reach a level of competency is getting ridiculous. If you think NGSS prepares our students for college...you haven't b
p and science and engineering practices, the standards also develop skills and understandings that are not present in the io
much stronger than the current Iowa Science Standards

epare someone post-secondary. However, as a teacher, I feel it's nearly impossible to get through everything!!!!
low level of understanding or is ignored in the lower grades. This does not adequately prepare students for future, deeper
culum writers thought the same thing. Time will tell and there are often errors in judgement regarding education especially
clude the concept of intelligent design and or creationism. I am okay with including natural selection and evolution, but the
narrowly on a topic (like penguins) but on conceptual thinking (like cycles and patterns) that can be applied in multiple disc
be heavily weighted toward engineering. Creative thinking and problem solving are one thing, but not everyone is made to
s more on creating models and understanding the principals behind concepts instead of asking our students to memorize.
am concerned that at the elementary level it is unrealistic.

, but the NGSS cannot be implemented with fidelity in 180 days.
ion and critical thinking. These skills will allow teachers to dig deeper into the content and help students to be prepared fo
work for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas" upon which the NGSS are based, these
nd depth of the content of NGSS. Although some topics that used to be discussed in middle school science are no longer in
UCKING BIG
pts and core ideas is critical to teach science as BOTH a body of knowledge and a set of skills/dispositions.
content of the NGSS is OK. . . not great, but OK. However, some of the performance expectations are too specific. If the
e, but impossible to implement with fidelity in 180 days.
e wide and an inch deep every year...
f the standards. I think that NGSS is a positive step forward in regards to our current Iowa Core. I remain concerned that b
ses it is a good program -- students still need a fourth year for physics or advanced chemistry
at it ultimately asks high school students to do work that is appropriate for post-undergraduate study. High school teachers
demands for post-secondary options.
m the content that students need to know to be ready for college

I wish they would identify some standards which are for upper level and not necessarily for all students in the core (like th
ntent, but also the cause/effect/impact that science plays in our daily lives. Relevancy is important!
s do an excellent job of integrating the Natures of Science, Technology and Engineering which is completely missing in our
cience, including Earth Science which seemed to have been forgotten for a short time in schools. The physical science sec
ically and help them to learn valuable skills. Pretty much every standard in the middle school bands requires students to (1
er you will be able to cover them more thoroughly.

nd don't allow for the depth of instruction that I have provided in the past.
they are good.
ds especially towards post high school opportunities
necessarily do so. Achieving both is unlikely. To get into depth, one MUST limit breadth.
sis on skills as content.
o ask for more inquiry-based approaches to the content.
e time needed to fulfill these standards might be too big of a demand on their time and not allow for other electives that th
Especially when it is in the area of critical thinking skills (which are more of a focus in the NGSS)
treme given they are intended for ALL students, but if students meet these expectations they will be well prepared.
e science that everyone should know. It does seem though that some topics go into more depth than many students may b
m would be nice. our current books are 14 years old...science has changed a little in 14 years.
distinct progressions across the grade bands. Because NGSS has a much higher level of detail regarding concepts and skil
f picking out the most important things for students to know to prepare them for a higher education in science.
ow do we cover the gaps that are present currently with where we should be, especially with all the other demands on time
x and some of them are very non-descriptive. I understand what the standard is, but how to get them their takes a lot of t
s gives enough information about what is required without appearing overwhelming. You get the information you need with
issing that are important, they need to be included

ompare to the Iowa Core Curriculum.
e and country need to be better trained in these standards and know what is expected before making a comment on this m
ery prepared for post secondary options
ts the necessary experiences to be a productive citizen, there are some weaknesses, but the end weighs more than the me
s clearly delineate what is expected of students as they progress throughout the curriculum, and allow for interdisciplinary
asis on basic, fundamental skills. It is great that the standards expect every student to perform experiments, develop mod
ppropriate for students. Past standards focus far too heavily on the memorization of facts; NGSS has distilled what knowled
nd concept based science instruction, rather than just content literacy
ent areas of post-secondary education. In some ways, more so than Iowa Core OR Common Core.
ic strands, and the depth of the content appear to be in line with both current thinking in science and expectations of instit
r and relevance
mance expectations imply the complexity of instruction to be planned and executed. The complexity and intertwining of the
clear than the Iowa Core standards are currently. The NGSS standards will help us better prepare our students for college
mphasized in elementary - like earth concepts - and some that needs more specific mention - like electricity, magnets, soun
ibility up to the districts in specific curriculum
eacher can get through on a student mastery level.
hing a student would need to knwo to be successful.
for all post-secondary options.
similar to past models.

these standards will provide a great basis for every students science education.
ents to become life long learners. Adding more to the content creates more stress for the teacher as well as the students.
edge in chemistry, physics and biology prepare students for college level science
d be better prepared for college and life in general.
d concepts than on minutiae, allowing teachers to focus on fewer topics. Teachers can become comfortable teaching fewer
n the NGSS, but I'm not sure some topics are covered in enough depth
ver 90 minutes of reading plus 60 minutes of math plus interventions and still think you can cover science with breadth an
areas of health, such as body systems, anatomy, etc.
re too narrow
gss, but some of the standards are still highly factual more than conceptual (science is a conceptual study). However, the Io
readth is off base. There are a lot of topics not covered that are just as or more important than some that are covered.
nd act on their thinking. THAT is what I have to do everyday in my job and in life.
d except human body in K-5
tent appear to be adequate, but there is danger in the assumption that a student will retain the "background content" (ora
pecific about what needs to be taught at each grade level. I do like the incorporation of math, technology, and engineering
eting the expectations of most performance tasks requires students to use higher-order thinking to apply and use science
hese are expecting evidence based thinking and have cross cutting concepts. Neither of which are found in the current sta
ore than the Iowa Core. They are written at a deeper depth of knowledge. When mapping them out across grade levels it i
er of topics to cover. Will it be manageable for teachers to cover this many topics with the level of rigor that is expected w
ngest selling point. Iowa's current standards are broad, but lack the depth of the NGSS standards in terms of expecting stu
ds. It probably still has a little too much breadth and not enough depth, but it is much improved.
tent of immersion they will encounter if they choose to study science. A shallow depth and limited breadth does not give th
uality instruction is key in the readiness of students.
still too much to teach in the time available. An example is the expectation of teaching earth science concepts in high scho
k better understanding of key concepts is most important.
ween the Iowa Core and NGSS in an area I am familiar with (life science and heredity at the high school level). As a former
ALL, the NGSS is good preparation for students.
e of science. At first glance, they don't look deep, but when you consider all the information it takes to meet a standard, yo
currently have. If implemented with fidelity, science instruction at the middle school level would be greatly improved.
um and activities that would help prepare students for post secondary success. What activities would show success for tha
th but it will still be up to individual teachers to ensure that students are being challenged.
eep and a mile wide"
s essential to know for college, careers, and post-secondary options. There is many topics in science that could be covere
he background they have when get to the middle school level. Example, it is difficult to teach weathering and erosion if the
clear that having students ready for college/careers is the defining measure.
e expectations, they will have a very deep understanding of material needed in our 21st century world. It shows us a path
h more to elementary students than what they are learning now. This will do so much for the Iowa economy in the years to
y program in science using the NGSS as the basis will definitely be college & career ready.
ills required for students' future success. Although the content may not include every little thing teachers have "always tau
ds adequately prepare them for their next level of education, high school. The skills that we use to acquire that knowledge
ature and will go in a deeper conceptual learning progression compared to previous standards.
mple test question do NOT agree
e to connect science content to the real world and it also requires a depth of understanding to make those connections. I b
s possible for future careers in science
as strengthened the standards, as well as the integration of science and engineering principles (rather than having them a
ose from other states who have had the benefits of NGSS
as good as the science teachers in classrooms. Tragically, Iowa has diminished requirements for teaching science. For insta
ded, such as motion and chemical reaction part seems to be missing some areas.
experiments/research.
little time in the schedule to teach science, so using reading, writing and math Core standards with science provides oppo
ds kept inquiry as a separate piece, while the new standards integrate best-practices and other areas. Preparing college-a
we have coming into biology do not come with the background or previous knowledge to accomplish what they require. W
ntent, but overall I like the approach of the standards.
mphasis on Earth science.
children could benefit from the NGSS.
curriculum standards that includes all of these different ideas.
more application of concepts with deeper thinking required. Again, the environmental principles and stewardship applicatio
arent emphasis on an education
he right direction to prepare students to be college, career, and other postsecondary options
he situations may also arise that so much is intended for a year that there is not way to cover it all well. That would make
tting concepts, and practices. While there is not as much "breadth" as other standards, I think it more than satisfies what s
d the world around us and.
ing the underlying details. That is not possible.
social skills and not get frustrated with school. I understand that science is important but why do they need to be doing sc
ts well for post-secondary options and will help them become science literate students
all the content covered.
deep understanding of science concepts and relationships.

more depth and breadth as compared to the standards.
curriculum, but I think that the standards themselves will not prepare students for college, but the way that the students le
to be flexibility in teaching styles and activities associated with the content area.
etlands, woodlands and oak savannas. I remember learning about rainforests, zebras and exotic places but not a word was
s are not only to prepare students to do well on a unit or performance expectation, but to succeed past high school.
hat will ultimately determine their success post-high school (i.e. developing critical thinking skills, scientific literacy, constru
dary options
field of study or have learning difficulties. HS-PS2-5 and -6 Having the teacher demonstrate this or guide the students in g
ear elementary educator I am finding that there are often not enough resources to go through with the labs that I would lik
lobal warming, when the major cause of global warming is actually the sun. During its history, the temperature of the Eart
NGSS that teacher may deem important, but they can interpret them for their personal situation or opinion.
building upon previous knowledge that many students may not have.
exts. The DCI hit the essential core concepts with sufficient broadness to allow teachers to hit the core concepts at a profou
OT the best we can do for our students who have educational diversity. Can the standards be modified for students who hav
per science content for a technical career. Requiring more and more science credits is not necessarily what they need to s
depth since for example there are specific performance tasks they do to show their understanding. I feel students may do
of aligning it to NGSS.
mmon sense science topics will then be brushed over and I feel more students will lose interest in science.
equirements in math (higher outcome expectation) the content will not prepare students for post-secondary careers.
naffected, although alignment with the NGSS would still be advised.
ssons and instruction.

ollege or career.
ep science understanding. It is a curriculum that allows for growth of ideas that need to be tested and then researched. It p
mpt to meet the standards as presented by teachers, they should be prepared for college.
opposed to knowledge.
tter. kids need to be ready for the next step each year not dumbed down with survey of this class and survey of that class
are unemployable for lack of technical skills. Our non college jobs require a high level of technical skill which is changing at
earth science is covered. More than any specific topic, the most important thing is to get kids to understand the scientific p
d like to see current topics included - i.e. biotechnology.
derstanding coding/programming should be spoken to more, as its importance within "next generation science" is probably
hough they may be presented correctly.
nto their future courses. In DCI Physical Science, if mechanics is done correctly, students will have a strong enough backgro
broadened a little. They are very good at focusing more in the process of science and less on the small facts. They also wa
fraid of tracking, and I'm not saying that tracking is good, but differentiated levels of instruction work.
der courses in the areas of science technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) courses require manageable class siz
icks. By high school students are being asked to apply knowledge in new ways and to authentic situations. There is also m
Because, let's face it. Inquiry is a process (e.g. asking questions, gathering information, trying things out, analyzing data,
ext level and we should be focusing on skills they arrested losing.

nto specific courses would seem to require some restructuring in what is taught in what class.
emistry and Physics are significantly more important for students pursuing post-secondary science careers.
dards to adequately allow for true student thought. In a perfect world, they would be great, in our world they are simply a
y in college. Also, I think the depth is good considering more advanced classes are offered after each course.
ult concepts involved in science. In college, professors expect you to work through concepts, and don't give you a set of pr
know, not allowing them to do their own research in life and forming their own opinions.
ence Standards. However, I also feel like the depth has been considerably improved, supports, and is communicated much
th the child to BUILD on that foundation before leaving school.
der thinking tasks.

college?
No anatomy & physiology - how will children be prepped for a career in medicine if first exposure isn't until coll
what these standards are trying to accomplish, but they are to "deep", to much what I call to be "messy". Science is simple
gons too late and at what cost?
nt interest in some of the topics.
e and allow them to have a basis for science through college and careers.
e lack of specificity of definitions, methodology, and origins issues remains.
y are being met? Standardized testing is not the best evaluation that "the child has learned what the teacher has taught".
ince 1993 - that a change occurred in the level of preparation I observed in the incoming Freshman classes. Ability to conce
hat the materials include all the sciences - not over emphasizing any one or two areas.
h of the content.
-... he would be very challenged by some of the concepts for his grade (5th)
dents to college.
where my child attends even understand half the concepts here. It will depend on the instructor and the student.
ot limited in their thinking an open minded toward all approaches. Need to leave out dating of rocks since Carbon 13 base
e content (core ideas) are intimidated and confess to me they, "... would need to google that." On the other hand, the scie
districts depending on teachers strengths and interests. It needs to be more topic and content specific.
in grade levels.
er of college classes are taught.
rs develop the superior standards we once enjoyed in our public school systems
ut is not. 2. Key scientific terms such as "design" and "model" are ill defined
pics necessary to be successful in the college setting.
3. Does not teach essential knowledge har
LL students. For students who desire a science-related career or college major, she/he will want to take additional courses
ure. Community colleges will grow to help with the deficiencies.

pectations. Weaving social studies and science is great, just don't "dumb it down".
al science to be taught. In order to assure that every student meets these standards is tough unless districts can assure th
ctive classes for science, this will make students less motivated to take them.
whether rich and appropriate content will have been previously discussed with students, and whether, in an assessment fo
do not learn best in acookie cutter type curriculum.
s in students a passion to learn -- and practice -- science. By encouraging a hands on approach, the standards inspire stude
fundamental physical principles that govern the universe, (2) an understanding of materials and how we use and interact
effectively prepare students for higher level education and careers.
o help create a foundation of understanding that will lead to better understanding of concepts when students encounter th
he context of this question, I can give you my opinion, if the interest is there, they will find a way to educate themselves to
nce are considered. A middle school student will have a broad introduction.
ar feels a little low.
ducator to teach and assess in a years worth of time. As a teacher, I was completely overwhelmed thinking about the data
rue measures of the breadth and depth
ect in practice the answer will be "it depends". A good student will do well regardless, a poor teacher can drag students dow
12 schools. But I think the content included is valuable and important for students.
een able to take them as deep as they could go with students. Along with that, just because they are written to give bread
sappointing approach and runs counter to the ADM School District goal of developing critical thinkers
NOT prepare our students in Iowa for college or really anything after secondary school.
d be confident enough to use it, and see much further applications of the information as well.
so great at including "creating a model". This type of thinking has not been presented to students and it is hard for studen
g to create scientists, we have universities for that. Our goal should be to introduce students to science and give them an a
tcome will result. However, cost considerations and time restrictions usually put science last in terms of time spent in elem
students will not get the full benefit of this exposure.
arten with equal experiences and knowledge nor do they have families who are able to provide experiences and conversati
curriculum, conversations run the gamet of sincere soul searching to "let's just check that and have it done". Having a clea
tary grades. The depth seems sufficient to guide instruction for teachers without limiting the creativity of teachers working
ill be quite difficult to accomplish. Labs, experiments, inquiry all take TIME, and with the heavy addition of writing, the stan
not only on what students need to know now but provide experiences that will prepare students for the future.
s on engineering. Many big ideas are present that address both content and scientific literacy/thinking.
hool no amount of forced education necessarily creates well educated students.
hey say students should model concepts but lack the how and in many cases they miss the bulk of many concepts that the
ndards are not set as steps to prepare at appropriate level for the middle grades instead expect a level at which they woul
tandards by the end of the year.
content. Since using NGSS I have been able to develop more meaningful learning opportunities for my students. It is well o
Will" will prepare them to be ready for college, careers and other post-secondary options. Many students currently lack the
what the expectations of a college student would do or need.
n the standards. These standards are serving their purpose. If they were more detailed and specific (breadth and depth) it
ous year. I have given several pre-tests which determine prior knowledge and retention of key concepts. Less than 3% of
ove on these standards are sometimes hard to come by.

Can we teach this many standards to the this depth?
on backed by evidence. This is inquiry at its best.

s stated very clearly.
student will continue to do excellent, or average, or below average. It is all semantics, and what we really need is a social
ee their relation to on another.
sk them to make in a higher ed. setting.
wever, I know most of my teaching colleagues will not "go there" if they do not have to, especially at the elementary level.
ding and math skills, leaving less time for in-depth science study. In reality, elementary schedules do not allow for enough t
stand interactions and make connections.
ng. I would actually need more experience teaching from the NGSS to determine if the breadth is an appropriate amount t
and students an opportunity to learn conceptually rather than memorize isolated facts. Learning how to learn, not memor
al with change.
g high school senior cannot surpass.

ays means the "depth" will suffer and vice versa. I feel the breadth of most science standards is way too much. I feel mys
e in science is a waste of their time
actly those grades where we have offered curriculum in the past.
vel classes is key to universal success.
ding cell phone transmission.
pen their understanding. There is still a lot of information included, but the emphasis on science practices and crosscutting
ently they are to broad.
lar science classrooms.
als, and did not have these standards.

cation. With out the specific skills and understanding of how different science rely on each other those who enter STEM ma
gression to prepare students for higher learning later on.
nding of the subject matter. When too many concepts are covered, students end up with a shallow understanding--and ofte
s for college. Each college teaches what it wants in their classes and have little continuity between them.
ngly feel with improve student understanding, mainly with the engineering aspects of the NGSS.
and the idea is to give them rigor and relevance, but there are things in there that I do not teach until my physics class, an
han what is currently being used.
e all children and not only high achieving math students is a good start.
rds seem to give the students a good base of knowledge, but is lacking when it comes to teaching the students to think cri
and middle school and another jump from middle school to high school. As a result, most students find it difficult to adapt a
edge the importance of science.
. I think it will lend to deeper understanding, but then a new look should be taken at the ITED's.
n be explored and presented in many different ways, giving each child a chance to learn the content.
d career opportunities.
e, and ability to perform and excel in today's career fields.
ost students take Biology as a sophomore, they are not going to remember information or activities they did by the time the
ess. I believe the NGSS will give students a solid foundation for science knowledge and that is it.
ed to the 'average' or 'below average' science achieving students that won't progress to advanced post-secondary careers?
They aren't two or three completely different sets of standards they are all tied into one.
ed to. It is assumed students learned everything they need to know about the digestive and circulatory systems in middle
pare students to work with the content, problem solve, work in collaborative teams, we will have students who are better p
ss emphasis on the teaching of superficial science knowledge that is easily forgotten after the assessment.
states and nations.

udents who will not pursue a career in science and in particular students who are struggling with school overall.
facts of science that have been confirmed by the hard-work of scientists working since the Renaissance. If we continue to
in preparation of students for any level or post-secondary options.
as those with other post-secondary options (like working after high school). Using one document to say all will be prepared
science too.
the content.
e given a broader base of learning to prepare them for analytic thinking skills required for post-secondary pursuits.
dards do not guarantee, but instead the methods that the standards are employed do.
that the standards creators have laid out a set of expectations for Americas children that are grounded only in an antiquat
hem a base in how new technological practices, etc will play a part in how this world works and their place in the world.
ement, not a suggestion. Also more time is needed in a school year to accomplish these standards for every student.
the local standards can advocate for different standards or transfer to another school that more closely aligns with the sta
nking skills.
e professional development and resources - ideas for lessons, projects, assessment, etc., that will help students achieve the
urces and what standards might apply to develop learning about specific public works functions such as waste water treatm
until I was out of Iowa State.
dents to know the topics on the list.

r post-secondary options because all the student will be cut down to the same level and not allowed to explore their individ
g activities/projects/simulations that task students with applying the concepts in meaningful ways (and teachers can consu
cience and Engineering Practices and understanding of Crosscutting Concepts across the disciplines. The progressions of th
pth of the content within NGSS.

essarily a textbook would also prepare students!
ed on so many items that it was difficult for students to understand how all the pieces they were being taught fit together.
ncy in the different standards. It will be important for districts to have teachers work out what course will be primarily resp
by our local school board and community leaders. Performance expectations clarify the expected outcomes.
of the science practice standards and cross cutting concepts is very strong.
aware of also. It provides a good base though.

performance expectations they would be prepared for college, careers and post secondary options without a doubt. The app
hat to truly allow students time to UNDERSTAND the concepts and MASTER the science process skills, there are still a few t
h. I often feel we underestimate the ability of children to understand complex concepts and tend to run more shallow than
ted in the future. The science foundations are necessary but using the science in real world problem solving would be extr
know but they are just a base.

orous than standards. Many of these experiences are not explored to their fullest because of feeling so tied to standards.
earns. The instruction that occurs will depend on good professional development and the access of the teacher and class
reatly to meet the needs of all students and prepare them for real world challenges ahead.
t jow it is determined this approach is more effective (details on research studies and results obtained to determine the sta
and implementing
estions about this and they would not be getting it unless it is supplemental information.
do. The three dimensions--disciplinary core ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts--come tog
g a standard does not mean a student is prepared to learn at a college level. It means the maker of the standard thinks the
e typically covered.
a year of Biology required, anything that needs added to the curriculum seems to always occur in the Physical Science cla
and opportunities in the private sector.

e mile wide and inch deep philosophy that permeates current science education. They are sufficiently wide, but more impo
ith some horribly developmentally appropriate.
sses and so for the 9-12 you are asking us to teach all the standard before the finish 10th grade.
me they are greatly scaled back in the life sciences area.

ng touched on in each content area.
orous set of standards teachers will be better prepared to teach science.
sed on grade level.
ve projects in which students have the opportunity to apply what they have learned.
d have them follow students up instead of having high schoolers begin it after years of "doing" differently?
WRONG God created all things in 6 short days. Amen End of story.
plaining everything else to the students.
Will my district have the financial resources to update our materials?
dle school. This is not always the case, as some content is too deep to be taught in middle school. Some standards are wr
me to adequately develop lesson plans that allow for everything to be included and appropriately delivered.
think that is very important for all to know. With that said the load of standards is already big, so something would have to
arth Science make it feel like the only choice is to add a required Earth science course to the HS grad requirements. Adding
ne topic over another
the organization of the NGSS.
by the state.
my was focused on science, math, and engineering. We are in desperate need upping the rigor of elementary science by u
an the Iowa Core. I also can do more differentiation with learning abilities and learning styles.
al science ideas.
e the prerequisite knowledge for some of the content.
dents for college...you haven't been in college!

gs that are not present in the iowa core
hrough everything!!!!
are students for future, deeper understanding.
t regarding education especially if individuals not directly involved in educating are making decisions on how to teach. Wh
selection and evolution, but the content is incomplete without including other theories.
can be applied in multiple disciples. We do not want narrow-minded thinkers.
ng, but not everyone is made to be an engineer. It seems to hit some areas very deeply and others not at all.
ng our students to memorize. These models and principals can be applied to all sorts of science topics in college and beyo
help students to be prepared for challenges that will present themselves as they enter college and careers.
hich the NGSS are based, these new science standards are superior in every way to the Iowa Core by simple virtue of havi
school science are no longer included, these are topics that were never developmentally appropriate for middle school stu
ls/dispositions.
ctations are too specific. If the Iowa Core is for ALL students . . . well, some of the performance expectations are things tha
Core. I remain concerned that breath is accented over depth with this set of standards.
ate study. High school teachers are not prepared, nor are they given time, to implement the science _and_ engineering com
all students in the core (like the math standards currently do).
h is completely missing in our current standards. I think that the standards could push some teachers to change current pr
ools. The physical science section looks lacking, but the content covered in there prepares students adequately for college
ol bands requires students to (1) create and use a model to explain something, (2) use evidence to construct an argument,
allow for other electives that they might have a stronger interest or aptitude for. Some of these standards are too specific a
ey will be well prepared.

pth than many students may be capable of and at the same time, science courses in districts will need to be sure to exten
tail regarding concepts and skills this will allow for teachers to create a more unified progression with a in a singular school
ducation in science.
all the other demands on time in the science classroom?
o get them their takes a lot of thought and reflection on our end. I feel like a lot of the necessary skills are not included tha
t the information you need without having to sort through a bunch of other information
re making a comment on this matter.
e end weighs more than the means.

and allow for interdisciplinary discussions as the students grow and develop.
orm experiments, develop models, and master scientific inquiry, however, there has to be a demonstration of basic skills, b
GSS has distilled what knowledge is essential and goes into depth that can be grasped by students when they are being rig
ence and expectations of institutions of higher learning. The downside is the limited amount of time some school have or c
mplexity and intertwining of the three dimensions will provide students with critical thinking and reasoning skills.
repare our students for college and careers, especially focusing on the science and engineering skills/concepts.
- like electricity, magnets, sound,
eacher as well as the students. Due to the amount of standards it seems that there is little flexibility in students being allo
me comfortable teaching fewer topics in depth. This in turn will make it easier for teachers to show students how science i
cover science with breadth and depth?
nceptual study). However, the Iowa core is far more fact based and shallow.
an some that are covered.
the "background content" (orange box) in order to meet the performance expectations.
h, technology, and engineering.

nking to apply and use science concepts, as opposed to simple memorization of science facts or rote procedures. The NGS
ich are found in the current standards.
hem out across grade levels it is apparent how they build on each other in terms of learning progressions.
evel of rigor that is expected with these standards?
ndards in terms of expecting students to understand systems and develop skills in problem solving.
imited breadth does not give them the correct impression of what the will be getting into.
h science concepts in high school. Many schools teach this in 8th grade and it is nearly impossible to add without requiring
high school level). As a former high school teacher and research scientist with a Ph.D. the NGSS contains the depth of con
it takes to meet a standard, you realize each standard represents a significant chunk of content.
ould be greatly improved.
ties would show success for that standard?
n science that could be covered. What is "ESSENTIAL?"
h weathering and erosion if the students do not have a good grasp on the properties of the minerals that make up those ro
ntury world. It shows us a path go deeper in the content and bring in science and engineering principles.
e Iowa economy in the years to come. Every year we waiver, we are impeding our states' progress.
hing teachers have "always taught" I think the depth helps students reach deeper understanding and more effective scien
use to acquire that knowledge are the items I hope they utilize beyond their high school career in whatever field they choo
to make those connections. I believe they encourage more rigorous development of content than the current Iowa standar
les (rather than having them as a separate standard). I respect and support the extend of study and research done by the
for teaching science. For instance, science teachers holding an "All-Science Endorsement" are in a very poor position to pr
rds with science provides opportunity to learn science while learning reading/writing/math.
ther areas. Preparing college-and-career-ready students requires time for thinking, designing, problem-solving, solututions
ccomplish what they require. We do have to address many lower level topics before they can get to the NGSS topics.
ples and stewardship application is better developed. Crosscutting principles are identified.
er it all well. That would make what is taught pretty worthless, if the speed required to "cover" an area is so fast that no on
nk it more than satisfies what students will need to understand for post-secondary options.
why do they need to be doing science in these early grades when they still cannot read, write or spell. Seems as if we are t
but the way that the students learn to study them would prepare them. I do not see any next-level standards for those stud
xotic places but not a word was spoken about how Iowa has many endangered ecosystems like prairie and wetlands and wh
ucceed past high school.
skills, scientific literacy, constructing experiments, etc.)
e this or guide the students in groups to learn about the concepts is one thing, but asking the teacher to assess each individ
gh with the labs that I would like to produce. Also, a major factor that hinders our ability to master the content in the NGSS
ory, the temperature of the Earth has fluctuated much more than it has during the last hundred years. Ice ages have come
ation or opinion.
it the core concepts at a profound level, rather than covering a total textbook's range of material superficially.
e modified for students who have special challenges or who learn differently than others? Why are we not looking at standa
ecessarily what they need to succeed.
anding. I feel students may do research but not actually know much or understand critical concepts related to that standar
est in science.
post-secondary careers.
ested and then researched. It provides a rich science base of concepts.
s class and survey of that class. Does every student really need the same science background?
hnical skill which is changing at a dramatic rate. That rate will only increase as our societies ability to process information c
s to understand the scientific process and learn how to evaluate evidence to support ideas.
eneration science" is probably very understated.
l have a strong enough background in data analysis and relationships between variables to be prepared to handle electrici
on the small facts. They also want students to be engaging with their education not just memorizing.
s require manageable class sizes and good paying salaries. So enlarging class sizes and having pay freezes for educators
entic situations. There is also more emphasis on preparing students for the technology skills they will have to use in just ab
ing things out, analyzing data, etc.) and students will be more prepared for life after high school through immersion into NG
cience careers.
, in our world they are simply a dream that leaves many students behind and disillusioned with education.
fter each course.
s, and don't give you a set of problems that you need to study and test on at the end of each unit. They also expect studen
rts, and is communicated much more clearly in the NGSS. One of my favorite parts of the NGSS are the "assessment boun
e if first exposure isn't until college?
Only one science lab, rest is engineering. Engineering is NOT science. While comple
be "messy". Science is simple to teach like any thing else kids learn, they learn at the level they are at. The other challen
what the teacher has taught".

eshman classes. Ability to conceptualize, write in full sentences and even enthusiasm to tackle more challenging intellectua
uctor and the student.

of rocks since Carbon 13 based dating has too many assumptions that limit accuracy especially there is lack of consensus
t." On the other hand, the science and engineering practices and the cross-cutting concepts are familiar to most adults an
ent specific.
teach essential knowledge hard enough; this concept in given a back seat in lieu of recommended practices. This will not
want to take additional courses specific to her/his interests. However, as a biochemist/molecular biologist, the earth/space a
gh unless districts can assure that all students are taking a chemistry, physics, earth science and a biology class (in 3 year
d whether, in an assessment focused environment, the content will be given its due.
ach, the standards inspire students to explore subjects deeply as well, which is supported by the rigorous, internationally b
s and how we use and interact with matter, (3) a firm understanding of biological processes, including evolution and genet
pts when students encounter these topics in a more challenging setting and will create greater scientific literacy than simp
way to educate themselves to a deep degree. All they need is a library card. It does no good to waste these breadth and d
elmed thinking about the data collection, thinking about how to fit this all in, etc. As all educators know, it is better to dig d
r teacher can drag students down regardless of what standards say should be taught.
Overall, the list of standards seems
e they are written to give breadth and depth of content does not mean that our students will be college and career ready be
udents and it is hard for students to problem solve and create a model to demonstrate learning.
to science and give them an appreciation for how it works.
st in terms of time spent in elementary schools. It doesn't matter what standards there are if they can't be or are not imple
de experiences and conversation to support the child's learning and curiosity. Learning has to relate to a child's life experie
nd have it done". Having a clear spread sheet that teachers can fill out through out the year would be a great tool to use in
e creativity of teachers working with a variety of ability levels in their classes.
avy addition of writing, the standards are now heavily time stressed.
ents for the future.

y/thinking.
bulk of many concepts that the Iowa Core includes. Therefore, the teacher could simply have the student complete a mode
pect a level at which they would be leaving to college the following year. Too much infuses on modeling
ties for my students. It is well organized and allows or the rigor of instruction.
any students currently lack the motivation to do well in science and are not being held accountable for the choices they ma
specific (breadth and depth) it would restrict the science teachers more than it would help the students.
ey concepts. Less than 3% of my students have retained 70% of the knowledge that NGSS standards assume they have a
what we really need is a social change curriculum...educational curriculum with have a miniscule impact of preparation for
ecially at the elementary level. With the extensive costs of health care, human diseases and illness on the rise, the studen
edules do not allow for enough time in science instruction to meet the NGSS standards.
adth is an appropriate amount to expect students to learn in a year.

arning how to learn, not memorize, is much more valuable in future endeavors.
ds is way too much. I feel myself rushing to get through all the stuff required which in turn does not allow mastery (depth)
nce practices and crosscutting concepts makes it more holistic.
other those who enter STEM majors are not prepared to think critically enough to master the skills necessary for meaningfu
shallow understanding--and often do not totally comprehend the subject matter.
etween them.
teach until my physics class, and not everyone takes physics.
aching the students to think critically, problem-solve, and use engineering skills. Some of the students end up know a lot o
udents find it difficult to adapt and get discouraged in pursuing a career in science. I recommend that the elementary and m
tivities they did by the time they get to college.
vanced post-secondary careers? Are we going to lock out these 'average' science kids from these classes? When I think of
d circulatory systems in middle school as it is excluded in the high school content. The same is to be said for taxonomy and
have students who are better prepared to encounter new and unique situations. The content student encounter in order to
he assessment.
with school overall.
Renaissance. If we continue to elect political leaders who believe in a young earth, who disregard the great body of facts of
ment to say all will be prepared must assume that all are doing the exact same things after high school and that their abilit
ost-secondary pursuits.
re grounded only in an antiquated conception of education and their personal preferences. And their followers, bedazzled b
and their place in the world.
ndards for every student.

more closely aligns with the standards wanted.
t will help students achieve the standards.

ons such as waste water treatment.
t allowed to explore their individual talents and abilities and interests that will inspire them to continue their education and
ways (and teachers can consult the engineering design standards to help with this).
ciplines. The progressions of the 3 dimensions of NGSS, if the shifts in teaching and curriculum needed to implement well a
were being taught fit together. By limiting the focus to the key concepts and the overlap of science disciplines as well as e
hat course will be primarily responsible for those standards. It will also still come down to students' learning. However, thi
ected outcomes.
ptions without a doubt. The application of knowledge to knew situations leads to deeper understandings of the concepts
ess skills, there are still a few too many in some of the grade levels. It would be beneficial to have curriculum experts criti
tend to run more shallow than not as a result. In some instances it may be that the instructor is unsure of the concepts th
problem solving would be extremely beneficial. The younger the better.
f feeling so tied to standards.

ccess of the teacher and class to resources that will challenge student thinking. Less and taught well with the time to use p
s obtained to determine the statistics on the effectiveness are needed) Also there is no explanation as to how this will impa
rosscutting concepts--come together in the performance expectations.

maker of the standard thinks they may be. Science at the next level is changing, and can meeting a standard really prepare
ccur in the Physical Science class. This is too much for freshmen to get the depth they need (not that the age can't handle
sufficiently wide, but more importantly they are deeper, which allows students to conceptually understand a topic rather th
g" differently?
school. Some standards are written in such a vague manner that even science teacher have difficulty interpreting exactly
ately delivered.
g, so something would have to be removed or some of the topics shortened to make room for human body. Another idea is
HS grad requirements. Adding an Earth Science course would take away the opportunities for students to take advanced
gor of elementary science by using NGSS.
decisions on how to teach. While I saw a variety of careers and many within education, I didn't see evidence (for or agains
others not at all.

ence topics in college and beyond instead of rote memorization that is sometimes currently presented.
ge and careers.
a Core by simple virtue of having more resources in their creation. This allows better research and validation of that resea
ppropriate for middle school students. The reduced number of concepts required by NGSS allows teachers to address stand
nce expectations are things that ALL students don't need. As an adult who is interested in science, I don't need some of th
e science _and_ engineering components of the standards.
e teachers to change current practices.

students adequately for college and careers. It is much better than the standards we have now.
ence to construct an argument, or (3) design an experiment, or (4) analyze data. These things are all very important life sk
ese standards are too specific and would really only be applicable for those interested in science-related careers. Most stud
ts will need to be sure to extend the curriculum beyond what is written in NGSS for our higher achieving students heading
ssion with a in a singular school.
ssary skills are not included that are needed to master the standard.
demonstration of basic skills, before it is possible to build on the abstract.

udents when they are being rigorously taught.
t of time some school have or choose to spend with science.
and reasoning skills.

ing skills/concepts.
flexibility in students being allowed to pursue their passions in the areas of science.
to show students how science is done, ie. what the scientific process is, rather than asking students to memorize too many
s or rote procedures. The NGSS are light-years ahead of the current Iowa Core science standards in this regard.
The NG
progressions.
ossible to add without requiring another science class. This cuts back on elective enrollment and career preparation.
NGSS contains the depth of content that is critical to prepare students for college, careers, and other post-secondary option
minerals that make up those rocks. The same holds true for the rock cycle and then going into plate tectonics. There is alm
ng principles.
nding and more effective science reasoning.

reer in whatever field they choose.
t than the current Iowa standards.
study and research done by the development team.
are in a very poor position to promote the noble ends that the NGSS address. And the State permitting elementary teacher
ng, problem-solving, solututions-based planning, and that can best be achieve my deep experience rather than wide exper
n get to the NGSS topics.
er" an area is so fast that no one really understands the standards in such a way that they can understand and apply them
e or spell. Seems as if we are trying to force learning to ages that is not appropriate. Did anyone ask the opinion of a child
t-level standards for those students that exceed the standards for their band. The breadth looks wide, but I am unsure abou
ike prairie and wetlands and what they do to make our environment healthier.
e teacher to assess each individual student regarding mastery I feel is unreasonable. HS-LS3-1 The idea of learning the ba
master the content in the NGSS is time. We have a mandatory 90 minute block for reading, a mandatory 60 minute block
red years. Ice ages have come and gone and will continue to do so, whether man thinks he is powerful enough to affect th
terial superficially.
hy are we not looking at standard models from other states who score HIGER than Iowa....instead of experimental standard
oncepts related to that standard.
ability to process information continues to accelerate with the use of more powerful computer processing capacity. At a mi
be prepared to handle electricity and magnetism at the next level. Ultimately AP College Board broke up the AP Physics cl
ving pay freezes for educators in IOWA is not a good way to go about promoting your NGSS plan.
s they will have to use in just about any career choice in the future,
hool through immersion into NGSS with its focus on inquiry.
with education.
h unit. They also expect students to have study and problem solving skills in place before entering college, something they
GSS are the "assessment boundaries" which give teachers guidance on how far and how deeply to teach/assess a concept
g is NOT science. While complementary, we need to be ensuring science is covered in the precious time our teachers get t
l they are at. The other challenge is you have teachers who have no idea how to "teach" science. Many teachers have see
kle more challenging intellectual endeavors declined. It is not difficult to attribute those observation, in part, to the "No chi
cially there is lack of consensus on the age of rocks and the earth/ universe.
s are familiar to most adults and they don't seem phased by them. Granted these adults are all college graduates. Upon s
mended practices. This will not set our kids up for scientific success.
4. Assessment ceilings are placed too low, making it
ular biologist, the earth/space and physics components would have been more than enough to prepare me for college. This
e and a biology class (in 3 years). Also, with some of the newer standards, there is so much background that needs to be t
y the rigorous, internationally benchmarked standards.

, including evolution and genetics, and (4) the mathematical background needed to model all of these fields.
ter scientific literacy than simply "covering more facts".
d to waste these breadth and depth details if they don't have the desire or readiness to learn. Every child has different deg
cators know, it is better to dig deep than to try to cover numerous topics over a short amount of time (and yes, a school ye
rall, the list of standards seems reasonable, but again implementation is everything. Will students be required to actually d
be college and career ready because of the standards.
if they can't be or are not implemented correctly.
to relate to a child's life experiences for there to be relevance, interest and a desire to learn. Learning has to be fun for chil
r would be a great tool to use in alignment and content. I'm not requesting an "administrator or legislator language" based
e the student complete a model of DNA and assume they know it. However, I would argue, they , should clearly define the
on modeling
untable for the choices they make.
the students.
standards assume they have acquired.
iscule impact of preparation for post-high school education and being a community citizen. Thank you for asking.
d illness on the rise, the students need to know the functions of their OWN bodies, not just other animals. Human anatomy
does not allow mastery (depth) on many subjects.
skills necessary for meaningful employment.
he students end up know a lot of facts and definitions, but they can't innovate, invent, or use their creativity to engineer ne
mend that the elementary and middle school curriculums get more scrutiny so topics like engineering, computer programm
these classes? When I think of any plans for adopting education standards, I have the impression that they apply to *all* s
is to be said for taxonomy and knowledge about algae and protozoa. It appears the standard's content was packaged for a
t student encounter in order to develop this preparedness will undoubtedly stay with them for a lifetime instead of simply u
egard the great body of facts of evolutionary biology, and who fail to see humans as part of the natural world and governed
high school and that their ability is the same. History and research might show that assumption to be incorrect.
And their followers, bedazzled by the standards length and breadth, illusion of depth, and elitist aura, have fallen into line a
o continue their education and have a fulfilling career.
um needed to implement well are made will prepare our students for college, careers and being science literate adults.
science disciplines as well as engineering and technology, students will see the forest instead of each tree. In addition, in
udents' learning. However, this will provide the opportunities for them to be prepared.
derstandings of the concepts

o have curriculum experts critically evaluate and estimate time needed to provide students with enough time to effectively
tor is unsure of the concepts themselves and are cautious about going too deep into a subject. More so in STEM than else
ught well with the time to use project based learning will have a much more lasting effect than a document of 100 standar
anation as to how this will impact more than the average student such as students that require different methods to be suc
eeting a standard really prepare them for the unknown? Maybe. It is probably better than the standards previously held.
d (not that the age can't handle any of the material). Biology has traditionally been left alone, and teachers are expected t
lly understand a topic rather than superficially.
e difficulty interpreting exactly what should be taught. If this should be so inquiry focused, perhaps include some ideas for
or human body. Another idea is to require 4 years of high school science and have all students take anatomy as a requirem
for students to take advanced science courses. Stick with the Iowa Core Earth Science standards.
dn't see evidence (for or against) to know if science educators were actively involved in heading up this effort. Surely scien
presented.
rch and validation of that research with data on student outcomes.
It might appear some familiar ideas are missing, but t
ows teachers to address standards with greater depth, thereby ensuring that students have a better opportunity for greate
cience, I don't need some of the performance expectations. (e.g. I've never used the mathematical equation for Coulombs
gs are all very important life skills to develop and we are focusing on these 4 themes in our science classes at our school, a
ence-related careers. Most students do not need this level of understanding in these topics to be successful outside of high
er achieving students heading toward a math, science, engineering related career. If NGSS is adopted and school districts i
tudents to memorize too many unconnected facts. In the long run this will serve students well as they will be better equipp
dards in this regard.
The NGSS are less broad than the current Iowa Core standards. At the high school level, the NGSS
and career preparation.
and other post-secondary options.
to plate tectonics. There is almost to much information in the standards and you are going to have to pick which ones that
permitting elementary teachers to teach up into Middle School is a travesty! Neither group of teachers possesses the scien
erience rather than wide experiences that are low-level and based on fact memorization.
can understand and apply them.
nyone ask the opinion of a child psychologist to see if when their brains are developed enough to understand the content in
ooks wide, but I am unsure about the depth.
3-1 The idea of learning the basic content re. DNA/chromosomes is one thing, but I feel assessing students on their ability
a mandatory 60 minute block for math (which often needs more time), there must be time for writing (which doesn't even
is powerful enough to affect the climate or not. As I see it, this is a politically motivated attempt to get the next generatio
stead of experimental standards that are not proven? NGSS is banking our children's futures on unproven standards that we
ter processing capacity. At a minimum we must prepare student/future citizens to be able to understand these changes. An
oard broke up the AP Physics class into two separate years in order to go more in depth.
ntering college, something they should not only work on at school, but be demonstrated by parents as well.
eply to teach/assess a concept.
precious time our teachers get to teach.
ience. Many teachers have seen these new "standards" and say WOW this is overwhelming. They feel it is to deep. They
ervation, in part, to the "No child left behind" programs. Many of us at the College level believe that it was a de facto "dum
e all college graduates. Upon showing these standards to a college professor (a biologist), he remarked that if high school
s are placed too low, making it difficult for teachers with not a lot of time to teach a bunch of standards the latitude to go a
to prepare me for college. This basic preparation would have given me the foundation in all sciences that I needed for my
background that needs to be taught in order to get to the standard that it takes time. For example, in our district HS-PS2-
all of these fields.
n. Every child has different degrees of comprehension. I am against the idea of pumping our tax dollars into taking tests an
nt of time (and yes, a school year really is a short amount of time). If you want to make kids college and career ready, teac
udents be required to actually demonstrate the ability to think, to apply what is learned, and to show true understanding, a
. Learning has to be fun for children; they are not bottles to be filled, they are candles to be lit!
or or legislator language" based document - instead an easy to use document that true science teachers can use to docum
they , should clearly define the fact that students should know the structure, function, uses and advancements in DNA. Th
Thank you for asking.
ther animals. Human anatomy and body systems is science!!!! We can not expect them to learn it just from other health
e their creativity to engineer new things or figure things out.
gineering, computer programming etc get just as much attention as arts, music, and sports.
ession that they apply to *all* students. I am struggling how Iowa will implement depth-of-content in the standards across
d's content was packaged for advanced science students rather for general education students. Students should spend mo
or a lifetime instead of simply until the next test is completed.
the natural world and governed by its laws, then something is going terribly wrong in how these students are being taught
tion to be incorrect.
tist aura, have fallen into line as if lured by the Pied Piper of Hamelin.
eing science literate adults.
ad of each tree. In addition, in order to fully understand what they are learning, students will learn many of the same conc
with enough time to effectively engage in learning activities for each standard.
ect. More so in STEM than elsewhere.
han a document of 100 standards.
uire different methods to be successful in the academic setting.
he standards previously held.
e, and teachers are expected to teach physical and Earth in the same year. Its not fair to the freshmen.
perhaps include some ideas for activities that could help meet the standard. If we are not sure what exactly the standard i
ts take anatomy as a requirement.
ding up this effort. Surely science-related business involvement and involvement from the leading scientists is key but edu
amiliar ideas are missing, but they are still present if some standards are interpreted in that fashion rather than spelling ou
a better opportunity for greater understanding of fundamental concepts, which leads to better understanding of new conc
ematical equation for Coulombs Law)
science classes at our school, and using the content to get there.
to be successful outside of high school.
s adopted and school districts implement it effectively, then the answer would be a resounding yes.
ell as they will be better equipped to approach problems scientifically.
he high school level, the NGSS is broad enough to adequately cover what should be expected of all students in introductory
o have to pick which ones that you believe are the most important. There is a lot of information to get through and it assu
of teachers possesses the science content understanding or understanding of the nature of science and technology to prom
gh to understand the content in the standards? Learning needs to be fun in order for kids to continue to higher education,
essing students on their ability to ask questions is unnecessary and not time well spent. The brighter students will naturall
for writing (which doesn't even account for time we should be spending on handwriting). Add in 25 minutes a day for spec
empt to get the next generation of voters to punish various industries and businesses by requiring them to pay higher taxe
on unproven standards that we HOPE work....or that we WANT to work?? Don't our kids deserve better than this? Iowa us
understand these changes. And hopefully to able to advance these technological and scientific innovations.
parents as well.
g. They feel it is to deep. They are going to keep teaching the way they have, which is what has been going on for years.
eve that it was a de facto "dumbing down" of the curriculum.
he remarked that if high school students could do all of this they wouldn't really need to go to college. I think it is importan
of standards the latitude to go above and beyond. This is a recipe for mediocrity, in my opinion.
sciences that I needed for my more advanced biology and chemistry courses.
example, in our district HS-PS2-4 and HS-PS4-2 are completely new and require a lot of pre-teaching before our students ca
r tax dollars into taking tests and giving every age a "core" or "standard" for science.
college and career ready, teach them how to research, dig deep, use 21st century skills to project plan, rather than trying
to show true understanding, and how will this be measured, or will they merely need to show that they "understand" som
nce teachers can use to document for themselves what they are doing to meet content requirements.
and advancements in DNA. The NGSS also adds 6th grade curriculum to the life science curriculum and now that we have
learn it just from other health classes. Health classes focus more on taking care of our bodies, emotional, mental and soc
ontent in the standards across the 3 middle school and the four high school grades aggregated in the NGSS.
ents. Students should spend more time on less content and learn the material is such a way that is applicable in their every
hese students are being taught science, and how effective the science standards are.
ll learn many of the same concepts as they would learn before, however, they would be learning them with context, which
he freshmen.
ure what exactly the standard is saying, how can we best teach our students?
eading scientists is key but educators are essential. Involvement from politicians is usually the area will make an idea of h
fashion rather than spelling out specifically. At the very least the Iowa Core standards are very vague in many areas.
tter understanding of new concepts in the future.
ed of all students in introductory physical science and biology courses, but is not broad enough to provide standards that w
ation to get through and it assumes that the student is developmentally ready to make the leap from concrete to abstract c
science and technology to promote the conceptual understandings (as opposed to mere recall of information) that appear
o continue to higher education, we cannot burn them out before they even get to high school. I am not saying we should n
e brighter students will naturally ask questions but there would be some students who would not be at the level where they
dd in 25 minutes a day for specials, one hour gone for lunch/recess, another 15 minutes gone for another recess, and we a
quiring them to pay higher taxes and incur greater costs trying to comply with ever burdensome governmental regulations
serve better than this? Iowa used to be #1 in education...doesn't that matter any more? NGSS and Common Core sure are
tific innovations.
t has been going on for years. Standards change but the teaching methods do not. In these standards you have forgotten
o college. I think it is important to remember that these standards are provided to help teachers decide what to assess at
eaching before our students can even handle what the standard is asking.
project plan, rather than trying to cover an incredibly large amount of material in a short amount of time...
ow that they "understand" something on a multiple choice, standardized test?
rriculum and now that we have middle school teachers that lack science degrees teaching science they do not teach the c
ies, emotional, mental and social health and a myriad of other "health" topics. Please keep the science of the human body
ted in the NGSS.
that is applicable in their everyday life.
ning them with context, which will be more meaningful.
the area will make an idea of how to teach...a failure.
very vague in many areas.
gh to provide standards that would be expected in an upper-level chemistry or physics course. I don't have a problem with
eap from concrete to abstract concepts. There is a lot of material to cover in these standards.
all of information) that appear in the NGSS.
ol. I am not saying we should not challenge them but we should not be over challenging them to a point that they hate sch
d not be at the level where they would know what questions to ask. Elem.: It seems that some of the standards are too in d
ne for another recess, and we are left with roughly 30 minutes a day for Social Studies or Science. Your legislation is puttin
ome governmental regulations.
GSS and Common Core sure aren't going to get us there.
e standards you have forgotten that in order to accomplish these "goals" the students need a "foundation" of knowledge to
chers decide what to assess at given grade levels. Hopefully the state will also develop assessments based on these stand
ount of time...
cience they do not teach the content well and do a cutesy project. They don't know what content to cover. This does not
the science of the human body in SCIENCE class!!
se. I don't have a problem with this if it is assumed that standards in these upper-level science classes would go beyond th
m to a point that they hate school.
me of the standards are too in depth for that grade level. 4-ESS3-2 and 3-5 ETS1-3 It seems that this would be a rather tim
ence. Your legislation is putting such a time restraint on what we are able to do and when that it is becoming harder and h
a "foundation" of knowledge to build on and grow from in order to accomplish what these standards want them too. You m
essments based on these standards and this in turn will drive instructional planning on the part of the teachers.
ontent to cover. This does not prepare students for college or careers.
nce classes would go beyond the NGSS.
s that this would be a rather time-consuming project and that such projects may require considerable parental involvement
hat it is becoming harder and harder to master our core concepts and teach with the vigor that the students deserve.
andards want them too. You must also remember that some students will not be able to fit into these standards of learning
part of the teachers.
siderable parental involvement if done individually. 4-PS3-4 Again it seems that this might be a good idea for a classroom
hat the students deserve.
nto these standards of learning for they learn in different ways or levels to their grade level. Simplify, cut to the chase, wr
be a good idea for a classroom project as a whole, with discussion of conversion of energy, but should not be required for i
. Simplify, cut to the chase, write it up in plain English, leave out the "fluffy stuff", as I call it. These standards are too brea
but should not be required for individual assessment. In my opinion, some of these standards seem unrealistic; the focus s
t. These standards are too breadth and have to much depth of content. You are over depthing something simple as scienc
ds seem unrealistic; the focus should be on more basic reading/language arts and math skills at the K-2 and 3-5 levels.
ing something simple as science. That can be taught in a simple, fun and hands on way that will engage students into lear
s at the K-2 and 3-5 levels.
t will engage students into learning and wanting to learn more. But you do have to start them young. But some will alway
em young. But some will always not like science until you connect it with their life in some way. Start with a school ground
way. Start with a school grounds and look at the life. Ask the students where do they find life, why is it living there, why is
fe, why is it living there, why is it not living other places on the school grounds. It gets them engaged and hands on in the
m engaged and hands on in their own back yard or in this case school yard. It will help them then explore the parts of a ha
m then explore the parts of a habitat, food chains, food webs, and more. Make science simple and fun and kids will learn an
e and fun and kids will learn and so will adults. These standards are to deep and complicated for me to understand.
ed for me to understand.
What are the major strengths of the Next Generation Science Standards?
Answer Options
Response Count
answered question
skipped question
941
941
1582
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a.
The best intere a.
a.
a.
Local School B b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
College of Educa.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
f. Student
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
f. Student
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
g. Community member
h. Business
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
Out of school a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a, c, d (retired b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
retired teacher b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
g. Community member
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
Informal Educa a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Basically at on b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
g. Community member
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a.
a.
Literacy Coach a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Naturalist
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Nonformal educa.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Work in STEM j b.
a.
a.
Parent,Environ a.
b.
Naturalist
a.
a.
naturalist
a.
Environmental a.
a.
naturalist, Cou a.
a.
b.
County Conserva.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
Non-formal Edua.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
d. Higher Education
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
h. Business
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a.
b.
b.
b.
student teache a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
grandparent
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Retired now butb.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
Parent and edu a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
homeschoolin a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Substittute tea b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Teacher and P a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Teacher and paa.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Non-formal edua.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
h. Business
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Museum & Aquar
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Science Instruca.
a.
County Conserva.
a.
a.
Museum and Aqa.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
g. Community member
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
County Environa.
environmental ea.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Both teacher a a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
g. Community member
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Environmental a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Environmental a.
Non-formal educ
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
nonformal educa
a.
a.
Public Works O a.
b.
b.
Professional En b.
Non-formal Edua.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
g. Community member
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
Nonformal educa. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
Someone who wo
b. No
a. Yes
b. No
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Teacher and paa. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
educational co a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
In the educatio b.
Going to schoolb.
Going to schoola.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
I am a homosexb.
iiuujj
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
I am a parent ob.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
school district a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
parent & teach a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Support scienc a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
I am both a teaa.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
What are the major strengths of

Standards?
they are relevant and research based
The major strength is that these standards were developed with the input of the best science currently availabl
Their attempt to promote conceptual understanding of fundamental science ideas and link them to application.
I liked them and felt they were appropriate for today's classroom.
Ties to Math and ELA Standards The NGSS include performance expectations and connections to disciplinary co
They are clear and they contain links to other standard areas.
Provide the skills we need our students to have to be our next generation problem solvers.
it's seems hard.
All schoolsteaching high order thinking and applying concepts.
I like the inclusion of engineering in the Standards. I do believe we need to continue to encourage and push stu
The major strengths of the Next Generation Science Standards are that they encourage students to problem so
layout is user friendly for educators with strong science knowledge and for new educators with limited science
The cross-curricular articulation, the definition of boundaries on the assessments, and the cross-cutting concep
They are challenging and rigourous
knowing that all students will gain a solid understanding of science concepts. I feel it is better at encouraging s
The strengths of the NGSS are the way they are organized and the fact that they tie specific concepts to each g
More organized!
Inquiry-based education.
Students are engaged. Uses great terminology, not understands and applies.
Scientific thinking, or the process is given more emphasis, not the rote memorization of facts.
They don't include the necessary physics aporia chemistry basics
They are supported by most major organizations that are affiliated with the teaching of science. They are comp
It covers a lot of content. It is somewhat flexible.
Precise explanations of what students should know and be able to do. They are being adopted nationally, so lo
--The clear categories for each level of learning --The comprehensiveness over time --The relevance for studen
Glad to see some structure and design. Teachers always appreciate direction. Having the standards sequenced
Including the engineering practices is a major strength
There are a lot.
Very detailed and provides a lot of information for teachers, parents and community.
Not as vague as the old standards. Organized well. More hands on and student centered.
It is user friendly by giving concepts and then breaking them down to a point where specific examples are given
Cross cutting through disciplines and a better progression of concepts
Great guidance as to what should be taught
The extensive concepts expected to be covered are impressive. The expectations that science is a significant p
Applicable for college bound students
Depth of concepts The flexibility of standards Incorporation of Crosscutting Concepts, Science Practices, and N
One of the strengths is that elementary age children will begin learning about science at a young age, however
science is emphasized and is integrated into the curriculum
Ensuring that significant topics are covered and sequentially, scaffolding upon previous grade levels.
They cover the most important concepts well; encourages teachers to strive for concept understanding rather t
Sorry but at this point in time I do not see too many strengths with any standards developed in conjunction with
Rigor of study - connections to ELA and Mathematics - how the standards are organized
I don't see any strengths.
It deals more with student centered learning, problem solving and inquiry based instruction.
The philosophy that conceptual big ideas and relationships are important and the philosophy that the practices
Having guidelines to follow.

For those who have a strong interest in science, they can find it. The rest of the students don't.
They are written to encourage inquiry and hands on activities.
Student engagement in the learning process while promoting a deeper understanding of scientific principles an
its application to a science and engineering based world
It forces teachers to change the way they are teaching.
Topical organization.
It is easy to understand and well organized
They outline what should be understood and known in each grade level or grade "band" about science. There a
Easy to read, well organized, helps to focus on objective writing.
In depth learning of Science material.
The organization, big ideas, and relationships between DCI and Cross cutting concepts.
It does not attempt to cover too much content - a good balance between breadth and depth.
5th grade is organized well and broken down specifically.
Breaks down very well into specific areas
A strength lies in the fact that many of the science standards relate to Literacy standards which I assume are a
I don'tknow.
Not sure I can find any!
Organized by the science areas
I like the clarification statements and assessment boundaries
They are detailed and easy to follow. They also work well with the Iowa Core.
Gives students focus.
Addresses life, earth, and physical sciences. Also addresses engineering and science methods.
science based subjects. deeper knowledge base.
Easy to navigate
They have a better break down and explanation of what students should know when they exit high school as co
More critical and creative thinking and problem solving
The organization, information provided, and the practices, and cross cutting concepts.
They are more focused on higher level thinking skills.
The sequencing at each grade level, and also the specific information included appears as if the student should
The NGSS allow for teachers to promote higher-order thinking in the science classroom, interest in STEM and th
Depth
Specific standards that build from one grade level to the next with overarching big ideas.
NGSS will make a lot of money for the text book companies and associated technology companies that sell prod
Better than before.. Better than nothing
A guide to stakeholders
I like the emphasis on scientific thinking rather than rote memorization. They incorporate evolution into the life
Clear ideas
Use of technology,questioning strategies, and higher order thinking skills.
1. Cross-cutting concepts 2. Inquiry-based learning opportunities in engineering practices
Examples of what is to be taught help the teacher understand the standard
It promotes science education and is in accordance with the Govenor's STEM initiative
Current, relevant, engaging topics of study presented in a way that forces the adoption of engineering/scientific
very broad but includes most everything necessaryt
looking toward the future.
The standards are focused on the process of gaining and using Science knowledge.
They focus on Higher Order Thinking skills.
Making it important to not just know the information, but be able to apply it.
Easy to read
Many U.S. students have a week understanding of science when they graduate.
I really like the three "strands:" STEM, Core content, and cross-cutting concepts. I think this allows for deep un
Better way to organize the science standards. Will give teachers a better idea of how they should be teaching t
Methods and research base, questions and communications, doing science
Fairly easy to follow
Level of detail allows me to see how the standards fit my curriculum.
none
Covers many areas.
High rigor, developed by experts in the field along with educator, guidance for teachers and school districts.
We will finally have a set of standards to measure whether or not students are learning new and important cont
It's a curricular guide.
Aligning / defining the engineering and math pieces into Science Standards. If you read articles at all, this is an
They are preparing students for science careers, but not those who just need a general understanding of scienc
That it stresses the process and not facts.
They force more science thinking and lab activities
I think a major strength of the Next Generation Science Standards is the fact that it is teaching true science to s
It is actual science and not religious mumbo jumbo
They seem to deal well with today's realities, as well as emphasizing the types of thinking crucial for understan
Measurable standards that focus the curriculum on science-related skills that will increase interest and improve
Organization and inclusion of Engineering, Technology and Mathematics.
I like that there are only a few and they are specific. I like having specific standards for 2nd grade rather than a
Setting fluent guidelines for student learning while allowing teachers to plan the rigor for lessons.
Getting more science standards in the curriculum is important!
It is a handful of deep concepts.
The rigor and preparedness they should bring students
Emphasis on performance expectations The 3 foundation structure -- not just discipline concepts Connections
I particularly like the engineering standards that are in the elementary standards.
With the use of using Next Generation Science standards, I have seen gifted students excel beyond the standar
Not sure
Organization. Content from all major areas of Science. Vertical alignment of concepts.
Straight forward and to the point, but with many options available for presentation of the standards.
I see that connections have already been made to ELA standards and that will help.
The standards are internationally benchmarked.
I like the way that they are written. They have good detail and are very nicely organized into units.
They include the practices that I use as a scientist - asking questions, conducting investigations and communic
In theory kids will be using the labs the school has instead of lecture only and one lab a month. Kids are not re
I believe students will have to work with the information, work with the technology to meet the new standards.
Organization of standards
Promotes thinking and analytics.
Multi-disciplinary. Geared toward critical thinking. Connected to the real world.
They seem relatively progressive, and it looks like they are designed to show how different areas of science rela
Looks Beneficial
Don't know
They are based on the current time rather than the past.
Science' is a broad subject area. The NGSS covers those areas, just not in depth enough to give kids a good ba
Follows a good path and has great diversity of topics.
Lack of explicit curriculum Connects engineering with technology
They are specific enough to meet each requirement but broad enough to be able to differentiate instruction to m
Great that students have to apply knowledge.
Clarity of the major goals of science education; including both concepts and process. Offering examples of POS
very detailed in some areas, but also challenging to understand
Emphasis on math and modeling

Emphasis on engineering and process over content.
Lays out a solid foundation for science and engineering. Moves away from mile wide but an inch deep approac
Grade leveled at elementary Much great depth and breadth on the standards--this helps create clear learning t
Written as performance expecations
Consistency Addresses important science concepts needed at each level Follows a logical progression of skills
Nice to have specific standards to guide instruction.
I like how the NGSS are grouped and give descriptions on each standard.
Breadth and depth.
normal progressive learning curve - step by step learning process - lack of motivational or stimulating
Systemic
Determined grade level standards so we can base curriculum on grade level.
They are written in understandable language.
I believe that it is important to teach with an accurate account, the ideas behind the Next Generation science s
Organized, clear
Major strengths are the focus on exploring and testing and creating not memorizing little facts.
Cross curricular, engineering addition. Science becomes more applied and students are able to relate to science
Based on sound scientific principles. Offer students an understanding of science as it is practiced in the real wo
Science areas are divided into major themes.
It does a good job of spelling out the performance expectations and give examples of outcomes which is helpfu
Strengths: Ensuring our children and students are getting a quality education
not many
They include all of the important topics that a scientific-literate student should know.
Variety of all science strands.
The standards are updated to better prepare students for the future. Many school's standards were written bef
The research base, the careful development, and the strange of topics
Setting standards for ALL Iowa students regardless of the school they attend. The standards are comprehensiv
They focus on big ideas like energy conservation and flows.
Incorporating engineering and process skills in content
They are organized in an easy to understand way.
A plan for all to follow
Speecificity
More focus on the Nature and History of Science is great to show our students how science works.
It is well researched and provides supporting documents.
It is a systematic approach to science that builds year to year. They are very and specific and laid out in a way
Focus on Inquiry. Knowledge of content but also APPLYING (yeah!) the content. Focus on how science makes s
Its
Organizes standards across the state.....levels instructional expectations for all students
sequential, build on previous learning, relate to real life science
Generalized plan for everyone in U.S.
They are written down and specific. I doubt the standards are "perfect" but they do provide a clear framework
Specific examples of what they mean with each standard.
comprehensive, levels build on each other, focuses on skill development and major themes leaving enough roo
They provide clear guidance about what the performance expectations for students.
Having students demonstrate, create, show what they can do such as create a model...
Hands on science topics.
A strength for the standards is the organization. They are easy to follow and read.
The samples that are given to help understand the expectation.
I like how the Crosscutting Concepts link all of the sciences together.
they do profess to want to make kids think more and repeat less.
I think they will help students decide what they want to go into when they go to college.
They are very clear. They show how the standards link to other subjects.
Fantastic details to help districts align science to other content areas!!!
NGSS includes very specific performance expectations that are well aligned to the framework, which I feel bene
They do a better job of emphasizing the disciplinary core ideas and processes associated with science than the
Address higher order thinking skills.
Specifies topic and grants ideas for educating the topic.
They have process as well as content standards.
That it will give teachers all across the state of Iowa the same topics to discuss so that if a student moves, they
Putting science back into the schools.
Performance based
At this time I cannot think of any major strengths.
Good for STEM and 21 st century skills
The blending of content and skills as well as very clear preformance expectations. Also cross linked to common
It cover all three science areas .
Create thinking, questioning community members.
The three dimensions that roll into creating each standard (practices, crosscutting concepts, core ideas). So mu
The breadth in which they cover without being overly specific or restrictive. There was certainly a lot of though
Have standards stated in way that teacher/students should apply them not just learn them
The cross curricular concepts are a plus. This way I can annotate what skills in science are aligning with the EL
These standards require thought and understanding from students. They require students to collect, analyze, co
Unambiguous in interpretation about what can be assessed. Very thorough. Developed by national leaders in s
Clarity, organization, connections to other content areas. Amount of resources aligned to NGSS.
No opinion.
Organization of the standards
They are very weak. There is no math guidance which is necessary in science, and the science content actually
Looks like a well balanced mix of physical science, life science, and geo science.
The way success is measured is on what the student can do and not just what they can memorize.
Students have a stronger science background. Trying to prepare the students for a better future.
It's rigorous.
Every grade studies the same thing regardless of whether they live in the same county, state, or move state to
Rigorous, purposeful, relevant, interdisciplinary
Organized and easy to follow. Standard format.
The three-dimensional framework for the NGSS offers a solid basis for the standards. I think it is important to in
Organization
A major strength is the flexibility of addressing the standards within the different curricula that districts develop
Rigor!
It seems to cover a broad array of topics, which provides all students a way to find something that interests the
The hands on emphasis of the lessons and being able to demonstrate a thorough understanding.
Encourage thinking
Addressing most fields of science to provide students with a broad knowledge of scientific disciplines.
Incorporating the science and engineering practices and using cross-cutting concepts to show the intersection o
provides a standardized guideline for all students, so that we can be sure they are all learning the same things.
Allows for freedom for a teacher to determine the content they want to cover.
Good outline for K thru high school requirements.
Potential to excite and engage students in their acquisition of knowledge that will help them better understand
Getting students to do the questioning and communicate what they have learned.
Big Ideas-depth of content, will help students further their knowledge on the topic
they are clear
Clearly there has been a lot of work and thought put into this important document for Iowa.
That they exist at all

New material
Seems to be easy and authentic for student understanding.
none
Curriculum connections at the bottom of each standard.
Linking them to LA and Math
stronger assessments and documentation of learning
Everyone has a common "language" with what they need to teach.
Documentation with the science notebook.
content standards are connected.
Learning to think like a scientist will enable all students to be better prepared to excel in whatever field they m
Goals for every school to strive to meet, hopefully making education parallel between schools and hopefully sta
As I have stated earlier, the view of the sciences/technology as a whole is a major strength. Also, creating a c
Include skills and understanding, not just facts; each level builds on the previous one so educators can help stu
I really like how concepts are clearly laid out. The color coding helps quite a bit too.
Broad based science
They represent a consensus.
Focus on actual science topics.
The use of expository writing to convey knowledge gain.
They are well defined and leave room for schools to decide how these standards are taught.
They provide clear, consistent guidance for instruction at all levels and across all areas of science. Regardless o
The topics will interest our students. This would help our students to move to a higher level of understanding I
Simple, easy to understand, prepare students in topics they will need to know for responsible citizenship in futu
Similar in set up like Core
They are specific enough to provide guidance to the teachers about their goal.
The 3-dimensional aspect of their organization. The fact they are developed from the Framework (evidence and
I does allow flexibility in teaching the standards.
The cross-cutting concepts being interwoven into the standards
Performance expectations: Practices. These are essential.
It provides a much more accurate view of science practice and concepts. This approach emphasizes the analyti
Suggestions for curriculum and specific tasks.
They are consistent and cover a wide range with little overlap.
The organization is a strength. Another strength is that the standards that are listed are EXTREMELY good stand
They are sequenced so each grade level will have something different to teach and the next level on a content
Real scientists and educators are thinking about what education in science is really needed for students to know
n/a
Created with intent to raise student learning to a new level
Consistency and rigor.
Strong link to 21st century skills and inquiry, as well as a link to ELA standards
none that I am able to discern
They are content specific, they do not leave anything to ambiguity.
It is about hands on experiences and not memorizing facts.
Focus on preparing students for college and career with increased rigor and focus on skills along with knowledg
I think the best part of the NGSS is the rigor. I also appreciate the details in the DCIs.
According to the Fordham Institute, who did a 67-page in depth anaysis of each state's standards against NGSS
The focus on science and engineering practices - that is what makes science different from other disciplines. I r
I don't know.
Well thought out, well linked, many examples.
I can't think of any
NGSS is more specific than our current Iowa Core.
They're supported by research on how students learn best in science. NGSS provides examples of how you cou
Clear standards that are thorough and well-written.
Rigorous
They want the student to model and investigate.(performance) Make sure schools have the resources. That tak
The science standards are good topics to cover.
great to weave history and science so greater understanding of complete picture is possible for students.
Linking practices to concepts are essential and a huge strength.
They push the kids to new levels in their understanding.
The links to Literacy Standards, in-depth detail of the skills and understandings of each standard.
Clearly defined.
They lay out the expectations that are expected in the lessons and what the students should be able to do befo
It includes topics on so many different areas and tells the goals for each science classroom. Teachers can look t
A lot of material covered, and measurable standards.
The challenges given to the students are deep enough to produce some great thinking and critical thought. The
Interdisciplinary, scientifically sound, & entirely sane
There are none.
All topics covered more specifically in a language that corresponds to our teaching and our textbook materials.
They bring world-class science standards to all students, build from year to year in an extremely thoughtful way
integration of skills
Curriculum and assessments build on students' knowledge and ability to meet expectations. The instructional fl
Very detailed and integrate 3 domains. Performance expectations show what.how students can demonstrate m
Easy to read/understand. They do contain breadth/depth that will prepare students to be great problem solvers
A major strength of NGSS is the clarity of the standards and the work that has been done to consider the conne
The greatest strength is the list of concepts and the correlation to other subjects. It is very clear that there is a
Specific expectations are set for teachers to use.
When was i suppose to read this? don't know.
Very specific, has examples and crosscutting relationships.
They have a ton of positive people boasting about them. I even heard some buzz words like "American Dream"
Strong overlap of topics to insure that topic is covered adequately from grade to grade.
basic coverage
Specific in content but general in application. They are easily adaptable.
It appears to be a very well thought out plan to expose the kids to all areas of science. It also doesn't even ack
That they are evidence based and prepared by experts in their respective fields.
It stresses the importance of cross-linked ideas and themes. They are much better written than the previous Io
They provides a framework that should be consistent and a set of ideas that should be taught. I also like that th
These standards are well organized and reasonably easy to understand.
Inclusion of STEM for those who are unable to figure out how to pull that into their science classes.
not sure
They give grade-specific support and clearly define important concepts. The spiraling nature of the standards i
Setting a baseline standard seems reasonable. Lack of flexibility and development of a curriculum that strives t
Sorry, I can't find any.
The standards give teachers a starting point in their lesson planning in science. I believe it is important for the
I think that these will help teachers realize that they can do more than throw information at children and expec
Covers the subject matter very well.
There are many strengths to the NGSS. I love how it creates an authentic learning environment for students an
1) 21st century learning ideas with inquiry and STEM skills throughout 2) Link to ELA standards
Clear, challenging, easy to use, focus on "showing" and "doing" using models/explanations
Organized by topics and which grade level should be receiving instruction for that particular topic
I don't see any.
I like the strong emphasis on inquiry and problem solving. These both are skills students will need to be informe
Just being exposed to the science subjects will excite the students at an earlier age. Many children do not get t
Nothing
Clarity. Focus. Brevity.
Easier to understand when reading
None.
PE's provide a specific assessment target.
They do a decent job covering the breath of science content.
The NGSS aligns the ELA and Math standards making it easy for teachers to support the work in other discipline
Strengths: -Deep and rich document -States across the country are implementing these standards and we will
Rigor necessary for students to be college and career ready.
They have students actively engaging in creating knowledge.
The NGSS are organized, detailed, specific, and relevant. They engage students in topics and practices that wi
How the subjects/material is broken down in sections.
This may not be only related to Next Generation but there is more introduction to science at a younger age.
We are talking about science and their is in the general publica perception that we need to focus more effort an
I like that it suggests we use higher order thinking and embed engineering concepts. However, it does not say
The NGSS are more clearly laid out with more specific criteria and clear examples, definitions, etc. on the webs
We as a group of educators are working and thinking about the future which is science.
Connections to other curriculum and activity based
rigor
There is a lot of room for choice in how to get to the standard
Detailed, Organized, Content/Practice centered
Breadth and interdisciplinary possibilities
The expectations and standards are a strong base for establishing curriculum.
Many places in the country have adopted them so there are more resources being developed to help teachers m
The standards ensure that students are thoroughly learning the concepts through higher level thinking. There w
I like that are specific in what the students need to know and be able to do. The performance expectations are
I am happy to know that students are being exposed to more science as they consider careers that may be in t
Finally get schools on the the same page!
They are specific and will allow more continuity when students move from one district to the next. We have ne
They have been written through the lens of problem solving, not just fact memorization. This will help students
The major strengths are the text organization allows for easy understanding of what the students should know
The detailed explanation of what information within a topic needs to be covered. It helps get rid of the extra an
They give specific examples to help teachers when teaching the standards. They are broken down into 4 basic
The ability to gain more depth into science concepts. The spiraling of science concepts through the grades is al
Language is much easier to understand.
Meaningful concepts
THey use more performance-based assessments
They are Standards that are for all Iowa standards
As a strength I appreciate the efforts that were made to delineate cross-curricular interactions.
Thorough in their coverage of some concepts
performance included
Includes majority of topics covered
they are more concerned about the skills students need instead of memorizing facts,.
It allows all science teachers to cover the same content.
That much of it is written in terms of performance outcomes which corresponds with the increase emphasis on
Helping set expectations, give teachers a platform to collaborate and streamline their courses.
How specific the standards are, especially after adding the evidence statements.
One set of standards that to which all students in the United States have been held accountable.
The content is extensive
They take a more modern approach to teaching science. They account for some of the 'soft' skills that are requ
Modeling and processes to utilize higher order thinking and problem solving to insure comprehension.
Aligns with the push for students to be critical thinkers.
They do give an in depth idea of what should be taught.
No comment, need to look into
They are starting to adapt to the direction the world and the job market is moving in by challenging students to
I love that the standards are broken down by grades and not in a 3-5 band. The standards are easy to read.
The standards include crosscutting concepts and the practices of science as part of the standards. Inquiry and e
Allows for teachers to not focus so much on all of the facts that students should know, instead the big ideas.
Reasoning skills are emphasized and essential
Compared to the current Iowa Core Science Standards, I do not see any strengths that make it a better choice.
It's K-12 and involves all levels
I think it is great that it is K-12 and that it has links to each prior and post grade and where it is learned.
They are precise and detailed. They offer suggestions for how to present the information and how to assess it,
It is a K-12 curriculum that will allow better communication throughout all grade levels.
Strengths- in depth standards that are performance based
Tie in to Common Core Focus on argumentation and engineering practices
It is written well, has supporting documents, and fits well with the Iowa Core.
The breakdown of the various areas and the clear assessment of the standard. I also like the interdisciplinary as
Connections!
Much more detail, less vague than the Common Core standards.
Organization and detail
The focus on applications propels a deeper, working knowledge.
Specific guidelines on what should be taught and at what level. It also is set up to use in an inquiry based class
Quizzing students on prior knowledge and teaching test strategies.
It will ensure that all students will be competent in the areas addressed by the standards.
It covers a lot of content that is absolutely necessary for students to know in preparation for science careers in
I believe that if teachers had adequate professional development in reading, understanding, and teaching from
They take students through a sequence of learning/understanding that grows in depth and breadth.
The standards are clearly defined and well-organized.
The major strenghth I see are helping prepare children to be able to achieve more in an increasingly technilogic
HA! they don't take into account those who need that extra help understanding the basic core curriculum
Good balance of physical/engineering and life sciences content. Seem to be based on evidence.
Aligned and categorized nicely.
They are very topic specific
There is definitely a lot to cover.
More exact to follow and teach.
Appendix E is very specific about what students should know.
in depth coverage
The major strength include the 3 dimensions and how those dimensions tie to each standard. I especially like i
specific
I really liked the progression tables and how that laid out the information.
One of the major strengths is that the standards include other disciplinary areas. I really believe students need
wide variety of topics
Depth of knowledge and the examples provided.
See previous answers
Content becomes standardized
Broad and easily attained in a standard classroom
More specific than current standards.
Well written, listing what should not be covered
They give the general intent of what needs to be taught - allowing teachers to implement the information as th
none
I don't see any strengths. GO BACK TO LOCAL CONTROL
Not sure, I don't really see any.
The rest of the country has adopted so much of the available materials is written to NGSS. The STEM connectio
I like that it's written out and its intended purpose.
Disseminated what topics should be covered in middle school grades.
They provide information to teachers about the science content and the assessment boundaries. They incorpor
I've found none.
I think it moves in the right direction -- STEM integration, but they need to go further and have clearer expectat
Well organized. Good numbering system for referencing. (ICC does not have a numbering system so we science
all standards are needed to help us, as a community, provide the best education for our children.
covers everything
A strength of NGSS would be the helping guideline that are given. More direction
The organization, the credibility of the creators and reviewers, and the scope and sequence are all major streng
Addresses what students need to be read for when they enter the workforce and college, namely critical thinkin
It makes sure that students from each grade are gaining the same advantages in learning particular subject are
they are about an important topic, science and how it is taught to middle school students
They are more specific than Iowa Core and organized in a better manner.
set out very specifically what should be accomplished
The spiraling approach k-12. Modeling of ideas (however extensive training will be needed for Iowa teachers to
I like the way that they came up with them. I trust that you took feedback from all of those that know and not t
Organization and clear explanation of assessment boundaries and what exactly students should be able to DO.
Better than the Iowa CORE.
Cohesiveness across the US.
Uniform expectations across the country.
- Applicable - Science Practices and Engineering Skills
Shows certain types of activities to meet the standard
Well defined
Connection to common core Cross cutting concepts 8 science practices Interactive approach of the online ve
They are clearer than current Iowa Core.
Shows importance of science education, and covers diverse topics.
Showing interconnectedness of the standards
The clarity on what not to cover.
The focus on place based learning, cross curricular concepts, and understanding the process rather than simply
Focus, I really like how the standards zero in on what you are suppose to be teaching, suggests assessment foc
Stated in the previous responses.
They give the teachers direction of what students should know and be able to demonstrate by the end of the sc
I like the fact that the standards are grade specific and explained clearly as to what learning is expected. The c
Organization and clarity of concepts. They provide direction for teaching and learning.
The standards build upon concepts and promote critical thinking.
They are organized and seem to meet most needs.
Standards and Strands are set up in a very user friendly way for ease of use
It is cross curricular.
It has a great deal of depth and analytic skill development.
I liked the incorporation of the performance standards with the content. It builds the inquiry aspect into it.
Clarity and focus on deep understanding.
The Foundation boxes, the cross curricular and especially the engineering practices are major strengths of the N
Rigor
How specific each section is and the amount of higher order thinking that is required of students.
The standards will better prepare students for work in higher education, including hands-on, practical applicatio
They are very detailed.
Broad categories with good descriptions of specific standards.
Strong emphasis on engineering Task specificity provides clarity
they are indepth. It is easier to unwrap the concepts without variation in interpretation. It already includes ELA
The topical organization is good and covers the major areas of science. I really like the cross-cutting concepts
All children all standards. Emphasis on experiments.
It is much more manageable when it comes to the amount of time to implement and cover them. It makes it so
Good core ideas in grade spans.
NGSS is very specific as to areas covered and what to cover. The assessment area is extremely specific, but ad
Not sure...standardize across nation.
Forces us to cover all areas of sciecne
standards are difficult to read and don't have enough information to comprehend unless you spend hours and h
The major strengths of these standards are that they are "higher level" standards.
There are strong connections to the STEM initiatives.
Organization; Clarity of expectations
That next generation science standards cover material that will be helpful to students when they enter college.
The standards are very specific, but often too difficult for the age of the student required to master that conten
They focus on the big ideas, and scientific thinking
Clarification of what should be covered and citing performance expectations.
I like how the standards take into account the human impact on the earth and that they encourage problem sol
Depth of knowledge that relates to current world need
Cross-Cutting concepts (math in science etc.) Models in standards
They make materials unified across all schools and make teacher materials more accessible
The boundaries and clarifications.
Cross-cutting concepts and organization (both by strands and K-5 by grade level) are the major strengths. The l
Enables all subject matters to participate
There is a broad, systematic construct to the standards. It doesn't seem like there is any shortfall to the definit
No strengths that are any more of better than what we already have, there are much better, higher quality stan
At a glance a teacher is able to operationalize the intent of the standards. They aren't so nebulous that a teach
Inquiry, figuring out science for themselves, hopefully elementary schools will take this opportunity to really wo
I love how well thought out they are. They have incorporated so many other standards and additions to them. T
Rigor and specificity.
They will unify science curriculum across much of the nation. They include natural selection and evolution.
They take into consideration everything that a students needs to be a well rounded student of science.
I like the broader perspective, not only from subcellular to ecosystem level, but also the emphasis on written an
Greater accountability in what should be taught.
The strengths are the focus on depth vs. breadth, an emphasis on banding (standards that encompass many di
The connectedness of the cross-cutting concepts with the science and engineering practices and the disciplinar
another program with great intent, tries to help organize and lead
I like the way they are structured. I have worked on them the last two years and feel as though they will help t
They provide an overview of all areas of science and science-related professions.
I do like that the three main areas of science, Earth / Biology/ Chemistry-Physics are kept as separate areas.
They help teachers approach science with the concepts and practices instead of just content. We love the organ
Well rounded curriculum.
NGSS requires students to do more higher order thinking in science while also covering less content. It gives te
A strength is the rigor as well as cross curriculum projects.
Much more applicable than Core.
Grade specific standards
Prepares students to actually think like scientists instead of rote memorization.
More experiential learning

They are clear and concise.
A strength is that there is a broad range of what can be covered within each standard.
Each topic appears to be well organized and set up well to understand
The greatest strength not yet mentioned in this survey is that they are current regarding 21st century learning
Politicians can speak about making educational change and educational administration can report back to them
Specific
Covers the breadth of science topics
Written as performance expectations rather than a list of facts. Clarification statements provided. Mixes skills w
broken up into easy to understand sub categories
The rigor is great-emphasizing skills over subject matter alone.
N/A
Depth and standardization for schools
Experts in education and science created the standards - a luxury few local school boards have if required to cr
They are well thought out.
They give a clearer sense of grade level scope and sequence so that all concepts are taught and reinforced reg
Clearly written expectations
With the Middle school 6-8 we currently have general science in 6th and 7th is life science and 8th is earth scie
Well laid out with emphasis on integrating skills of science with content procedures.
They are specific and measureable
Shows the flow and sequence very clearly
create a common goal for students & teachers all across the state.
Allows teachers to have a set of standards to work from.
Strenths? LOL! Thats's cute! There are NONE! While students prepare for STEM or any other careers, it will be a
The strengths: Standards are listed by grade level and not spans. Standards are listed with clarification state
Major strength is the inquiry that is infused into these standards.
The NGSS are broad yet to the point. I also believe my duties as an environmental educator already fit into thes
Cross cutting concepts. Explanations for each standard. Color coding helps to isolate information.
Flow and assessment boundaries for teachers and where to teach each topic.
Every school will be on "the same page" with expectations.
broad and project based
specific; correlates to other common core standards
It lets the individual teacher to design lessons that cover each standard.
Very easy to read...detailed information..broken down for each grade level
NGSS complements the Iowa Core, some schools are already using the best science practices from NGSS. I also
Inclusive.
Inquiry based; hands-on learning; practical approach
Focusing on hands on and student driven learning
Due to Mobility of families, strive to be consistent with other states.
Standards should be a local community decision. Not state wide nor federally mandated. Any parent and studen
Rigorous and relevant. Challenging.
They are based on current research and show progressions in thinking as well as content knowledge.
Science is important
A comprehensive framework that all educators can follow with local adjustments from there.
Organization, more specificity.
STEM, supports hands-on more interactive and meaningul learning experiences.
Commonality
None
Need to increase science education and encourage greater student participation
Very detailed and process oriented
It is easy to read and divided up nicely. They cover a broad area of topics and will help students.
A major strength is the inclusion of the engineering component,
More in line with 21st Century Skills.
Relevance & Rigor
Trying to integrate some engineering principles.
Encouragement of inquiry. Focus on learning science skills, not just content.
Easy to read. Good examples of project/experiment ideas.
Next Gen appears to have a wide variety of science study, which will make for a more educated society as a wh
Giving children an appreciation for technology and what it can do to enhance lives.
Specific.
Love them - let's get them adopted and implemented!
That it covers the important science topics
NONE whatsoever
Comprehensive, modern, hands-on
Organization.
The clarification statements are very helpful, as they ensure that teachers understand what information should
Specficity of each standard
It is not what is in the NGSS that is the great strength, it is the unification they bring across classrooms, district
I like the correlation piece between other areas of the common core. The language seems to be easy to interpr
Inclusion of STEM with the NGSS
rigorous! Finally something to ensure science education in our youngest learners
They are written to explain what exactly the students should be able to do.
Organization. Continuity.
I think the major strengths are: A) the crosscutting concepts. I like how draws conceptual understandings betw
Gives the instructor, especially new a roadmap to go by.
Science and engineering practices, cross cutting concepts, and clear definition of the performace standards
Give definite guideline for teachers
The science and engineering practices and the crosscutting concepts are the major strengths.
They reflect the broad thinking skills that scientist use.
The standards written as performance expectations was a very astute way of writing standards. It gives a clarit
For students the standards are across states so as students move the standards and expectations will be simila
That the concepts are limited and broken down into core ideas that will greatly simplify science teaching and le
Well organized and connected to the math and language arts standards. I like that it has three parts. Our stud
Just the fact that there are finally some Science Standards in writing is a strength.
Inquiry based, project learning, set objectives
It provides clarity for what students should be able to know and do, where the boundary for that is, it more clea
Standards are presented and given cross-curricular suggestions. Standard build upon one another across grade
Performance expectations, Cross-cutting Concepts, Science and Engineering Practices, Links to CCSS
Gives guidance
It is comprehensive K-12. It can help districts have another accountability tool. It can develop some common l
I'm just glad that we have standards to follow. I think the topics are reasonable.
They cover a wide range of science concepts and build on those concepts yearly.
Conceptual basis and integrated
never heard of them
The NGSS has depth to it and helps students to learn how to think to solve scientific problems.
It is organized pretty well and touches on topics that students will need to be aware of to be successful once th
The performance expectations give clear goals for all of us to teach toward and describe to what level all stude
seem to attempt to be somewhat comprehensive and flexible to some extent.
The challenging rigor of the NGSS certainly challenges all science teachers to continue to maintain high standa
Wonderfully constructed performance expectations that successfully combine science processes, concepts and
I like that there is a concise list of the most important standards, not an impossibly long list of detailed sub-goa
I like how it explains what is to be a part of the assessment and what is not suppose to be assessed. the bench
I see topics of complexity being introduced in a purposeful fashion early in the curriculum and the threads seem
Consistency within the state and with other states that adopt them
The detail and clearness of the language
Organized, Thoughtful ideas of student understanding. Challenge teachers to develop performance based eval
Helps to organize instruction at the various grade levels.
Focus on Constructing, Analyzing, Evaluating, and Developing
Not sure there are any. I guess if you want to more easily develop and assessment it does a good job of narrowl
I like that the elementary standards are put in to grade levels and not grade bands.
Less width and more depth. This is what more of us need in all curricular areas.
Inquiry base Full set of appendices STEM connections Disciplinary literacy connections Math connections
They set the standards for what all students should know.
Technology
Need more information to provide accurate feedback.
They are performance based
I strongly agree with emphasis of science in classroom and a hands-on approach versus rote memorization
That there is absolutely nothing concerning intelligent design anywhere in them. It seems the writers know the
There is a flow of the topics and that is good.
I think the NGSS does a good job of breaking down the major content into the separate cross cutting concepts,
It was developed by a group of people who have the knowledge of what is important now and may be importan
Rigor, rigor, rigor.
broken out my grade levels so that there is no longer overlapping within grade level bands; a stricter guideline
Very clear on what the standards are. Includes engineering. Coordinates well with Iowa Core. I am not a fan of h
The detail and support in the standards for content and pedagogy.
Depth of content. Inclusion of contemporary, relevant and scientifically researched and accepts topics of evolu
Disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts progress and grow in a meaningful way K-12; clear connection
I think what the standards have done with including all STEM Fields and skills essential to all fields of science an
I like how the standards are grade specific for K-5. This gives a framework for what should be covered at each
Its organization and connection to real world applications.
Depth of knowledge is expected and go beyond "understand" a concept.
The same standards will be used across state lines.
Details
I think getting them by grade level is essential until reaching the high school level.
I think the focus on performance-type standards is a strength.
Provide a very rigorous list of skills and knowledge that kids should learn and be able to do and they make sure
Begins to create a workable framework for educators writing curriculum.
- Coherent and logical progressions i.e. building upon previously learned material. Example: forces is introduced
the rigor!
I see very little.
I love the assessment boundary that lets teachers know how far to take material.
It will help to keep curriculum consistent throughout the state.
It is complete.
These actually are one of the best set of standards that have been written in recent years. It covers the concep
Just having some science guidance so teachers are not inventing what students in our state should know.
Project based learning.
The parameters given help to clarify what to teach. The arrangement in the DCI. Appendix A is helpful.
The emphasis on integrating science and engineering practices in context of content learning. Assessment that
More specific and defining "what" students should know and be able to do in science at the specific grade level
Comprehensive, connected to other disciplines
None
Organization and categories
One strength is that Inquiry is woven into all the sciences and not dangling as its own section.
Focus is earlier and continues through hs
It makes for common standards across those states that take part in the standards, making it easier when stud
They push kids to do real science. I can see that they ask kids to think and perform like scientists.
Integrated and focus on nature of science.
Inquiry- based learning; cross-curricular connections, integrated approach across grades
Stated clearly
Nature of science is more pronounced and integrated in these standards.
Good connections to engineering
I think it is good to have consistency across the grade levels and across the state.
Clear, concise,
The focus what all kids should be learning when
it is organized well
It gets every school on the same page, or at least it should
It allows every teacher to be on the same page.
They show what needs to be taught. They are specific
They focus on inquiry-based learning, allowing students to develop skills in thinking like scientists. This will allo
There are a lot of them that are project/model based
It is a very technical friendly website. The pop-ups can be useful.
Strengths: Focus on pertinent content with supports provided for in English and engineering. Standards' wordin
The content covered is appropriate for 4th graders (at least in what I looked at).
I prefer the Iowa Core standards.
I like that the standards have some clarifications with them.
See my comments above.
Obviously, a lot of time, energy, and thought has been put into these standards - the variety and depth of conte
Easy to use as a performance assessments are already expressed in the standard.
The tie-ins to engineering and the crosscutting concepts help with lesson design and conveying a purpose of th
Prioritizing process skills necessary for studying science topics.
They are complete for the grade levels
They have been developed and tested nationally, giving us confidence in their rigor and appropriateness for Iow
They cover a lot of information and skills.
Detailed and has connections across standards
If adopted, the NGSS provide structure to instructors' curricula. I do like the engineering aspects of NGSS and e
Depth of concepts needed for our students. Gives limits for expectations at the band levels and allows for teac
Ability to ensure students receive what is needed to compete nationally. Guidance for teachers to ensure stude
Emphasis on fewer standards learned at a deeper level.
The NGSS provide guidance for new teachers and consistency among districts for each grade.
The rigor has been raised and engineering has been featured!
Performance based
NGSS focuses many topics into a few. By using crosscutting strategies, you can cover many to those units and
I like how they: explain what a student can do to demonstrate competency, and how those performance expect
.
I do believe it is important to include STEM better, particularly the engineering aspect.
It gives each grade-level teacher specific standards to measure their students.
It is organized.
I do believe that the standards are incorporating the STEM idea more than the previous set.
Focused.
organized
fairly organized
Schools teaching the same material
It is a balanced approach to science ed that should help beginning teachers
Additional of the Science and Engineering Practices The Performance Expectations
I do like the integration: Cross Cutting Concepts, Engineering, DCI and PE. I think the DCI's are relevant. I like
Few and deeper. Allows teachers to understand and instruct in depth which in turn will allow students to do the
I like that there seems to be more emphasis on thinking skills not memorizing skills. Involving the concepts of
Well laid out and organized. Appropriate content for specified grade levels.
The set up and vertical articulation of performance expectations. The standards being there as a guide for syst
I love the assessment boundary to help guide the class room instruction.
performance based
Good start
I like the idea of the assessment boundaries, it helps clarify how in depth you need to go and what is too much
I don't think anyone can say that they are not rigorous and relevant.
Real world application, relevant content, more hands on learning
The clarification statements and assessment boundaries are two of the major improvements in usability in this
Provides a starting point for a common educational experience.
Grade level, easy to read and follow with a conceptual understanding.
It's all encompassing. I can tell a lot of work went into creating it.
One of the major strengths of NGSS is that it spells out very clearly for teachers what students should be able t
there is none all hope is gone
fdgfd
Attention to practices, concepts and core ideas. Connection to the common core standards for literacy and mat
show connections between areas--i. e. science and engineering
Cross cutting ideas. Mixing science areas to work well together.
They are well organized. They have incorporated the three dimensions in the performance expectations. They
Different areas of science are addressed at age-appropriate levels
The plan for integration and for depth of knowledge to increase.
Looking at cross-cutting concepts including engineering.
They seem to address and focus on scientific ideas, scientific concepts and scientific processes...... There is not
Very thorough
The presence of the Cross Cutting Concepts and Science Practices and that they are to be assessed. The doing
Ensures all 3 areas of science (physical, earth, life) are learned. Like the connections across curricular areas, as
K-5 grade level expectations
none
Specific on what needs to be taught
Well defined content and process standards
Its alignment between grade levels.
I like how the performance standards are written. They are very specific, you know exactly what the student ne
They are more specific and provide more examples and information than the current standards.
They are in depth and specific to science content areas and grade areas.
They cover the content-specific information that students will need as schema for further inquiry, but also, they
The standards allow for students to learn science by doing science. More focus is placed on understanding rath
The standards build on one another, instead of repeating content like the current IA Core standards. The stand
They cover the major requirements of science in detail, but not SO detailed as to restrict teacher's decisions an
The focus on the crosscutting concepts and the science and engineering practices are powerful and critical com
Continuity in the rigor
I like that ideas and examples given, but as I stated before, some of them seem narrow and somewhat limiting.
SOOOO clear for teachers. Grade spans in elementary. Allows for teachers to see the vertical articulation of the
The clarifications/examples.
Good layout and for thought

They have the right idea. The purpose is worthwhile.
Clear recognition of conceptual barriers related to students developmental growth.
The focus on Nature of Science concepts rather than cover massive content.
How detailed they are in what they are teaching and the ideas for assessment that are supplied.
Include a lot of engineering and designing standards that are necessary for everyday life, not just science. The
Core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and engineering practice approach interweaves science concepts and skills m
Demands hands-on or inquiry learning.
Wide variety of content Incorporates engineering, problem-solving, and technology skills that all students can
They target skill areas not targeted in the past such as problem solving and the design process.
easy to follow
Concepts are articulated K-12. Clear application of content in practice. Less memorization of facts and more em
The variety of scientific understandings students gain. The connections these have within other areas of conten
They put more emphasis on skills development rather than just pure knowledge.
Greater emphasis on critical thinking skills. Arrangement by "themes" or strands with cross-cutting relationship
I like the performance based expectations, but I have concerns about that as well (see concerns)
Developed with input from across the nation Well developed resources for teacher professional development a
Giving specific directions on what students should be able to do.
Flow nice together
Cross-cutting concepts and science practices-at first I did not understand the meaning of these, how they were
They are universal
Organization and structure
They are specific
NGSS provides educators with a more distinct picture regarding the concepts and skills to cover. The connectio
It is well organized and helps teachers know which things need to be covered and which things would just be ni
Very broad - Comprehensive
Well organized
They are easy to read and are organized well.
Easier to read than Common Core.
Easy to navigate. It's important that it clearly relates it to other topics. It clearly gives you the main ideas as w
Ease of use and more clearly laid out standards than the Iowa Core has. They have better standards
The relevance and rigor associated with them.
Easy to read and navigate and are more specific as to what and how much to teach for each standard
more specific
The major strengths are the emphasis on application of science content (engineering) and the detail provided a
That they are more specific than the Iowa Core
They are more specific than the Iowa Core Curriculum
They are well laid out.
I feel that the standards will bring in good information and allow teachers to know what is expected in each cou
Very complete, adds in other things, cross cutting concepts, etc.
Clear and concise, yet flexible for the teacher.
Give better information than the current standards and what students should be able to complete .
Helps provide all students with an opportunity to learn the same information. It allows teachers some flexibility
Attempts to prepare students for college and beyond
The incorporation of 3 dimensions is phenomenal. The Iowa Core separates content and skills, and makes it diffi
Performance task based. Focus is on student outcome, not what the teacher is "to do". Focus is on higher orde
They include engineering with the standards.
The fact that they are tied to the other parts of the Iowa Core is a strength.
I feel NGSS mandates higher order thinking, where previous standards did not.
keeping the basic in them
They are easily adapted into curriculum and easy to read through. Unlike Iowa Core, they allow specification in
Specific, targeted, and clear learning goals
The content prepares students to be able to step into programs of higher learning in science, should that be the
Rigor and Relevance, focus on concepts, allows for cross curricular objectives
One major strength is the combination of the three dimensions. This one area is where NGSS reflects more curr
I think they allow for so much more than just knowing facts. More hands on activities.
The NGSS is more rigorous and incorporates/focuses on higher level thinking of students. It puts emphasis on h
The standards meet the needs of students.
They are written as performance standards - so teachers really cannot lecture all the time and accomplish the s
The NGSS standards incorporate cross cutting concepts & provide examples of expectations for students.
Specific, relevant, rigorous, organized
These standards do no omit major science concepts that the current Iowa science standards do. In the NGSS th
Organized
Research based, final draft received much revision based on feedback, rigorous, will create a generation of scie
engineering
Cover all branches of science and including evolution and global warming.
They are broad and allow teachers to work toward mastery of the standards.
Consistent expectations for all
Change is good.
Orgainzation
The standards make it clear as to what content should be addressed.
none. I am not in favor of adopting NGSS
They are process/concept based.
The NGSS provides information that is specific as to what content should be taught.
Simplicity with rigor.
Provides for inquiry and gives our students the skills to succeed in a global environment.
Students in the United States no longer spend their entire life in a single district or state. To me the biggest adv
Focus on authentic learning
Incorporation of STEM content
The ease of implementing in a 6-12 Scope and Sequence alignment
Brings science education in Iowa into the 21st Century.
National standards so used in most states, so most books should have them referenced.
Looks like they will satisfy the STEM movement
Identifying essential questions to look at the big ideas of science. Big ideas are identified in the elementary g
Logical progression, clearly stated targets, concise language
Organized and has examples given to meet each standard.
I see no advantages over common core.
They don't micro manage the curriculum, which is of the utmost importance in a world with an almost infinite a
Practical application and asking students to DO things with the content.
Rigor. I also think that the performance assessment piece gets students into a critical thinking state of mind.
Everything is very organized and should make connections easier for students and teachers.
Clearer and more detailed than Iowa Core Science Standards.
assigns concepts to each grade levelj (not 6-8) expectations of each grade level (not 6-8)
They encourage application of science concepts rather than memorization or retention of facts without context
They are well organized and written to make inquiry unavoidable. They also do a good job of including enginee
The cross cutting concepts (connections within content) and the skills (modeling and engineering).
The spiraling of standards in the elementary specifically. The depth of knowledge.
I think connecting science, math, technology, and engineering is a strong point of the Next Generation Standar
Focus on inquiry and negotiation
Major strengths are the depth of thinking required by students to meet the standards; the integration of science
The standards seem to be organized for all parties involved. I think that having the cross cutting concepts will a
The major strength of the Next Generation Science Standards is the organization. I also like the added ELS stan
The standards are set up so that students engage in science as scientist. They are at a higher depth of knowled
They outline not just how to assess specific concepts but it includes engineering, literacy, and mathematics sta
I feel they are more forward thinking. The science field is constantly changing.
Integration of engineering concepts is fantastic and long overdue
1.Depth of content 2. Emphasis on Earth science 3. Emphasis on Engineering 4. Lack of redundancy 5. The e
The cross cutting concepts. STEM components. Aligned with Common Core Math and ELA standards. Very com
In regards to evolution, the focus is on understanding that the data supports the theory. I'm glad that learning a
The infusion of science process skills as a major part of standards. The cycling of the content throughout grade
As noted, greater breadth and depth of study.
Much better definition; Great depth; Explicit connections are made across domains of the sciences.
A good balance between content and process The connection of the engineering process Connecting concepts
Our society is very mobile. Students and their parents should be able to move from state to state without worr
Emphasizing practices including engineering and design
Based on evidence, not on political or religious opinion.
Consistancy
Depth of content. Exploration at this level allows students to form the habits of mind that we need in our future
Very Comprehensive.
Clear and easy to understand
They ensure students are learning content, skills, engineering, and nature of science.
Much more rigorous; performance expectations offer teachers and students a much clearer target of what a pro
Organized in one easy document
Having a standard or expectation for students to have been exposed to these standards after graduating high s
The biggest strength is that they are specific enough to be relevant and still flexible enough for teachers to allo
The NGSS is well researched and well presented for its users to understand.
They focus on actively "doing" science. Students will gain not only science content but crucial critical thinking s
Organization by content and cross cutting concepts.
I think NGSS provides consistency to our society. All kids are learning what is "essential" for them at the next le
They give everyone the same goals to shoot for so all students are working toward the same thing, however, th
I like that it will offer the theme/domain topic across the grades to help the children explore that theme, develo
It takes the DCI's and framework and expands them to a curriculum guide that is useable and will help our teac
Outcome-based Lend themselves well to performance tasks Support inquiry Integration with math and literac
NGSS is very coherent and offers vision and clarity for our STEM education.
They are well integrated using technology and inquiry standards embedded into the standards.
Outlined and provides consistency on the different grade levels to help students get similar instruction in subje
The focus on student performance, and not just "understand and apply"
The performance assessments encourage more indepth understanding.
I believe that the performance assessments give better direction as to what teachers need to focus on in the cl
The consistency and grade-level specific expectations make it easier for educators and will help ensure all stud
I think these standards have a lot of research based ideas to them, the learning progressions make sense, and
They are comprehensive
Depth of content and allowing for connects to real world (STEM) applications. They are easy to read and follow,
They help teachers with what to teach and give guidance on how far to take a topic or concept.
-Integration of the science and engineering practices -value of the cross-cutting concepts -scope and sequenc
Content
cience currently available and thus are the most relevant and useful standards which we can use in teaching our children.
link them to application.
nections to disciplinary core ideas.
A teacher from another content area could easily understand the NGSS because of its
encourage and push students towards the skills and knowledge needed to become successful engineers, in a variety of fie
e students to problem solve, think independently and how to use research, technology and a variety of lab materials/equipm
ors with limited science knowledge. Objectives are clear with specific clarification examples for formative and summative a
the cross-cutting concepts are all fabulous ways to create students who can solve deep problems.
s better at encouraging students to understand the process of science and encourages higher lever thinking as opposed to
ecific concepts to each grade level.
science. They are comprehensive, rigorous, and consistent.
adopted nationally, so lots of materials will be correlated to them. It is impossible to meet the standards without some han
-The relevance for students
the standards sequenced and each level built upon is extremely helpful.
ecific examples are given.
science is a significant part of a secondary education is an improvement. Some of the standards reach too high in some sit
Science Practices, and Nature of Science in the standards themselves - not just content
at a young age, however the NGSS had way too much information for early elementary years.
s grade levels.
pt understanding rather than memorizing lots of details
loped in conjunction with Common Core. We will end up with a generation of kids that do not go to college because we ha
sophy that the practices and crosscutting themes of science should be integrated with and emphasized with the developm
of scientific principles and concepts.
" about science. There are many of them that encompass many fields of science.
ds which I assume are already "set in stone."
ey exit high school as compared to the IOWA CORE.
s as if the student should be building upon the previous year's learning.

, interest in STEM and the core concepts and soft skills necessary for scientific literacy. The NGSS are easy to negotiate and
companies that sell products to the schools in order to implement these sub-par standards. Companies who create and im
ate evolution into the life science standards which is essential to understanding life on Earth.
of engineering/scientific practices throughout the course (as opposed to a single unit of study).
k this allows for deep understanding.

hey should be teaching the FOSS kits and will also give them a better grading tool.
s and school districts.

new and important content that will better prepare them for their futures.
d articles at all, this is an area that needs to go in the future.

understanding of science. Some of these standards seem they should be covered in additional courses, not the basic, elem
eaching true science to students. It also gives guidance to teachers as to what should be taught at a more rigorous level.
ing crucial for understanding tomorrow's challenges.

ase interest and improve college readiness
2nd grade rather than a K-2 band.

or lessons.
e concepts Connections to math and language arts
excel beyond the standards and I have seen special education students meet the standard. The standards are rich and dem
he standards.
d into units.
tigations and communicating my results.
a month. Kids are not ready for the rigor of college lab classes when all they do is sit at a desk in advanced chemistry class
meet the new standards. Through contest and team project students will better understand the why they need to learn this
rent areas of science relate to each other.
gh to give kids a good base.
fferentiate instruction to make it meaningful.
Offering examples of POSSIBLE assessment ideas.
ut an inch deep approach to science. Builds in opportunities to make kids think and problem solve.
ps create clear learning targets Performance Expectations Practices Framework
gical progression of skills with inquiry emphasis at every level
or stimulating
ext Generation science standards. It is important to remain neutral and to not let religious groups change the content of th
e able to relate to science better than ever.

s practiced in the real world.
outcomes which is helpful.
andards were written before there was easy, readily available internet access. Now that students have this at their fingertip
dards are comprehensive, cross-cutting, and rigorous.
ence works.
fic and laid out in a way that makes sense to educators, parents and other stake holders.
on how science makes sense/connects to the world around us.
ovide a clear framework that appears to be reasonably aligned with ages/grade levels. If in fact kids graduate having mas
mes leaving enough room for flexibility within the curriculum
mework, which I feel benefits teachers in terms of any questions they have about what they need to teach. It also includes e
ed with science than the NRC standards. For example inquiry was too nebulous and open to interpretation than outlining a
if a student moves, they will not miss out on science education.
cross linked to common core makes it easy to see how they are supporting other focus areas
cepts, core ideas). So much more description and communication around each standard and what is expected as far as ins
certainly a lot of thought put into the standards as they are.
are aligning with the ELA standards of reading and writing.

nts to collect, analyze, collaborate, and use math and writing skills to communicate.
d by national leaders in science education. More balanced than Iowa Core.
science content actually contains some errors. We shouldn't bother.
n memorize.
, state, or move state to state
think it is important to incorporate core standards while encouraging students to engage in scientific practices such as buil
ula that districts develop.
mething that interests them and validates the importance of learning about issues related to science.
ific disciplines.
o show the intersection of science and all subject areas.
earning the same things.
them better understand their physical, biological and social world. Critical thinking appears to be included in terms of the
n whatever field they may choose.

schools and hopefully states. Research & evidence based & updated for more current information.
ngth. Also, creating a coherent view of science/technology which is presented from the beginning through the end of K-12
o educators can help students progress rather than repeating or missing areas.
of science. Regardless of what Iowa school a student attends, there would be a basic level of skill and knowledge that stud
level of understanding IF implemented well.
onsible citizenship in future years
Framework (evidence and research based). The fact that each performance expectation includes the use of critical thinking
h emphasizes the analytical reasoning and relationships that characterize science and provides skills that are useful by eve
e EXTREMELY good standards. They are easy to understand, therefore making it much easier to implement and teach to.
next level on a content area will do deeper from the first level.
eded for students to know in this time in order to contribute to the benefit of all.
kills along with knowledge.
standards against NGSS, these standards would move Iowa from a 'D' currently to a 'C'. I guess you could call that a streng
rom other disciplines. I really appreciate that the standards, as I read them, are written as performance expectations which
examples of how you could do cross-discipline activities. The standards strongly support writing in science too.
e the resources. That takes a lot of money. Labs, models, field experiences......money.
ssible for students.
hould be able to do before the next level of schooling

oom. Teachers can look through it and find the specific topic and the standards describe the specific expectation that there
and critical thought. The layout and order of the standards are well thought out and strategically placed.
our textbook materials.

extremely thoughtful way, and mostly get students excited about learning and doing science. I am very supportive of the in
tions. The instructional flexibility to spark student interest in real world situations.
ents can demonstrate mastery of the standard
be great problem solvers, if taught with the inquiry-based approach.
ne to consider the connections across disciplines.
ery clear that there is a connection between science and math and reading and writing.
s like "American Dream" and "solid support" in the description.
It also doesn't even acknowledge the intelligent design concept, so that's a huge plus. The only reason I even took this su
tten than the previous Iowa Core Standards.

taught. I also like that they don't shy away from "controversial" subjects such as evolution and climate change.
nce classes.
nature of the standards is clearly evident. Clear connections to the Literacy Standards will help content area teachers teac
curriculum that strives to teach beyond just the basic standards.
ve it is important for the standards to be divided by grade level so that teachers know exactly what standards they are resp
on at children and expect it to stick. They will have specific guidance to help the children learn and apply the information in
ironment for students and it will make them think more about what they are learning instead of just recall. If the NGSS is a
cular topic
s will need to be informed citizens and effective contributors in their careers.
any children do not get this at home unless their parents are in a science and tech career. Independent and creative think
e work in other disciplines.

se standards and we will be able to share resources with them. -Grade specific to make it less likely that content will be m
ics and practices that will help them now and in the future.
ce at a younger age.
d to focus more effort and resources in science education.
However, it does not say how.
nitions, etc. on the website that continues to evolve and is further defined.
eloped to help teachers meet them.

er level thinking. There will be a greater need for scaffolding to get students to this level of thinking for every standard.
mance expectations are clearly written and match the core ideas.
careers that may be in this field.
to the next. We have needed this in our schools for a long time.
n. This will help students be flexible as they grow and need to learn new information and assimilate it with their current kno
e students should know and understand. Also, the engineering section gives meaning to how to create learning opportuniti
ps get rid of the extra and creates better time management.
broken down into 4 basic big ideas.
through the grades is also a strength.
e increase emphasis on performance assessments. The more teachers venture into performance assessment the more se
'soft' skills that are required in the engineering field and other STEM fields.
omprehension.
y challenging students to utilize their resources and use critical thinking skills needed to strive after high school.
ards are easy to read.
standards. Inquiry and engineering practices are embedded. They will help all levels of science educators, but I am thinkin
instead the big ideas.
make it a better choice.
here it is learned.
on and how to assess it, as well as what needs to be taught and tested. They are prescriptive for teachers.
ke the interdisciplinary aspect denoting math and literacy connections.
n an inquiry based classroom.
on for science careers in the future.

nding, and teaching from the standards, we would see great development in our students' understanding of science concep
and breadth.
n increasingly technilogical word

sic core curriculum
ndard. I especially like including science and engineering practices within each strand.
ly believe students need to think overall not just specifically one topic.
ent the information as they see fit for the needs of their students. Provides suggestions on various ways to assess the stude
GSS. The STEM connection.
oundaries. They incorporate science and engineering practices which increase both rigor and relevance.
nd have clearer expectations for outcomes.

ng system so we science teachers had to develop our own and everyone's is different)
ence are all major strengths of the NGSS.

e, namely critical thinking skills.
ing particular subject areas as students from all schools and states.
ded for Iowa teachers to know what is really meant by this).

hose that know and not those that think they do.
ts should be able to DO.
pproach of the online version Color coded
ocess rather than simply arriving at a correct answer.

suggests assessment focus, and describe what assessment should not include.
rate by the end of the school year in the given grade/class.

rning is expected. The cross-curricular references are very helpful and give ideas of how to incorporate various subjects.
nquiry aspect into it.

major strengths of the NGSS.
s-on, practical application.
n. It already includes ELA standards linked to science content

e cross-cutting concepts such as energy and energy transfer as these concepts go across all areas of science and should be
over them. It makes it so we aren't teaching the same concepts over and over, yet it covers all the crucial concepts.
xtremely specific, but addresses understanding vs. recall
s you spend hours and hours. So, at this point, I don't know enough to comment.
when they enter college. They will have a broad background in a wide variety of science topics
ed to master that content.
y encourage problem solving and creativity.
he major strengths. The learning progressions are a strength.
ny shortfall to the definition of concepts, expectations, etc. for any of the grade levels.
etter, higher quality standards available that we should be looking into.
so nebulous that a teacher not comfortable with science that they cannot visualize the knowledge, skills, and understandin
opportunity to really work hard to make time for science in their daily schedule.
and additions to them. The teacher is able to know how the student should know a specific part or topic and what specifica
ction and evolution.

dent of science.
e emphasis on written and oral communication and mathematics/statistics. I also appreciate the no-nonsense inclusion of e
hat encompass many disciplines) as well as tasks and assessments that cause students to think and apply knowledge in n
ctices and the disciplinary core ideas provide teachers with the big picture of science instruction setting the stage for in-de
s though they will help to propel our students to the next level of science education.
pt as separate areas.
ontent. We love the organisation and support the website gives in explaining the standards. Iowa Core is inconsistent K-12 a
less content. It gives teachers the opportunity to really develop problem-solving skills that can be applicable to more than
ng 21st century learning and skills our students must have. In addition, they do not have the ability to limit teaching style o
n can report back to them with data.
s provided. Mixes skills with knowledge.
rds have if required to create local standards.
aught and reinforced regularly.
nce and 8th is earth science. I think a better idea would be to integrate all into 6 - 8. Notice we currently teach very little
other careers, it will be a severe hindrance to gaining even basic knowledge and understanding of critical science concepts
d with clarification statements, easy to understand Standards include the Science and Engineering Practices (relation to S
cator already fit into these standards, and this makes my transition to NGSS a little easier.
nformation.
actices from NGSS. I also feel it integrates with STEM. NGSS asks students to actively participate in collecting data, asking
d. Any parent and student not satisfied with the local standards can advocate for different standards or transfer to another
nt knowledge.
educated society as a whole.
what information should be focused on.
ross classrooms, districts, states.

ems to be easy to interpret.
tual understandings between different sub-disciplines in science, and it's avoids compartmentalizing different topics (life sc
erformace standards
andards. It gives a clarity to teachers as they have the endpoint assessment described. Instead of terms such as understan
xpectations will be similar.
science teaching and learning. All of the specifics to science can and will be taught within these core ideas. Teachers will
as three parts. Our students need to know more than just facts.
y for that is, it more clearly unifies the practices of science, and it shows ways in which science and correlate with ELA.
one another across grade levels.
Links to CCSS
develop some common language and processes when used district-wide.
to be successful once they finish high school.

be to what level all students need to reach to be considered proficient. For the first time we have concrete descriptions of a
e to maintain high standards. By separating the ideas of science into the three main sections, teachers can clearly see how
processes, concepts and cross-cutting ideas in terms of student performances. A multitude of support documents (Append
g list of detailed sub-goals like in the MISIC curriculum.

be assessed. the benchmarks give more detail as what to cover, allows teachers the freedom to not have to teach a whole
um and the threads seem continuous through HS with a concurrent increase in complexity and expectations of student outc
performance based evaluations of student mastery.
oes a good job of narrowly defining the performance expectations.
s Math connections
s rote memorization
ms the writers know the difference between science and religion. Also, the fact that there is material on the changes that h
cross cutting concepts, core ideas, and developing and using models.
ow and may be important for students in the future
ands; a stricter guidelines for teachers

Core. I am not a fan of how the Iowa Core does Science as Inquiry. NGSS handles this much better.
d accepts topics of evolution and climate change.

ay K-12; clear connections to Iowa Core reading & math standards; broader definition of science that includes engineering;
to all fields of science and industry relevant skills is a big step.
ould be covered at each grade level.
o do and they make sure that students will practice the concepts as well.
mple: forces is introduced in third grade, expanded upon in fifth and more in 9th grade. - Specific and testable standards. -
ars. It covers the concepts and skills students need to be prepared for post secondary.
state should know.
ndix A is helpful.
arning. Assessment that requires learners to apply learning.
t the specific grade levels.
king it easier when students move from one area to another.

e scientists.
e scientists. This will allow them to continue learning outside of school and to find answers for themselves.
ering. Standards' wording repeats through high school, with advanced emphasis on modeling and mathematics...but found
ariety and depth of content displayed makes that obvious.
onveying a purpose of the topic to students
d appropriateness for Iowa.
g aspects of NGSS and expect a wide variety of suggestions regarding this aspect of NGSS.
evels and allows for teaching beyond.
eachers to ensure students are being taught the necessary information. Well structured, indepth documentation
many to those units and many Iowa Core Standards and Benchmarks. Those that I have tried to explain this to, do not get
ose performance expectations are supported by Science & Engineering Practices, Disciplinary Core Ideas, and Cross Cuttin
DCI's are relevant. I like the specific information in the DCI.

allow students to do the same.
volving the concepts of engineering is awesome. Too often in education, emphasis is on students preforming on standardiz
there as a guide for systems to set up a scope and sequence of science standards to be taught by each grade level.
go and what is too much for your students. Clarification statements help teachers understand exactly what is to be taught.
ments in usability in this document.
tudents should be able to know, understand, and do by the end of the teaching on that topic.
ards for literacy and math. Integration of engineering in support of STEM initiatives.
ance expectations. They have incorporated the Common Core Math and ELA standards into the document.
ocesses...... There is not any nod toward political/ideological/religious driven nonsense such as "alternative theories" of cre
be assessed. The doing science in order to learn science. The possibility of greater integration of the science disciplines.
cross curricular areas, as well as the links to the literacy standards.
actly what the student needs to be able to do.
er inquiry, but also, they highlight how these topics are relevant to students. There are abundance opportunities for transf
ed on understanding rather than memorizing facts
re standards. The standards also require students to learn about and engage in the process of science, rather than memor
ct teacher's decisions and lessons. They cover science as inquiry in a great way. Additionally, engineering is covered as w
powerful and critical components of NGSS.
w and somewhat limiting.

ertical articulation of them.
fe, not just science. They also flow well through all the age levels. Most states and schools are turning to NGSS and this al
nce concepts and skills masterfully.
lls that all students can benefit from.
tion of facts and more emphasis on demonstrating understanding and applying skills.
hin other areas of content.
ross-cutting relationships. Incorporation of the engineering processes.
fessional development around them PEs give a view of how teachers can assess their students
of these, how they were organized or the intent. Again, after training and closely working with NGSS, I clearly see the conn
to cover. The connection between grade bands allow for district wide implementation and easily distinguishes the differen
h things would just be nice to know if you have the extra time. It would also be nice to have the same standards throughou
you the main ideas as well as provides you with an idea of how to incorporate engineering into the lesson.
tter standards
each standard
and the detail provided about the standards at all levels.
t is expected in each course.
o complete .
teachers some flexibility in the amount of depth to differentiate for students. Makes it easier for students who transfer betw
d skills, and makes it difficult to teach the two together. NGSS has recognized which skills and cross-cutting concepts go we
. Focus is on higher order thinking.
hey allow specification in standardization and are easy to apply.
ience, should that be their choice. The content SHOULD result in a general population that is more aware of thinking in scie
NGSS reflects more current research into how students learn science.
ts. It puts emphasis on higher level of Blooms.
me and accomplish the standards.

tions for students.
dards do. In the NGSS there is strong presence of Inquiry even though the vocabulary is not the same that Iowa has been u
eate a generation of science literate citizens
e. To me the biggest advantage is that is students move among NGSS states they will be presented with a cohesive scienc
fied in the elementary grades rather than waiting for a science focus until middle school.
with an almost infinite amount of scientific knowledge.
hinking state of mind.
of facts without context. They do encourage students to see relationships between science and other subjects.
job of including engineering concepts.
ngineering).
Next Generation Standards. From looking at the fifth grade standards, it didn't seem like there was an unrealistic amount o
he integration of science practices and principles with the science content; requirements for students to show understandi
ss cutting concepts will allow teachers to see that science isn't just information from a book.
o like the added ELS standards within the science standards.
higher depth of knowledge, They are easy to follow/understand.
cy, and mathematics standards. They are also inquiry based, which breaks teachers away from being reliant upon tradition
of redundancy 5. The expectations for student understanding of science are more applied and practical than current stan
ELA standards. Very comprehensive.
y. I'm glad that learning about evolution is a standard.
ontent throughout grades with a little more depth added each time. The boundary explanations that go with each standard
he sciences.
ess Connecting concepts together rather than leaving them in silos
ate to state without worrying that key concepts will be repeated or skipped because of the relocation.
hat we need in our future innovators.
arer target of what a proficient student of each standard would be able to do
s after graduating high school is good.

ough for teachers to allow students to meet them in different ways.
crucial critical thinking skills and combined with the level of engineering design that is built into all standards I believe tha
l" for them at the next level. I think much research has went into NGSS including developmental aspects of the brain and
same thing, however, the Iowa Core Standards are already doing that if you are using them correctly.
plore that theme, develop ideas and hopefully "click" with it.
ble and will help our teachers focus better and develop better lessons.
on with math and literacy
milar instruction in subject matter across their education.
eed to focus on in the classrooms. As previously stated, the clarification statements and assessment boundaries that acco
will help ensure all students are getting similar science instruction. The NGSS have interdisciplinary connections and cove
ssions make sense, and the resources available to schools is immense. I also appreciate the connections to math and litera
easy to read and follow, plus they include clarifications and connections to other common core subjects.
pts -scope and sequence of the content standards -the grade level tool that allows one to hone in to specific standards -t
n use in teaching our children.
stand the NGSS because of its stated ties to content.
ful engineers, in a variety of fields. We are missing a great opportunity with the next generation if we do not make this a m
a variety of lab materials/equipment to complete the goals set by the standards.
for formative and summative assessments.Cross curricular standards are listed and examples are provided. Engineering is
er lever thinking as opposed to the rote memorization of science facts.
he standards without some hands-on, inquiry-based activities, which will push a lot of districts to better science. No Child L
ards reach too high in some situations: timelines too short for what is to be taught, less practical, more complicated. The i
ot go to college because we have killed the fun of learning.
emphasized with the development of conceptual understanding. The NGSS will encourage teaching practices that are mor
NGSS are easy to negotiate and understand, and cross-checking lesson plans with the NGSS often increases the student ce
Companies who create and implement assessments (SBACC and PARCC) will also profit off the backs of the students. The
onal courses, not the basic, elementary courses.
ught at a more rigorous level.
The standards are rich and demanding. High expectations are set for all grade levels.
esk in advanced chemistry class. Right Teachers doing the right jobs... just because they have tenure doesn't mean they ar
he why they need to learn this lesson. It should help young people understand the world they live in and are growing up in
groups change the content of these standards.
dents have this at their fingertips, they crave and demand more from us at teachers. They know the jobs they will have wi
n fact kids graduate having mastered the standards I would think they would be well prepared for the college or vocational
need to teach. It also includes engineering design, which is an excellent way to apply learning
interpretation than outlining a subset of processes.
d what is expected as far as instruction and assessment (performance for students). The scope and sequence is so much m
scientific practices such as building models and developing experiments.
to be included in terms of the direct inquiry methods that students will use to acquire knowledge. Years ago, a student m
ginning through the end of K-12 is a major strength.
of skill and knowledge that students would be expected to have mastered.
udes the use of critical thinking skills (science and engineering practices). Elementary teachers now have a clear guide of
des skills that are useful by everyone - not just those that decide to pursue careers in science.
r to implement and teach to.
uess you could call that a strength.

erformance expectations which start with the verb (focused on the practices) telling what students will be able to do at the
ting in science too.
specific expectation that there is for students.
ically placed.
e. I am very supportive of the inclusion of climate science in the standards. Given the clear scientific evidence about human
e only reason I even took this survey was to help keep ID out of the science classroom.
and climate change.
help content area teachers teach to these standards as well.
y what standards they are responsible for at which grades.

arn and apply the information in a hands-on way that will benefit them much more!
d of just recall. If the NGSS is adopted by Iowa it will create a learning environment that will make Iowa a leader in Science
ndependent and creative thinking is a great part of our science instruction that will carry over to the college level.
ss likely that content will be missed. -Greater real world application -Higher cognitive rigor -Disciplinary core ideas, cross
thinking for every standard.
imilate it with their current knowledge.

w to create learning opportunities with a STEM integration.
mance assessment the more sense the NGSS make.
ve after high school.
ence educators, but I am thinking especially of the help it will give elementary teachers.
ve for teachers.
nderstanding of science concepts. The connections to literacy are strong and performance expecations are clear.
arious ways to assess the students for each standard.
d relevance.
incorporate various subjects.
areas of science and should be underlying themes K-12

all the crucial concepts.
wledge, skills, and understanding that all students should have.
part or topic and what specifically they should teach and what not to include in their testing.
e the no-nonsense inclusion of evolution as a central theme in biology.
think and apply knowledge in new and unique situations.

ction setting the stage for in-depth student exploration and understanding.
Iowa Core is inconsistent K-12 and is written so you cannot tell what is a standards vs a benchmark or objective, etc...plus
can be applicable to more than just science and school.
ability to limit teaching style or ability any more than the current Iowa Core.
e we currently teach very little physical science.
ding of critical science concepts. And if people actually read the NGSS and the comments of the Fordham Institute (http://w
neering Practices (relation to STEM) Standards include the disciplinary core ideas with crosscutting concepts I like that the
cipate in collecting data, asking children to predict outcomes, and design and improve solutions against a model. The goal
tandards or transfer to another school that more closely aligns with the standards wanted.
ntalizing different topics (life sciences vs. physical sciences, for example). B) the engineering piece. I think this encourage
ead of terms such as understand and apply which can be interpreted in many ways, the performance expectations give a
these core ideas. Teachers will have greater authority and flexibility to create curriculum that ties these concepts together
nce and correlate with ELA.
have concrete descriptions of assessments we should be striving to have students meet.
s, teachers can clearly see how these science ideas need to be integrated into their students' learning of good science.
of support documents (Appendices) available but not attached to the PE document so as to make the document overwhelm
m to not have to teach a whole textbook chapter to chapter to chapter

nd expectations of student outcomes. I like the breadth of concepts covered by the standards.
material on the changes that humans make to earth systems.
ence that includes engineering; performance-based standards
ecific and testable standards. - Engineering components - Thoroughly vetted already. - Implementation ready i.e. we can
or themselves.
g and mathematics...but foundations are the same.
epth documentation
ed to explain this to, do not get it.

ry Core Ideas, and Cross Cutting Concepts.
udents preforming on standardized tests which is the opposite of education; there has been the learning of facts with this a
ght by each grade level.
nd exactly what is to be taught.
the document.
as "alternative theories" of creation or "we don't know if climate change is happening." The standards stick to the things
tion of the science disciplines.
undance opportunities for transfer and integration.
of science, rather than memorizing isolated facts.

ly, engineering is covered as well, which is a great addition to school curriculum.
are turning to NGSS and this allows Iowa's students to be at the same level and at the same expectations as other states/s
ith NGSS, I clearly see the connections.
easily distinguishes the difference between grade level content.

the same standards throughout the state and country, so that our students aren't behind if they attend out of state colleg
into the lesson.
r for students who transfer between schools within NGSS states.
nd cross-cutting concepts go well with which scientific concepts, making teachers' lives easier.
s more aware of thinking in science--SHOULD dispel ignorance and therefore many beliefs and practices that are potentiall
the same that Iowa has been used to using. they use Process instead of inquiry, One recommendation would be to careful
esented with a cohesive science education experience. The new standards also focus much more on teaching the scientific
and other subjects.
re was an unrealistic amount of content/information to teach.
r students to show understanding in multiple modes (e.g., designing and carrying out experiments, evaluating claims, deve
rom being reliant upon traditional methods of teaching and assessing.
and practical than current standards
ons that go with each standard
into all standards I believe that NextGen standards will truly give our students the 21st century skills they need to be succ
ental aspects of the brain and what is appropriate for students at all levels.
sessment boundaries that accompany individual performance expectations are extremely helpful. The inclusion of 21st ce
ciplinary connections and cover all areas of science. The engineering standards align well with the STEM initiative.
connections to math and literacy in each performance expectation. It appears science teaching will be more conceptual in
ore subjects.
hone in to specific standards -the attention to performance standards rather than just content standards
tion if we do not make this a major emphasis.
es are provided. Engineering is included.
ts to better science. No Child Left Behind has taken science off the radar of many districts, or if it is taught, it is mostly no
ctical, more complicated. The interlacing of standards is good, so are lots of application required rather than "book" learnin
teaching practices that are more in line with research supported teaching practices. The encouragement to focus on claim
often increases the student centered nature of the lessons.
the backs of the students. The state and federal government are going to be able to mine a lot of great data from our stud
ve tenure doesn't mean they are the right person to stretch the young minds of today. Let the new teachers teach, help th
ey live in and are growing up in.
know the jobs they will have will require them to be able to problem solve and think critically and simple memorization doe
ed for the college or vocational programs.
ope and sequence is so much more coherent than our current Iowa Core Science Standards.
wledge. Years ago, a student mentioned to me that if they'd only learned how to think critically at an early age, they could
hers now have a clear guide of what they should be assessing at each grade level. They are correlated to common core st
tudents will be able to do at the end of instruction.
cientific evidence about human-caused climate change, and the stakes for our kids, it is crucial that they learn about facto
make Iowa a leader in Science Education. It is important for students to have the ability to think about and apply knowled
er to the college level.
-Disciplinary core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and Science & Engineering Practices are interwoven -They are written sim
xpecations are clear.
chmark or objective, etc...plus the inquiry standards are separated out which does not work for science. NGSS includes the
the Fordham Institute (http://www.edexcellence.net/), which is selfdescribed a "the nation's leader in advancing education
scutting concepts I like that the standards go deep with a few, instead of many standards going only an inch deep.
ons against a model. The goal of science is learning how to create an environment for argument, construct an argument b
ng piece. I think this encourages teachers to design learning activities where students are actually applying their knowledg
formance expectations give a good description to create assessment pieces. And with the recent release of the high schoo
at ties these concepts together as well as work with teachers from other areas to coordinate learning on a much larger leve
s' learning of good science.

make the document overwhelmingly large.
plementation ready i.e. we can start teaching it right away--or are we so arrogant to think we could do a better job....go thr
the learning of facts with this approach...not the learning of how to think. If creativity and critical thinking are the emphasi
e standards stick to the things we accept, based on what information has been accumulated to this point in time. This is a
e expectations as other states/schools.
they attend out of state colleges. I feel that not having similar standards to other schools and states leaves many gaps in
nd practices that are potentially harmful due to a general lack of science knowledge.
mmendation would be to carefully look at process/inquiry language and adapt or bring that wording more into alignment wit
more on teaching the scientific process. Since the amount of relevant scientific data is too overwhelming for students to le
iments, evaluating claims, developing and using scientific models, designing and building devices to apply concepts, etc.),
tury skills they need to be successful.
elpful. The inclusion of 21st century skills within the performance expectations along with the CCSS cross-reference for ea
ith the STEM initiative.
hing will be more conceptual in nature if taught the way they should be.
nt standards
or if it is taught, it is mostly nonfiction content readers. Those have a place but should not be the only science a student g
uired rather than "book" learning, could be more expensive to teach because of materials required, Application in other ar
couragement to focus on claims and evidence as a critical aspect of moving science forward is crucial to helping students
lot of great data from our students that will follow them the rest of their lives and be part of their permanent "file". Schoo
he new teachers teach, help the new teachers teach.
y and simple memorization does not prepare students for this. The updated standards will better prepare students for the
ally at an early age, they could have avoided being manipulated by a sexual predator. Who would think that a sound scien
e correlated to common core standards.
cial that they learn about factors changing our climate, and what can be done about it.
think about and apply knowledge not just in the classroom but also in the real world. The NGSS will help create a learning
terwoven -They are written similar to competencies
for science. NGSS includes them at the objective level, therefore helping teachers understand how they work together.
leader in advancing educational excellence for every child through quality research, analysis, and commentary Fordham
oing only an inch deep.
ment, construct an argument based on evidence. The results might not be correct but that's OK if they have evidence tha
ctually applying their knowledge. And it's uber-compatible with PBL. C) I think the standards are progressive in the real-wo
recent release of the high school evidence statement (and soon to be released MS and Elementary statements) it gives eve
e learning on a much larger level.
e could do a better job....go through the expense, time and work of 'tweaking' them or worse yet, designing our own curric
ritical thinking are the emphasis, it will be a MAJOR improvement over what it taught now.
d to this point in time. This is a very good thing when compared to what some other states come up with in order to attemp
nd states leaves many gaps in the education of students.
ording more into alignment with what the 3 regents universities are using to prepare their science education graduates. A
overwhelming for students to learn and make sense of by the time they graduate, it is important that we equip them with t
evices to apply concepts, etc.), and clear connections to existing ELA and Math Iowa Core standards.
he CCSS cross-reference for each standard is a great benefit.
be the only science a student gets in Iowa.
equired, Application in other areas is also good.
d is crucial to helping students understand science. Students must be encouraged to view the development of scientific un
f their permanent "file". Schools will get $$ from pimping our students to the federal government. As for the students and
better prepare students for the future.
would think that a sound science education could accomplish THAT?
NGSS will help create a learning environment that will foster true authentic learning.
nd how they work together.
is, and commentary Fordham is also involved with, and generally supportive, of national programs... including the Commo
s OK if they have evidence that supports their argument. Teachers will still need to ensure they understand correctly, but
ds are progressive in the real-world, 21st century things that students need to know. Namely, climate change. Our students
entary statements) it gives even more clarity of what teachers should see in students that are proficient. The connection b
e yet, designing our own curriculum ala Iowa Core, which is so porous and flawed as to be unusable? - Heavy literacy comp
come up with in order to attempt to teach their own versions of "science."
cience education graduates. Another strength is on the focus of engineering process.
tant that we equip them with the tools to interpret data as they move through life after high school. The new standards are
he development of scientific understanding as a process of collecting empirical data that is used to support or refute claims
nment. As for the students and their education---they get NOTHING other than a sub par science education that won't prep
ograms... including the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).
they understand correctly, but they will be thinking through the process. NGSS develops models to describe, analyze and i
, climate change. Our students need to be confronted with these realities in a way that encourages them to use their talen
are proficient. The connection boxes to ELA and Math are particularly helpful for elementary teachers who need to have the
nusable? - Heavy literacy components. - Built into common core (or is that too toxic of a phrase now too?) This allows tea
h school. The new standards are a major step toward making this a reality.
used to support or refute claims with evidence and a process of discussing and debating the strengths of these claims. It is
ence education that won't prepare them for STEM careers or college courses.
odels to describe, analyze and interpret data, gather and make sense of information (turn from data to evidence, develop a
ourages them to use their talents and knowledge to address them.
teachers who need to have the connections to Math and ELA to justify the time spent on science and to help understand th
hrase now too?) This allows teachers to work effortlessly with literacy teachers to integrate science. - emphasize conceptu
strengths of these claims. It is NOT a process of bits of factual information passed on from one generation to the next. So
om data to evidence, develop a model that predicts and describes, develop and use a model to describe.
ence and to help understand that science is the perfect subject to apply those skills developed in Math and ELA. It will also
science. - emphasize conceptual development over route memorization of random science topics. - focuses more on how
one generation to the next. Some scientific ideas have a high level of debate and discussion associated with them and th
l to describe.
ped in Math and ELA. It will also help MS and HS teachers see the connections between ELA and Math and help cross curric
topics. - focuses more on how science is done (and the process) rather than re-generating old facts.
on associated with them and that is a GOOD thing.
and Math and help cross curricular conversations.
What are concerns you have about the Next Generation Science Standards?
Answer Options
Response Count
answered question
skipped question
938
938
1585
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a.
The best intere a.
a.
a.
Local School B b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
College of Educa.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
f. Student
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
h. Business
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Out of school a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
retired teacher b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
g. Community member
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
Informal Educa a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
Basically at on b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Literacy Coach a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Nonformal educa.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Work in STEM j b.
a.
a.
a.
Parent,Environ a.
b.
Naturalist
a.
naturalist
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
County Conserva.
a.
b.
b.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
d. Higher Education
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
h. Business
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
Non-formal Edua.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Retired now butb.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
g. Community member
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Parent and edu a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
homeschoolin a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Substittute tea b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Teacher and P a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Teacher and paa.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Non-formal edua.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
h. Business
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Museum & Aquar
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Science Instruca.
a.
County Conserva.
a.
health educatora.
a.
Museum and Aqa.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
environmental ea.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Both teacher a a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
g. Community member
a. Teacher
g. Community member
g. Community member
g. Community member
e. Parent
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Parent and tea b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Environmental a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
Non-formal educ
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
b.
nonformal educa
a.
a.
b.
Grandparent anb.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
g. Community member
g. Community member
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. No
b. No
Professional En b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Nonformal educa. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
citizen of the a. Yes
Someone who wo
b. No
b. No
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
Teacher and paa. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
b. No
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
b. Administrator
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
educational co a.
b.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
i
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
In the educatio b.
Going to schoolb.
Going to schoola.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
e. Parent
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
b.
a.
I am a homosexb.
iiuujj
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
g. Community member
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
I am a parent ob.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
school district a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
parent & teach a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Support scienc a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
b. Administrator
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
I am both a teaa.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
What are concerns you have about

Standards?
that they will not be adopted soon enough
I am concerned only that some of the science-based content may be challenged due to political considerations.
Their diminished attention to the nature of science, ecology, and environmental issues. By placing so much atte
They need to be reviewed/revised every few years. Kept current.
That they won't be accepted as the standards to use.
Effectively rolling it out to the community that they understand what the standards are and that these are the m
Teachers who check list and continue to teach as they always have taught.
kids will be turned off because it seems hard.
Seems to be missing some areas in motion, chemistry.
As with all Standards that try to "fix" what is wrong with education I am reluctant to endorse a national model,
My only real concern is that we have yet to get approved Core Standards in Science. Let's make this happen an
The concern is the standards are not always stated in a user friendly fashion.
I believe that the NGSS are an improvement from current science standards. No concerns at this time.
For years we have focused on the idea that I teach science, math, shop, or English. That's not exactly realistic,
It is not likely that we will get through all of them.
Although I like the uniformity in knowing that all Iowa students will have an understanding of certain concepts,
They are so specific that I worry that for some it will turn into a series of unrelated, "one-off" activities to say a
They are pretty wordy for teachers that may not have science as their strong point. Our elementary school tea
Testing could be tricky and may need some iterations to get right.
We may not teach what we currently teach in science or have taught.
There are some holes, but that will happen with any standards.
They are untested, why are we rolling these out, they set a standard as man made global warming as a truth w
An effective infrastructure to support teachers in making the shift. Especially at the elementary level where cu
Too much Earth science and not enough specilization for students with extra science interest and ability and too
Very challenging to read. Likely a few people are going to study them carefully and then interpret them for the
That like with so many other core curriculum attempts, the school boards will impose restrictions and limitation
none at the time
As in all curriculums, there just seems to be too much information to cover but in the end it works.
They are too vague
Disregard.
Hard to access. Website is a bit confusing.
Major concern will be a transition into the standards as seasoned teachers try to adjust. Another concern would
There is a lot of material that is required in one year for both NGGS and Ia Core. Difficult to cover it all in depth
Maturity of students - some materials are presented before students are developmentally ready for the specific
special education students are often pulled out of science for additional support in the areas of reading and ma
People will back away because it is too complicated and not do it justice.
They are FAR too narrow, and focus on college bound students. I am a teacher, but more important I am a pare
I think people will have difficulty understanding what the NGSS is actually trying to get across unless studied. I
Too much is expected in the early elementary standards. It also seems like biology, chemistry and physics has
that there can never be enough real science experiences that take students out of the classroom into the real w
Example: meiosis-students are expected to explain how meiosis results in variations (and mutations) WITHOUT
I don't want to implement any more government restrictions on teaching and make it more difficult to reach suc
As before, probably too much information for non-college bound students. It makes a cumbersome chore to try
First, these standards are aligned with Common Core Standards set by the Federal government, not by State go
None - it has taken too long to adopt the standards in Iowa
There is to a miss understanding of child development in the NGSS. The NGSS require students in lower grades
They seem confusing and somewhat disorganized. There is still a great deal of uncertainty.
n/a
That people will think the Performance Expectations are THE standards and all they have to do is get students t
Finding the teachers qualified to teach all subject areas in all Iowa schools.
Depth of topics, outreach to students
I believe that this will require a lot of instructional support for classroom teachers to be implemented with fideli
implementing them into the curriculum of my courses
Are teachers willing to change the way they are teaching or just use the same lesson plans from one year to an
Depth related to an honors program (currently being offered).
That the public has a misconception of what the standards are.
They do not appear to have an extended guideline for students who exceed the standards quickly or have alrea
Some may feel they are not specific enough as in a check list of items to cover.
I have none. Just want to make sure everyone is educated on how to read and use them correctly.
That they are inflexible - with our world changing so much and so rapidly how can we say NOW what students w
none
No concerns
HS-ESS2-4, 2-6, and 2-7 I do not believe that these standards should be individually assessed. These concepts
that they won't help.
I think that education standards should be decided locally. Common Core is a prime example of a failing system
bands and some areas are too in-depth while others are vague
1) I'm concerned it will harm the AP science program as these courses cover many topics in GREAT depth, and
how to cover all these standards with high school kids if there are no required classes....only that they earn 6 cr
Not having enough time to efficiently teach the standards.
Elementary students need to be taught a broad range of facts about science instead of having them come up w
Hard to understand. What exactly should be covered in each one?
Assessment of the standards are left to districts to decide. If your district doesn't have a curriculum coordinato
nothing
I am concerned if they do not include AP courses that teachers who do not have core classes will be left with a
Teacher time to plan and adjust instructions
Not all important topic are covered. For example gas laws and acid base chemistry are not covered in the NGS
In some cases, the standards expect students to have a strong understanding of background knowledge that m
Cost of implementation and implementation format. Science is best learned in an experiential way, which will in
They will need to be updated often to keep up with the high pace of scientific and technological advances in the
I would like to see resources to support implementation if there is a gap at some level in the local school curricu
None-I think we have done a great job in Waukee of making sure these standards are spread throughout grade
The NGSS are mediocre, at best and won't prepare our students for college or STEM careers. These "standards
Not realistic for real world competition , attention to detail, team work and layers that success does not come r
I don't want religion to dictate what is or is not taught in a science classroom, whether that religion is Islam, Bu
I feel like science needs to be given extra funding extra weight and extra importance and should be required by
Practicing teachers using it as a script. Inquiry, criticism, and individual student interests being neglected
We have been waiting for the State of Iowa to adopt SOMETHING for the past ten years. The last two years hav
May be a little complicated for the average parent to follow
Money to provide tools needed in my district and time.
1. Performance tasks are not in student-friendly language 2. grades 9-12 have some content that would NOT
Depth is always difficult when there is so much content to cover in science.
I think they are hard to read and understand. They do not give enough detail on what actually needs to be cov
I'm concerned that religious communities will attempt to reject the standards. It's important that all students le
None
money for supplies needed
People misunderstanding their structure.

none
TIme consuming when trying to prepare curriculum. Spend more time power standards and unpacking them or
Big bang theory taught as truth
The standards don't always align with the standardized testing that requires students to recall specific facts and
They are vague as to the actual science "topics". Teachers want more clarity.
The ability to cover all in 2 required clsses.
Hoping that the concepts are need to know and relevant for todays world and thinkers.
The videos all seemed like government propaganda. At no point did they say what the standards were, they jus
I am concerned that there is resistance to these great standards!
There are a lot of standards, some of which do not match up with the common core. Also it is going to be difficu
Lack of current science in lower elementary grades right now and how those students will catch up with NGSS
Universal implementation
incorporating out of school programming into the NGSS curriculum in schools.
everything
It looks over whelming.
What if students do not meet them? Adaptability?
They currently seem so broad -- really having them narrowed down to align specifically to the curriculum we are
Too specific in the outcomes. Hard to read and map. Just give me topics to cover.
Are they realistic expectations? How to assess them?
I feel they lack a health aspect. I believe a lot of things will no longer be covered, such as the body, plants, wea
That we'll switch to something else in a couple of years.
There is so much that often times it is difficult to go to the depth that is desired while allowing for student disco
Will there be monetary support from our state government to help train teachers to be able to implement the s
None
Getting enough qualified people to teach them effectively.
mathematics courses are still used as the weeder courses in science majors.
That they haven't been implemented yet.
My only concern is funding to buy materials. I am very interested in teaching these with integrity, but our schoo
With these standards, or any standards, how will student learning be monitored? Will there be a specific end of
Implementation, time, money, and resources
I am concerned that the disciplinary core ideas are staggered rather than a steady progression.
Not widespread enough to cover a variety of topics/interests
Getting appropriate materials; reading and applying them to each grade level. I think it will take a while to see
It is a new learning curve for some teachers.
Not enough content
No concerns
Just like most of the education system, political beliefs are pushed on students. Specifically, climate change is
When the standards will be adopted and Iowa education can have some solid footing as to which criteria is use
they are too rigorous and too task-oriented. Tasks should be up to the educator as to what shows mastery of co
That our students will be competitive in an increasingly automated and complex world.
I think that the middle school standards should be split into grade levels.
In theory it works. Does every student need the scientific background, behavior kids or kids that simply don't
To implement this plan correctly it will require a large increase in resources from the community. Computers, te
Teacher in service that is not rushed and required for all. I think math and literacy stands were not required for
They get distorted with belief systems.
I understand the idea that all students are required to meet the standards for all areas, but since these areas of
That teachers won't be given time to change their lessons to meet the standards and that standards will be "fo
na
some areas are covered again and again throughout a child's education, whereas others are only touched upon
just hope the highschool is not just a repeat of the middle school and gets a little more in depth maybe.
Too wordy
As with most standards, the interpretation of those reading it.
Reading and math being WAY TOO MUCH of an emphasis and science not being a focus.
I believe many of these skills are beyond the maturity of the average middle school student. Many are not yet a
People (including educators) will interpret that it is specifically prescriptive for performance assessment.
6-8 is in a grade band
hard to decipher
Some are very specific and some are very broad.
Still too much breadth. If every student is expected to accomplish all standards its too much.
The fact that we have been unsure of whether to use these or MISIC standards is a problem. Some teachers bel
When looking at all of the standards across the elementary grade levels there are some major areas that are le
The standards are too hit and miss for grades. Things that were considered theory in the past are now conside
None
lack of creative teacher input more creative learning..stimulate learning
Teaching or presenting evolution as a fact rather than a theory.
I don't agree with the evolution theory and don't think it should be taught as how humans developed. I do not
none
The language could be made simpler. Long sentences are sometimes confusing.
More ecology and environmental issues could be included
HS-PS2-3 Is really specific while most of the other standards are more broad. It seems that the only way to fufil
Implementation will be at least a two year process. We just finished Iowa Core. How much more are we going to
Please pay no heed to those who would have us remove solid science for fringe theological reasons. Teaching s
None
legislators who know nothing about science or education will try to substitute Jesus for science.
TOO MUCH INFORMATION!!! If it were broken down by grade level and gave specific starting points and ending
Before starting to change the world of education, take a good look at the children in our schools systems today.
to wordy and not age appropriate
Assessment - how does Iowa plan on determining if students are proficient in science?
Are there too many?
I do worry that they seem to rely heavily on students remembering most of the information they learn in early y
is it viable or still too much?
None.
Some of them seem very in depth.
They will require a dramatic expansion in earth and space science education, which our school is not prepared
How to assess standards in a timely and feasible way
That not all children learn in the same way or at the same pace.
What about younger grades
Evangelicals
Not easy to follow. Too much content.
We need more outreach to parents.
None
None at this time.
I am concerned that the standards do not meet the needs of all kids. Some kids like mine will not be rocket sci
None
While rigorous, I would like to see more in depth study in math/science relation.
A little to much focus on group learning and not some individual skill levels.
Not sure if they have been "road tested" to see if it is actually possible to fit them all into the time/years kids ar
Time to integrate them when Math & Reading take the front seat to Science and Social Studies content...
Need to be more specific on how to conduct an experiment so then they can later design their own experiment
Some concepts (such as evolution and the age of the earth) are stated as "fact" and "law" when in fact they are
I am mostly concerned about how to achieve more science time in our schools to meet these standards.
There is no involvement of health or body systems.
It is difficult to know exactly how to reach each standard. Many people can interpret the standard differently an
Where do hands-on experiments come into play with a lot of these standards?
The lack of the depth on knowledge in HS chemistry and physics.
Some very important concepts are missing, like body systems at the high school level
Standards are to time consuming, not allowing for true understanding in many areas. Unfortunately, I end up t
They do not offer enough engineering courses to the schools. They have great pathways for those in the medic
1.) How long will it take for our state to decides if we are using this for sure or not? I hate being in limbo! 2.) S
I am concerned about teachers being bogged down with the amount of material and organization of the NGSS
The PE's emphasize content and a reasonable portion of the content identified for MS students is not consistent
For the younger grades it's slightly surface only.
People won't read them but think they are faulty simply because they are national standards.
I still believe that set standards in science take discovery and imagination out of the equation. Many children g
N/a
None
There is a big push of evolution (a secular theory) and global warming (a man-made theory) which have both b
None
Teachers will need a lot of help to see how to teach to this level of integrated rigor. At all levels
Having enough time to cover all the standards
Not very detailed
No concerns other than if they are not accepted the United States will continue to fall behind in the academic w
Training and support for classroom teachers and district staff to understand the structure and framework of the
Standards are great to have, but limiting what the teachers can actually teach constricts the way they can reac
As a freshman teacher I am not sure what standards should be covered in physical science and what should wa
There are so many standards for each grade level. I am concerned that with so many standards for teachers to
My concern is how to teach them and that schools will need more materials, money, and training to meet these
Difficulty of reading and interpreting them limits their usefulness to people who are deeply and truly motivated
none
No opinion.
They are all higher order thinking objectives. This should be the goal of all learning but a lot of ground work ne
Again something that takes time out of our day to double check and figure out.
They weigh much more heavily towards engineering than real science. Science is about discovery, obtaining re
It will weaken students' true understanding of science and scientific study. It will also confuse students, brain w
None.
I hope they are put in place after the work that has been done by those in Iowa and the other 25 states.
It is just another set of Standards that teacher and more will not understand or know how to implement. That m
Believe it or not, there are still students who are not interested followed a career path in the STEM areas. The 9
Teacher animosity
Regimented. More new things for teachers to learn and I feel we are going to be giving up other forms of teachi
Teachers being told specifically what they are to teach. The Iowa core allows for teacher individuality when it c
Some of the standards are out lying standards and do not connect well with the rest of the standards in creating
That they won't be implemented.
too broad topics
People will not give adequate time to the new curriculum before deeming it unsuccessful.
Prepare students for the role of science in their lives.
Without developing critical thinking skills in the scientific fields, the students will only regurgitate information sp
None. They are well vetted by many organizations and should be adopted as they are, with no adjustments to c
Guidelines may be too rigid and not allow for teachers to adapt the curriculum to the different learning styles o
So much space and too many science courses don't allow for space. Then robotics is entering the curriculum, w
That they are not teaching the basics of science in the K-6 grade levels. From this information the more comple
It will be rejected based on some elements within the approving entities finding political and religious reasons t
That they have not yet ben adopted! Also that science has taken such a back seat to math and literacy - both o
I would like to see the standards split into single grade spans.
flexibility to adapt; the talent pool
I hope they are adopted and respected throughout the state.
That they will be watered down with technology & game playing
Are teachers prepared to teach at these standards?
Finding time to complete them in full.
none
More specific LA and Math connections at lower grades
validity and consistency of the standards
How are students going to be able to apply these in their everyday lives?
Validity to the kit and everyone doing the same thing.
Only that enough funding be provided to enable schools to update and make changes necessary to carry out th
Politics are interfering with great efforts that involved great minds in education and business and communities
I do wonder how my particular son, with ADD, would be able to sit still long enough to focus on some of these m
None at this point
That they will be overlooked and not adopted by the state of Iowa.
Reserving the ability for educators to incorporate hands-on/experiential learning into science (and all) educatio
All the I'll-informed people trying to gut them.
The breadth and amount of content at the lower levels may be too extensive given the actual amount of time c
What resources are available to help support the teaching of these standards? What training will be provided to
Nothing
Really specific for grade levels.
Most students in most schools in Iowa will not understand any of this, ever.
Bringing up climate change when it is such a controversial, politically motivated topic and has potential to offen
The lack of a state or national assessment that evaluates student learning of the NGSS. The fact that engineer
That is does allow too much flexibility in content and topics.
They are complex to understand because of the many facets included in the standards.
Would like to see more emphasis within the engineering standards on newer processes such as computer nume
I would love to see a focused standard on Philosophy of Science (implications and purpose of scientific investig
Many elementary & middle school science teachers may struggle with the concepts and having students engag
How each level is very similar. For example, middle school standards are not much different than high school. H
They try to teach too much without any real understanding of the needs ot students.
N/A
How well they match up for each grade level so it matches up with the Iowa Assessments.
My main concern is that "religious conservatives" will somehow succeed in blocking their adoption and widesp
Complicated to read throug
None
None
cookie-cutter, mind-numbed test takers with no real education nor incentive to learn beyond the confining boun
Standards are to be met but may not be in required classes at my school
They will have very little effect on the way science is taught beyond middle school. Most high school classes w
Without an abundant amount of resources available for the science teachers who aren't creative - the experime
Breadth/Scope given all other duties as teacher.
I just worry that people not familiar with the standards may have difficulty understanding how to read and impl
First of all, I don't believe the Iowa School Board, who has already recommended the State adopt the Smarter B
It presents concepts and idea that children are not ready for at the early grade levels. I also do not appreciate t
The integration boxes can be a bit confusing. Perhaps we can consider just adopting the performance expectati
I can't answer if I don't know what it actually is.
Information overload!
They are not of high quality.
That they will be attacked from a philosophical base.
They don't match up with the curriculum we currently have, meaning we will have to supplement or spend a lot
Several concerns: - Need to make sure teachers are knowledgeable about the topics in order to adequately tea
They are not focused and they are too specific and "wordy." The expectations are at a junior college level. I beli
To confusing for educators to map.
low expectations, and the timing of some topics for math abilities-students will be pushed to learn more faster
none
Many of the standards were pushed into the MS content, which leaves the high schools playing catch up - very
The lack of time to build as many models as the Standards list.
Too much material. Won't let the students chose their own electives and could lose the whole thing where kids
I do not like that the abundance of categories of standards will take away students ability to choose the science
None
Lack of clear content, unclear grading guidelines (too much "rubric" and too little right or wrong answers), lack
Kick Jan Kim L)(kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkklllllllllll
The Next Gen science standards takes control of classroom content from teachers, parents, and local schools w
Getting it all covered with limited time.
None. My only concern is that those who have a narrow, ideological opposition to a couple of the standard area
I'm already hearing talk of non-scientists watering down the curriculum with pseudoscience and mysticism like
none
Being new, certain Ankeny groups will protest, just because they can...... and not see the value in educators, pr
It is backwards engineered standards. The standards are barriers to learning.
My concerns are that many districts across the state/country may not be able to afford science curriculums/pro
The biggest concern that I have about NGSS is the lack of teacher support for it until more teachers are using it
I am concerned with the wording of the NGSS. It is not in kid friendly language, so that is difficult to decipher as
How does a teacher collect data on all these standards in all subjects.
When was i suppose to read this? don't know.
Very tough for teachers to teach the content as well as have students apply some of the higher order thinking d
I read the presentations of the three dimensions. The first one, 'Practices', had weak flowing sentences that gav
Do NOT like the genetic part... mixing science with ethics, evolution, and survival of fittest. Keep it to the facts
may be incomplete
Two deviations from current standards are the focus on energy (at all level/concepts) and the infusion of engine
There is just so much information. Most people will not take the time to fully understand them. Districts will ne
I'm concerned such tight integration will make it hard for a student that excels at one topic like physics to take
In looking at the third grade standards, the amount of content 8 and 9 year olds are expected to retain is fright
As with all across-the-board standards I've seen, the main concern is having enough contact time with students
While I see ideas and skills that should be learned, I see nothing about how that will be evaluated, nor about wh
The amount of content (breadth) is sill probably too much for PreK-12 schools to teach well, unless schools are
For those who teach Middle School or High School, I hope their expectations are made to be realistic. The realit
not sure
Schools will have to do some major investing in materials to ensure students achieve these rigorous standards.
As with much of the move toward Core Curriculum, ADM currently teaches above these standards and produces
The blatant indoctrination of our children that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is a FACT when it is N
I worry that some teachers could be afraid of the hands-on approach for kids. Is there a "teacher try-it" or som
What happens when students do not meet standards and each year builds on the next.
My biggest concern about the NGSS is getting all science teachers on board and showing them how to use it ap
The NGSS sometimes focuses too much on the minutiae of science while overlooking broader conceptual ideas
None-- as long as grade levels are assigned at the MS level. I understand the idea of local control, but with incr
Will there be time to train teachers and/or professional development to help teachers understand how the NGS
Not many
There are too many and the wording is very complicated. Remember, elementary teachers do not major in con
They look very complicated. I also question if the timing is right to implement these standards at the elementa
They need to ensure some flexibility for classroom teachers but not allow teachers to introduce non-science con
I do feel that there is so much information in the science area that we really need a strong foundation in basic c
More Government control, standrds that are used for political propaganda!!
The strands have to be interesting, relevant and integrated with math, social studies, literacy and writing. A var
I haven't spent enough time to effectively comment on this area yet.
Website is confusing and a lot of info
They are not neutral and objective on the origin of the universe and of life. All explanations are based on ungu
Elementary educators do not have sufficient content knowledge to teach with the standards.
Time and resources to accomplish them, in addition to all of the writing standards and literacy issues that also n
-What will be the implementation timeline? -What kind of support will the state provide?
None, the NGSS should be adopted as is.
They could be written in an interdisciplinary way, particularly in K-8. Fore example, physical geography and Ear
If adopted, will the NGSS take the place of the Iowa CORE? Will they mesh together to form one set of standard
The huge emphasis on engineering. I am not convinced this is for the good of science education and will be a fa
The ability for all to understand.
Do we have the resources to produce assessments that reflect what the students need to know.
They lack clear guidelines and lack major content expectations. The organization is not user friendly for teach
The standards do not align directly with our current standards and there will be shifting of content from one gra
That people who are not in the classroom will make decisions that will affect the students and teachers.
hard to find connection to the curriculum. Some didnt make sense like finding the mathematical relationship for
they are too specific they are loosing focus on broader subjects that are just as important.
That they are too broad. I will need examples of things to teach.
A lot of information/needs to be more concise
A lot of info
The fact that the standards are setup to be broken down but they still have not been broken down. Also not hav
They are so new, and sometimes hard to know how to meet due to the wording. There are not a lot of free reso
Not being able to teach everything that's expected in the middle school experience.
Although I do not live in Iowa, I teach in Iowa so therefore I am answering these questions based on how I see t
NONE!!! Get it done so schools and teachers can move on!
I think that transitioning to the standards could be slightly tricky (just as it is when standards are adopted in rea
Our current structure for endorsements at the BOEE does not reflect the three distinct strands present in the NG
A concern would be if the grade span of Middle School changes to grade level will 6th grade teachers will conte
Feeling overwhelmed when I look at them. Training is will be the most important thing so that teachers are pre
How do these standards or the quantity of science standards for each grade effect the continued gap between
Hopefully they don't become the only focus of curriculum development.
How to develop more performance -based assessments
That all students will NOT have the basics
I do not believe students are adequately prepared to undertake the tasks being asked of them. They are too di
At times to specific Misses some concepts in biology - Classification for example
performance, but not content
Kind of wordy...what specifically do you want us to teach? List
I think they are hard to incorporate in the classroom
My concern over any standards is "How long will they be our standards?" Not opposed to change, but we seem
That I make adjustments to align with the standards and then later on they (or the district) change expectation
Our school isn't ready for it!
None
Using any standards for the development of standardized tests
Insuring that I am meeting the requirements within my class and our science department.
Not being able to model each concept, running out of time to cover the breadth of topics
Adopting the NGSS and then not having materials to teach it (books, curriculum plans)
They still can be a little vague in some areas. Will there be textbooks and other materials to match the NGSS.
nothing as of yet
The financial aspect of it. Throughout the Next Generation Science Standards there are plenty of great ideas bu
I would like to see examples of tasks that would be used for assessments for the elementary standards.
I don't understand why they haven't been adopted yet. I don't understand why I can't use them when I know th
I am concerned about the progress in states. The fact that Iowa has not adopted them yet and are currently re
Aside from the engineering component, I do not see how the Next Generation Science Standards are better, or
Gaps that may exist from grade level to grade level based on interest in science of the teacher
My concern is that there will be a gap because I am not sure all of it will be taught due to time and money issue
How long it is taking to get them adopted and if we are all going to be well informed and prepared when they a
Prior knowledge for those students at higher grade levels may not be there. (NGSS assumes that students wou
Concerns-budget for supplies
Districts will buy resources that are not aligned with NGSS. Teachers will not be afforded the professional deve
None
None
Resistance by educators, schools and districts who want to continue doing things the way they always have and
There are a lot of standards to implement without requiring 4 years of high school science.
None at this point.
none
I feel like the students interested in a medical field are not addressed in these standards. And, I feel like the sta
The standards have narrowed the components that can be taught by causing teachers to eliminate some areas
The lack of human body systems
As I mentioned before, an overwhelming and complex layout, as well as expectations that may not be realistic
The cost of providing the hands on materials necessary to give students real experiences. Also there is a quest
That we may not have the proper support available to achieve these standards (monitarily, or educationally)
they don't take into account those who need that extra help understanding the basic core curriculum
I am concerned that there needs to be more emphasis on ensuring sexual health and reproduction is taught in
will teachers follow them.
That the standards are very specific. I would be worried that the next thing I would be given a canned curriculu
There is so much to cover, how is a teacher to get it all done.
I do not feel there is enough time to incorporate all of the topics into my elementary classroom with the breadt
uncertain which level things will be given
My concern lies within the implementation of the standards. It will take significant time and training for our tea
way too specific, need a happy medium between broad and over detailed
Very in depth and will need some time to help teachers get used to the layout of the information and not be ov
each standard not explained enough
Why are some topics specified out in such detail ? Why shouldn't students identify scientific claims in general, n
At the elementary level, I am concerned about having enough time to teach all these concepts at the depth and
My concern is that there will not be adequate professional development for educators around how to use NGSS
Sufficiently covering all of this material for all of the students.
My concern is that in two years a new set of standards will be coming out.
Limiting what can and the depth currently being taught. Some say I shouldn't teach that because the standard
This information will need to be provided to publishers to ensure that the text book sources districts purchase f
unrealistic because students can't gain the knowledge needed to succeed. Go to local control
Too much information and too specific of content to be delivered. Keep the standards broad to allow teachers t
How can we cover this much information? It's unrealistic to expect teachers to try and get through all of this an
none
It's not user friendly. The overall look is hard to interact with as it's very "busy" and the links to here, there and
Wording is difficult to comprehend.
They are called "standards" but are written as performance expectations/assessments -- this might confuse som
They are vague, too hard to decipher what they actually want taught, would cost schools a ton of money to imp
I think the standards lack a hands-on component. Experiential learning is the strongest indicator of whether a c
All standards can become too restrictive, resulting in the teacher not being able to adapt curriculum to their stu
MS-ESS3-5 Shouldn't students be investigating what global temperatures have over the last 100 years and fac
Our classrooms are not equipped to teach and do not have supplies for the models we are required to make in c
My concern is not with the NGSS itself, but rather the professional development that our science teachers will n
1. Several studies show much of the curriculum that is "NGSS ready" is not ready. 2. We need some in depth p
Some teachers and administrators may follow these standards so closely they may not be able to take advanta
it unnecessarily takes decision making away from the local level and moves it to a nebulous conglomeration of
Wordiness
The way they are currently organized can be confusing and again, I would love AP standards.
Limiting including topics that are worthwhile but not included
Nature of science is an after thought and gets lost in "science practices". The history of science is also almost n
Evolutionary ideas are interwoven throughout the standards. Evolution is assumed to have happened. Bible-be
Let the experts tell us what all children should know - let me (with the help of my district) find a way to get the
There is still a lot of information included for high school. I don't know if it is realistic to get to it all in just three
The incessant emphasis on NON-SCIENTIFIC issues like global climate change and evolution. These seem to be
Does not flow very well. Very difficult to find information. Too much emphasis placed on Earth Science when tha
At times the standards are written way to advanced and whether or not students can achieve these standards w
- Lack of content depth
NGSS are the minimums. NGSS could be used as a cost cutting tool.
None
We have rigorous standards but not a rigorous assessment (Iowa Assessments)
They require too much mastery, some kids aren't developmentally ready for some concepts. They are too rigid
Sometimes vauge and/or give similar standards for each grade level without guidance on how to make the less
Confusing/ not clear delineation of the differences between technology, science, and engineering. Often times
That it does not include human growth and development
They do nothing to address the reasons why students are not successful. They are just a rehash of things that
I am concerned that the state will eliminate the climate change, and evolution focused of NGSS. Both deserve
I don't really have any to speak of. It seems like a solid foundation for science curriculum to me.
If implemented and used to develop appropriate standardized tests to assess student performance, none. Asse
With such a strong emphasis on reading and math, especially in some DINA or SINA schools, we need to show t
I have not read beyond my grade level, so to be quite honest, I have no concerns at this time.
As an elementary teacher, I do not have concerns.
Do I understand what the standards are asking me to teach? Am I interpreting the objectives correctly?
Science changes based on new findings and examining evidence--emphasis on just one explanation needs to b
My only concern is that I need more time to better align my curriculum to NGSS.
Many teachers will not teach it as it is written.
1. Time for implementation. Give at least a 3 year transition to allow it to be done well. 2. HS PS2-4 - needs to
Transition and having the full support of admin.
I think it will cause issues between teachers but I think the K12 overall science collaboration between teachers
VERY DIFFICULT performance standards. NOT ACHIEVABLE for ALL students. Not all students are required to ta
The lack of any great depth or focus on health and human body.
My concern with NGSS is that I won't have enough resources and lab activities for students to master each spec
none
Would like to make sure that they are aligned to assessments.

They are too confusing. There is little distinction between sciences.
How do I teach it?
There are always too many standards - districts will have to prioritize
Some of the descriptors are confusing and extra wordy
How will the standards be implemented? How will this change requirements and classes for our middle and hig
I believe the student need to focus more on engineering and design. Research shows there is a shortage of peo
The ridiculous amount of language that is attached to the documents. Even my science teachers struggle with
How specific the assessment are and I am unsure how specific areas were chosen over others. (Who chose wh
How will they affect my classroom.
needs to be more flexable
being able to fully understand how to implement them in my 6th grade classroom.
First we heard these standards would be adopted, then we heard they were not, now we are back to discussing
The outcomes (4 large concepts) are on target; there are too many components under each to cover with any d
none
I felt a great deal of the standards felt as they were written for a much older students than middle school stude
All students needing nuclear chemistry and reaction kinetics in Chemistry.
There is still too much information and categorization which leads to confusion.
On the ground (in classrooms) adaptation to lessons.
Not enough time to cover everything. Students reaching high school still need to do some of the middle school
They introduce some new topics which may dilute the rigor of current curriculum
I have concerns that teacher preparation institutions will need to properly adjust their science methods courses
Very difficult to understand. Iowa core is much easier to follow and implement.
As students progress to their later years (grades 11 and 12) they need to start focusing on one area of science
that it may not be inacted
It's a double-edged sword: its breadth and depth give it strength, but that is also its weakness. I am not a teac
Teachers need to have standards that allow for adapting lessons both inside and outside the traditional classroo
We need to teach the history of science, and distinguish between what has been proven in this scientific history
My greatest concern is that Iowa will move too slowly to formally adopt them. Our district needs the clear guida
I'd like to see Computer Science standards added
It is very hard to read if not given the proper guidance on what each part means and how they go together. I ha
Don't include flexibility in implementation when students choose not to take Biology or the district does not req
Expectations do not seem appropriate for kindergarten. Focus should be on exploration and discovery, not on a
They appear to be written for advanced science interested students rather than general education students. Th
None at this time.
none
The follow-up on seeing that it IS being taught. NGSS document is rather intimidating and confusing.
My concern is that Iowa will shy away from adopting these standards. They are the best science standards I've
I am concerned the loudest voices (those that don't understand the standards, do not work with them, and do n
leaves key concepts out or relies on teaching of those and other supporting concepts in addition to standards
One concern I have is how some districts will be able to incorporate all of the concepts if they have a small staff
Do they go deep enough to provide needed foundation to all for some level of post-secondary science-related e
There is much emphasis on students analyzing data that will need to come from large scale scientific studies, n
How do we ensure that schools are providing hands-on science/investigative experiences for students rather th
No concerns
Not user friendly- the format is hard to read and hard to understand the specifics of what is to be taught at eac
My concern is that they look good on paper, but that's all. The standards are not being effectively met. We are
I believe teachers will need to time to look over and get time to accustomed to the new requirements but think
The time in our day to teach the standards at the depth needed to teach.
None at this time.
A bit difficult for people unfamiliar with them to grasp at first.

It needs to not just focus on robotics but get the students connecting to nature and understanding environment
Not having grade specific standards could lead to some material not being addressed as in depth as the studen
I feel that standards are very broad, which does not always give me a lot of guidance as to what I should be tea
Too many topics to be covered in any given year. If a student takes only the introductory level they will not be
None.
The grouping of standards for 6-8th grade and 9-12th is just more of the same, watered down lowering of expec
Data generated is not indicative of all student development, educational change is not accomplished by creatin
Somewhat confusing to navigate your way around
Not enough time to meet them during 4 years of high school
Assessment of them through standardized testing. I like the standards but I have no idea how a multiple choice
none
As a teacher I do not always understand what I am supposed to teach. The emphasis statements help. My colle
What about the kids who don't plan on going to college. Do the NGSS cover why we are teaching these things
Can Be Vague and could be covered by several grades at the same time.
Ambiguity of terms. Level of master of skills may be difficult for some students. Standards are good ideas, but n
Our school would have a difficult time adopting the NGSS as a religiously based school. We do not feel that the
Alignment to classes and ensuring that the standards are being taught at the appropriate levels to prevent too
Anything that takes over education by the government is a disaster. Name one dept. that the gov. runs that is
Don't allow for individual student beliefs in science. All are forced to agree with a predetermined standard.
I have many units I like to teach that students love. It will be hard to give up these to make sure I teach, at a g
It will be difficult to achieve high level mastery if students are not receiving science skill before 6th grade.
Becomes political and over of the hands of content specialists.
that not all Districts will have resources (staff, equipment, etc.) for students to fully realize what NGSS intends.
Non science teachers may not understand the standards.
First, missing and implicit content. Pruning and prioritizing can be taken too far, and it does nobody any favo
After viewing these standards I do not have concerns other than being able to get materials for teaching the sta
I already spoke to the concern about the inquiry possibly limiting project-based learning opportunities.
I am concerned implementing these standards may take more time in some schools and school districts. So som
It is not a fix all.
Enforcement and political wrestling that deals with passage of the bill.
Some of the Standards may be too specific. It may be unrealistic for some school districts to abide by every St
broad and project based
Interface is not easily read- I wish there were some "at a glance" features for teachers to use as they plan.
Being able to accomplish all the standards with the current number of classes required at the high schools.
None...something we need to adopt!!
I feel that because the students create their own models, gather evidence and look at outcomes, that NGSS is n
Time, materials, professional development, assessments, time, time, time.
I hope that individual students will have opportunities to amplify their studies in areas of their greatest interest
Need to see what the text books say before an assessment is made as to whether or not the standards will wor
Politics will interfere with what qualifies as science - scientific fact ignored for public opinion
The standards need to be consistent with the Science Goals neccessary to ready students for Post-Secondary L
Standards should be a local community decision. Not state wide nor federally mandated. Any parent and studen
6-8 together.
My concern is that they will be altered and thus lose their comprehensive perspective. They should be adopted
Not enough science is given to students in elementary
Schools need to talk about evolution and climate change. Families can determine what they believe/follow on th
My main concern is helping students reach the standards. We spend so much time itemizing and revising stand
Still to challenging to see equitability of standard.
The challenge is and will always be to keep the standards strong and ethical, but free of religious bias and taint
Standards will result in teaching to the test, not improving science education. We should not implement these
That they will not address science facts such as evolution and climate change
Concern that people would let politics, economics, or religion block an open minded understanding of scientific
Some important content areas have been omitted.
None
Trying to integrate too many engineering principles.
None, unless politics gets in the way and removes/interferes with content on climate change, evolution, etc.
I don't really like the first grade standards. Our school is beginning to use the new FOSS kits, and only one of th
None.
One size fits all. The baggage that kids bring to school.
There is little to no biology or life science emphasis, and if that continues to be the case, we're going to leave b
none
I have no special concerns.
That it will focus on conformity and not individual learning and success and is more focus on numbers than stud
Qualified teachers, reaching challenged students, covering all of the material
5th - 8th grade, we have noticed there are small gaps. ie - electricity Vagueness of some standards - I underst
None with the standards themselves - I think they are terrific. I am concerned with their implementation in som
Too many separate standards for the ms grade band. Making grade specific standards would solve this.
Loonies cherry-picking science that does or does not cater to their biases.
Continue to keep the wording in language that is easy to understand and decipher so that every teacher is sure
Developing curriculum to be used with the NGSS
TIME! When will I be able to fit all of this in on top of reading and math demands?
What do students need to know by the end of 6th, 7th, and 8th grade? What is the best curricular plan to follow
Takes away some flexibility in what is taught.
The organization and read-ability of the website leaves a lot to be desired.
There may be gaps I have not encountered yet
Takes away from the freedom that our country supposedly gives us.
I am concerned that our state may not adopt them! I have not seen an alternative that would do as much for ou
The standards still have to be taught by qualified teachers. If the teachers can't get the information to the stud
It will take professional development to understand the shifts that will need to be made in teaching, to understa
Transitioning to the Next Generation Science Standards.
The biggest concern is the willingness of teachers and administrators to embrace the new standards. In order f
None, come on Iowa let's make this the Iowa Core .
My only concern is the teaching of evolution as scientific fact that leaves no room for intelligent design as taug
How will all the content be covered and how will it be implemented.
My concern is for training of teachers and the time for teachers to implement them. I am concerned especially
FOSS is currently pushing that they are NGSS aligned....they are to a point, but not completely. We have a lot o
Effectively communicating and implementing the standards
No real concerns. Just important to make a decision as soon as possible so we can move forward to begin deve
They will pigeon-hole our teaching creativity and the pacing at which students need to learn the curriculum.
I find it hard to interpret and hard to assess.
Elementary teachers are not teaching science. Change middle school and high school standards will not help ill
They are difficult to follow and the bands are too broad at the primary level.
Amount of concepts vs amount of time during the year. How do we determine what areas are "power standard
never heard of them so I don't know...
I wish they were set in grade level instead of grade band.
It would be nice to have links to interactive websites/plans/experiments for each of these standards for more id
There will need to be professional development for all teachers as well as resources needed in some cases espe
The NGSS is very wordy and compact. Parents and students would have a hard time translating them. Districts
State supported professional development is needed for teachers to truly understand the significant conceptua
The local focus and methods need to be considered as well as standards. City school just don't operate the sam
that it may be too much of a challenge for the middle school mind and development it would be helpful to hav
My only concern might be that the bar for student outcomes may not be high enough for HS students. They loo
My concerns are that we are to teach one concept without teaching some basics needed to understand those c
There is more to these standards and more of them at each grade level. There will need to be some prioritizing
Some people may assume this is all you need to teach. That the teachers will use only the suggested performa
Middle School standards are too broad...all over the board on what is being covered at the various grade levels.
Too much information may cause teachers to teach a mile wide and an inch deep, which will not in the end crea
Very narrowly defined Performance Expectations that require ALL to learn or demonstrate these Performance Ex
Non at this time. I'm excited for National science standards so that more curriculum will be produced that addre
Is there too much on all of the pages? Could this greatly overwhelm a teacher new to science education?
K-5 teachers cannot implement 2010 Iowa Core ELA, 2010 Iowa Core Math, and 2015 Iowa Core Science in the
There is too much to cover.
Kid friendly language
Need more information and I feel that for substantial changes like these more individulas need to be involved in
Again, implementation. Time and resources need to be devoted to help educators implement effectively.
My main concern is the one mentioned before.
That our district hasn't adopted them for elementary and we have to create and gather our own resources to te
I'm a bit concerned with the huge emphasis put on engineering. I like students thinking critically about the cont
None
FUCK
None at the moment.
none
There is an expectation of high cognitive abilities in middle school, where that is not the case in many students
It seems like a lot of the things in the Iowa Core will be taken out if we move completely to NGSS. I think that m
They can be hard to understand and will require teachers to dig into them to work all into the curriculum for all
I am not in favor of the entire Core Standard process/guidelines.
Process of aligning with current school standards and available materials.
Adequate state funding, the need for intensive professional development, assessments that reflect the breadth
Do I as a teacher have the means to teach according to these standards? I teach upper level high school scien
Again, it tries to cram too much into certain areas and doesn't cover enough in others.
add more physics-force and motion to the standards. Focus less on astronomy
At times the learning progressions for each standard are challenging to devise, and also appropriate assessmen
Getting experienced science teachers to use them.
I feel the standards are missing a large group of my students that are not college bound.
Being able to implement change k-12 to get the standards in place.
Health-infused topics are lacking
Too much of a one size fits all approach. The best teachers are those who are willing to step outside the box. I s
Absolutely none. When I was on the NGSS committee, we did this exact same survey and I was puzzled then a
none - our district has unpacked them and are currently abiding by them. They need to become official!!
Designed for 4 years, district won't require 4 years, "All Students All Standards" means all the standards SQUEE
Excessive political backing. We need to teach our youth to be responsible citizens, but leave the political enviro
There seems to be a negative public view of common core standards in general.
At the high school students all take a different path so it's impossible to make sure they are all covered for ever
None. Just do it already. Get them approved and in place.
Preparation and training for teachers. Some of these concepts and ideas will be more in depth than teachers h
Missing some content and depth in the Life Science areas.
The recommendation that the content be taught in 3 integrated years. That doesn't leave much room for scienc
That they will not be implemented. There needs to be ongoing support for teachers as they work to implement
Just like the Common Core Standards, materials, training and resources for teachers, especially at the elementa
none
They will make kids who don't excel feel like losers and that they won't amount to much in life.
Not grade level focused which will lead to the same problems with the current science standards.
I don't feel they have been addressed very well at the AEA and local level. If they are important, they should b
Concerns...children learn differently..half visually. The most important part of the program will be the teacher d
Not all students learn at the same pace, so use of the standards and the measurement of individual students an
No concerns. We need to push our kids to a higher level as this will serve them well in their future. Teachers wi
The transitional period is always tough to adjust to... But teachers are paid and trained to be flexible, so we will
some of the performance-based assessments are unrealistic and contrived - not very practical
materials to use
The complexity of the elementary standards exceed most elementary teachers content knowledge of science. T
The standard on light and sound vibrations does not seem to be one that I feel first graders can make a lot of c
As an educator, I don't find them to be very user friendly. They are too broad in most of the disciplines.
Implementation, training, too much control taken away from local districts...some national or state groups does
They didn't drop out the false teaching of evolution.
Teachers may feel the need to try to squeeze in a lot of information in one year.
The standards are a little hard to understand.
If I am interpreting them right
Middle school need to be grade specific
My big concern in the science and engineering practice section isn't very helpful in supplying teachers with valu
They do not reflect the current content of Iowa Core exactly and science departments all across the state have
Obtaining materials and resources to effectively support my students in becoming proficient in these standards
The amount of material that must be taught in maybe two required courses is huge. The wording is unclear on
I am concerned about the Science/Engineering box, the Disciplinary CORE box, the cross cutting box and the re
None at this time.
What drives these standards - communication between teachers (i.e., between high school teachers and colleg
As I mentioned as a strength is the fact that the performance assessments are there. The resources that are av
The way the key ideas are written is very limiting. Because the key ideas are already written in "the student ca
Depth and breadth of info. The Iowa Core gives more flexibility and choices NGSS is very ridged and specific.
None
I'm wondering if they try to cover too much.
A whole new learning experience for teachers to understand and the role out will be expensive for districts to u
Certification and licensure are concerns of mine. As a veteran teacher, I am concerned about who will eventua
Needs to be read and digested to make the most sense. People need to read deeply to follow and understand.
The Middle School not being grade banded, the discussion of modifying the document which is already establis
Lack of science teachers in Iowa prepared to teach at the level of rigor presented by the NGSS.
Every set of standards are influenced by agendas. For instance, these standards seem to overemphasize the te
That schools will read them and think, "How can we keep doing what we're doing and fit it into the NGSS."
How will schools assess and be assessed by state? Iowa assessments???? With all hands on materials?
My biggest concern is the engineering aspect. I do not have a strong background in that discipline and worry th
Lack of support for schools to dissect the standards and incorporate them into science curricula.
.
there is so much in there and districts will spend lots of time and energy figuring out how they will use them an
I do not think my district will be able to fund my anticipated needs to teach the standards. I would like to think
Do the VAST kits that many elementary buildings using correlate with each grade's standards?
How does it translate into practical use in the classroom.
Traditional assessment will be difficult to use with these standards. Standardized tests will need to be altered o
Measurable.
All of the human body systems should be covered in high school biology so all students have access to the mat
There is a lot of breadth and depth at the same time. I am not sure where to focus as a teacher & how to get it
Schools teaching the same, low standards, material!

I don't want it to become dogma and result in the reduction of teacher creativity
Making sure it can all be accomplished in one school year.
That Iowa will not adopt them or that they will change them significantly and make it difficult to implement usin
There is so much detail. It's really hard to understand at times, or it will take a lot of time to understand what is
How do we avoid the problems that occured with ELA and Math? How do we build teacher capacity? I know k-5
Who wrote them and who was driving this home? If the answer is educators, then great. If the answer is anyth
I am concerned the content does not include the concept of intelligent design and or creationism. I am okay wit
None
Assessments that are across bands.... what if it is assessed in 6th grade yet taught in 8th.
So many of the options require students to defend an argument. Many teachers will have to be trained on wha
One concern I have is that we would be going from more general state objectives to much more specific. This i
The complexity ans specificness of the assessments.
There is a huge gap between what our textbooks are doing in fourth grade and some of the standards that are
My bigger concern it that we not to officially adopt some science standards and move forward. NGSS provides
Need to be grade specific and easy to understand.
Elementary teachers may have a difficult time with the standards since they focus almost entirely on math and
My concern is the time necessary to successfully implement NGSS. There is far too much for a 180 day school
Correct implementation
It would take time to make sure we are creating classrooms that would match the vision put forth by the empha
How effective they will be depends upon the instruction and student motivation.
How can it all be covered within the school year? Resource availability.
May be too much for some teachers to work through. Is there a way to simplify the document?
When teachers start using NGSS, they may find that they are teaching different topics than they have taught in
I have many concerns
gfdgfdgfdg
Without proper support and professional development there is the risk that this will amount to very little real ch
So many things. 59 standards are a lot even over three years.
We will need lot of PD!!!! What will the assessments look like? When will the assessments be completed? Who
Any time you standardize something, it decreases the flexibility that teachers have to cater their lessons to the
I would prefer 6-8 was grade specific.
Having teachers teach engineering concepts without a background in technological and engineering design. Wh
My main concern is what specifically are the standards that need to be addressed in the classroom. I have aske
Too much to teach in a single year, especially at the elementary level, given the focus already placed on literac
In my work with the standards some of the Performance Expectations are vague. Teachers need to infer a grea
Not the standards in particular, but in general, we are continually expanding what we are expecting of teachers
To many engineering components. yes engineering is important but not all student will be engineers. What abo
Getting every thing covered in three years of science
Too much to be realistically taught. Would require enormous financial commitment from the state to reduce cla
While technology is always changing, this should be a prominent area of science education.
Engineering is a large focus in the Next Gen Standards. In my opinion, engineering is a career in science and s
The amount of control the State will have over the development of units and organization of standards.
I have some concern about the grade level appropriateness of some standards at the elementary levels.
Some people interpret the DCIs as the standards, while some have the performance expectations as the standa
My only concern is that Iowa will allow our ties to local control prevent us from moving forward with a set of sta
Continuity in materials
Some of the middle school standards I don't feel are appropriate for all middle school ages.
None
None
Like most sciences, things change at a rapid pace and meeting the needs and maintaining the standards may n
Too wordy and difficult to organize in a meaningful way. Standards should be straight forward and only as spec
either too vague or too exact
They seem very vague. They are confusing for a teacher without a lot of background knowledge and there are
The breadth of the standards, large focus on engineering, and absence of nature of science standards.
Changing our curriculum again in such a quick time.
As a member of our district's curriculum committee it has really left us in limbo. Do we work for a curriculum th
NONE! They are great!! Please use them!
Political concerns might squash the effort. It is what's best for learners.
We need to get them adopted, so we can begin work now.
Switching curriculum again.
A lot of the content is more than what MOST students need to be successful outside of high school. I think expo
How will this impact standards based grading? Will there be an assessment for each standard per grade level?
Too narrow on how each standard may be met. Too hard to apply or model the standards that are written that w
Assessments aren't an easy answer. You can't assess using the current IA assessments.
The way that the expected outcomes are written seems to not leave much room for teaching/assessing standar
all expectations are performance based, I'm unsure how we are supposed to judge proficiency on performance
PEs may limit what teachers do with students
Switching standards. We have curriculum in place.
Middle school seems like it has no order. How can we ensure they continue to know things if they do not have a
I have a personal concern with better understanding the engineering standards/practices. This is an area of we
none
controversial topics
Having served as a science safety consultants on numerous occasions for the state of Iowa I am gravely concer
That we'll switch to something else AGAIN in a year or two. This is insane. We cannot be expected to change o
NGSS does take a little time to investigate and understand. Thankfully our AEA completed a training with our d
How do you ensure all will get the content? What will the quality control look like for this?
Sometimes a bit technical to read
They are well done but I feel that there is a lot of room for improvement in regards to how to assess the standa
Do we need to do everything at the bottom of the standards page?
Ease of use/navigation as compared to Iowa Core.
None, as of now
none at the moment
The gaps in content.
None
very wordy
Too specific
I am concerned that if Iowa does not adopt these standards soon, our children will not be able to compete glob
Chemistry areas like nomencalture, stoichiometry, and a few others are not included.
I understand the broad category of the standard but when I read the more specific information about the standa
We need to break it down by grade content for 6-12.
Training for teachers, public knowledge, administration knowledge
There is a lot to cover and the projects prescribed by the standards would take a lot of time, and that is always
The amount of material that needs to be covered.
Fitting all the required standards into a year and schools having enough funding to obtain materials for student
Having qualified teachers to meet all of the standards and having the time within schools to teach them.
Developing the "programming", the textbooks, the informative tools available to science teachers to implemen
I am concerned that educators are dismissing it because they don't understand it. Reading NGSS may not be in
Far less the the Iowa Core!
They are not as specific to subject areas. The Iowa Core is much easier to follow.
While the standards are easily read by secondary science teachers, I think we will need strong support at the e
Many of the tasks suggested take more time. Can teachers cover enough of the key standards given limited tim
if everyone is on the same page
They tend to have a bit of political basis and I don't believe that political leanings are relevant in learning situat
none - love them!
There is too much information and too many content-specific words for the average parent to understand what
Too rigorous for special education
My only concern is that if Iowa does not adopt NGSS, we will be out of the loop with regards to innovative instru
Understanding the wording of the standards and exactly what is expected from each
Just concerned about the time it will take our AEA to be able to purchase the updated curriculum (FOSS kits), es
Organization could be better is done by grades.
Teacher will pick out topics only and continue to teach the way they always have.
The examples provided do not have links to specific lesson plans for teachers to obtain easily. It would be nice t
The organization of the NGSS suggests a completely different structure for a high school science sequence than
The concern is not about the standards but about the transition from the current weak Iowa Science standards
Too much.
Consideration of moving elementary into grade bands, education for educators about implementation, standard
Won't be followed
The confusing layout of the NGSS.
It would be nice if the standards for high school would be grouped according to subject, like math.
Too much breadth
The structure, layout, and complexity for parent use and understanding.
Middle school needs broken down.
There seems to be a lot of content to be covered for the amount of time that students spend in school. If we co
engineering and design overload.
The earth science standards at the 9-12 level are a huge cost with low return for schools.
The amount of standards that need to be addressed in any course. Whether we move to hours of school or day
I am not sure I have any.
no common assessments.
My main concern is that the assessments may be problematic. I have yet to see the assessments. I am also con
how to incorporate them all, authentically
have none at the moment regarding the NGSS, but do so in regard to, "will these stick or will there be a ""new"
No concerns. Move forward with adoption.
Too specific and not enough latitude for the teacher.
It will be next to impossible to get into a day --- there is no time left--students can only take so much and they s
The lack of health and body systems content. The amount of time it has taken to get them established. Scienc
I am concerned about the number of standards for high school in the earth science area. I am also concerned th
Topics are often very random while others very repetitive. Language is written in a manner that it is difficult to
They'll will be matched with prescribed curriculum rather than used to give teachers curricular freedom.
Implications that science and engineering are one in the same. Engineering is the pursuit of creating technolog
I have deep reservations. Although the rigor and depth is there, it is generalized and non-specific. We can teach
Maybe they are too complicated, but I am not really sure that will be a real problem.
5th grade concepts do not flow into 6th grade (somewhere in the 6-8 maybe? but not a good variety for each g
Assessment is going to be difficult, to say the least. The performance expectations are too specific and do not
I am concerned that they will not be adopted by the State of Iowa or other states. It is important that students
None.
Less units being covered than in the past.
The standards need to be very specific about what needs to be taught and how deep to go. I also think teache
None! Adopt them!
I have major concerns about the fidelity with which the standards will be implemented. Meeting many of the cu
None at this time.
No concerns.
Will schools have the adequate resources (time, money) to do quality PD around these standards, how to teach
Teachers understanding what they really mean and having the time to implement them with fidelity.
Older teachers not wanting to change and embrace the new courses. Also funding is also a issue.
No concerns.
None
The Earth/Space standards would require students to have 4 years of science for our high school students and t
Not many. There needs to be some training so teachers read the introductory material and understand their exp
Too much "by the rule" or standard, as it may be, teaching. Teachers need to understand that they have the rig
Simply helping teachers get acquainted withe new structure and probably a need to rearrange where some of o
The earth science inclusion in high school does not leave time for all the important parts of the other areas.
Will they be updated to accommodate new information?
training of staff
No in depth learning.
Change is hard. There will be a steep learning curve. I still think adopting the NGSS in Iowa is necessary, and w
Cannot be done correctly. Trying to go extremely broad vs. depth of knowledge. Students who can think and p
I have concerns about being able to get all students through all high school content in 3 years (as required by I
I don't think we can cover all of them in 3 years. I think schools need the support (and be required) to have 4 ye
I would like more guidance on exact assessment boundaries & specific learning objectives as well as actual exa
Iowa science teachers would need a lot of time and training to make sure they are ready to implement the stan
Lack of some subject matter... Example: to light in the Human Anatomy classes and the Weather standards T
As previously stated, I want to see more activities that teachers can pick from to help teachers meet those stan
That politicians with questionable morals, zero classroom teaching experience, and a dangerously limited know
Xenophobia of people who think science is trying to indoctrinate their children is preventing the NGSS from pas
Anytime you look at a major shift in educational standards you have to recognize it will take time and money. Te
The descriptions of the standards are confusing and too broad. There are many teachers who believe that they
Now whatsoever. Let's get on with the adoption.
We need to have teachers highly trained in NGSS. We cannot just hand them the standards and say go teach t
If the students don't have the background needed when they get to the next level the whole idea falls apart be
Having standards are nice, but do our schools have the teachers/equipment/materials needed to offer such dep
The NGSS can only help guide our teachers into a more STEM and 21st century skill based education system.
None
I'm concerned about it being ignored in Iowa.
Understanding for teachers that are unfamiliar with the language of the standards.
The only concern is training for teachers who implement
The professional development teachers will need to help them teach.
Not all of them are based on the appropriate cognitive developmental for the grade level
None. I would prefer Iowa makes the switch to NGSS.
That they are implemented the way they are supposed to be.
My concern is that some will hunt specific things in the standards rather than looking at them as a whole. The
breadth of information - if this is supposed to be goals for EVERY student reaching all of these goals in 2 years
individual understanding and interpretation
These standards represent a large shift (and large improvement) over the current Iowa Core science standards.
political considerations. Educators and scientists should be making these decisions, not politicians nor community membe
By placing so much attention on engineering, the misconceptions that technology, engineering and science are all the sam
and that these are the minimum of what is taught, not the maximum.
dorse a national model, one size fits all approach. We restrict ourselves as a nation, a state, and/or local communities when
et's make this happen and stop politicizing the standards.
ns at this time.
at's not exactly realistic, as the STEM or STEAM focus of the past five years in Iowa suggests. My biggest concern is that th
ing of certain concepts, I am concerned that it will encourage a prescribed curriculum that can't be altered to suit the need
e-off" activities to say a standard has been covered.
r elementary school teachers are having a difficult time understanding which ones they need to follow. We have had an ea
al warming as a truth when it is not. Why would teach lies to our children
ementary level where current focus is on reading. Is the state willing to provide the support needed to ensure fidelity to the
terest and ability and too much science for those with very little science interest or ability.
n interpret them for their districts.
estrictions and limitations on the educators so that the new standards lose their effectiveness --That the concurrent enrollm
nd it works.
. Another concern would be teaching certain science concepts, that usually align with certain points in the year, in new tim
lt to cover it all in depth.
lly ready for the specific concepts.
areas of reading and math -- How will these students influence scores without the fundamental science skills from the prim
e important I am a parent of 2 VERY different children. For one of them Next Gen would be a disservice, and I strongly feel
across unless studied. I have seen educators misreading/misinterpreting the organization and focus of the standards.
emistry and physics has been all but left out.
classroom into the real world of nature and citizen science opportunities and environmental attachments that will contribut
nd mutations) WITHOUT learning the phases of meiosis. The result will be memorization not deep understandings. This fla
more difficult to reach success.
umbersome chore to try to cover everything for a student with low-interest and/or low-ability
ernment, not by State governments which is where education standards should be established. Second, we are expecting k
students in lower grades to use skills they are not developmentally able to use. I am also concern about the focus on clim
ve to do is get students to do those very specific combinations of practices, DCI and crosscutting ideas. The point of the sta
implemented with fidelity. I don't think teachers are equipped to begin implementing NGSS without this support.
ans from one year to another?
rds quickly or have already mastered the concept. I do not know how students failing to grasp the concepts will be address
ay NOW what students will need to know 5, 10, 15 years from now. I believe the science process skills are more important
sessed. These concepts can be discussed; however, there is controversy about global-warming and findings obtained thro
ample of a failing system!!!
cs in GREAT depth, and thus take more time. Students who take AP classes will be at a disadvantage if they have to meet
.only that they earn 6 credits.
having them come up with questions that they can't possibly solve without background knowlwdge. The SWH method give
a curriculum coordinator, then each teacher is left deciding for themselves how to assess the standard. The reason for a s
asses will be left with a lack of direction.
not covered in the NGSS but they are covered in higher education chemistry classes.
round knowledge that many students do not have despite learning the concepts in previous classes. Students often do not
riential way, which will involve supplies and of course a mess. Is the education system willing to withstand this to help our s
nological advances in the 21st century. Professional development must be provided so that teachers are able to keep up wi
n the local school curriculum.
pread throughout grade levels with the appropriate amount of overlap for maximum learning.
eers. These "standards" are untested, unproven and completely experiemental..and our kids are the guinea pigs. There is
uccess does not come right away - it's part of a process
that religion is Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, Judaism, or Christianity. I would like science classes to only cover those things whi
nd should be required by all students were capable of grasping it. we need to require our students to take biology chemist
ts being neglected
. The last two years have been terrible in trying to write out curriculum without the State making a decision until AFTER th
content that would NOT be conceptually appropriate for a typical 9th grader. There is a big difference between what a 9th
actually needs to be covered. Too much is left open to each person's interpretation.
rtant that all students learn all major scientific theories such as evolution, so this needs to be a state-wide standard.
and unpacking them or prioritizing them, that the true purpose of creating powerful curriculum is used on our own curricul
o recall specific facts and/or information on a subject.
standards were, they just had 'experts' talking about how great they were. Almost every shot of students featured an Asian
o it is going to be difficult to decide when and how to teach each standard through the FOSS kits.
will catch up with NGSS
to the curriculum we are teaching would be extremely helpful.
as the body, plants, weather, rocks, astronomy, etc.
llowing for student discovery

able to implement the standards. Most elementary teachers are not science majors. Also, will there be monetary support to
h integrity, but our school is cutting $400,000 and I may not be able to but materials to do that.
ere be a specific end of unit test? Can assessment be project based and allow students to demonstrate their learning?
t will take a while to see growth because of the rigor
cally, climate change is seen as man made according to the standards. Also, the individuals from the states who were invo
s to which criteria is used as our reference.
hat shows mastery of content. It's another example of control being taken away from the local level. We have just adopte
r kids that simply don't want to be in school for higher learning classes mixed in classes causing distractions. If the kids ar
mmunity. Computers, technical instruments, materials for students to work with, to learn from. Personnel with the technica
ds were not required for all teachers.
but since these areas of study can be pretty difficult - especially chemistry and physics - hopefully the standards won't get
hat standards will be "forced" upon them before they are ready!
s are only touched upon or not covered at all. It seems the areas that are growing the most (biology, biotechnology, chem
in depth maybe.
dent. Many are not yet able to draw such large conclusions as expected.
ance assessment.
blem. Some teachers believe they are very different at their grade levels.
e major areas that are left out.
he past are now considered fact.
ns developed. I do not believe that humans evolved from other animals such as apes.
hat the only way to fufill this standard is by doing the egg drop experiment. While there are large numbers of physical conc
ch more are we going to change things up?
gical reasons. Teaching students about geological time and evolutionary theory is no more an endorsement of those theorie
arting points and ending points for each grade that would help a little.
r schools systems today. Look at the behaviors and their abilities to learn, especially in our less fortunate or low income sc
tion they learn in early years, in order to build in later years. There are many standards to cover in each area and they all
school is not prepared to handle.
ne will not be rocket scientists and they are forced to learn things that they will never use. There is no curriculum that add
to the time/years kids are in school. My sense is that unless the Iowa Assessments underwent some very significant chan
Studies content...
gn their own experiments.
w" when in fact they are theories that have some significant flaws in them.
these standards.
e standard differently and therefore create holes from one district to another.
Unfortunately, I end up teaching material that is to challenging for students who do not have a sound enough understandin
s for those in the medical fields, but lack in the engineering fields.
te being in limbo! 2.) Support from the state and AEA as we unroll these (if we do).
ganization of the NGSS
tudents is not consistent with national thinking and reasoning norms that is currently available. There is little delineation o
uation. Many children go on to struggle in higher level science classes, strictly because they don't get the answers on the
eory) which have both been proven unfounded scientifically. Creation and natural cyclical changes are not introduced to th
ehind in the academic world and in the sciences.

re and framework of the NGSS.
s the way they can reach the minds of students. I agree to a curriculum but an open one where teachers still have a say in
nce and what should wait until chemistry or physics. I try to cover all of them but there are some concepts I have to go ove
tandards for teachers to address that we are going to be forced to go very fast over concepts and may not get the the dep
d training to meet these standards. In thinking about how to modify some of these standards for my lower level students,
eply and truly motivated. I myself have put off studying them in depth "until I have time" - which for busy teachers is often
a lot of ground work needs to be mastered by the student before this can happen.
t discovery, obtaining real world, quantitive data, forming theories, doing experiments, finding out how & why things work.
onfuse students, brain washing them into believing that certain theories are fact, when they are indeed still only theories.
other 25 states.
ow to implement. That most states will just keep teaching what science they are teaching they way they have for years an
n the STEM areas. The 9th grade standards are very good for those that are, but incredibly demanding of those who are no
up other forms of teaching to obtain these standards. Are we simply going to be teaching to the test again. Iowa was ranke
er individuality when it comes to covering standards.
the standards in creating a curriculum that makes sense.
egurgitate information spoon fed to them. They need to know what science is and what it isn't so they will know the limitat
with no adjustments to content.
fferent learning styles of their students.
tering the curriculum, where will it fit. In the little sliver of engineering and design?
mation the more complex information can be built and taught in the upper grade levels.
l and religious reasons to reject this sound educational project. Science is science. It is evidence-based, rich with data that
math and literacy - both of which are very important, but science is also. I also am concerned that many educators will feel
necessary to carry out these standards.

iness and communities - we should trust education experts to do good education.
ocus on some of these more complex ideas. If he can get hands-on experiments that call for his physical activity, he'd be m
ience (and all) education topics. That political concerns/issues around climate science, evolution, water quality, etc will pr
actual amount of time currently spent in science instruction at the those levels due to the expectations of literacy and mat
aining will be provided to teachers to expand their knowledge and understanding of these concepts? Elementary teachers
nd has potential to offend many people.

The fact that engineering practices are not familiar to all science teachers. Iowa requires three years of science and it se
such as computer numerical control machines (3d printing, mills, etc.), simulation, and practical design.
ose of scientific investigation and what counts as science). I believe much of the decline in science literacy and some of the
d having students engage with science rather than read & memorize.
erent than high school. How are we supposed to no over lap?
eir adoption and widespread use.
eyond the confining boundaries of this ill-conceived program; you may contact me for what and whom I really believe is att
st high school classes will remain as rote memorization and recapitulation experiences.
t creative - the experiments will be hard to create.
ng how to read and implement them initially.

ate adopt the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) against parent and taxpayer objections, are actually listen
also do not appreciate the climate change agenda nor the push for evolution as fact.
e performance expectations as our standards and then linking to the connection boxes and using them for professional dev
upplement or spend a lot of money on new materials.

order to adequately teach students. For example, there's a section on Engineering design, but I would imagine very few m
unior college level. I believe in rigor but not in making the mark unattainable for most kids. Whoever wrote this does not un
ed to learn more faster and you will lose half the class with that plan. easier to provide advanced class for TAG students
playing catch up - very difficult. Also, there are no health, human physiology standards at high school. I personally think t
whole thing where kids want to learn science instead of have to learn science
ty to choose the science classes they want to take and will also take away science electives. This takes some of the fun ou
or wrong answers), lack of math focus in many areas. I also have concerns that by focusing on "college and career readine
kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkllllllllllllllllll
nts, and local schools who know their students and the best way that they learn. When I first moved to Iowa there was gr
ple of the standard areas will have undue influence on the adoption process. As a lifelong Iowan proud of my state's leader
ence and mysticism like creationism and intelligent design. If that happens, Iowa's education system will be a laughing sto
he value in educators, professors and those with doctorate degrees in education developing curriculum.
science curriculums/professional development they need to effectively train teachers to teach science in an inquiry-based,
ore teachers are using it. The sooner that it is adopted, the sooner teacher support will be more readily available.
My oth
is difficult to decipher as a teacher and difficult to understand for students especially in the Elementary classroom.
e higher order thinking during one school year for just one content area.
wing sentences that gave no backbone to what point they were trying to make. The second one, 'Crosscutting', is fine, but
est. Keep it to the facts and quit pushing agenda on the kids.
nd the infusion of engineering skills. These are new areas of focus and teacher will need to receive training to better suppo
d them. Districts will need to provide functional overviews that allow teachers to explore them and embrace them.
opic like physics to take advanced courses in that topic if they are not as adept at chemistry or biology.
pected to retain is frightening. I'd much rather see less standards that allow students to dig deep and plan projects and res
ntact time with students to fully meet them all fully.
evaluated, nor about what happens if a student doesn't master a particular unit. I fear that despite the best of intentions,
well, unless schools are willing to devote more time to science instruction. (Color me cynical, but I don't foresee this happe
o be realistic. The reality is that elementary teachers are most often not science teachers and these standards do not take
hese rigorous standards.

standards and produces students well above State and national averages. By embracing the Next Generation Science Stan
ng is a FACT when it is NOT! Also that these standards have not been field tested ANYWHERE! I am sick of my kids being us
a "teacher try-it" or something for each grade level that could help them build confidence and lesson plans if they need it?
ng them how to use it appropriately in their classrooms. The AEAs can be helpful, but they are still trying to unpack the per
roader conceptual ideas.
cal control, but with increasingly mobile students, we need to provide that consistency as a state.
nderstand how the NGSS are different from previous standards.
hers do not major in content areas.

andards at the elementary level, at the same time as teachers are struggling to understand and teach to the Common Core
ntroduce non-science concepts, like intelligent design.
ong foundation in basic core learning of math and reading in the early grades. Schools may not have the manpower to help
teracy and writing. A variety of assessments to show student strengths, at their ability levels (writing or projects or tests) a
tions are based on unguided materialistic processes; there is not mention of teleology (purposeful design). The environme
iteracy issues that also need covered in the Common Core (Iowa Core).
sical geography and Earth science could be integrated.

form one set of standards? The two do overlap which is nice; we wouldn't be reinventing the entire wheel. I know I would
ducation and will be a fad that will soon fade.
ot user friendly for teachers or families. They suggest modeling, but do now help us determine how.
of content from one grade to another. My concern is in the side effect of creating content gaps for students as this shift oc
nts and teachers.
ematical relationship for waves and amplitude. Activites were not always realistic for the classroom.
oken down. Also not having the kits and expensive materials that the NGSS prescribes that all teachers will have.
are not a lot of free resources and models available to help teachers begin to implement them in the classroom with fidelity
ons based on how I see the NGSS affecting my students and my classroom.......I feel that these standards are not grade leve
dards are adopted in reading and math), and the funding for supplies will need to be there, especially for smaller districts.
strands present in the NGSS. This could cause some difficulty in high school settings because of the lack of congruence bet
rade teachers will content ready. What will this mean for those districts that are currently using the NGSS?
so that teachers are prepared to roll out the NGSS correctly.
continued gap between special education and the general eduction population?
of them. They are too distracted by electronics, etc. and are not expected to be full participants in their own education.
to change, but we seem to have changed standards frequently in the last 10 years.
ict) change expectations.
als to match the NGSS.
plenty of great ideas but some of them require having upgraded classroom resources which are not always easy to come b
ntary standards.
se them when I know they are what is best for students right now. Politics take so long and our children are growing up.
yet and are currently researching other sets of standards, just wish something would get settled on for the sake of our stud
Standards are better, or worth adopting, over the current Iowa Core Science Standards. I feel as though the standards are c
to time and money issues in the districts..

d prepared when they are. We have concerns about budget and funding to help all districts meet these standards.
umes that students would have a certain level of knowledge and there may be gaps until it has been in the districts for a w
ed the professional development needed to fully understand the NGSS and how to use it in their classroom.
ay they always have and expecting different results.
s. And, I feel like the standards regarding evolution is far less useful in preparing students for college and careers. I also fe
to eliminate some areas such as human anatomy in order to add others
hat may not be realistic in the current structure of elementary science time allocations.
es. Also there is a question about the background knowledge of teachers who are not trained in inquiry based learning. Al
rily, or educationally)
ore curriculum
eproduction is taught in age-appropriate ways at every school level. My son is in high school and says he has never had for
given a canned curriculum and would lose a lot of the freedom in teaching.
assroom with the breadth and depth outlined.
e and training for our teachers to be able to implement the standards. We will need professional development and time to
formation and not be overwhelmed by the amount the data.
ntific claims in general, not specifically about electromagnetic radiation ? Is there some agenda that is being pointed to ?
oncepts at the depth and breadth expected in one year.
round how to use NGSS. Adopting NGSS without this would be disastrous. I would recommend consulting with Achieve, th
at because the standard doesn't tell me I have to.

rces districts purchase for their students meet these standards and provide various ways to present and assess students.
road to allow teachers to be flexible in their delivery and material.
get through all of this and still have the students have a thorough understand of the material as it is listed in the Next Gen
e links to here, there and everywhere clutter up thought processes.
-- this might confuse someone who simply glances at the document. The rigor expected at the HS level can only be accomp
ls a ton of money to implement, and are not at all user-friendly. There is also too much content to possibly get covered in a
indicator of whether a child will retain the information.
pt curriculum to their students. Another BIG concern is the quantity of testing and reporting to government. Any testing m
e last 100 years and factors related to that rather than accepting that they have risen?
are required to make in class. We have been using the FOSS kits which supplied us with materials. I am very excited to be
r science teachers will need to support them in implementing the NGSS with fidelity. We can do this, but we are going to ne
We need some in depth professional development for our individual standards and how to meet them in our timeline. 3. N
be able to take advantage of curriculum and field trips designed for multi age students with informal education opportuniti
ulous conglomeration of people who may have good intentions, but are nonetheless removed from the local level. that alon
science is also almost non-existent and is crucial to the understanding of how science knowledge has been generated ove
have happened. Bible-believing christians WILL pull their children out of public schools because of these standards.
ct) find a way to get them to know it - assess them on it - and then tell me that I'm good enough at it or not. Can I trust tha
get to it all in just three years.
ution. These seem to be woven throughout the entire NGSS. There are many of us in education who feel political issues sh
Earth Science when that is a discipline that is not propagated once students hit college. In the day of reduced number of t
chieve these standards will be entirely based on the age they are when they are exposed to them.
epts. They are too rigid.

on how to make the lessons different.
ngineering. Often times the lines are blurred as to the differences.
a rehash of things that have already been done, a new refreshed package.
of NGSS. Both deserve and are necessary to properly understanding human impacts on the environment, and creating sol
erformance, none. Assessments should align to these standards if adopted, or they are an invalid means of measuring gro
ools, we need to show teachers how to these standards can connect with reading and math. Some teachers are feeling lik
ctives correctly?
explanation needs to be considered deeply, and history shows that. It seems, at times, scientists, teachers, and students
l. 2. HS PS2-4 - needs to go or be rewritten. This will likely be taught to freshman in my district and they do not need to do
ation between teachers is needed with any list of standards to follow student learning throughout school. I think NGSS doe
udents are required to take physics, for example, and some of these standards are not topics that freshmen physical scienc
ents to master each specific objective.
es for our middle and high school children who are already well into their educational journey? How will this be received by
here is a shortage of people qualified to fill STEM related jobs. If that is where the demand is, I'd like to see us prepare our
e teachers struggle with what some of the details mean.
others. (Who chose what was important to cover.
e are back to discussing them.

each to cover with any depth.
han middle school students. I feel middle school teachers are going to have a very difficult time meeting the standards bec
me of the middle school curriculum.
cience methods courses. Not only that, but currently practicing teachers will need lots of support to make the needed shift
on one area of science to better prepare themselves for post secondary options.
akness. I am not a teacher, but I think they would be overwhelmed by all the point items that need to be addressed in the
e the traditional classroom. Exploration, investigation, and working on projects with a team are often more effective and wi
n in this scientific history and what is mere consensus or popular vote.
ct needs the clear guidance that they provide to make a positive impact for students.
ow they go together. I have had 3 semester long classes use them and I still second guess myself on what exactly the part
the district does not require it.
n and discovery, not on a completed product or essay type explanation. Standards only cover a few topics, but for the youn
l education students. The high school content covers too much information for the average student for 3 years of science c
and confusing.
t science standards I've seen in 21 years in education
work with them, and do not facilitate teachers in articulating them) will continue to shift the focus from what really matters
addition to standards
if they have a small staff that is stretched to far?
ondary science-related education?
cale scientific studies, not just from experiments that students develop. The availability of quality data that is written at th
es for students rather than one more content area that the test subject and content is "taught" and memorized? We can't s
at is to be taught at each grade level.

effectively met. We are producing a generation of science students who are easily misled, and who can't tell the differenc
w requirements but think this is what students need in science.
derstanding environmental principles

s in depth as the students may need.
s to what I should be teaching my students at each grade level.
ry level they will not be prepared for success.
d down lowering of expectations that is happening across all subjects. This is not going to prepare our students for the futu
accomplished by creating a document to follow.
Exit test applications are subject to testing bias and incorrect alignment
ea how a multiple choice test can be used to assess them which is how I assume the state will try to assess them, and that
atements help. My colleagues and I have spent hours collaborating and trying to figure out what we are supposed to teach
e teaching these things and their real world application?
rds are good ideas, but not all students will be able to achieve success in all areas.
We do not feel that they present a clear explanation of the origin and history of the universe. A 4.6 billion year old earth
te levels to prevent too much overlap and reduce need for reteaching.
hat the gov. runs that is efficient?? The Post Office, Defense, Educ. Get the federal gov. out of education and back to the lo
etermined standard.
make sure I teach, at a greater depth, the standards that I will be asked to teach.
l before 6th grade.
lize what NGSS intends.
it does nobody any favors to pretend to omit content from one grade that later turns out to have been essential. Yet the NG
erials for teaching the standards.
g opportunities.
d school districts. So some students may not be exposed to this before graduation. Also resubmitting all my lesson plans to
cts to abide by every Standard.
to use as they plan.

at the high schools.
outcomes, that NGSS is not biased toward any one subject in science, it allows for agriculture, farming, land use, water qua
of their greatest interest. I also think that field work is a great motivator for students.
ot the standards will work.
nts for Post-Secondary Learning needs regardless if they are a four year College/University or 2 year Associates degree
d. Any parent and student not satisfied with the local standards can advocate for different standards or transfer to another
They should be adopted fully as is.
they believe/follow on their own time.

mizing and revising standards, but what about teaching the standards? You can tell me that the new standard is for every c
f religious bias and taint.
ld not implement these standards.
derstanding of scientific principles and methods.
hange, evolution, etc.

S kits, and only one of the three kits fits the Next Generation Science Standards. I also feel that the kindergarten standards
e, we're going to leave behind another generation of consumer-driven people that will take more form the Earth than what
us on numbers than students.
me standards - I understand that students should understand the concept affiliated with that standard but I also worry abou
r implementation in some districts. I see teachers stressing over being told they will accountable for covering everything or
would solve this.
hat every teacher is sure that he or she has completed the task successfully based on the standards' wording.
curricular plan to follow?
would do as much for our children.

e information to the students in a way they can learn, then no amount of standards will help our students learn Science.
in teaching, to understand that not only the core ideas but the practices and cross cutting concepts need to be designed i
ew standards. In order for the standards to be utilized to the fullest potential, coordination of teachers at all grade levels w
telligent design as taught in the bible. I understand different families and students have different beliefs, it's just concernin
m concerned especially elementary teachers implementing these with lack of training and also the lack of science being ta
mpletely. We have a lot of districts jumping on board with FOSS thinking they are fully teaching the standards.
ve forward to begin developing our units and writing new curriculum guides.
learn the curriculum.
Thank you for taking the time to review the N
tandards will not help ill prepared students entering middle school.
eas are "power standards"?
se standards for more ideas to make sure we are doing these standards justice.
eded in some cases especially at the elementary level. Time to become familiar with NGSS, shifts that we will have to make
nslating them. Districts need to provide a version of what standards are being learned by the various grade levels to their
he significant conceptual shifts in instruction and assessment need to meet the performance expectations. The biggest con
ust don't operate the same as rural schools and many decisions are made for big school districts, not small ones.
would be helpful to have scaffolding included for accommodations/modifications
or HS students. They look good on paper. I wonder if the content is covered deeply enough within any given discipline. In
d to understand those concepts. For example, how am I to teach chemical bonding without teaching about valence electro
d to be some prioritizing especially at the primary level because there is not enough hours in the day for all the reading, m
the suggested performance measures. The engineering standards are difficult to understand or use in a science classroom
the various grade levels.
h will not in the end create students that can construct, analyze, evaluate, and develop.
te these Performance Expectations when it is clear the vast majority in fact do not need or will ever need it. The real value
l be produced that address the standards.
cience education?
owa Core Science in the time they have available. Not the issue for grades 6-12 but really an issue for elementary teaches
as need to be involved in the discussion for what is the best approach. It is critical that all sides are represented in this disc
ement effectively.
our own resources to teach them.

critically about the content, but I do worry that the engineering aspect being so large kind of limits other cross curricular a
e case in many students, especially in 6th grade. There is really too many standards to teach them in depth.Where is the m
y to NGSS. I think that mixing our Iowa Core with the NGSS would be the best solution.
to the curriculum for all students.
that reflect the breadth and depth of the standards

r level high school science. How soon before I see the real effect of these standards when they are met by the levels bene
o appropriate assessment resources and test banks would be greatly beneficial.
step outside the box. I see no allowances much less encouragement for this.
nd I was puzzled then as I'm puzzled now as to why they've not been implemented. Do we have the public comment on h
become official!!
all the standards SQUEEZED into 3 years, with some horribly developmentally appropriate.
eave the political environmental issues to the lobbyists and other groups. Keep it out of the schools!!! Teach them to be r
y are all covered for every student unless they are covered in required classes. That is impossible because of the breadth o
n depth than teachers have previously taught. It will take teaching the teachers in order to implement.
ve much room for science electives like anatomy, AP and a more intensive chemistry.
they work to implement the standards as intended. Science leadership capacity at state, AEA, and district levels must be d
specially at the elementary level who may not have the content knowledge of science as deeply as a secondary teacher.
mportant, they should be "in our face" almost.

am will be the teacher delivery. If children don't have an effective teacher, new or old programs are irrelevant. Make sure
of individual students and schools should not be used to judge the ability of students to teach the standards. The standard
heir future. Teachers will need support in teaching them. Could we also use people in industry and in higher ed to help?
to be flexible, so we will be able to handle it!
knowledge of science. Time is an issue at the elementary level.

ders can make a lot of connections in their daily life too. I also have a concern about the standard regarding the length of t
the disciplines.
nal or state groups does not understand the unique needs of my students
plying teachers with valuable information to gear their lesson plans in a more STEM like approach.
ll across the state have spent the last five years aligning to Iowa Core. The format is detailed and at first, intimidating and
cient in these standards.
he wording is unclear on some of the standards. What exactly is it that we want students to be able to do when they comp
s cutting box and the relationship to other standards. I think these are great ideas, but am wondering about the organizatio
hool teachers and college professors, and between college professors and professionals in the science fields), or test scores
he resources that are available to help students design and perform how things work is time consuming and resource consu
ritten in "the student can" format, it's difficult to approach them from varying levels of rigor.
ry ridged and specific.
pensive for districts to update materials

about who will eventually succeed me. In some of the smaller schools, math/science teachers are not specifically trained
follow and understand. Once you have this, it is easy to read and understand.
which is already established.
to overemphasize the teaching of evolution at younger grades.

t it into the NGSS."
ds on materials?
at discipline and worry that I will not do justice to it.
ow they will use them and what courses will be required because of NGSS
ds. I would like to think that RESOURCES to teach the standards would not take as long to get into the hands of the teache
will need to be altered or eliminated for proficiency to be determined.

have access to the material.
teacher & how to get it all done in one school year.
fficult to implement using resources developed around NGSS

me to understand what is expected. Before I can figure out what lessons to teach that will fulfill the NGSS, I have to figure
her capacity? I know k-5 teachers feel very overwhelmed and unprepared. Will elementary schools change to department
t. If the answer is anything else...I am skeptical. Science education at the elementary and middle school level in Iowa is p
eationism. I am okay with including natural selection and evolution, but the content is incomplete without including other t
ve to be trained on what a good paper defending an argument looks like. One of the biggest struggles of our lower level le
uch more specific. This is is nice in the fact that it ensures that all districts are teaching the same concepts in the same ma
the standards that are expected.

orward. NGSS provides the opportunity to do just that.
ost entirely on math and reading.

ch for a 180 day school year.
n put forth by the emphasis on engineering skills.
han they have taught in the past. Many teachers feel overwhelmed by this and would love to have support materials to he
ount to very little real change and sour teachers perspectives about science teaching
ents be completed? Who will be involved in developing all the resources (PD, assessments, curriculum materials, etc.) nee
ater their lessons to their individual classes.
d engineering design. What role does engineering and technology education play in science education has not been addres
e classroom. I have asked admin and fellow teachers along with people at our local AEA and no one can give me a straight
already placed on literacy and math standards and instructional time available to move students to core level proficiencies
hers need to infer a great deal about what student learning needs to occur before particular lessons are done. A chemistry
re expecting of teachers and students...hope we can do it all well.
be engineers. What about the students that struggle with science and math.
m the state to reduce class sizes to 15-20 in high schools, to purchase necessary equipment to teach the standards (though
career in science and shouldn't be focused on any more than medical careers. The "engineering" focus should be on math
on of standards.
lementary levels.
pectations as the standards. This should be clearly defined as which to use and communicated.
forward with a set of standards embody best practice and help us move forward as a state. Educators believe that NGSS is
ing the standards may need to be adjusted over time
orward and only as specific as necessary to get the "must have" across. If these become our standards I will just continue
nowledge and there are not many resources available to teach the vagueness.
ence standards.
work for a curriculum that is NGSS or focus more back to Iowa Core? There is also a pull in both directions which leads to
high school. I think exposure to a variety of content is important but the level of depth and application of these concepts is
andard per grade level? Will this decision be left up to local control? If so, doesn't that defeat the purpose of consistency ac
ds that are written that way
aching/assessing standards in a variety of ways. these could be merely suggestions rather than the only expected outcome
ficiency on performance of all of these in the time that we have
ngs if they do not have a certain order. Too easy for them to forget.
es. This is an area of weakness for me to integrate effectively without some more training, work, and practice. I am hopefu
owa I am gravely concerned in the lack of any mention of safety practices and education in the standards. Every year stude
be expected to change our curriculum at the whim of politicians.
ted a training with our district to better understand the setup of the standards. Training and additional resources may be n
ow to assess the standards. All we get is things like, "assessment does not include calculation energy transfer." Pretty brie
be able to compete globally with students in other states who have been educated under the guidance of the NGSS.
mation about the standard, they don't make sense. I don't know how to reach every little aspect of the standard because
time, and that is always a concern in science education.
ain materials for students to be able to perform the standards.

ols to teach them.
e teachers to implement these standards. Also, what concerns me is the amount of standard to cover, and increasing the
ing NGSS may not be intuitive, but it is SO simple once you are taught how to use it. I worry that NGSS will not get the pro
strong support at the elementary levels for teacher understanding behind the intent of some of the language.
andards given limited time?
elevant in learning situations. Especially in an objective area such as science.
ent to understand what their children will be learning. When parents are confronted with information like this that they ma
ards to innovative instructional and assessment practices.
urriculum (FOSS kits), especially since they are putting emphasis on purchasing elementary kits and not middle school kits
easily. It would be nice to have a database where teachers can go to find specific activities with teacher instructions.
ol science sequence than the model that is currently being implemented in many Iowa Schools. This new structure would n
owa Science standards to the more rigorous NGSS. Schools, particularly elementary levels will have a sharp learning curve
mplementation, standardized testing that truly reflects the NGSS
like math.
spend in school. If we continue adding information to be covered without adding time to the calendar that seems like we a
to hours of school or days of school, it does not matter as we are not extending our calendar to accommodate for more info
sessments. I am also concerned that many teachers will not be given enough PD to use the standards wisely in the classroo
or will there be a ""new"" initiative a few years down the road - somebody seems to always think we need to do things diffe
take so much and they such down.

hem established. Science is important and the amount of time it has taken to get them in place has been wasteful. It seem
a. I am also concerned that there is nothing in the standards about the importance of plants to our ecosystems. There is no
nner that it is difficult to truly understand intent of standard.
rricular freedom.
uit of creating technological advancements (often using science ideas). These advancements can be driven by solving prob
on-specific. We can teach tornadoes, as an example, within one of the larger weathering and climate standards, but then ha
good variety for each grade past 5th grade) 6th grade does not have certain concepts and we have a 4-6 building...
too specific and do not give enough flexibility for teachers to come up with more creative ways to assess students.
important that students across the state and country are held to the same standards. This is especially true because we n
o go. I also think teachers need training and/or materials to help them teach very well.
Meeting many of the current Iowa Core science standards can be accomplished by simply giving a lecture or having stude
standards, how to teach them, and how to assess them.

with fidelity.
so a issue.
gh school students and that just isn't feasible for many districts. Adopting the standards, however, as a K-5 and 6-12 frame
and understand their expectations on how to use them. Again, concerned that they will read the Performance Expectations
d that they have the right to teach in their comfort zone, not by the book.
arrange where some of our content presently lives.
s of the other areas.
Iowa is necessary, and worth the growing pains.

nts who can think and problem solve will be able to learn material not covered. Schools should use test data to determine
3 years (as required by Iowa Code). I would love to see some priority standards to help guide teachers in what to emphasiz
be required) to have 4 years: physics, biology, chemistry, and earth science.
ves as well as actual examples of possible assessments to show mastery of objectives.
y to implement the standards with fidelity
e Weather standards To heavy in Evolution and Nuclear reactions
eachers meet those standards. The standards are a great start, but what can that look like in the curriculum. Please includ
angerously limited knowledge of science will attempt to inject their personal religious beliefs in a thinly veiled attempt to g
nting the NGSS from passing in states and therefore helping those states' children.
take time and money. Teachers need time to get familiar with the standards, align them as necessary, and determine how
rs who believe that they are covering topics in the high school when in reality, they are not. Don't be afraid to be specific a
ards and say go teach them. We need to have all teachers on the same page to provide consistency for our students.
whole idea falls apart because you do not have the time to go back and fill in the gaps so the gaps continue to increase. Th
needed to offer such depth of study?
sed education system.
t them as a whole. The NGSS's strength and value is in the entire package. Nit-picking them means viewers have persona
f these goals in 2 years of required high school science is almost impossible. Elective courses will meet many of the goals
Core science standards. Teachers will need time and resources to effectively implement the major shifts of these new stan
iticians nor community members who do not understand science.

ring and science are all the same thing, and that human problems are solved solely or primarily though technology advanc
and/or local communities when we try to make a "square peg fit into a round whole." More control at the national and state
. My biggest concern is that the FEAR of change to the Next Generation will be greater than the will to change them.
To
an't be altered to suit the needs of students in a particular classroom. As long as there is still flexiblility for the teacher in
d to follow. We have had an easier time b/c of our training with our local AEA Agency.
needed to ensure fidelity to the standards?
s --That the concurrent enrollment system in more and more high schools will place high school students into college clas
in points in the year, in new time frame and order.
tal science skills from the primary grades?
a disservice, and I strongly feel more curriculum should be implemented for students who will benefit from technical school
nd focus of the standards.
attachments that will contribute to a life-long appreciation for nature and our native plants and our ecosystems in Iowa
t deep understandings. This flaw is apparent is several instances.
ed. Second, we are expecting kids at a young age to know too much, that is why we have junior and senior high. In the hi
oncern about the focus on climate change, and evolution. Finally, I am very concern about the lack of focus on biology an
tting ideas. The point of the standards is that students will gain an understanding of all the DCI, all the science and engine
without this support.
sp the concepts will be addressed.
ocess skills are more important to teach and assess than the content knowledge.
ming and findings obtained through carbon dating that are very complicated, with disputes even in the Christian community
dvantage if they have to meet every requirement on the list. For example, a student would have to take AP Bio, AP Chem,
wlwdge. The SWH method gives the students three or four big ideas to try to solve through their own research per school
he standard. The reason for a standard is so that all kids can demonstrate proficiency, but without the assessment portion,
classes. Students often do not retain information as well as the standards seem to imply. In other cases, the use of an ass
g to withstand this to help our students to learn. Will the standardized tests then begin to identify where in the sequence th
eachers are able to keep up with these improvements and advances.
ds are the guinea pigs. There is absolutely NO DATA to prove these standards will work or make our kids smarter or be an a
to only cover those things which can be observed and which hold up to scrutiny.
udents to take biology chemistry and physics before graduating. at the same time biology chemistry and physics principle
aking a decision until AFTER the election. That was very aggravating.
difference between what a 9th grader would learn in physics or chemistry vs. a junior or senior. 3. Wording of some conce
e a state-wide standard.
um is used on our own curriculum maps.
t of students featured an Asian student, and when showing the countries the US falls below, China was given it's place to s
ill there be monetary support to purchase supplies to teach the concepts in a hands on way?
emonstrate their learning?
s from the states who were involved seem to have merely reviewed the standards rather than actually writing it. This is co
ocal level. We have just adopted common science standards in the Common Core - for many of us, that did update the stan
using distractions. If the kids are not prepared in lower grade levels to handle the NGSS, drags intire class behind. Can do's
m. Personnel with the technical skills or training for teacher to acquire the technical skills and the "people skills" to work w
pefully the standards won't get watered down or lowered to ensure that the students at the lower end of the scale can mee
(biology, biotechnology, chemistry, etc) aren't covered well enough to prepare students for college level courses.
large numbers of physical concepts that are just as important that are not addressed. Like understanding the path of a pro
n endorsement of those theories than teaching students about WWII is an endorsement of Naziism.
less fortunate or low income schools. This new plan you are developing, could be a set up for failure for many kids.
cover in each area and they all are more on the apply end of the spectrum requiring teachers to quickly review and move o
There is no curriculum that addresses simple life skills. Why teach 8th grade special education students how to determine
ent some very significant changes there could be a misalignment between what is being covered (using the NGSS) and wh
e a sound enough understanding of the basics within that concept.
ble. There is little delineation of the rigor and or indicators of what is an acceptable level of performance in relation to any
y don't get the answers on the test correct; and for many that pursue a career in science and technology will repeatedly te
hanges are not introduced to the students which doesn't allow them to come to their own conclusions. Science is about for
here teachers still have a say in how or what they teach

some concepts I have to go over before student can understand some of the standards.
ts and may not get the the depth of understanding that students need to achieve.
ds for my lower level students, I am struggling to think of how to modify that. Teachers need to be provided training in impl
which for busy teachers is often never.
ng out how & why things work. Engineering is the exact opposite: it's about using provided qualitative data, design, implem
y are indeed still only theories. It gives too much attention to superficial topics that are pushed by the liberal agenda. And
hey way they have for years and nothing will change. I know teachers know saying well I think how I am teaching fits into t
demanding of those who are not.
the test again. Iowa was ranked high in the nation, now we've slipped and teachers never seem to have time to keep up a
n't so they will know the limitations of science and how and when to apply it. Definitions and the scientific method are cen
ence-based, rich with data that can be verified. No leaps of "faith" involved. It is, or it is not. We have tools to measure wha
d that many educators will feel like they do not have enough of a science background. I hope continuing education will hel
r his physical activity, he'd be much more likely to engage and learn.
ution, water quality, etc will prevent actual science and scientific methodology about these topics from being addressed or
xpectations of literacy and math instruction.

oncepts? Elementary teachers are trained as generalists and many do not the the background knowledge to just look at th
three years of science and it seems like there are too many standards to teach/learn in that time. We need to require 4 ye
ctical design.
cience literacy and some of the increase in anti-intellectualism is due to an ignorance of this.
and whom I really believe is attempting to destroy our education system
Frank B. Adams JD Mason City IA 50401 641.42
er objections, are actually listening to us. I believe this survey is simply for show and not actual listening. We, as parents, h
using them for professional development.
but I would imagine very few middle school teachers that ever took an engineering class, or would know about that proces
Whoever wrote this does not understand the range of abilities of students in most urban districts. The justifications for the
anced class for TAG students
high school. I personally think that it is important for high school students to learn about themselves at a deeper level than
. This takes some of the fun out of learning for these students and can essentially give teachers one more big thing to worr
on "college and career readiness" we are limiting options for those students who want to go deeper into sciences and truly
rst moved to Iowa there was great pride in the educational system. Iowa was ranking as one of the best states in over all e
wan proud of my state's leadership in education, I urge decision-makers to fully embrace and adopt NGSS asap!
n system will be a laughing stock, lampooned for its ridiculousness. More devastatingly, we'll create a generation of studen
curriculum.
ch science in an inquiry-based, hands--on way. This result is many science teachers across the state/country teach science
more readily available.
My other big concern is about different districts teaching different content in different grades at th
Elementary classroom.
d one, 'Crosscutting', is fine, but it oftentimes occurs naturally in a child while educating and experimenting. I noted especia
eceive training to better support these concepts.

hem and embrace them.
or biology.
deep and plan projects and research around which would then support 21st century skills, math, and science.
In addition
despite the best of intentions, understanding will be measured by a standardized, multiple choice test and performance (o
, but I don't foresee this happening.)
and these standards do not take that into account. As I stated earlier, much professional development should be offered i
e Next Generation Science Standards, will teachers now have to "dumb down" to the basic core requirements?
E! I am sick of my kids being used as guinea pigs! Also, the Fordham Institute gave the NGSS a grade of C. Now a realize th
nd lesson plans if they need it?
re still trying to unpack the performance expectations as well. It will be a HUGE shift for some teachers and it will be a ver
and teach to the Common Core Standards.
not have the manpower to help growing classrooms be successful in teaching to every student.
s (writing or projects or tests) and to demonstrate growth.
oseful design). The environmental standards promote a radical political agenda stressing negative human interactions with
e entire wheel. I know I would feel more comfortable following one set of standards than two sets.
aps for students as this shift occurs.
all teachers will have.

em in the classroom with fidelity.
se standards are not grade level appropriate and that (so far) Iowa lacks the resources and materials to adequately teach t
especially for smaller districts.

e of the lack of congruence between endorsements and subjects/courses. I would ask the BOEE to revise the way they offe
sing the NGSS?
ants in their own education.
are not always easy to come by.
our children are growing up.

ttled on for the sake of our students.
l as though the standards are covering the same content, just worded differently.
meet these standards.

has been in the districts for a while.)
heir classroom.
or college and careers. I also feel the ecosystem category is far more involved than necessary considering what opportuniti
ed in inquiry based learning. Also a concern with lack of instructional materials available that are aligned with Next Genera
and says he has never had formal instruction on the existence of or avoiding STDs. He gets this at home, of course, but I t
onal development and time to re-organize our curriculum.
nda that is being pointed to ?
end consulting with Achieve, the National Science Teachers Association, and states that are implementing NGSS, and findin
present and assess students. Right now it seems as teachers, we have been bounced around between standards for NGSS
al as it is listed in the Next Gen Standards. Standards need to be much broader and allow for teachers to be flexible--one s
he HS level can only be accomplished if the standards are properly implemented K-12. As with any list of standards, there i
tent to possibly get covered in a year, and there are lots of religious problems with the creation vs evolution ideas presente
g to government. Any testing must not take more teaching time. It seems like common sense that they cannot teach and
terials. I am very excited to begin teaching the NGSS and look forward to the support from the state.
n do this, but we are going to need differentiated support. Some of us are well versed in the NGSS and know how to make i
eet them in our timeline. 3. NGSS, common core and Iowa standards are in many ways a pipe dream. In talking to many
informal education opportunities and offerings.
d from the local level. that alone makes it a bad idea. these types of recommendations should be approved and adopted a
wledge has been generated over time. Engineering is squeezed in and does not have a natural fit.
use of these standards.
ough at it or not. Can I trust that the "powers that be" will not come up with something completely different and change th
tion who feel political issues should not be misrepresented as "science."

the day of reduced number of teachers, we are trying to figure out how to staff teachers for Earth Science standards - for w
e environment, and creating solutions to issues our country and state currently face; especially climate change!
nvalid means of measuring growth.

. Some teachers are feeling like there isn't enough time in the day to teach science and social studies K-5.
entists, teachers, and students are ridiculed for a certain belief and that just plain doesn't hold up when the same scientific
trict and they do not need to do the mathematical computations for these. Conceptually, ok, but not mathematically. 3. 67
ghout school. I think NGSS does a better job at emphasizing the overall K12 learning goals for students throughout their hi
s that freshmen physical science students will understand.
y? How will this be received by our teachers?

s, I'd like to see us prepare our students for those positions. I believe in teaching concepts such as force and motion throu
ime meeting the standards because of the developmental age of the students. I really hope they reconsider a great deal of
pport to make the needed shifts to the Nex Gen.
at need to be addressed in the standards for each topic in a grade level. Who will assess and determine if a teacher's curri
are often more effective and with better retention in an outdoor setting. Hands-on, real world inquiry taps into all learning s
myself on what exactly the part I am looking at says and what it is used for. Also, sometimes when comparing Next Gen to t
er a few topics, but for the young learner more topics should be explored.
student for 3 years of science classes. Students that are choosing science classes as additional electives can cover that am
focus from what really matters in an attempt to act on personal beliefs and agendas. Hopefully we can focus on the comme
quality data that is written at the appropriate student level is a concern. I have not yet found any resource that has gather
ht" and memorized? We can't simply require students to "know" more facts...science discoveries are always changing!
and who can't tell the difference between science and pseudo-science, fact and faith, the difference between the natural w
repare our students for the future. We need to see evidence that NGSS standards actually produce results. Furthermore, h
ng bias and incorrect alignment. High stakes testing is not new - quick research would show problems associated with this t
will try to assess them, and that is not appropriate to demonstrate learning of these standards.
what we are supposed to teach. We search the Internet and look for other people's interpretations of what the standards ar
se. A 4.6 billion year old earth is inexplicable and should not be presented as sound science as basing science on a hypoth
of education and back to the local level.
have been essential. Yet the NGSS sometimes does precisely that: it never explicitly requires some content in early grades
ubmitting all my lesson plans to school districts with the new NGSS correlations will be a bit of a hassle (but one I am willing
e, farming, land use, water quality, and other issues to be examined.
r 2 year Associates degree

andards or transfer to another school that more closely aligns with the standards wanted.
the new standard is for every child to leave high school knowing calculus - that does nothing to help me teach calculus to a
hat the kindergarten standards are above their level of readiness.
more form the Earth than what they give back. It is no longer sustainable to give short shrift to the environment and the lif
t standard but I also worry about depth of content.

table for covering everything or missing some of the nuances that support the concepts.
andards' wording.
our students learn Science.

concepts need to be designed into the curriculum. Elementary teachers will may need content professional development. M
of teachers at all grade levels will need to occur and this may be difficult in large districts. Additionally, early frustrations m
erent beliefs, it's just concerning that some students are taught things that contradict their spiritual beliefs and told this is
also the lack of science being taught at all. There will need to be a unified team with elementary, middle school, and high
ng the standards.
taking the time to review the NGSS and asking for feedback from various stakeholders!
shifts that we will have to make in our teaching.

e various grade levels to their families.
e expectations. The biggest concern is that districts will just do an alignment exercise using the concepts and not change c
ricts, not small ones.
within any given discipline. In an increasingly STEM driven world HS courses may be the last chance for some students to
teaching about valence electrons.
n the day for all the reading, math, science, social studies, health, p.e., art, and music expectations
nd or use in a science classroom without teacher professional development.
will ever need it. The real value of Science Literacy for ALL(Understanding Nature of Science, valid claims evidence and rea
n issue for elementary teaches who teach everything. Thus districts need time to get up to speed. A lot of time.
des are represented in this discussion including parents, teachers and those familiar with mental health, cognitive disabilit
of limits other cross curricular areas or ideas.
h them in depth.Where is the metric system? Almost too much when viewing performance expectations, except for top.
hey are met by the levels beneath me? How can students meet the standards at this level if they had met them at previou
have the public comment on how doctors are taught or certified? How about plumbers? Why are non-education (or non-sc
e schools!!! Teach them to be responsible. Teach them to think on their own and let them form their own opinions!
ssible because of the breadth of the standards. We can't shove 4 years of standards into 2 years of instruction and expect
implement.
A, and district levels must be developed and supported with financial investment.
eply as a secondary teacher.
rams are irrelevant. Make sure the teachers have the vision, skillset, resouces, and knowledge needed to have successful
ch the standards. The standards should be used as guidelines, not hard and fast rules.
try and in higher ed to help?
andard regarding the length of the day. This one would require kids to do observations at home and the study would be one
d and at first, intimidating and overwhelming.
be able to do when they complete the course. The language is not student friendly (and hardly teacher friendly).
wondering about the organization? Is there a way to make it less overwhelming?
he science fields), or test scores? Who, exactly, determines what is included and excluded in the standards? Do/will educato
consuming and resource consuming. More guidance will be needed to teachers as this is a new approach to teaching that
ers are not specifically trained for teaching the content.
get into the hands of the teachers as it did with the Core implementation.
ulfill the NGSS, I have to figure out what the NGSS is saying, that's a lot of work!
schools change to departmentalization at the earliest grades? Is that a good or bad thing?
middle school level in Iowa is poor (at best) but emphasis is on reading and math. High school science classes are better b
mplete without including other theories.
st struggles of our lower level learners is writing. I believe that they will not do well and not because they don't understand
same concepts in the same manner but because they are so specific does this take out the interpretation that districts and
o have support materials to help them make this transition.
curriculum materials, etc.) needed to implement the NGSS. What actually is considered the Standard? Is it one performan
education has not been addressed, nor has the possibility that the best prepared teachers for this content may not be scie
no one can give me a straight answer to the question.
ents to core level proficiencies in these areas.
lessons are done. A chemistry example: Stoichiometry (relating chemical compounds through chemical reactions) is an im
to teach the standards (though not prescribed, laboratory equipment will be a big expense, since research and science pra
eering" focus should be on math integrated into science and problem solving.
Educators believe that NGSS is the best path ahead for Iowa students - please don't allow politics to get in the way of wha
r standards I will just continue to do what I do now because they are just too messy to make orderly.
both directions which leads to some interesting professional development as we are asked to "dig into" our standards.
application of these concepts is more than what the average, non-science, career-related person would need.
t the purpose of consistency across the state & nation? The concern for schools will be scheduling enough classes to meet
han the only expected outcome.
work, and practice. I am hopeful I will find those opportunities. The other concern in our district is how to get all students al
the standards. Every year students are getting maimed across this country due to a lack of science safety consciousness. T
d additional resources may be necessary for implementation statewide.
on energy transfer." Pretty brief. The descriptions of the standard are very difficult to read and understand.
e guidance of the NGSS.
spect of the standard because it's TOO specific.
rd to cover, and increasing the amount of standards, when teachers are pressed for time. I am concerned about the assess
y that NGSS will not get the professional development support it needs to be effectively used by educators.
me of the language.
ormation like this that they may not fully understand, they could call things into question that may have been present for y
kits and not middle school kits.
with teacher instructions.

ols. This new structure would not necessarily need to be enforced with the adoption of NGSS, however I believe that the st
will have a sharp learning curve and in order to implement all the NGSS standards more time must be allocated to science
calendar that seems like we are creating an overloaded curriculum when students need time to adequately process the in
r to accommodate for more information that must be covered. There are foundational items that are not listed in the stand
standards wisely in the classroom and that principals will not take the time to understand how they should be applied and h
think we need to do things differently when we do a pretty damn good job of Science ed in Iowa, already!!
lace has been wasteful. It seems like the delay is being based on politics rather than helping our students and teachers be
to our ecosystems. There is nothing about immune systems, bacteria and viruses
s can be driven by solving problems or by financial gain. Science aims to understand the natural world and often uses tech
climate standards, but then have trouble with alignments between schools in the district because it is not specific enough
we have a 4-6 building...

ways to assess students.
s especially true because we need to increase our science skills.
giving a lecture or having students read a textbook passage. It will not be possible to adequately have students meet the N
owever, as a K-5 and 6-12 framework however could allow us to implement many of the HS standards into physics and into
d the Performance Expectations and think that they have to do EXACTLY that.
uld use test data to determine the gaps or areas of low achievement and then address how they are going to improve the
e teachers in what to emphasize.
n the curriculum. Please include activities and ideas for teachers.

s in a thinly veiled attempt to gain votes in their next election.
I also have a concern about Earth and Space standard
necessary, and determine how to approach them in their classes. Districts will need to provide the finances necessary to p
Don't be afraid to be specific about what needs to be taught. Should the focus be wholly conceptual, or should students b
nsistency for our students.

e gaps continue to increase. This is my biggest concern with this system. It is also a lot of concepts to cover and it assumes
m means viewers have personal agendas rather than a concern for all Iowa students to be ready for college or a career.
es will meet many of the goals but not every student will take those courses. Some of the standards are beyond the gras
e major shifts of these new standards with fidelity. I have seen it work beautifully for elementary mathematics, for example
arily though technology advancement are exacerbated. I've always advocated addressing connections between science, te
control at the national and state level will result in lower student achievement - it happens in every area that government i
n the will to change them.
To do this, we will need to build an increasing base of community understanding among all sta
ill flexiblility for the teacher in each classroom to teach the content in a manner best suited to their classroom, I feel the N
chool students into college classes before the students have learned the new standards; then the colleges will still have to
ll benefit from technical schooling.
and our ecosystems in Iowa
unior and senior high. In the higher grades is where more in depth learning should be done because their brains are more d
the lack of focus on biology and chemistry.
DCI, all the science and engineering practices, and all the crosscutting ideas and could demonstrate understanding or be a
ven in the Christian community. For those Christians who believe the facts outlined in "Answers in Genesis" (re. the Genes
have to take AP Bio, AP Chem, AP Env Sci, AP Physics 1 AND AP Physics 2 to cover all benchmarks - this is 5 years of advan
their own research per school year. This does not teach science foundation and it limits the amount of information that th
without the assessment portion, then it is very subjective.
n other cases, the use of an assessment boundary will discourage teachers from teaching and assessing students who are r
entify where in the sequence that the listed standards were not learned and then the necessary action taken to eliminate t
ake our kids smarter or be an advantage. Banking on a "hope & a prayer" doesn't sound like a very responsible strategy. N
chemistry and physics principles should be integrated into the elementary and middle school curriculum so that it won't be
nior. 3. Wording of some concepts such as Laws of Motion seem too specific and focused on only one thing (such as 2nd la
, China was given it's place to shine. We need to stop worrying about what China's doing. They score higher on standardize
an actually writing it. This is concerning because this appears to be Common Core with another name.
y of us, that did update the standards we were using.
gs intire class behind. Can do's and won't do's in the world - they are in the classrooms too. Instructors need to be equipp
nd the "people skills" to work with young people in a hands on/lab setting.
lower end of the scale can meet them.
college level courses.
understanding the path of a projectile.
or failure for many kids.
s to quickly review and move on to the more rigorous content quickly. Many schools do not have current class series that w
tion students how to determine chemical composition of elements when their math and reading levels are three to four gra
vered (using the NGSS) and what is being assessed on those higher stakes tests. If we go with NGSS whatever state asses
performance in relation to any given standard.
d technology will repeatedly tell you that they learned their trade not from getting the answers correct on a middle/high sc
nclusions. Science is about forming a hypothesis, researching for evidence & then forming a conclusion, but these standar
d to be provided training in implementation of these standards. We need a menu of ideas, models of exemplars, lesson plan
qualitative data, design, implementation, & making things work.

By leaning so heavily on engineering & the associated
hed by the liberal agenda. And it does not encourage students to do their own research or allow them to hold a differing vi
ink how I am teaching fits into the new standards, but they are not sure, or even how to figure out if how they are teaching
seem to have time to keep up and teach necessary life skills to students. Will this help or hurt the system.
d the scientific method are central to science. Otherwise, it will get hijacked by the establishment and used to promote po
We have tools to measure what formerly were considered to be unexplainable "phenomena" - the stuff of mythology and
pe continuing education will help show them how to best work with the new standards.
topics from being addressed or studied at all.
nd knowledge to just look at these and teach them.
time. We need to require 4 years of science.
D Mason City IA 50401 641.420.8974
ual listening. We, as parents, have the ultimate responsibility to ensure our kids are properly educated and instilled with th
would know about that process in any more depth than what is shown in the texts. - Science doesn't stand alone - it need
tricts. The justifications for the performance standards listed under them looks like what a college professor would like to h
emselves at a deeper level than what is taught in middle school health class.
hers one more big thing to worry about. The amount and depth of the standards also worry me a bit because of the limit in
o deeper into sciences and truly excel with them in higher education.
e of the best states in over all education from elementary schools through college. With the Next Gen standards coupled wi
d adopt NGSS asap!

ll create a generation of students who don't know how to think critically.
the state/country teach science only through textbooks and reading, because of lack of resources, curriculum, materials, an
content in different grades at the middle school level. Since so many students move during the school year, it is important
experimenting. I noted especially in the 'DCI Arrangements of the Next Generation Science Standards', there aren't any gr
math, and science.
In addition, as an educator my head spins reading these standards. Students will never understand the
choice test and performance (or lack thereof) on those tests will be used by politicians to pursue their various agendas.
evelopment should be offered in the state before these standards are to be used in the classroom. Instead of rolling them
core requirements?
S a grade of C. Now a realize that Iowa's Science standards received a grade lower than that, but can't we look at some of
me teachers and it will be a very frustrating and long process.
egative human interactions with the environment, sustainability, and global warming.
materials to adequately teach them. As a staff, we have had very little "training" on these standards, yet we are expected
OEE to revise the way they offer secondary science endorsements to better match this structure.
ry considering what opportunities students will have with this topic and the usefulness of what that category contains.
at are aligned with Next Generation Science Standards and Common Core. If we are going to do this right, we need to com
this at home, of course, but I think it should be part of the curriculum as well.
implementing NGSS, and finding qualified professional development providers who know NGSS to guide professional devel
nd between standards for NGSS and our local state - wasting our time!
or teachers to be flexible--one size does not fit all!
th any list of standards, there is too much to teach in too little time. However, none of these concerns should stop Iowa's im
ion vs evolution ideas presented.
se that they cannot teach and test at the same time. TEACHERS MUST BE ALLOWED TO TEACH! DO NOT ALLOW MORE TE
NGSS and know how to make it happen in our classrooms. Some of us do not have the understanding of the NGSS or the b
ipe dream. In talking to many who teach science (anecdotal, I realize), we are not able to address all the standards, and th
ould be approved and adopted at the local(school district) level, not at the state level.
pletely different and change the game again. Local control set us back - and politics hold us there. Find out the outcome fir
Earth Science standards - for what outcome?
lly climate change!
cial studies K-5.
old up when the same scientific explanation can support those views. There have always been differences of opinions amo
, but not mathematically. 3. 67 standards in 3 years of science is A LOT.... A LOT. If there is any to cut, that would be grea
or students throughout their high school career.
such as force and motion through the engineering of products such as rockets, solar-powered cars, and windmills. I have a
they reconsider a great deal of the language and bring it to a level that middle school students can achieve. I also hope th
d determine if a teacher's curriculum meets the standards? How will teachers get trained on how to adopt their current cur
d inquiry taps into all learning styles better, but especially the difficult learners.
when comparing Next Gen to the Iowa Core, there are missing topics and concepts in Next Gen that Iowa has right now, su
onal electives can cover that amount of content. Also, little basic anatomy/physiology and taxonomy are present in the high
ully we can focus on the comments of those that are living the work every day.
nd any resource that has gathered such materials for educators. At this point it is up to the teacher to go out and seek this
veries are always changing!
fference between the natural world and the world of the supernatural.
roduce results. Furthermore, having Minnesota as the lead state is not a comforting thought. Are we really willing to use o
problems associated with this type of testing and how ineffective the results really are. How many current K-12 teachers
ations of what the standards are asking us to have students to do. They need to simplify the jargon in the standards and m
as basing science on a hypothesis that cannot be proven leaves our students skeptical and confused. We feel this theory
s some content in early grades that is then assumed in subsequent standards. This problem is especially visible in the ear
of a hassle (but one I am willing to take on).
g to help me teach calculus to a child who can't do algebra. Likewise, more support is needed for actual teaching strategie
t to the environment and the life sciences.
nt professional development. More/different materials and resources may be needed. Hopefully, we can work with other st
Additionally, early frustrations may lead to abandonment of the structure the NGSS encourages and will lead to erosion of e
spiritual beliefs and told this is the only possible option.
ntary, middle school, and high school to make it successful and beneficial for students.
the concepts and not change current practice to meet the intent of the standards.
t chance for some students to experience scientific principles and critical analysis of data and experimental results. If they
, valid claims evidence and reasoning) gets lost in the narrowly defined expectations (Expectations that further promote m
peed. A lot of time.
ental health, cognitive disabilities, etc.
xpectations, except for top.
f they had met them at previous levels?
hy are non-education (or non-science) people allowed to dictate how/what science is taught? Is it because the NGSS are "c
rm their own opinions!
years of instruction and expect all our students to thrive.
dge needed to have successful culture change.
me and the study would be one that would be a year long comparison. If students lack home support at this level, it would
ardly teacher friendly).
the standards? Do/will educators have enough time to adequately prepare lessons, and thus adequately prepare students
new approach to teaching that is not taught in colleges.
ool science classes are better because they're hands-on and more relevant. My secondary concern is keeping the interest
because they don't understand the concept, but because they are not good writers.
interpretation that districts and teachers have to present the information in meaningful ways.
Standard? Is it one performance expectation (PE) or is it multiple PEs pertaining to a concept or topic?
or this content may not be science teachers. Does engineering curriculum count as science education when taught by eithe
gh chemical reactions) is an important part of chemistry, yet not mentioned by name. A teacher would have to know their
since research and science practice is a part of the standards) and teacher professional development.
olitics to get in the way of what is best for kids.
to "dig into" our standards.
rson would need.

duling enough classes to meet them and allowing scheduling to ensure meeting the standards will be possible.
ict is how to get all students all of the NGSS content. For example, many Next Gen standards are only well met currently w
science safety consciousness. This is an opportunity to ensure that Iowa's students and teachers are safe.
and understand.
am concerned about the assessment of students' understanding of these standards. Assessments are lacking in their abilit
d by educators.
at may have been present for years, even when they were in school, but that they don't understand. It seems to me taking
S, however I believe that the standards would have the greatest effect if they were implemented as the writers intended. I
e must be allocated to science instruction that currently is allowed in our district. This will cause major conflicts with time
me to adequately process the information.
that are not listed in the standards that must be taught as well in order for students to have a proper foundation for learni
ow they should be applied and how assessments should be interpreted,
owa, already!!
g our students and teachers be able to strengthen their instruction and get good science foci for students.
tural world and often uses technology in the pursuit.

ecause it is not specific enough to say that. It also makes deep assumptions. One of the performance standards for 8th gra
uately have students meet the NGSS this way. Many teachers will have to make wholesale changes in how they teach scien
standards into physics and into our 8th grade ES class.
w they are going to improve the achievement. No two years of students have ever been the same. The key is using your d
bout Earth and Space standards. For many schools, we do not require 3 courses in science but maybe one or two. I would
de the finances necessary to purchase supplies and texts (if needed) to support a new curriculum.
onceptual, or should students be getting into calculations more? Every single teacher out there either has a firm belief tha
oncepts to cover and it assumes each student is excited and developmentally ready to cover the material which sadly is no
eady for college or a career.

standards are beyond the grasp of most freshmen and sophomores which is when most students are required to take their
ntary mathematics, for example, when districts were supported by AEA, DE, and legislature (with appropriate funding). How
onnections between science, technology and engineering, but the NGSS go too far and commit too much of the science cur
n every area that government intervenes - we set the "standard" in order to ensure that the "lowest common denominator"
ty understanding among all stakeholders, a robust way to build professional confidence, and an understanding that chemis
to their classroom, I feel the NGSS are a step in the right direction.
n the colleges will still have to offer remedial and basic introductory information since the students took the sciences befor
because their brains are more developed which means more understanding of what you are learning. Third, k-3 is when ki
onstrate understanding or be assessed through any combination of them. I worry that narrowly defined curricula will be de
wers in Genesis" (re. the Genesis creation account and the scientific evidence which supports it), it appears that some of th
hmarks - this is 5 years of advanced science - just to meet the minimum benchmarks. 2) It will disrupt a lot of course offeri
e amount of information that they learn about science. The government appears to be too heavily involved in this. We nee
d assessing students who are ready for more rigorous content. Schools and teachers should be able to assess at a higher l
sary action taken to eliminate this oversight.
e a very responsible strategy. NGSS, like Common Core, is a one size fits all education...and kids all have different and uniq
l curriculum so that it won't be quite as challenging when they get to high school.
only one thing (such as 2nd law) 4. Environmental science - we don't have room to put in standards and would have to c
hey score higher on standardized tests than we do because they only test their elite students, whereas we test all students,
her name.
. Instructors need to be equipped to deal with both teach the cant do's another place for the won't do's so the class isn't d
have current class series that would allow for students to cover all the high school standards in four years. New graduatio
ding levels are three to four grade levels below their peers?
ith NGSS whatever state assessment gets used needs to be aligned with the standards or it will be demoralizing to studen
wers correct on a middle/high school tests. They had outside influence to understand and learn real-world concepts and th
a conclusion, but these standards do not allow the basics of science to even be completed by students since they are force
odels of exemplars, lesson plans, and resources to figure out how to teach these standards. Additionally, assessment ideas
n engineering & the associated labs, children are taught to value skills practices over knowledge, the latter of which ultima
allow them to hold a differing viewpoint on the topics presented.
re out if how they are teaching does fit in or how they can easily change their teaching style to have their science fit into t
rt the system.
shment and used to promote political agendas as has proven to be the case in some fields such as climatology. Also, dogm
a" - the stuff of mythology and "origin stories".
y educated and instilled with the proper values and morals to succeed in an increasingly morally bankrupt society. The un-e
ce doesn't stand alone - it needs to be supported by the appropriate math concepts. If there is no tie to that, then the stude
ollege professor would like to have students attain ahead of time to make their jobs easier. These standards are too busy, t
me a bit because of the limit in time that we have with students.
Next Gen standards coupled with the Common Core State Standards Iowa is dumbing down it's excellence in education to m
urces, curriculum, materials, and training on how to effectively deliver science instruction. The truth that research shows i
he school year, it is important for student learning that we provide some continuity for them by teaching the same concep
Standards', there aren't any groundbreaking new discoveries. It is basic science, the same stuff being taught right now!
dents will never understand these and isn't that what they are for? So students can have a goal that I need to understand t
rsue their various agendas.
sroom. Instead of rolling them out and thinking AEAs are going to offer PD, the state needs to have some hand in controllin
t, but can't we look at some of the states, like California or D.C., that received a grade of A?! Wouldn't that make more sen
standards, yet we are expected to teach them. I feel that we are caught in "limbo" between not yet knowing if Iowa will ad
hat that category contains.
o do this right, we need to combine the content of Next Generation Science Standards with Common Core. This is time con
GSS to guide professional development efforts.
e concerns should stop Iowa's implementation of these standards!
ACH! DO NOT ALLOW MORE TESTING!
erstanding of the NGSS or the budgets to make the hands-on, interactive component that is critical in implementation of th
ddress all the standards, and those who are, are not addressing them deeply or well.
there. Find out the outcome first and then let's find a way to get there.
een differences of opinions among scientists, inventors, and the like, and we need to consider there will be differences in th
s any to cut, that would be great. 4. The Engineering Design (HS - ET) section needs to be removed from the "list" since th
d cars, and windmills. I have a hard time deciding where these project fit into the NGSS.
ents can achieve. I also hope the state then is going allow for a larger budget for these new standards because textbooks a
n how to adopt their current curriculum to meet the standards? The NGSS is broad and complex, and I am concerned that t
Gen that Iowa has right now, such as the solar system. Next Gen is so specific with the solar system in 6-8 that is might be
xonomy are present in the high school content. If next generation science standards are written for every high school grad
teacher to go out and seek this information. There is a lot available through the internet, but the time needed to find this m
t. Are we really willing to use our Iowa students as an experiment for untested, unproven standards?
ow many current K-12 teachers were on the task force? I worry about outside interests writing/approving information that is
e jargon in the standards and make it easier to understand.
confused. We feel this theory can be taught in addition to other explanations for the origin of the universe and give stude
m is especially visible in the earth and space science section, where (in the reviews words) so much implied content is infe
ed for actual teaching strategies, not just constantly rewriting standards.
fully, we can work with other states that are also adopting these same standards. Time and support to bring about the shift
ges and will lead to erosion of education instead of raising it as intended.
nd experimental results. If they only have a limited exposure to depth of content and complexity of principles they may str
ctations that further promote misconceptions that only 1 S/E Practice need be tied to 1 piece of content tied to 1 crosscuttin
? Is it because the NGSS are "controversial?" Evolution and climate change are not controversial---they happen. Now, the
me support at this level, it would be a very hard one for them to do. Also the need for them to compare their observations f
s adequately prepare students for college and beyond?
concern is keeping the interest alive in students and not making them think science is something you do if there's time (ele
ept or topic?
education when taught by either industrial technology or math teachers as currently happens in Project Lead the Way class
acher would have to know their content well to recognize that some of the PE's could not be addressed without Stoichiome
velopment.
ds will be possible.
s are only well met currently within our chemistry or physics courses, but not all students take those courses. All students
chers are safe.
ments are lacking in their ability to assess a student's performance, modeling, and experimentation.
derstand. It seems to me taking certain "hot button" terms out, but keeping the content the same, might prevent some bac
nted as the writers intended. In order for this to happen, schools will need resources and a lot of guidance to figure out a n
cause major conflicts with time allocated to literacy. A conflict, I personally, feel needs to be addressed. Science has been p
e a proper foundation for learning the information. In my years as a teacher it seems that more and more gets added to w
ci for students.
formance standards for 8th grade wave interactions has an example assessment on the NGSS site that makes the assumpt
hanges in how they teach science in order to get students to meet these standards. I fear that many teachers will go strai
same. The key is using your data to drive your improvement. Standards are not going to guarantee improvement.
but maybe one or two. I would like to see earth and space Science integrated into Life and Physical Science as an alternati
here either has a firm belief that what they want to teach is what should be taught OR they have no idea what to teach at a
r the material which sadly is not the case.
dents are required to take their science courses in high school. As a teacher I have a hard time understanding what some
(with appropriate funding). However, without the necessary professional development for teachers, these standards alone
mit too much of the science curriculum to technology and engineering. Finally, schooling is more than job-prep. The NGSS,
"lowest common denominator" will meet success. In reality what we are ensuring is that we all will sink to that bar. That is
d an understanding that chemistry is embedded throughout ALL the standards.
We also need to realize that the standards
tudents took the sciences before truly prepared for the college science courses
learning. Third, k-3 is when kids should learn basic skills so that when they start 4-6, they are able to start critically thinki
owly defined curricula will be developed that target ONLY the specific Performance Expectations in the NGSS, rather than c
s it), it appears that some of the information related to these standards may be teaching an opposing perspective or theor
will disrupt a lot of course offerings and most likely limit interesting exploratory courses like anatomy and physiology, healt
heavily involved in this. We need to have local control over what our students learn.
be able to assess at a higher level if their students are ready. Why limit the students? There should only be a minimum bo
kids all have different and unique learning styles and challenges. Added costs for already strapped school districts for new
standards and would have to cut other things that are important to cover them too
s, whereas we test all students, including special education. The grim reality is the sub-par Chinese students don't get to g
e won't do's so the class isn't dragged down like happens now. You can put all the new programs in place you want but tea
ds in four years. New graduation requirements would have to be implemented.
will be demoralizing to students, teachers, and schools.
earn real-world concepts and that getting answers correct on a test doesn't make you successful at these career paths.
by students since they are force-fed what they're supposed to know.
Additionally, assessment ideas would be useful! Money needs to be available to take kids on field trips or site visits to lear
edge, the latter of which ultimately is the true purpose of education.
As an engineer, I am a bit concerned that these st
e to have their science fit into the new standards. Many ask well how do I teach science to these new "standards". I do no
uch as climatology. Also, dogmatic teaching of only one origins model gives the false impression that science has proven a
rally bankrupt society. The un-elected Iowa School Board, teachers, administrators and others are simply enablers. I do not
is no tie to that, then the students are not getting the whole picture. - Although the breadth of knowledge is commendabl
These standards are too busy, too specific, and should have been made solely by teachers who have to be on the front line
it's excellence in education to meet the mediocrity of the rest of the nation. Iowa no longer stands above other states with
The truth that research shows is that science being taught this way does not effectively prepare students to be problem-so
m by teaching the same concepts at the same grade level, at least throughout the state.
stuff being taught right now!
I believe this NGSS is a pep talk for teachers to keep doing what they are already doing. It d
goal that I need to understand this standard? If they can't even understand what "Generate and compare multiple possible
to have some hand in controlling how that PD looks and where and when it is offered and how it is advertised so that all sc
! Wouldn't that make more sense? Also, with all the talk of STEM lately, the NGSS does not advance STEM. Another thing is
not yet knowing if Iowa will adopt these standards, or the ones mandated by the Iowa Core. It is frustrating as an educato
Common Core. This is time consuming and regular education (elementary) teachers are not provided the time or materials
critical in implementation of the NGSS. So we need the financial support of our state government, and local support within
er there will be differences in the science community as well. A good scientist should take a look at all the evidence as wel
emoved from the "list" since they are embedded into the performance standards. Otherwise it comes off as a stand alone
standards because textbooks and supplies to meet the requirements of NGSS will be a necessity and a nonnegotiable to al
plex, and I am concerned that the complexity could overwhelm administrations, teachers, low-, mid- and high-achieving stu
system in 6-8 that is might be more challenging teaching everything we need to teach to understand the solar system. Io
tten for every high school graduate to master, then they need to be what every US citizen needs to know. Maybe we need
t the time needed to find this material and the reading level at which it is available is beyond that of the students in high s
g/approving information that is not in their profession.
of the universe and give students the tools and skills to pursue truth.
so much implied content is inferred in a single statement that it is difficult to imagine just what one might expect to be tau
support to bring about the shifts needed.
lexity of principles they may struggle as a result.
e of content tied to 1 crosscutting concept) that have little isolated value for most. The NGSS document is another albatros
ersial---they happen. Now, the conversation about how climate is changing or what is causing it provides an excellent opp
to compare their observations from fall to winter to spring is a long time span to make these comparisons. These standard
thing you do if there's time (elementary) or that you hear about and remember.
ns in Project Lead the Way classrooms? As PLTW is only one curriculum of many, what will be the role of technology and eng
addressed without Stoichiometry as a critical idea
ake those courses. All students take a year-long freshman physical science course, but there does not seem to be enough in
same, might prevent some backlash from an uninformed public. But thank-you for collecting opinions from a wider audienc
lot of guidance to figure out a new course progression. Teachers that have been teaching one 'subject' for many years ma
addressed. Science has been pushed aside in the elementary almost to the point that teaching science concepts in option
more and more gets added to what I am supposed to be addressing content, technology, 21st Century skills, socialization. I
SS site that makes the assumption that 8th students should have a working knowledge of electromagnetic generators. (http
hat many teachers will go straight to the Disciplinary Core Ideas, ignoring the required integration with the Crosscutting C
uarantee improvement.
Physical Science as an alternative option. Earth Science can be integrated into Life science and Space Science into Physica
have no idea what to teach at all... If had a new science teacher come to me, asking what they should cover in class, and
ime understanding what some of the outcomes expect so I'm sure the same would be true for students.
eachers, these standards alone won't change anything.
more than job-prep. The NGSS, in overemphasizing engineering practices, convey that the value of science is primarily link
e all will sink to that bar. That is the inherent, and I believe, the unfixable problem, when we impose "standards" that are no
ed to realize that the standards are a minimum of what ALL learners need to know and be able to do at a base level, rathe
are able to start critically thinking about subjects they are learning but should always be able to build on what they have le
ions in the NGSS, rather than considering the NGSS holistically. I would argue strongly for making it clear that when we ad
n opposing perspective or theory which these students should not be required to support/prove.
anatomy and physiology, health, animal science, plant science, botany, marine biology, etc. All of these excellent courses
e should only be a minimum boundary not a higher level boundary. Some of the boundaries are below what we currently te
strapped school districts for new curriculum, new technology, new assessments, etc. I strongly oppose the use of the NGSS
Chinese students don't get to go to school, they get to go to work.
On top of this, the government needs to have less invo
rams in place you want but teachers need to be able to sort through the can do's and won't do's. If you don't want the edu
ssful at these career paths.
n field trips or site visits to learn about some of the ideas in the standards and to conduct investigations and collect data in
m a bit concerned that these standards are untested for efficacy, which ironically, is actually contrary to both the science a
these new "standards". I do not understand them and more. I know I do not understand them.
ssion that science has proven a historical event which is outside the realm of the scientific method. It would be ideal to sh
rs are simply enablers. I do not support NGSS, because we will be paying a ton of tax dollars, on top of Common Core State
h of knowledge is commendable, I worry that teaching to standards does not encourage students to obtain a greater depth
who have to be on the front lines everyday.
stands above other states with high quality education and that tradition and legacy is tossed aside for an uninspired secon
pare students to be problem-solvers and curious learners. Research has shown that the inquiry-based, problematic, critica
what they are already doing. It doesn't carry anything besides trying to organize a group of people "NRC" and their thoughts
and compare multiple possible solutions to a problem based on how well each is likely to meet the criteria and constraints
ow it is advertised so that all schools in the state can take advantage of it.
advance STEM. Another thing is the teaching of evolution as a fact and not a theory. There are just so many things wrong w
. It is frustrating as an educator to not have a direction or vision of where science is going or how to best teach it to our st
provided the time or materials to create the integrated units of study.
nment, and local support within our district budgets to make this work. We can do this, but teachers are going to need som
look at all the evidence as well. There are some standards which will be changing as we progress. The concern just migh
e it comes off as a stand alone like the science as inquiry does for the Iowa Core.
ssity and a nonnegotiable to all the districts in Iowa. When state changes are created often the districts are left to fend for
w-, mid- and high-achieving students.
nderstand the solar system. Iowa is a little more broad and might be easier to work with.
needs to know. Maybe we need basic standards and advanced standards. I am also concerned that engineering is the only s
nd that of the students in high school who have not yet developed a full understanding of the concepts and who lack the vo
what one might expect to be taught.
Second, the risk posed by including assessment boundaries along with the standa
S document is another albatross following the tired pattern of difficult to follow directives whose intent will easily get lost on
ng it provides an excellent opportunity to see how science works. Besides, these "controversial" topics are already in Iowa
e comparisons. These standards are very different than what has been taught at the first grade level. Where does the mat
e the role of technology and engineering education as Iowa Common Core is modified (it is currently a high school graduatio
does not seem to be enough instructional time to cover all physics, chemistry and earth science related standards using t
g opinions from a wider audience.
ne 'subject' for many years may need to be trained in other disciplines in order to teach those newly designed courses.
hing science concepts in optional and if concepts are brought to students it is through literacy.
t Century skills, socialization. I realize that much of this can be addressed in an integrated approach, but with additional c
ectromagnetic generators. (http://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/ngss/files/MS-PS-Ocean%20Waves_version2.pdf page 4).
gration with the Crosscutting Concepts and Science and Engineering Practices in the performance expectations, thus under
and Space Science into Physical Science so that schools that give their students a choice on their other science credits wil
hey should cover in class, and I handed them the Next Gen Science Standards and just said "this," they would be lost.
or students.
alue of science is primarily linked to its application in technology.
impose "standards" that are not set at the local level - those closest to their community.
ble to do at a base level, rather than setting a mountain top goal that we expect only the top students to reach. That artic
e to build on what they have learned so that when they are in the higher grades they have the ability to really understand
making it clear that when we adopt the NGSS as Iowa's standards, we are adopting the entire document and the Framework
. All of these excellent courses do not "have a place" in the NGSS and thus will be bumped to the back or dropped as cours
are below what we currently teach and what our students currently learn without difficulty.
gly oppose the use of the NGSS standards and think we can do better for our students. If improving our kids' education an
rnment needs to have less involvement in school. I'm fine with tax money going to support schools. Public education availa
do's. If you don't want the education then the parents need to deal with the won't do's so all kids don't have to trip over th
vestigations and collect data in the real world settings laid forth by these standards.
contrary to both the science and engineering practices themselves. Why would we do something that risky, especially to o
method. It would be ideal to share the strengths and weaknesses of all origins models so the student will think for themselv
s, on top of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and SBAC for the NGSS and it only moves the football 5 yards down the
dents to obtain a greater depth of knowledge in a given subject in which they might have interest. There needs to be a pat
d aside for an uninspired second-rate education program that, according to the Fordham institute, doesn't rank above a C.
uiry-based, problematic, critical thinking approach engages more students and requires students to use the problem-solvin
people "NRC" and their thoughts. It also costs folks lots of money to print up these thoughts. When it gets down to the nitty
eet the criteria and constraints of the problem" they won't know what they are trying to reach for, can't goal set, and can't
re just so many things wrong with NGSS, we should not be even considering them!
or how to best teach it to our students. I also firmly believe that EACH grade should be assigned standards, as this does aff
eachers are going to need some level of guidance; otherwise the student understanding that we know will develop as a res
ogress. The concern just might be teaching some of the standards as concrete, unchanging, the only way to believe perio
the districts are left to fend for themselves on how to make the changes work, the state must be prepared to pay districts t
ed that engineering is the only science career with standards. That emphasis adds to the misconception that you only need
e concepts and who lack the vocabulary to interpret such articles.
ndaries along with the standards. These are meant to cap large-scale assessments and put a ceiling on the content and s
ose intent will easily get lost on the 90-95 percent of the population that have no real need for their understanding. Would
rsial" topics are already in Iowa Core. NGSS adoption would allow Iowa to take part in a multi-state group to share the cost
ade level. Where does the material come from to teach this? My school is just are beginning a new Foss Kit on air and we
urrently a high school graduation requirement in 11 states)?
ence related standards using the inquiry type methods contained in the practices.
se newly designed courses.
approach, but with additional class time being lost due to professional development expectations plus loss of planning time
0Waves_version2.pdf page 4).
I also get the feeling that our local district leaders are promoting NGSS because its the onl
mance expectations, thus undercutting the main strengths of these standards. It will have to be made clear that the only w
n their other science credits will have been exposed to all the standards upon graduation.
"this," they would be lost.
p students to reach. That articulation will be critical to the success of this initiative.
the ability to really understand the concepts. I am not sure how many kids in K-5 have the ability to understand cause and
document and the Framework it is being built on, NOT just the Performance Expectations.
to the back or dropped as courses are rearranged.
mproving our kids' education and returning Iowa to a #1 ranking in education is the goal, NGSS won't even come close to ac
schools. Public education available to all students is important, and the only way to fund it is through tax dollars. But every
all kids don't have to trip over them in the classroom adding more mentor teachers and more $$ at programs will not fix the
ething that risky, especially to our most precious resource, our children?
e student will think for themselves and be led by logic rather than by indoctrination.
s the football 5 yards down the field. Why are why settling for mediocrity? Iowa used to be a national leader in education, y
terest. There needs to be a path available for additional learning. - I worry that valuable learning time will be taken up by
titute, doesn't rank above a C.
dents to use the problem-solving components of their brain---which isn't just great for science, but for all aspects of the who
When it gets down to the nitty gritty of teaching science, that money should have been spent on the teachers. Offering ne
ch for, can't goal set, and can't work toward the goal. Parents who are not science professionals or educators may struggle
gned standards, as this does affect students who move in/out of our schools and across grade levels.
at we know will develop as a result of NGSS implementation will not occur.
g, the only way to believe period kind of standards.
st be prepared to pay districts to get current with these new standards. There should also be training for teachers who are
sconception that you only need to learn about science if you are going to be an engineer. You wouldn't list accounting as th
t a ceiling on the content and skills that will be measured at each grade; not to limit curriculum or instruction. The likely rea
for their understanding. Would prefer a sleaker more agile tool to better adapt to changing needs and skill sets that better
ti-state group to share the costs of implementation and assessing. The notion that "we know better" is flawed and a weak
ng a new Foss Kit on air and weather and I do not see how this kit will fill many of the standards for our grade level. I am n
ations plus loss of planning time due to increased expectations for collaboration...I am at a loss of where and how I will be a
oting NGSS because its the only standard around for science. We do not have common core and the Iowa core is on the ot
o be made clear that the only way to meet the standards is through integration of the three dimensions of the Disciplinary
ability to understand cause and effect and what it truly means. As an adult figuring out cause and effect can be difficult, ju
SS won't even come close to acheieving that. With so much rallying around Common Core and NGSS, one has to wonder if
s through tax dollars. But every set of standards the government places on schools makes it harder for them to succeed, an
e $$ at programs will not fix the way kids look at education and school...parents need to parent and engage. Life is hard -
national leader in education, yet it appears we do not have state leaders with the courage to set the bar high for our stude
rning time will be taken up by standardized testing to try and prove conformity to standards. - What happens when evolut
e, but for all aspects of the whole-learner. What can Iowa or other states supporting these standards do to help ensure sch
ent on the teachers. Offering new resources, new field trips. Not by making teachers learn a whole new (supposedly) way to
nals or educators may struggle to understand what is being expected of their child as well.
Most importantly - allow stude
e training for teachers who are required to now learn another whole group of very complicated standards. I cannot see a m
u wouldn't list accounting as the only career in math standards.
um or instruction. The likely reality, however is that such assessment limits will needlessly constrain what is taught and le
needs and skill sets that better addresses a Science Literacy that ALL ( both those interested in pursing Science and those
w better" is flawed and a weak argument. As for "dictating what teachers have to do." YES! Teachers should be told what
ards for our grade level. I am not aware of much material out there to teach about these standards so where does the mon
oss of where and how I will be able to do what is expected other than giving up MORE personal time than I already do. The
e and the Iowa core is on the other end of the spectrum. It is too broad and wishy washy. Lets not jump at something becau
dimensions of the Disciplinary Core Ideas, Crosscutting Concepts, and Science and Engineering Practices in student work.
se and effect can be difficult, just look at our government. We continue to so things that we have already seen the cause a
and NGSS, one has to wonder if giving Iowa students the best education we can is even the goal anymore....or is it all abou
harder for them to succeed, and how are they 'fixed'? They get less tax money. Which in turn causes more problems, push
ent and engage. Life is hard - coddling everyone in school is not the answer. Additionally, general science in 9th grade aft
to set the bar high for our students. We, the adults, owe them better than that. I also have great concerns that NGSS will no
s. - What happens when evolution in science or change in understanding of the world (as is inevitable) happen? These are
standards do to help ensure school districts have the funds and resources they need to teach science in this way? The prob
whole new (supposedly) way to teach it. Not by making children take daunting tests so they can see how well the NRC's co
Most importantly - allow students to dig deep, not wide...
ed standards. I cannot see a mandate coming down that now we are using NGSS and no help from the state on preparing t
constrain what is taught and learned, particularly in advanced classrooms and for high-achieving pupils. The assessment
d in pursing Science and those whose role would be a well informed citizen)would truly benefit from. As Shamos Morris exp
! Teachers should be told what to teach...we're not curriculum writers; our job is implement standards and curriculum, not
andards so where does the money come from to train the teachers? Schools are already limited on their funds! I know cha
nal time than I already do. The Earth and Space standards at the 9-12 level are highly concerning for our district in that we
s not jump at something because its the only thing in town.
ring Practices in student work.
have already seen the cause and effect for but we have not learned our lesson so we continue to try things that do not wo
goal anymore....or is it all about MONEY and CONTROL??
rn causes more problems, pushes the school farther behind, and in many cases, causes schools to close due to insufficient
general science in 9th grade after they have already completed 7th & 8th grade science is a waste of time and resources.
great concerns that NGSS will not show scientific concepts in a fair and balanced way, but push indoctrination. Great examp
inevitable) happen? These are specific enough that they will surely become obsolete. Dictating standards from the top dow
h science in this way? The problem in the past has not necessarily been the lack of depth/breadth of science standards, bu
y can see how well the NRC's collective thoughts (NGSS) have improved the great state of Iowa. My opinion is that if we w
p from the state on preparing teachers for such a massive change. It cannot be just more work for teachers to learn on the
ieving pupils. The assessment boundaries articulated in the NGSS too often reduce the rigor or narrow the content of the
efit from. As Shamos Morris expressed in great detail in his book The Myth of Science Literacy before we spend many bil
standards and curriculum, not to devise it. For every teacher that bemoans, "I'm tired of the state telling me what to do",
ited on their funds! I know change needs to be made, but these seem to be drastic changes in what is already being taugh
erning for our district in that we do no offer anything to currently meet the majority of those standards. Our class schedulin
nue to try things that do not work. My 4th grader struggles with cause and effect I cannot imagine seeing what it will do to
ools to close due to insufficient funds. Now kids, especially in rural areas, have to be bused an hour to and from school eac
waste of time and resources. Common Core now requires general science @ high school - why? Did they not just spend 2
ush indoctrination. Great example is climate change. I hear many progressives say the "science" is settled, there is no more
ing standards from the top down does not let the schools quickly address innovation or changes.
readth of science standards, but more so, the way science has been taught.
wa. My opinion is that if we would like to improve Iowa's science program, hire cool teachers, not make the existing teach
ork for teachers to learn on their own time, we already give too much of our own time.
or or narrow the content of the standards when we could (indeed should) expect more.
Third, the failure to include essen
y before we spend many billions of dollars more on loosely targeted school science programs, we should seriously ques
e state telling me what to do", I find 5 teachers who just want to be told what to teach and make it happen. In my experien
s in what is already being taught. Teachers are burdened by all the new things coming in from the ELA and math standards
standards. Our class scheduling already suffers from overloads due to current credit requirements. Students have very lit
magine seeing what it will do to a 1st grader.
an hour to and from school each day. And when the kids are at school, the teachers, on the days they get to teach instead
why? Did they not just spend 2 years covering that same material? Going forward to NGSS- what are you going to do with
nce" is settled, there is no more debate while several reports come out saying the "science" is not settled. I don't think any
rs, not make the existing teachers mad by making them integrate this confusing, nondescript, fluff of "standards" into thei
ird, the failure to include essential math content that is critical to science learning. In reality, there is virtually no mathema
ams, we should seriously question both the why and the what of compulsory science education.
make it happen. In my experience, the people opposed to NGSS are typically uninformed or have bias against any mandate
om the ELA and math standards and so much change in science seems overwhelming.
ements. Students have very little opportunity to explore elective classes because their schedules are being filled with requ
days they get to teach instead of test, have to teach with the next test in mind. If the class has a hard time grasping a topi
what are you going to do with the kids who do not know what they need to know moving from grade to grade? Lower the
is not settled. I don't think anyone knows what ground truth is. What I do know, if we need to teach kids HOW to think criti
pt, fluff of "standards" into their curriculum. My biggest concern is if the government is passing laws for only these "comm
y, there is virtually no mathematics, even at the high school level, where it is essential to the learning of physics and chem
have bias against any mandated curriculum.
edules are being filled with required credits to graduate.
has a hard time grasping a topic, they can't slow down and spend an extra day going over it. That would push them behind
rom grade to grade? Lower the standards like no child left behind?
to teach kids HOW to think critically and problem solve, not WHAT to think, as many proponents of NGSS would have. Prove
sing laws for only these "common core" and only these "standards" to be taught across the same age group, across the sam
e learning of physics and chemistry. Rather, the standards seem to assiduously dodge the mathematical demands inherent
. That would push them behind and they won't be ready for the next standardized test.
ents of NGSS would have. Prove me wrong and actually listen for once to the host of parents, educators and other stakehol
same age group, across the same country... isn't that a form of knowledge monopoly?
mathematical demands inherent in the subjects covered. There is math available in the Common Core that could be used to
s, educators and other stakeholders who do not support these standards. I'll fight this in the legislature, if I have to. You all
mon Core that could be used to enhance the science of the NGSS.
legislature, if I have to. You all should be ashamed of what you are doing to a once-proud and effective education system.
nd effective education system.

Thank you for completing the basic Science Standards Survey. Click Submit if you
would like to stop now. Click Continue if you would like to give more detailed
feedback concerning the standards.
Response
Response
Answer Options
Percent
Count
Submit
85.6%
1435
Continue
14.4%
242
answered question
1677
skipped question
846
Thank you for completing the basic Science Standards Survey. Click Submit if you would like to stop now. Click Continue if you would like to give more detailed feedback
Submit
Continue
Click Continue if you would like to give more detailed feedback concerning the standards.

On which grade range would you like to comment?
Answer Options
a. K-2
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
Response
Percent
8.5%
9.2%
17.4%
30.0%
10.9%
23.9%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
25
27
51
88
32
70
293
2230
On which grade range would you like to comment?
a. K-2
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
d. 9-1
e. K-1
f. Fini
e to comment?
a. K-2
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finis h Survey

PS1 Discipline sub-ideas
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
17
17
15
5
5
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
2
3
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
24
24
21
24
2499
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS1A Structure
and Properties of
Matter
PS1B Chemical
Reactions
PS1C Nuclear
Processes
ine sub-ideas
cal
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS1C Nuclear
Processes
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1A Structure and

Properties of Matter? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a
grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?
Which stakeholder group do

you primarily represent as you
Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Nonformal educat a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would
you like to
comment?
What, if any changes, do you recommend

for PS1A Structure and Properties of
Matter? <i>(Indicate if your feedback is
specific to a grade level.)</i>
a. K-2
Make this more simple. Children this age need simplicity not technical words.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
Crosscutting Design is not appropriate for this age group. These age groups have no idea w
These standards aren't appropriate for kids this age, their brains aren't wired to understand
*more specific, detailed descriptions for educators to follow
What does this look like in K, 1, and 2 from a curriculum/ teaching standpoint?
None
None
None
It is difficult to see 3rd in this band - maybe fits in more with primary elementary band
This is too hard for this grade level!
5-PS1-1- Develop a model or diagram... Nuclear processes is too abstract for students in this age range.
I don't recommend any changes.
No change
please don't change IA standards so they are not the same as on the national website
I do not recommend any changes.
Get rid of MSPS1-3
It says that we need to look at chemical structures. I agree. It says that the boundary should
Ok
I have taught science for over 10 years. I should not have to read and reread standards to t
The wording that I would change would be the assessment boundary. They take A LOT of th
Since there isn't anywhere else to put this, I recommend cutting ALL of the ETS standards. E
No changes
Matter is anything that takes up space and has mass...How can you teach differences in mat
In HS-PS1-1, "outermost energy level" should probably be changed to "valence shell". At the
none
None.
1-LS1 From Molecules to Organisms: Structure and Processes (I would remove this)
none
Change the performance expectations to better reflect the true Practices of Science and not
technical words.
ese age groups have no idea what cause and effect represents. I think learning patterns at this age is great because they
ains aren't wired to understand these concepts.
ching standpoint?
primary elementary band
s on the national website
says that the boundary should not include any valence electrons and not use subunits. How can we teach this without val
read and reread standards to try and figure out what is being asked. How do we expect students and more importantly pa
oundary. They take A LOT of the math out of science which for lower classes is ok but in upper level science classes it is no
ing ALL of the ETS standards. Engineering is already embedded in many of the performance expectations. I envision teach
an you teach differences in matter in one week? Just teaching the differences between solid, liquid, and gases takes 2 to 3
anged to "valence shell". At the high school level, there probably isn't a need to shy away from the correct technical term i
(I would remove this)
ue Practices of Science and not tie just one Practice to one "core idea" tied to one crosscutting concept.
this age is great because they start learning about other pattern changes in other subjects. Engaging in Argument from Ev
w can we teach this without valence electrons? They are everything. They say not to use subunits but methanol is an organ
dents and more importantly parents to get on board when it is worded so poorly?
per level science classes it is not only important but necessary. Take out "Assessment does not include quantitative unders
expectations. I envision teachers not bundling these but, doing an "engineering unit" or project to say they have been cov
, liquid, and gases takes 2 to 3 weeks. But the NGSS don't allow that much time.
om the correct technical term in favor of a more descriptive term.
ng concept.
Engaging in Argument from Evidence is something a 2nd grader should be doing??
bunits but methanol is an organic molecule with a SUBUNIT. Students cannot write or therefore compose proper chemical fo
not include quantitative understanding of ionization energy beyond relative trends."

oject to say they have been covered. They will be treated like the current Iowa Core Science As Inquiry Standards are: one
ore compose proper chemical formulas without knowing valences which is what gives it its ionic charge. We could teach usi
e As Inquiry Standards are: one and done. No purposeful integrate across the curriculum.
onic charge. We could teach using the cross method, I could have most of my kids get properly balanced compounds withou
rly balanced compounds without ever knowing why.
MS-PS1-3. - What does "make sense" mean? Isn't that what we do fo
mean? Isn't that what we do for all standards in all subjects? Synthetic materials seems way off base if we are looking at
ay off base if we are looking at a chemistry standpoint that doesn't have any balancing equations. This standard should be
ations. This standard should be thrown out. We don't balance equations but we look at synthetics?
MS-PS1-4. "Develop a m
etics?
MS-PS1-4. "Develop a model that predicts" OK thats all well and good but if the students don't understand through
dents don't understand through prior knowledge what is happening at the molecular level they will not be able to predict w
ey will not be able to predict what happens. Its beyond an 8th graders grasp. Once you explain what happens at the molec
lain what happens at the molecular level with a change in kinetic energy my 8th graders can do it. Except that now there is
n do it. Except that now there is no way to do a model and a prediction. Its the same concept for all substances. We could d
pt for all substances. We could do a simple phase change diagram but that leaves the prediction completely gone.
tion completely gone.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1B Chemical

Reactions? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
6
answered question
6
skipped question
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Nonformal educati a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1B
range would you
Chemical Reactions? <i>(Indicate if your feedback
like to
is specific to a grade level.)</i>
comment?
a. K-2
Make this simple.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
What does this look like in K, 1, and 2 from a curriculum/teaching standpoint?
None
None
None
A little wordy for 3rd
Specifically add the distinction between chemical change and physical change.
No change
Some of the atoms and molecules expectations may be over the heads of many middle sch
You need to teach about valence electrons to get an understanding of bonding and reaction
MS-PS1-2. - Looks good MS-PS1-5. - Conservation of mass is critical in the study of reactio
Ok
The performance expectation is good as a minimum but put the quantitative understanding
None
Chemical reactions should basically be chemistry...the changes in matter. Chemical reaction
The wording is too confusing; maybe stop after "... of atoms into new molecules."
I like the linear ideas behind PS1 B, but it is wordy. Perhaps pare it down to the basics.
none
None.
students are asked to develop a model for which adults have trouble. Change this ! !
none
Change the performance expectations to better reflect the true Practices of Science and no
These age groups have no idea what cause and effect represents. I think learning patterns at this age is great because the
brains aren't wired to understand these concepts.
aching standpoint?
nd physical change.
as on the national website

er the heads of many middle school students.
standing of bonding and reactions. You also need to add balancing equations.
s is critical in the study of reactions. I agree this should be a standard. Why are we stopping before we balance equations? T
t the quantitative understanding back into the wording.
nges in matter. Chemical reactions only covers 6 different types of reactions.

s into new molecules."
s pare it down to the basics.
ve trouble. Change this ! !
true Practices of Science and not tie just one Practice to one "core idea" tied to one crosscutting concept.
at this age is great because they start learning about other pattern changes in other subjects.
before we balance equations? Thats the whole point of balancing equations. Mix this into the MS-PS1-1 standard where we
tting concept.
e MS-PS1-1 standard where we dont use valance electrons and how are students going to understand what to balance. We
nderstand what to balance. We want them to understand that mass is conserved but we don't actually let them let them do
n't actually let them let them do it. By getting rid of balancing and valences it becomes over simplified and should be in the
r simplified and should be in the 3rd -5th grade range of standards.
MS-PS1-6. - This would be great but most schools are
d be great but most schools are limited in budget and safety for what students can use for chemicals. We over simplify rea
hemicals. We over simplify reactions in all previous standards and now we are asking them to control the endothermic and
to control the endothermic and exothermic properties of a reaction.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1C Nuclear

Processes? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
7
answered question
7
skipped question
2516
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1C
range would you
Nuclear Processes? (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
specific to a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
Make this simple and fun.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
Did not see a PS1C.

Could not locate in the document.
None
None
None
Have you ever tried to teach an 8 year old about nuclear processes? What are these peopl
5-PS1C- I believe this should be a middle school topic.
I feel nuclear processes may be a very difficult concept for this grade range, as it is very ab
Eliminate this.
cannot find this in 3-5 standards only high school?
Reword to give an idea of what will be achieved in this idea.
I would like a more clear cut explanation of what they are requiring of nuclear processes. Is
None listed under middle school. Should that be added so they have an understanding of ho
The word nuclear does not show up on the middle school NGSS anywhere. Not sure what yo
Very vague title
Ok
What is PS1C? When I am on the website searching for Nuclear Processes and what I shoul
The ES standards are not necessary for HS students as they head to college or to the work
None
I would get rid of Nuclear Processes....NGSS has 16 standards in PS to cover in 36 weeks. Th
I think students should know the difference between fission and fusion, we talk about it with
Nuclear processes is not a first year physical science idea. It should not be taught to the de
Nuclear processes should just focus on the difference between nuclear and chemical reactio
I hesitate to eliminate this, but it isn't exactly fundamental. There isn't a call for this depth
None.
none
How necessary is this for high school?
Not important enough for inclusion as sub-idea.
aching standpoint?
rocesses? What are these people thinking???
this grade range, as it is very abstract.

equiring of nuclear processes. Is this found in a benchmark?
hey have an understanding of how the Sun produces energy & radioactive dating in geology?
GSS anywhere. Not sure what you are asking
clear Processes and what I should be teaching, I get rerouted to History of the Earth and Structure and Properties of Matter.
y head to college or to the work force. The PS standard and nuclear change standard is ok and useful for students.
ds in PS to cover in 36 weeks. The only problem is there are also 16 standards for Earth science which is taught with Physic
and fusion, we talk about it with respect to the sun. But most of my 9th graders didn't know these were two separate wor
It should not be taught to the depth indicated in the NGSS. A qualitative approach would be much better.
een nuclear and chemical reactions and the different types of nuclear reactions. Going beyond that is to complex for the ti
There isn't a call for this depth of understanding in post-secondary chemistry or biology.
ucture and Properties of Matter. Once again, this is not clear to parents.
nd useful for students.
ence which is taught with Physical science. That makes 32 standards in 36 weeks of school...NO TIME!!
w these were two separate words. The topic is important, just doesn't need to be one of the major topics, not a DCI to focu
e much better.
ond that is to complex for the time we have in high school chemistry/physics.
tting concept.
.NO TIME!!
e major topics, not a DCI to focus on.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
16
16
5
5
4
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
22
22
22
22
2501
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS2A Forces
and Motion
PS2B Types of
Interactions
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems
ine sub-ideas
of
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2A Forces and

Motion? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
5
answered question
5
skipped question
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2A
range would you
Forces and Motion? (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Again, kindergarten students will not necessarily understand the cause and effect. They wi
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
We need to be able to assess concepts and not just vocabulary. Vocabulary gets in the way
5th Grade- The study of forces and motion is very limited according to the NGSS. This is a g
None
none
ok
-Why only Newton's 2nd Law? Do you expect only Newton's 2nd Law to be taught? Is 1 and
I like that it says "Newtons second law of motion describes the mathematical relationship a
Forces and Motion is the Physics side of physical science. Ninth or tenth graders can unders
There is a lot of background needed before students can readily understand Newton's 2nd l
Points #2 and #3 are clunky...they don't read well. Perhaps combine them and reword.
Would like to see an emphasis on understanding 2d and 3d motion either in HS or earlier gr
None.
none
d the cause and effect. They will understand what the motion is doing and what happens but I am not sure they will be ab
aching standpoint?
lary. Vocabulary gets in the way of demonstrating content.

ccording to the NGSS. This is a great level to study Newton's Laws including the concepts of gravity, speed, velocity, accel
s 2nd Law to be taught? Is 1 and 3 not important? Mathematical models for Newton's Law of gravitation and Coulombs Law
the mathematical relationship among the net force on a macroscopic object, its mass, and its acceleration." However, I co
inth or tenth graders can understand the motions and forces. This was one of the few NGSS that I agreed with!
adily understand Newton's 2nd law and momentum that seems to be missing. Such as understanding models of motion: po
s combine them and reword.
motion either in HS or earlier grades.
ut I am not sure they will be able to associate it to cause and effect. But showing them differences will be a good start to e
f gravity, speed, velocity, acceleration, and inertia.
of gravitation and Coulombs Law are needed for ALL students? This takes a certain math level to understand.
its acceleration." However, I cover this much information in 9th grade. When my students take physics we calculate motio
that I agreed with!
erstanding models of motion: position/time graphs, velocity/time graphs, acceleration, etc.
tting concept.
erences will be a good start to eventually understanding cause and effect.
vel to understand.
ake physics we calculate motion in 2 directions and we take relativistic speeds into consideration when doing calculations.
ration when doing calculations. So, if it is made clearer that the Assessment boundary is the lower boundary then I would li
lower boundary then I would like it better.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2B Types of
Interactions? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
5
answered question
5
skipped question
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
Types of Interactions? (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
Consider 5-PS2-1 Support an argument with evidence that the gravitational force exerted b
I think these are too broad for grades 3-5. Kids are not ready in 3rd grade to learn about th
Give an idea of relationary action- Energy? Conservation? Transfer?
What interactions are covered in this portion?
In order to teach about gravitational attraction you have to include Newtons law of gravitat
The interactions are so broad - how are teachers supposed to cover the basics of biology an
The idea of electrical fields and magnetic fields are a very abstract concept for students tha
clarify wording.
none
Need to change the wording since it is dealing with forces...Maybe putting "interaction force
I don't think my 9th grade students would be able to use Newton's law of universal gravitat
This is an unreasonable thing to require of high school students. For instance, we are askin
HS-PS2-6 should be moved from PS2B to PS1A. There is a natural sequence in PS1A from P
None.
none
HS-PS2-4 for ALL students? Seriously?? At least take out the names of the laws and reword
Be more specific...
Types of interactions seems redundant, and not separate from, forces and motion, because
aching standpoint?

the gravitational force exerted by Earth on objects is directed toward the Earth's surface.
dy in 3rd grade to learn about these topics.
include Newtons law of gravitational attraction.

to cover the basics of biology and then go to interactions in a single course?
abstract concept for students that are concrete thinkers. Is it necessary to push every student through the idea of electric
.Maybe putting "interaction forces"

ewton's law of universal gravitation and Coulomb's law to describe and predict forces between objects. I don't think that sh
ents. For instance, we are asking students to grasp Faraday's law of induction (!), which is something college physics/engin
natural sequence in PS1A from PS1-1 (Properties of elements determined by valence electrons) to PS1-3 (Properties of mole
e names of the laws and reword to be more appropriate for ALL students. Just not sure why they need to know Coulomb's
om, forces and motion, because forces lead to a type of interaction between objects.
ent through the idea of electric fields, Coulomb's law, and magnetic fields? A cursory attempt at describing fields without d
en objects. I don't think that should be a headline, big idea kind topic. My ninth grade students struggle with the algebra
something college physics/engineering majors struggle to understand. This standard is not "brain development" appropriat
ns) to PS1-3 (Properties of molecules determined by intermolecular forces) to PS2-6 (Importance of molecular structure to f
they need to know Coulomb's law to be scientifically literate.

tting concept.
pt at describing fields without digging deep into them will create misconceptions that will be difficult to change at the colleg
ents struggle with the algebra involved in Newton's 2nd law. It's important that they understand the concepts, but I think
"brain development" appropriate.
ance of molecular structure to function of designed materials). The connections between HS-PS2-6 and the remainder of
difficult to change at the collegiate level.
stand the concepts, but I think the math is too far beyond my 9th graders.
HS-PS2-6 and the remainder of the PS2B standards are much weaker.
"Attraction and repulsion between electric cha
repulsion between electric charges at the atomic scale explain the structure, properties, and transformations of matter, as
d transformations of matter, as well as the contact forces between material objects." I don't have as much time in my clas
t have as much time in my classroom to teach everything in the NGSS, and I think this would take up too much time.
d take up too much time.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2C Stability and
Instability in Physical Systems? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
5
answered question
5
skipped question
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2C

range would you
Stability and Instability in Physical Systems?
like to
(Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
We could consider removing 3-PS2-2 as it could easily be incorporated in other standards
What?? I have no idea, and I'm going to have to teach this?
Is this in 3-5?
None
I feel the terminology "Physical Systems" is vague.
Not in middle school, at least that I can find.
Im not even finding this. Where do I look?
ok
Not on the website? I can't analyze.
none
All systems are unstable...students know and understand this without weeks of teaching. D
I don't see a PS2C on the NGSS website.
I am just not sure what is being addressed here, need more information.
This could easily be incorporated into other standards instead of being a stand-alone.
None.
none
Stable or instable systems should focus on variation, common and special cause....at the su
It seems as though this area is redundant. When forces and motion of matter are discussed
aching standpoint?

ncorporated in other standards
his without weeks of teaching. Don't really need this as a separate standard.
e information.
ad of being a stand-alone.
mon and special cause....at the sub process or process level. The use of the word Systrm means All Physical Processes that
d motion of matter are discussed, physical systems are used to model the behavior of each type of force, etc. It seems as
tting concept.
ans All Physical Processes that make up the system.
type of force, etc. It seems as though the stability/instability of physical system is addressed as part of PS2A
d as part of PS2A

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
15
15
15
4
4
4
4
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
2
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
21
21
21
21
21
2502

25
20
15
10
5
0
PS3A
Definitio
ns of
Energy
PS3B
Conserv
ation of
Energy
and
Energy
Transfer
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life
ine sub-ideas
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3A Definitions of

Energy? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
5
answered question
5
skipped question
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
Definitions of Energy? (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Eliminate a portion of the crosscutting concepts: This seems to be a little advanced if they
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
Again, this needs to be more grade specific. An 8 year old is not going to be able to handle
None
Again, delving into abstract matters of electricity and magnetism make this a difficult conce
none
Is there any support for making the third year of science that is now required more specific
HS-PS3-1 We want students to understand the over all concept being able to calculate the c
I'm not sure what I recommend, but everything is so wordy! Please make it simple.
None.
ms to be a little advanced if they are just learning the definition. Remember most students in this grade still cannot spell co
aching standpoint?

is not going to be able to handle most of these topics where a 5th grader might be able to be introduced to these concepts
netism make this a difficult concept for high school students to grasp. They need to be able to see it and experience it.
at is now required more specific to address some of these standards? Right now, if you have a student heading to a four y
cept being able to calculate the content is not important to student understanding of energy.
! Please make it simple.
n this grade still cannot spell correctly. Some things need to have precedence over other subjects. Interdependence of Sc
e introduced to these concepts.
to see it and experience it.
e a student heading to a four year college, they sign up for chemistry, possibly physics their senior year, and then if the stu
tting concept.
ubjects. Interdependence of Science, Engineering, and Technology Knowledge of relevant scientific concepts and rese
senior year, and then if the student is considering science, whatever other offerings the district has. Earth Science ends u
nt scientific concepts and research findings is important in engineering. (4-ESS3-1)
strict has. Earth Science ends up being a 3rd year option for those not strong in science or math or not going to a four year
math or not going to a four year college. What ends up happening many times is students who are challenging themselves
who are challenging themselves with Chemistry miss out on the more advanced Earth Science concepts. If we could teach
ce concepts. If we could teach the first two years of high school science as Science I and Science II, we would have a bette
ence II, we would have a better chance of covering all of the required information, and then students would still be able to
students would still be able to choose their 3rd year of science. I realize this would cause an uproar with teacher licensure
an uproar with teacher licensure, but if working something out there was better for the students, I am confident the BOEE c
ents, I am confident the BOEE could come up with something. Right now, a teacher with a degree in History and middle sc
degree in History and middle school endorsement is allowed to teach middle school science, and a teacher with a Biology d
and a teacher with a Biology degree at the high school level is not allowed to teach freshman Physical Science. Seems like
an Physical Science. Seems like something is not right with this current setup.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3B Conservation
of Energy and Energy Transfer? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
5
answered question
5
skipped question
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3B

range would you
Conservation of Energy and Energy Transfer?
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
HS-PS3-3 what is the point of building a device? Not needed.
Good stuff, just too wordy.
None.
impacts of energy from outside influences (chemicals)
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3C Relationship
Between Energy and Forces? (Indicate if your feedback is specific
to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
5
answered question
5
skipped question
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

range would you
Relationship Between Energy and Forces?
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
This is strange wording... it seems disjointed and not relevant
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3D Energy and
Chemical Processes in Everyday Life? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
4
answered question
4
skipped question
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3D

range would you Energy and Chemical Processes in Everyday Life?
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

None
None
I like changing 5-PS3-1 to Use a model to describe that the food animals digest: a) contains
None
None listed in middle school that I can see, which seems strange for middle school.
ok
HS-PS4-5 - this is very specific. I also think this is outside the realm of everything else that
none
Could be included in life science.
Too much!
It just seems that these concepts are addressed elsewhere. For example, one of the high sc
this is very much life science while the others are physical. if districts are teaching by disci
None.
Should not be a separate sub-idea. Applications to everyday life should be a part of every s
Again, it seems as though this section will be touched on for the topics above.
aching standpoint?

food animals digest: a) contains energy that was once energy from the sun, and b) provides energy and materials for body
range for middle school.
he realm of everything else that is taught. Where does this fit in the curriculum continuum? I am confused about why this
For example, one of the high school DCIs is about nuclear fusion, but that is a concept also showing up in Matter and its In
if districts are teaching by discipline like has been typically done, these would fit in a different course
y life should be a part of every sub-idea. It should be a part of instructional methodology. If it can't then the content should
r the topics above.
s energy and materials for body repair, growth, motion, body warmth, and reproduction (from Massachusetts Draft Standard
I am confused about why this is here.
showing up in Matter and its Interactions: Nuclear Processes
t can't then the content should not be in the science standards.

tting concept.
m Massachusetts Draft Standards)

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
14
14
3
5
5
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
21
21
21
21
2502
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS4A Wave
Properties
PS4B
Electromagneti
c Radiation
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n
ine sub-ideas
eti
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4A Wave

Properties (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
Wave Properties (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
None
This is okay, because it can be a concrete experience when students deal with physical wav
none
Keep the inverse relationship between frequency and wavelength, it helps them understand
None.
I think 4-PS4-1 is almost the same as MS-PS4-1. Not sure both are needed. Grade 4 could

students deal with physical waves. As the experience become more and more abstract students are going to have difficu
length, it helps them understand em spectrum. But unless there are specific lessons, or something else that ties in the dig
oth are needed. Grade 4 could be rolled over to MS.

dents are going to have difficulty following and understanding because they do not have a physical representation they ca
mething else that ties in the digitization, eliminate that.
tting concept.
physical representation they can rely on.

Electromagnetic Radiation (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
4
answered question
4
skipped question
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
Electromagnetic Radiation (Indicate if your
like to
feedback is specific to a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
Too obnoxious
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
Are you kidding?? Clearly again written by a PHD who has never met a third grader.
I think we are going to wide again and not deep enough. Students will struggle with why th
none
The performance expectation for wave vs particle is too much. The idea is okay, students n
If it can't be taught in any more depth than how it relates to eyes, then can we utilize it at a
None.
HS-PS4-3 is about the wave/particle model. I don't feel ALL students need this. Yes, for col

never met a third grader.
tudents will struggle with why the double slit experiment demonstrates wave properties. They will have a hard time relatin
uch. The idea is okay, students need to understand there is a dual nature to light, but not enough time to go as in depth as
o eyes, then can we utilize it at all?
students need this. Yes, for college-bound, but not for EVERYONE. This is a pretty difficult concept.
hey will have a hard time relating it to things they work with in the physical world.
ough time to go as in depth as I think that PE would take. Otherwise everything else is fine, good for students to see how m
tting concept.
good for students to see how matter interacts with em radiation and it's easy enough to show students how a solar cell wo
ow students how a solar cell works, especially as it ties in with natural resources.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4C Information
Technologies and Instrumentation (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
Information Technologies and Instrumentation
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
4-PS4-3 Develop and compare multiple ways to transfer information through encoding, send
leave off instrumentation instruments are a technology
This is unnecessary for all students in middle school
Does every student need to be exposed to the inner workings of information technology an
This feels like it is from left field. Where does this fit?
none
HS-PS4-2. HS-PS4-5. Why are these 2 standards important must haves for all HS students?
Far too complex to be a) understood by high school students and b) to be taught by teache
Make sure this is worded so that as technology changes over the years, this still fits.
Good links to engineering and society
Think about what level this would happen. What would this look like?
None.
Iimplementation/ uses of wave technologies?
renewable/green enrgies

ormation through encoding, sending, receiving, and decoding a pattern. (from MA draft standards)
ngs of information technology and data storage? How important is it that students understand how data is written to a CD,
must haves for all HS students?

ts and b) to be taught by teachers without a degree in physics and/or engineering (65% of teachers of physics have no phy
er the years, this still fits.
nd how data is written to a CD, or sent through fiber optics?
eachers of physics have no physics degree).

tting concept.

LS1 Discipline sub-ideas
Answer Options
Organisms
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
15
14
13
2
2
3
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
2
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
19
19
19
18
19
2504

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
LS1A
Structure
and
Function
LS1B
Growth
and
Develop
ment of
Organism
s
LS1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
s
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g
ine sub-ideas
S1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1A Structure and

Function (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
2
answered question
2
skipped question
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1A
range would you
Structure and Function (Indicate if your feedback
like to
is specific to a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
We could leave out 4-LS1-2
is this where human body systems should be placed? With the obesity rate in the US, we sh
LS1A Structure and function of organisms from cells to systems or divide into cells, genetics
TOO MUCH to cover within a general biology course - if added to the rest of the recommend
Boundary says "does not include the biochemistry of protein synthesis". I'm not sure what
none
I don't have time to look at all of these right now and my computer battery is almost done.
All of the human body systems should be covered in high school biology so all students hav
None.
the obesity rate in the US, we should have nutrition and how your body works somewhere?

ems or divide into cells, genetics, and body system of plants or animals. Would organization of molecules be part of the DN
ed to the rest of the recommended core ideas

n synthesis". I'm not sure what should be excluded here.
omputer battery is almost done.

chool biology so all students have access to the material.
n of molecules be part of the DNA translation.
tting concept.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1B Growth and
Development of Organisms (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
2
answered question
2
skipped question
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1B
range would you
Growth and Development of Organisms (Indicate if
like to
your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
This should be embedded within Growth and Development. There should be a category for
Have each component read "plant or animal" instead of specifically one or the other.
Keep steps of Mitosis in the Assessment boundary
None

There should be a category for classifying organisms. Including how microorganisms. Do we include a category for ecolo
ecifically one or the other.
we include a category for ecology? Or put the structures of plants and animals here.
tting concept.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1C Organization
for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms (Indicate if your
Response
Answer Options
Count
2
answered question
2
skipped question
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1C

range would you
Organization for Matter and Energy Flow in
like to
Organisms (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
comment?
a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
Divide into the genetics or cells unit. Combine the the cells and genetics and body systems
In learning photosynthesis and cell respiration, the student will simply be memorizing expla
none
None
impacts of outside influemnces (chemicals)

s and genetics and body systems to show how they are interconnected. How do the genes design the body or affect their f
will simply be memorizing explanations for the processes, if they are not expected to learn about the reactions, and the re
design the body or affect their function.
about the reactions, and the reactions are very difficult for 10th graders to learn. (esp hot having had chemistry!)
tting concept.
aving had chemistry!)
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1D Information

Processing (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
2
answered question
2
skipped question
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1D
range would you
Information Processing (Indicate if your feedback
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
There needs to be more connections to understand how the subcategories show a bigger pi
We should just get rid of this one. Wording is complicated. It'd be nice to introduce this in
Information systems do not have to have a special category. Covered in structure and funct
I'm not a big fan of the standard that says uses statistics and data to construct a model of D
No information available on the website. Can't analyze.
none
What is this? I don't see it in the standard.
seems much more specialized than the other groupings. Why just cover structure and func
None
Not a separate sub-idea. It is part of Structure and Function.
MS-LS1-8 seem to be more appropriate at HS level since they aren't suppose to be getting i

e subcategories show a bigger picture of designing or functioning as an organism.
It'd be nice to introduce this in MS but not test over it.
y. Covered in structure and function.

nd data to construct a model of DNA.

Why just cover structure and function and then get specific with information and the brain. Gives the appearance of a pet to
ey aren't suppose to be getting into detail about any other human body system at this grade band. The big idea for MS-LS
ves the appearance of a pet topic that was thrown in by a small minority on the development committee. Why not allow t
e band. The big idea for MS-LS1 is about how the systems INTERACT, not how each system works on a detailed level. I wo
tting concept.
nt committee. Why not allow the teacher to choose the system to get more specific in or make a broader category that tie
works on a detailed level. I would argue that the nervous system is more complicated to understand than say the respirat
ake a broader category that ties in societal issues. Info processing can be done with a unit on concussions.
nderstand than say the respiratory or circulatory system for a middle school student.
on concussions.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
13
14
14
3
3
4
2
answered question
skipped question
1
2
1
2
answered question
skipped question
19
18
19
18
19
2504
20
15
10
L S 2 B C y c le s o f M a t t e r a n d E n e rg y Tr a n s fe r in E c o s y s t e m s
L S 2 D S o c ia l In t e r a c t io n s a n d G ro u p B e h a v io r
L S 2 C E c o s y s t e m D y n a m ic s , Fu n c t io n in g , a n d Re s ilie n c e
Eliminate
L S 2 A In t e rd e p e n d e n t Re la t io n s h ip s in E c o s y s t e m s
Response
Count
ine sub-ideas
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2A Interdependent
Relationships in Ecosystems (Indicate if your feedback is specific
to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
4
answered question
4
skipped question
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2A

range would you
Interdependent Relationships in Ecosystems
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
f. Finish Survey
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

I feel that 2-LS2-1 is almost the same content as 5-LS1-1. There isn't one that is this simila
None
None
We could consider putting most of LS2 in 5th grade (see MA draft standards)
Could be more of a 6th grade curriculum because it is hands on for their minds and less abs
I don't have time to comment on this right now.
At the high school level, I strongly feel that to prepare students for college, biology, chemis
None
include impacts of chemicals- human caused water quality
There isn't one that is this similar for any other content and I think one could be eliminated.

A draft standards)

s on for their minds and less abstract. Although it can be implemented in Life Science, it could pull away from the content
ents for college, biology, chemistry, physics, anatomy, and advanced sciences should be emphasized above ecology. Astro
uld pull away from the content of trying to show how organisms function from the DNA to the entire organism.
mphasized above ecology. Astronomy can be incorporated into a higher level than currently emphasized (in physics, as opp
tting concept.
he entire organism.
emphasized (in physics, as opposed to an Earth science course). However, ecosystems, social interactions, etc. should not
cial interactions, etc. should not take the place of higher level sciences

What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2B Cycles of
Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems (Indicate if your
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2B

range would you
Cycles of Matter and Energy Transfer in
like to
Ecosystems (Indicate if your feedback is specific
comment?
to a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
cycle ARE energy transfer
None
wordy
None
tting concept.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2C Ecosystem
Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience (Indicate if your feedback
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you Ecosystem Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
wordy
TOO MUCH to cover with any detail and understanding - LESS IS more if one teachers the n
None
SS IS more if one teachers the nature of science in specific concepts rather than covering so much material
o much material
tting concept.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2D Social
Interactions and Group Behavior (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
Social Interactions and Group Behavior (Indicate if
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

NOne
None
social interactions IS group behavior
Where can I find the content covered in this? Is this in terms of biology or psychology? If ps
Eliminate
This can be part of LS2C, Ecosystem Dynamics. There doesn't need to be a superfluous sta
Again, seems like a more specific add on. Doesn't show up in many grade ranges, so this m
None
water quality
Not separate sub-idea. Part of relationships.
I do not feel that this should be emphasized as strongly as, say, other standards in life scien
s of biology or psychology? If psychology, then not very relevant here, better suited in social sciences.
sn't need to be a superfluous standard for this concept.
in many grade ranges, so this might get set aside by teachers crunched for time anyway. This is certainly more psych rela
say, other standards in life science.
l sciences.
his is certainly more psych related and seems too specific. Again, let the teachers choose the specificity.
tting concept.
e specificity.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
15
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
19
19
19
2504
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
ine sub-ideas
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3A Inheritance of

Traits (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
Inheritance of Traits (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
This should be included in MS-LS-1. I didn't even know these were in the NGSS!!!! I design
Need to add mitosis/cell division
Students will simply be memorizing the role of mitosis rather than understanding it if the st
Keep steps of Meiosis in Assessments.
None
include impacts of chemicals- human caused
This entire topic of Heredity should be a sub-topic of Biological Evolution. Why such an emp

se were in the NGSS!!!! I designed my assessments around the standards and had to make up questions that weren't linke
er than understanding it if the steps are not taught as they are modeled.
ical Evolution. Why such an emphasis on heredity? Is there a new world emphasis on this topic that our populace needs a b
up questions that weren't linked to standards since I wasn't able to find specific standards on this topic. They would be be
pic that our populace needs a broad and deep understanding of it? Seems like with a bill in Congress: someone lobbied rea
tting concept.
on this topic. They would be better if they were embedded within the cell unit.
Congress: someone lobbied real hard to get Heredity as a major topic in the NGSS, but the progressive increase of knowled
rogressive increase of knowledge on the subject from K-12 doesn't seem to justify it.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3B Variation of

Traits (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
Variation of Traits (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
None
If students are not learning (through steps and modeling)they will not know the "whys": the
none
None
Same as #42. This entire topic of Heredity should be a sub-topic of Biological Evolution. Wh
Once again. ..variation implies that you have special cause that needs to be fixed.

ey will not know the "whys": they will be memorizing them.
-topic of Biological Evolution. Why such an emphasis on heredity? Is there a new world emphasis on this topic that our pop
e that needs to be fixed.
hasis on this topic that our populace needs a broad and deep understanding of it? Seems like with a bill in Congress: some
tting concept.
ke with a bill in Congress: someone lobbied real hard to get Heredity as a major topic in the NGSS, but the progressive incre
NGSS, but the progressive increase of knowledge on the subject from K-12 doesn't seem to justify it.

Answer Options
LS4C Adaptation
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
16
16
16
2
3
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
3
2
3
3
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
21
21
21
21
21
2502

25
20
15
10
5
0
LS4A
Evidence of
Common
Ancestry
LS4B
Natural
Selection
LS4C
Adaptation
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans
ine sub-ideas
S4C
daptation
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans

What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4A Evidence of
Common Ancestry (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
Evidence of Common Ancestry (Indicate if your
like to
comment?
a. K-2
This is an agenda driven topic.
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
No e
Eliminate because of evolution aspect which is not shared by everyone or add intelligent de
evolution is going to made this one hard to sell to the public--rename the standard use foss
I don't think there should be as much emphasis of this.
Embryological development could just be one of the way students compare anatomy. Stude
Take the emphasis off the origin of life and the focus on the origin of species - TWO totally d
Evolution needs to be stated as the predominant, but not the only, theory for variations in s
NGSS does not note that the scientific literature is filled with studies where DNA similarities
none
None
Combine all four to one standard. Evolution. Evidence of common ancestry and natural sel

by everyone or add intelligent design to explain gaps in fossil record.
c--rename the standard use fossils for the evidence wording
udents compare anatomy. Students could make claims about relationships among organisms based on all of their research
origin of species - TWO totally different concepts.

he only, theory for variations in species. Other theories need to be presented and offered for critical evaluation.
h studies where DNA similarities conflict with the predictions of common ancestry. A 2009 article in New Scientist, "Why Da
ommon ancestry and natural selection are chapter headings.

ms based on all of their research whether it be observations made during research or dissections or research and observatio
r critical evaluation.
rticle in New Scientist, "Why Darwin Was Wrong About the Tree of Life," observed, "Many biologists now argue that the tree
tting concept.
ions or research and observations of embryos.
ologists now argue that the tree concept is obsolete and needs to be discarded."
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4B Natural

Selection (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
Natural Selection (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
Should be more explicit.
This is a vital aspect to the understanding of all life, should be incorporated into all life scie
none
None
See above.

be incorporated into all life science topics and not only one section of a course.
tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4C Adaptation

(Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
3
answered question
3
skipped question
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4C
range would you
Adaptation (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
clarification of evolution - there is no distinction made between microevolution, macroevolu
none
None
See above.

een microevolution, macroevolution, etc.
tting concept.

What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4D Biodiversity
and Humans (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
4
answered question
4
skipped question
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
Biodiversity and Humans (Indicate if your
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Since when is evolution the only science that should be talked about. Evolution is only part
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
human impact on environment
See above.
ked about. Evolution is only part of how humans came to be. If evolution is going to be talked about then creation should b

ed about then creation should be added.
tting concept.

ESS1 Discipline sub-ideas
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
16
16
3
3
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
20
20
21
21
2502
25
20
15
10
5
0
ESS1A The
Universe and Its
Stars
ESS1B Earth
and the Solar
System
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth
ine sub-ideas
h
ar
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth

What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1A The Universe
and Its Stars (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
2
answered question
2
skipped question
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for
range would you
ESS1A The Universe and Its Stars (Indicate if your
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
It is too abstract for this age of students.
More needs to be added about deep space & stars. New information about other solar syste
ok
none
It's all a bit wordy, but it's okay. Teaching these sub-ideas takes up a lot of time!
None
Not sure what writer were thinking but 5-ESS1-2 and MS-ESS1-1 are very dense. They will t

ormation about other solar systems, how stars form and die, etc. is being disseminated all the time. Middle schoolers are v
akes up a lot of time!
S1-1 are very dense. They will take a significant amount of time to teach and learn! This needs to be taken into considera
he time. Middle schoolers are very interesting in things like black holes and neutron stars.
eeds to be taken into consideration when thinking about how to teach all the standards in a specific grade level.
tting concept.
specific grade level.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1B Earth and the
Solar System (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
ESS1B Earth and the Solar System (Indicate if your
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
nothing about the planets in the solar system? just sun and constellations...
ok
none
Too much. Planets aren't within the high school standards. We talk about orbiting bodies, b
None
I don't feel that HS-ESS1-4 is appropriate for all students. Kepler's laws? Seriously?? Yes, c

constellations...
We talk about orbiting bodies, but to go through it as in depth as this would take up too much time.
Kepler's laws? Seriously?? Yes, college-bound need this, but not everyone!
tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C The History of

Planet Earth (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C
range would you
The History of Planet Earth (Indicate if your
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
no need for the word 'planet'
ok
The age of the earth should be presented as a leading theory, and not stated as absolute fa
none
None...is it fair that you are asking people to comment on changes to the standards when a
ry, and not stated as absolute fact. Other theories of the age of the earth need to be offered as possibilities for review. Flaw
changes to the standards when all you are doing is giving them the topic, and not the standard itself?
d as possibilities for review. Flaws in the current theory need to be offered as well.
tting concept.

Answer Options
Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
Keep as is
Change the
wording
14
15
14
14
14
3
2
3
2
3
answered question
skipped question
1
2
1
2
2
answered question
skipped question
18
19
18
18
19
19
2504
20
15
10
E S S 2 E B io g e o lo g y
E S S 2 C T h e Ro le s o f Wa t e r in E a r t h s S u r fa c e P ro c e s s e s
Eliminate
E S S 2 A E a r t h M a t e r ia ls a n d S y s t e m s
Response
Count
ine sub-ideas
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2A Earth

Materials and Systems (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a
grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

ESS2A Earth Materials and Systems (Indicate if
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
Very vague
Take out "human activities" on the 4th line. Humans can not change global and regional clim
none
There are way too many things in here. Way too much for me to decipher and figure out wh
I feel that these standards can be covered at the middle school level, and should not take t
None
resource depletion- human caused
I have worked with teachers trying to implement 5-ESS2-1. This is a very complex model a
Seams too broad by using Systems

t change global and regional climate. That is ridiculous.
me to decipher and figure out what I'm actually supposed to teach. But then to find lesson plans for all of it? It's way too o
hool level, and should not take the place of chemistry, physics, biology, or advanced science courses
This is a very complex model and requires a large amount of background info for 5th grade students to understand in orde
lans for all of it? It's way too overwhelming!!
e students to understand in order to develop an integrated model. In addition, most elementary teachers are not going to h
tting concept.
tary teachers are not going to have the background in science to be able to effectively develop a unit without lots of suppo
lop a unit without lots of support. If the state doesn't provide $$$ and time for PD, I would recommend this one be moved
recommend this one be moved to MS, maybe even HS.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2B Plate

Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interactions (Indicate if your
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

ESS2B Plate Tectonics and Large - Scale System
Interactions (Indicate if your feedback is specific
to a grade level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
this is also in 6-8, repetitive
This needs to stay in the middle school.
none
The sub ideas are okay, it's just the PE's that are too much. They need to be worded differe
None
Okay if you are not mixing processes with systrms.
They need to be worded differently. There is way too much for a 9th grade student to handle.
tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2C The Roles of

Water in Earths Surface Processes (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2C

range would you The Roles of Water in Earths Surface Processes
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
none
I love the idea of students realizing how important water is, but way too much. There are s
This should also include a section on water quality and conservation. It is imperative that w
Just reduce
None

, but way too much. There are so many topics within ESS2, I can't do it all. I've got 9 weeks (on a block schedule) to get a
servation. It is imperative that we instill this knowledge on our youth to bring them up in better citizenship and civic respo
s (on a block schedule) to get all the Earth Science DCI's taught. 9 weeks (again, block schedule) for ESS1, ESS2, and ESS3
etter citizenship and civic responsibility.
tting concept.
dule) for ESS1, ESS2, and ESS3 - reading some of these sub ideas just overwhelms me!
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2D Weather and

Climate (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

ESS2D Weather and Climate (Indicate if your
a. K-2
don't you dare show that propaganda film, "An Inconvenient ...." Lie.
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
This is a seriously unproven and political topic.

None
All theories about climate change (including whether or not it is occurring) need to be offere
This needs to stay in the middle school as well.
eliminate the 3rd bullet point on page 101: "Changes in the atmosphere due to human activ
none
I think the sub ideas are good, but the PE's that go with these ideas are just too much. My
Probabilistically? I had to check on the validity of this word. I'm all for being concise, but th
None
Based on data? All data? Opinion based?

it is occurring) need to be offered for critical review.
e atmosphere due to human activity have increased carbon dioxide concentration and thus affect climate." Not true. Also e
se ideas are just too much. My students would take forever to complete these PE's!
I'm all for being concise, but this is silly. It could read, "Because these patterns are so complex, weather can only be pred
affect climate." Not true. Also eliminate ESS2.D: Weather and Climate under Disciplinary Core Ideas on page 102. That who
mplex, weather can only be predicted using probability.
tting concept.
e Ideas on page 102. That whole statement is wrong.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2E Biogeology

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2E
range would you
Biogeology (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
I don't know what this is. How can teachers be expected to teach this when they have NO
Add more geologic time and history to tie in better with evolution.
What is this?
none
Way too much!!!!
Just reduce
None
Not sure what you mean by biogeology.... paleontology? fossils? sedimentary rocks formed
I need to go back and read what 'biogeology' is all about. Sounds like a nonsense made-up
Be more specific
Not sure this is clear about what is meant by biogeology.

o teach this when they have NO training and no clue!!
ssils? sedimentary rocks formed by bioaccumulation - like limestone??

ounds like a nonsense made-up word. Fossils, coal, oil, natural gas and the like ??
tting concept.

ESS3 Earth and Human Activity
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
16
16
16
2
2
2
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
2
3
4
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
20
20
21
21
21
2502

25
20
15
10
5
0
ESS3A
Natural
Resources
ESS3B
Natural
Hazards
ESS3C
Human
Impacts on
Earth
Systems
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change
d Human Activity
SS3C
uman
mpacts on
arth
ystems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3A Natural

Resources (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

ESS3A Natural Resources (Indicate if your
a. K-2
This is a political topic, not appropriate for K-2.
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
This can be easily integrated into other core ideas; in fact, it should be in order to make eac
none
It's probably okay, the PE that goes with it might be too much to ask of students.
These standards can be incorporated into other subject areas
Just reduce
None
water quality emphasis
HS-ESS3-2 is more of an engineering/math standard. I feel it could be cut and HS-ESS3-4 w

it should be in order to make each topic more relevant. In most cases, they have a sub-topic that includes these under the
ch to ask of students.
it could be cut and HS-ESS3-4 would fit the need for an engineering standard that is more appropriate for all students.
c that includes these under the other ocer ideas.
ppropriate for all students.

tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3B Natural

Hazards (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
ESS3B Natural Hazards (Indicate if your feedback
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
see above
none
The sub idea is good, but the PE is too much.
Just reduce
None

tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3C Human

Impacts on Earth Systems (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
Human Impacts on Earth Systems (Indicate if your
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
see above
none
Some of these sub-ideas are quite the same or similar, but again way too much for the stud
None
Too politicol...teaching will not be consistent

again way too much for the students to complete the PE's. Too many concepts, not deep enough for the understanding.
ough for the understanding.
tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS3D Global

Climate Change (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

ESS3D Global Climate Change (Indicate if your
a. K-2
Global climate change has not been agreed upon by scienctist This should not be taught as
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
Human caused Global warming is NOT something which should be taught, as the "facts" are
None
Discard to personally offensive material and not universally accepted by scientist like me.
isn't this human impact on Earth?
see above
Tie into biological aspects here as well; extinction and evolution.
none
Addressing multiple data sets, long-term data (thousands of years vs. only the past 100 or 2
Global Climate change is being blamed on CO2...there is no proof of that!...these are suppo
The sub ideas are okay, it's the PE's that worry me. How am I going to find lessons that are
Very much keep this. Do not cave to political pressures
None
A new program will be completely shot down and judged by this title alone. Not a nay saye
tist This should not be taught as fact. .
ould be taught, as the "facts" are not settled, and there is significant question as to if it's really happening. Much less bein

y accepted by scientist like me. Too politically motived.
f years vs. only the past 100 or 200 or 300 years, is necessary
o proof of that!...these are supposed to be SCIENCE...not dream land of politics!
m I going to find lessons that are specific to the PE's?
y this title alone. Not a nay sayer...but why put an entire program in jeopardy??
ally happening. Much less being caused by people.
tting concept.

Would you like to return to other grade range options?
Answer Options
Yes
No, Finish Survey
Response
Percent
21.7%
78.3%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
5
18
23
2500
Yes
No, Finis
range options?
Yes
No, Finis h Survey

PS1 Matter and Its Interactions
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
20
22
17
2
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
1
0
4
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
23
23
22
23
2500
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS1A Structure
and Properties of
Matter
PS1B Chemical
Reactions
PS1C Nuclear
Processes
nd Its Interactions
cal
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS1C Nuclear
Processes

Properties of Matter (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a
grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live you primarily represent as you
in Iowa?
Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Nonformal educat a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would
you like to
comment?
What, if any changes, do you recommend

for PS1A Structure and Properties of
Matter? (Indicate if your feedback is
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
No change
Get rid of MSPS1-3
It says that we need to look at chemical structures. I agree. It says that the boundary should
Ok
I have taught science for over 10 years. I should not have to read and reread standards to t
No changes
Matter is anything that takes up space and has mass...How can you teach differences in mat
In HS-PS1-1, "outermost energy level" should probably be changed to "valence shell". At the
none
None.
none
Change the performance expectations to better reflect the true Practices of Science and not
technical words.
ese age groups have no idea what cause and effect represents. I think learning patterns at this age is great because they s
ins aren't wired to understand these concepts.
hing standpoint?
primary elementary band
s on the national website
says that the boundary should not include any valence electrons and not use subunits. How can we teach this without vale
read and reread standards to try and figure out what is being asked. How do we expect students and more importantly pa
oundary. They take A LOT of the math out of science which for lower classes is ok but in upper level science classes it is no
ng ALL of the ETS standards. Engineering is already embedded in many of the performance expectations. I envision teach
an you teach differences in matter in one week? Just teaching the differences between solid, liquid, and gases takes 2 to 3
anged to "valence shell". At the high school level, there probably isn't a need to shy away from the correct technical term i
(I would remove this)
ue Practices of Science and not tie just one Practice to one "core idea" tied to one crosscutting concept.
this age is great because they start learning about other pattern changes in other subjects. Engaging in Argument from Ev
w can we teach this without valence electrons? They are everything. They say not to use subunits but methanol is an organ
dents and more importantly parents to get on board when it is worded so poorly?
er level science classes it is not only important but necessary. Take out "Assessment does not include quantitative unders
expectations. I envision teachers not bundling these but, doing an "engineering unit" or project to say they have been cov
liquid, and gases takes 2 to 3 weeks. But the NGSS don't allow that much time.
om the correct technical term in favor of a more descriptive term.
ng concept.
Engaging in Argument from Evidence is something a 2nd grader should be doing??
bunits but methanol is an organic molecule with a SUBUNIT. Students cannot write or therefore compose proper chemical fo
not include quantitative understanding of ionization energy beyond relative trends."

oject to say they have been covered. They will be treated like the current Iowa Core Science As Inquiry Standards are: one
re compose proper chemical formulas without knowing valences which is what gives it its ionic charge. We could teach usi
e As Inquiry Standards are: one and done. No purposeful integrate across the curriculum.
nic charge. We could teach using the cross method, I could have most of my kids get properly balanced compounds withou
rly balanced compounds without ever knowing why.
MS-PS1-3. - What does "make sense" mean? Isn't that what we do fo
mean? Isn't that what we do for all standards in all subjects? Synthetic materials seems way off base if we are looking at a
ay off base if we are looking at a chemistry standpoint that doesn't have any balancing equations. This standard should be
tions. This standard should be thrown out. We don't balance equations but we look at synthetics?
MS-PS1-4. "Develop a m
etics?
MS-PS1-4. "Develop a model that predicts" OK thats all well and good but if the students don't understand through
dents don't understand through prior knowledge what is happening at the molecular level they will not be able to predict w
ey will not be able to predict what happens. Its beyond an 8th graders grasp. Once you explain what happens at the molec
ain what happens at the molecular level with a change in kinetic energy my 8th graders can do it. Except that now there is
n do it. Except that now there is no way to do a model and a prediction. Its the same concept for all substances. We could d
t for all substances. We could do a simple phase change diagram but that leaves the prediction completely gone.
tion completely gone.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 B Chemical

Reactions (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
Chemical Reactions? (Indicate if your feedback is
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Make this simple.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
No change
Ok
None
none
None.
none
aching standpoint?
nd physical change.


tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 C Nuclear

Processes (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
Did not see a PS1C.

None
None
None
Eliminate this.
Very vague title
Ok
None
None.
none
aching standpoint?

e much better.
tting concept.
.NO TIME!!

PS2 Motion and Stability: Forces and Interactions
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
20
17
13
1
3
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
21
20
17
21
2502
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS2A Forces
and Motion
PS2B Types of
Interactions
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems
Forces and Interactions
of
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems

Motion? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
ok
None.
none
aching standpoint?

that I agreed with!
tting concept.
vel to understand.

Interactions? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
clarify wording.
none
None.
none
Be more specific...
aching standpoint?




tting concept.

Instability in Physical Systems? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
Is this in 3-5?
None
ok
none
None.
none
aching standpoint?

e information.
tting concept.
d as part of PS2A

PS3 Energy
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
21
21
21
20
0
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
21
21
21
21
21
2502
PS3 Energy
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS3A
Definitio
ns of
Energy
PS3B
Conserv
ation of
Energy
and
Energy
Transfer
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life
S3 Energy
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life

Energy? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
None.
aching standpoint?

tting concept.

of Energy and Energy Transfer? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

Between Energy and Forces? (Indicate if your feedback is specific
to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

Chemical Processes in Everyday Life? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

None
None
None
ok
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?

r the topics above.

tting concept.

PS4 Waves and their Applications in Technologies for Information Transfer
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
17
16
14
2
2
4
answered question
skipped question
er
Eliminate
1
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
20
20
20
20
2503
PS4 Waves and their Applications in Technologies f
25
20
15
Ke
10
Ch
Eli
5
0
PS4A Wave
Properties
PS4B
Electromagneti
c Radiation
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n
Applications in Technologies for Information Transfer
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n

Properties? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None.


tting concept.

Electromagnetic Radiation? (Indicate if your feedback is specific
to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Too obnoxious
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None.

tting concept.

Technologies and Instrumentation? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None.



tting concept.

LS1 From Molecules to Organisms: Structures and Processes
Answer Options
Organisms
Keep as is
Change the
wording
17
17
14
15
2
2
5
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
19
19
19
19
19
2504

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
LS1A
Structure
and
Function
LS1B
Growth
and
Develop
ment of
Organism
s
LS1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
s
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g
s: Structures and Processes
S1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g

Function? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None.



tting concept.

Development of Organisms? (Indicate if your feedback is specific
to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None

tting concept.

for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms? (Indicate if your
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None

tting concept.

Processing? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None



tting concept.
on concussions.

LS2 Ecosystems: Interactions, Energy, and Dynamics
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
15
14
15
2
3
4
3
answered question
skipped question
0
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
18
18
18
18
18
2505
20
15
10
Eliminate
Response
Count
s, Energy, and Dynamics
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Relationships in Ecosystems? (Indicate if your feedback is specific
to a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
f. Finish Survey
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None

A draft standards)

tting concept.
he entire organism.

Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems? (Indicate if your
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
to a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None
wordy
None
tting concept.

Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience? (Indicate if your feedback
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
wordy
None
o much material
tting concept.

Interactions and Group Behavior? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

NOne
None
Eliminate
None
water quality
l sciences.
tting concept.
e specificity.

LS3 Heredity: Inheritance and Variation of Traits
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
16
16
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
19
19
19
2504
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
and Variation of Traits
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Traits? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None

tting concept.

Traits? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
None
none
None

tting concept.

LS4 Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity
Answer Options
LS4C Adaptation
Keep as is
Change the
wording
13
15
17
16
3
2
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
18
17
18
18
18
2505

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
LS4A
Evidence of
Common
Ancestry
LS4B
Natural
Selection
LS4C
Adaptation
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans
n: Unity and Diversity
S4C
daptation
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans

Common Ancestry? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a
grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
No e
none
None



tting concept.

Selection? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4C Adaptation?

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

and Humans? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

ESS1 Earths Place in the Universe
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
17
17
16
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
1
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
19
18
18
19
2504
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
ESS1A The
Universe and Its
Stars
ESS1B Earth
and the Solar
System
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth
ce in the Universe
h
ar
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth

and Its Stars? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
ok
none
None

tting concept.
Solar System? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
ok
none
None

constellations...
tting concept.

Planet Earth? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
ok
none
tting concept.

ESS2 Earths Systems
Answer Options
Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
15
16
17
13
3
3
2
1
4
answered question
skipped question
0
0
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
18
18
19
19
19
19
2504
ESS2 Earths Systems
20
15
10
Eliminate
Response
Count
ths Systems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Materials and Systems? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a
grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
Very vague
none
None

tting concept.

Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interactions? (Indicate if your
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

to a grade level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
none
None
tting concept.

Water in Earths Surface Processes? (Indicate if your feedback is
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
none
Just reduce
None

tting concept.

Climate? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
none
None

tting concept.
What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2E Biogeology?

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
What is this?
none
Way too much!!!!
Just reduce
None
Be more specific


tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
15
14
14
14
1
1
2
2
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
16
15
17
17
17
2506

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
ESS3A
Natural
Resources
ESS3B
Natural
Hazards
ESS3C
Human
Impacts on
Earth
Systems
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change
d Human Activity
SS3C
uman
mpacts on
arth
ystems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change

Resources? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
none
Just reduce
None


tting concept.

Hazards? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade level.)
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
see above
none
Just reduce
None

tting concept.

Impacts on Earth Systems? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to
a grade level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
see above
none
None

tting concept.

Climate Change? (Indicate if your feedback is specific to a grade
level.)
Response
Answer Options
Count
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
see above
none
None

tting concept.

Answer Options
Yes
No
Response
Percent
17.4%
82.6%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
4
19
23
2500
range options?
Yes
No

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
29
28
21
2
4
5
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
1
0
4
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
32
32
30
32
2491
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS1A Structure
and Properties of
Matter
PS1B Chemical
Reactions
PS1C Nuclear
Processes
nd Its Interactions
cal
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS1C Nuclear
Processes

Properties of Matter?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
Structure and Properties of Matter? (Indicate if
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
No change
Get rid of MSPS1-3
It says that we need to look at chemical structures. I agree. It says that the boundary shoul
Ok
I have taught science for over 10 years. I should not have to read and reread standards to
No changes
Matter is anything that takes up space and has mass...How can you teach differences in ma
In HS-PS1-1, "outermost energy level" should probably be changed to "valence shell". At th
none
None.
none
ot technical words.
aching standpoint?
h primary elementary band
It says that the boundary should not include any valence electrons and not use subunits. How can we teach this without v
to read and reread standards to try and figure out what is being asked. How do we expect students and more importantly
boundary. They take A LOT of the math out of science which for lower classes is ok but in upper level science classes it is
tting ALL of the ETS standards. Engineering is already embedded in many of the performance expectations. I envision tea
can you teach differences in matter in one week? Just teaching the differences between solid, liquid, and gases takes 2 to
hanged to "valence shell". At the high school level, there probably isn't a need to shy away from the correct technical term
es (I would remove this)
at this age is great because they start learning about other pattern changes in other subjects. Engaging in Argument from
ow can we teach this without valence electrons? They are everything. They say not to use subunits but methanol is an org
tudents and more importantly parents to get on board when it is worded so poorly?
pper level science classes it is not only important but necessary. Take out "Assessment does not include quantitative unde
ce expectations. I envision teachers not bundling these but, doing an "engineering unit" or project to say they have been c
id, liquid, and gases takes 2 to 3 weeks. But the NGSS don't allow that much time.
from the correct technical term in favor of a more descriptive term.
tting concept.
s. Engaging in Argument from Evidence is something a 2nd grader should be doing??
ubunits but methanol is an organic molecule with a SUBUNIT. Students cannot write or therefore compose proper chemical
s not include quantitative understanding of ionization energy beyond relative trends."

project to say they have been covered. They will be treated like the current Iowa Core Science As Inquiry Standards are: on
efore compose proper chemical formulas without knowing valences which is what gives it its ionic charge. We could teach u
nce As Inquiry Standards are: one and done. No purposeful integrate across the curriculum.
ionic charge. We could teach using the cross method, I could have most of my kids get properly balanced compounds with
perly balanced compounds without ever knowing why.
MS-PS1-3. - What does "make sense" mean? Isn't that what we do
e" mean? Isn't that what we do for all standards in all subjects? Synthetic materials seems way off base if we are looking a
way off base if we are looking at a chemistry standpoint that doesn't have any balancing equations. This standard should b
uations. This standard should be thrown out. We don't balance equations but we look at synthetics?
MS-PS1-4. "Develop
thetics?
MS-PS1-4. "Develop a model that predicts" OK thats all well and good but if the students don't understand throug
udents don't understand through prior knowledge what is happening at the molecular level they will not be able to predict
they will not be able to predict what happens. Its beyond an 8th graders grasp. Once you explain what happens at the mol
xplain what happens at the molecular level with a change in kinetic energy my 8th graders can do it. Except that now there
can do it. Except that now there is no way to do a model and a prediction. Its the same concept for all substances. We could
ept for all substances. We could do a simple phase change diagram but that leaves the prediction completely gone.
diction completely gone.

Reactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
7
2516
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Make this simple.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
No change
Ok
None
none
None.
none
aching standpoint?
nd physical change.


tting concept.

Processes?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
Did not see a PS1C.

None
None
None
Eliminate this.
Very vague title
Ok
None
None.
none
aching standpoint?

e much better.
tting concept.
.NO TIME!!

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
28
22
22
0
5
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
28
27
26
28
2495
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS2A Forces
and Motion
PS2B Types of
Interactions
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems
of
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems

Motion?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
ok
None.
none
aching standpoint?

that I agreed with!
tting concept.
vel to understand.

Interactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
clarify wording.
none
None.
none
Be more specific...
aching standpoint?




tting concept.

Instability in Physical Systems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
7
2516
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
Is this in 3-5?
None
ok
none
None.
none
aching standpoint?

e information.
tting concept.
d as part of PS2A

PS3 Energy
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
28
28
28
26
0
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
1
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
29
29
29
28
29
2494
PS3 Energy
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS3A
Definitio
ns of
Energy
PS3B
Conserv
ation of
Energy
and
Energy
Transfer
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life
S3 Energy
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life

Energy?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
None.
aching standpoint?

tting concept.

of Energy and Energy Transfer?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

Between Energy and Forces?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

Chemical Processes in Everyday Life?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

None
None
None
ok
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?

r the topics above.

tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
25
24
21
2
3
3
answered question
skipped question
er
Eliminate
0
1
4
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
27
28
28
28
2495
30
25
20
15
Ke
10
Ch
Eli
0
PS4A Wave
Properties
PS4B
Electromagneti
c Radiation
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n

Properties?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None.


tting concept.

Electromagnetic Radiation?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Too obnoxious
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None.

tting concept.

Technologies and Instrumentation?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None.



tting concept.

Answer Options
Organisms
Keep as is
Change the
wording
27
26
26
19
1
1
0
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
1
2
5
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
28
28
28
27
28
2495

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
LS1A
Structure
and
Function
LS1B
Growth
and
Develop
ment of
Organism
s
LS1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
s
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g
S1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g

Function?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None.



tting concept.

Development of Organisms?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None

tting concept.

for Matter and Energy Flow in Organisms?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None

tting concept.

Processing?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None



tting concept.
on concussions.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
26
25
26
26
1
2
0
0
answered question
skipped question
0
0
1
1
answered question
skipped question
27
27
27
27
27
2496
30
20
10
Eliminate
Response
Count
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Relationships in Ecosystems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
f. Finish Survey
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None

A draft standards)

tting concept.
he entire organism.

Matter and Energy Transfer in Ecosystems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
to a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None
wordy
None
tting concept.

Dynamics, Functioning, and Resilience?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
wordy
None
o much material
tting concept.

Interactions and Group Behavior?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

NOne
None
Eliminate
None
water quality
l sciences.
tting concept.
e specificity.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
25
26
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
26
27
27
2496
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Traits?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None

tting concept.

Traits?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
None
none
None

tting concept.

Answer Options
LS4C Adaptation
Keep as is
Change the
wording
25
25
29
27
2
4
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
3
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
30
29
29
30
30
2493

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
LS4A
Evidence of
Common
Ancestry
LS4B
Natural
Selection
LS4C
Adaptation
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans
S4C
daptation
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans

Common Ancestry?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
No e
none
None



tting concept.

Selection?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

and Humans?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
24
28
25
2
0
2
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
2
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
28
28
28
28
2495
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
ESS1A The
Universe and Its
Stars
ESS1B Earth
and the Solar
System
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth
ce in the Universe
h
ar
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth

and Its Stars?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
ok
none
None

tting concept.
Solar System?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
ok
none
None

constellations...
tting concept.

Planet Earth?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
ok
none
tting concept.

ESS2 Earths Systems
Answer Options
Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
Keep as is
Change the
wording
23
25
25
25
21
3
1
1
1
3
answered question
skipped question
0
0
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
26
26
26
26
26
26
2497
ESS2 Earths Systems
30
20
10
Eliminate
Response
Count
ths Systems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Materials and Systems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
Very vague
none
None

tting concept.

Tectonics and Large - Scale System Interactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

to a grade level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
none
None
tting concept.

Water in Earths Surface Processes?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
none
Just reduce
None

tting concept.

Climate?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
none
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
What is this?
none
Way too much!!!!
Just reduce
None
Be more specific


tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
25
24
25
24
0
1
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
1
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
26
26
26
27
27
2496

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
ESS3A
Natural
Resources
ESS3B
Natural
Hazards
ESS3C
Human
Impacts on
Earth
Systems
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change
d Human Activity
SS3C
uman
mpacts on
arth
ystems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change

Resources?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
none
Just reduce
None


tting concept.

Hazards?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
see above
none
Just reduce
None

tting concept.

Impacts on Earth Systems?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
see above
none
None

tting concept.

Climate Change?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
see above
none
None

tting concept.

Answer Options
Yes
No
Response
Percent
15.4%
84.6%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
6
33
39
2484
range options?
Yes
No

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
54
54
45
8
9
9
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
8
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
62
63
62
64
2459
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
PS1A Structure
and Properties of
Matter
PS1B Chemical
Reactions
PS1C Nuclear
Processes
nd Its Interactions
cal
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS1C Nuclear
Processes

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
No change
Get rid of MSPS1-3
Ok
No changes
none
None.
none
ot technical words.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

MS-PS1-4. "Develop
thetics?

Reactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Make this simple.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
No change
Ok
None
none
None.
none
aching standpoint?
nd physical change.


tting concept.

Processes?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
11
11
2512
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
Did not see a PS1C.

None
None
None
Eliminate this.
Very vague title
Ok
None
None.
none
aching standpoint?

e much better.
tting concept.
.NO TIME!!

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
49
46
44
7
8
4
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
2
7
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
56
56
55
56
2467
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
PS2A Forces
and Motion
PS2B Types of
Interactions
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems
of
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems

Motion?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
ok
None.
none
aching standpoint?

that I agreed with!
tting concept.
vel to understand.

Interactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
clarify wording.
none
None.
none
Be more specific...
aching standpoint?




tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
Is this in 3-5?
None
ok
none
None.
none
aching standpoint?

e information.
tting concept.
d as part of PS2A

PS3 Energy
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
49
48
48
45
5
5
5
6
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
1
3
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
54
53
54
54
56
2467
PS3 Energy
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
PS3A
Definitio
ns of
Energy
PS3B
Conserv
ation of
Energy
and
Energy
Transfer
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life
S3 Energy
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life

Energy?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
None.
aching standpoint?

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

None
None
None
ok
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?

r the topics above.

tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
46
44
38
4
6
8
answered question
skipped question
er
Eliminate
2
2
4
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
52
52
50
52
2471
60
50
40
30
Ke
20
Ch
10
Eli
0
PS4A Wave
Properties
PS4B
Electromagneti
c Radiation
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n

Properties?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None.


tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Too obnoxious
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None.

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None.



tting concept.

Answer Options
Organisms
Keep as is
Change the
wording
45
45
45
36
3
3
3
7
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
0
6
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
48
48
48
49
50
2473

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
LS1A
Structure
and
Function
LS1B
Growth
and
Develop
ment of
Organism
s
LS1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
s
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g
S1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g

Function?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None.



tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None

tting concept.

Processing?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
7
2516
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None



tting concept.
on concussions.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
43
44
42
38
2
1
3
3
answered question
skipped question
2
2
3
8
answered question
skipped question
47
47
48
49
49
2474
60
40
20
Eliminate
Response
Count
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
f. Finish Survey
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None

A draft standards)

tting concept.
he entire organism.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
to a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None
wordy
None
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
wordy
None
o much material
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

NOne
None
Eliminate
None
water quality
l sciences.
tting concept.
e specificity.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
46
44
3
4
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
49
48
49
2474
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Traits?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None

tting concept.

Traits?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
None
none
None

tting concept.

Answer Options
LS4C Adaptation
Keep as is
Change the
wording
47
47
47
46
4
2
3
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
51
49
50
50
52
2471

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
LS4A
Evidence of
Common
Ancestry
LS4B
Natural
Selection
LS4C
Adaptation
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans
S4C
daptation
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans

Common Ancestry?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
No e
none
None



tting concept.

Selection?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

and Humans?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
40
41
42
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
6
6
5
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
47
48
49
49
2474
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
ESS1A The
Universe and Its
Stars
ESS1B Earth
and the Solar
System
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth
ce in the Universe
h
ar
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth

and Its Stars?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
ok
none
None

tting concept.
Solar System?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
ok
none
None

constellations...
tting concept.

Planet Earth?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
ok
none
tting concept.

ESS2 Earths Systems
Answer Options
Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
Keep as is
Change the
wording
40
40
38
38
37
4
3
5
5
2
answered question
skipped question
6
7
6
6
10
answered question
skipped question
50
50
49
49
49
51
2472
ESS2 Earths Systems
60
40
20
Eliminate
Response
Count
ths Systems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
Very vague
none
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

to a grade level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
none
None
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
none
Just reduce
None

tting concept.

Climate?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
8
2515
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
none
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
What is this?
none
Way too much!!!!
Just reduce
None
Be more specific


tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
41
40
41
39
3
4
3
5
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
5
5
6
7
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
49
49
50
51
51
2472

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
ESS3A
Natural
Resources
ESS3B
Natural
Hazards
ESS3C
Human
Impacts on
Earth
Systems
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change
d Human Activity
SS3C
uman
mpacts on
arth
ystems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change

Resources?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
6
2517
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
none
Just reduce
None


tting concept.

Hazards?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
see above
none
Just reduce
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
see above
none
None

tting concept.

Climate Change?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
9
2514
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
see above
none
None

tting concept.

Answer Options
Yes
No
Response
Percent
8.3%
91.7%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
6
66
72
2451
range options?
Yes
No

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
23
22
20
2
3
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
25
25
25
25
2498
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS1A Structure
and Properties of
Matter
PS1B Chemical
Reactions
PS1C Nuclear
Processes
nd Its Interactions
cal
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS1C Nuclear
Processes

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
No change
Get rid of MSPS1-3
Ok
No changes
none
None.
none
ot technical words.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

MS-PS1-4. "Develop
thetics?

Reactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Make this simple.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
No change
Ok
None
none
None.
none
aching standpoint?
nd physical change.


tting concept.

Processes?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
f. Student
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
Did not see a PS1C.

None
None
None
Eliminate this.
Very vague title
Ok
None
None.
none
aching standpoint?

e much better.
tting concept.
.NO TIME!!

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
23
21
20
1
3
3
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
24
24
24
24
2499
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS2A Forces
and Motion
PS2B Types of
Interactions
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems
of
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS2C Stability
and Instability
in Physical
Systems

Motion?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
ok
None.
none
aching standpoint?

that I agreed with!
tting concept.
vel to understand.

Interactions?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
clarify wording.
none
None.
none
Be more specific...
aching standpoint?




tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
f. Student
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above.
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
None
Is this in 3-5?
None
ok
none
None.
none
aching standpoint?

e information.
tting concept.
d as part of PS2A

PS3 Energy
Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
23
23
23
20
1
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
24
24
24
23
24
2499
PS3 Energy
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
PS3A
Definitio
ns of
Energy
PS3B
Conserv
ation of
Energy
and
Energy
Transfer
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life
S3 Energy
PS3C
Relations
hip
Between
Energy
and
Forces
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS3D
Energy
and
Chemica
l
Processe
s in
Everyda
y Life

Energy?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
None.
aching standpoint?

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
b. Administrator
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
b. Administrator
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
Same as above
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

None
None
None
ok
none
Too much!
None.
aching standpoint?

r the topics above.

tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
20
20
19
2
2
2
answered question
skipped question
er
Eliminate
1
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
23
23
23
23
2500
25
20
15
Ke
10
Ch
Eli
5
0
PS4A Wave
Properties
PS4B
Electromagneti
c Radiation
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
PS4C
Information
Technologies
and
Instrumentatio
n

Properties?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None.


tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
Too obnoxious
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None.

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None.



tting concept.

Answer Options
Organisms
Keep as is
Change the
wording
22
22
22
20
1
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
23
23
23
23
23
2500

25
20
15
10
5
0
LS1A
Structure
and
Function
LS1B
Growth
and
Develop
ment of
Organism
s
LS1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
s
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g
S1C
Organizati
on for
Matter
and
Energy
Flow in
Organism
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS1D
Informatio
n
Processin
g

Function?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None.



tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes

range would you
like to
comment?
a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None

tting concept.

Processing?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
none
None



tting concept.
on concussions.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
21
21
22
20
1
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
0
0
0
2
answered question
skipped question
22
22
23
23
23
2500
25
20
15
10
5
0
Eliminate
Response
Count
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
f. Finish Survey
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None

A draft standards)

tting concept.
he entire organism.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

range would you
like to
comment?
to a grade level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None
wordy
None
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
wordy
None
o much material
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
d. 9-12

NOne
None
Eliminate
None
water quality
l sciences.
tting concept.
e specificity.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
22
21
1
2
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
23
23
23
2500
25
20
15
10
5
0
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Traits?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
None

tting concept.

Traits?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
None
none
None

tting concept.

Answer Options
LS4C Adaptation
Keep as is
Change the
wording
22
22
22
22
2
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
24
24
24
24
24
2499

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
LS4A
Evidence of
Common
Ancestry
LS4B
Natural
Selection
LS4C
Adaptation
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans
S4C
daptation
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
LS4D
Biodiversity
and
Humans

Common Ancestry?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
No e
none
None



tting concept.

Selection?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

and Humans?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey

None
None
none
None
See above.

tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
22
22
23
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
23
23
24
24
2499
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
ESS1A The
Universe and Its
Stars
ESS1B Earth
and the Solar
System
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth
ce in the Universe
h
ar
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS1C The
History of
Planet Earth

and Its Stars?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
ok
none
None

tting concept.
Solar System?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
None
None
ok
none
None

constellations...
tting concept.

Planet Earth?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
None
ok
none
tting concept.

ESS2 Earths Systems
Answer Options
Interactions
ESS2E Biogeology
Keep as is
Change the
wording
20
20
20
19
20
2
2
1
2
2
answered question
skipped question
0
0
0
0
0
answered question
skipped question
22
22
21
21
22
23
2500
ESS2 Earths Systems
25
20
15
10
5
0
Eliminate
Response
Count
ths Systems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
4
2519
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
Very vague
none
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
2
2521
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

to a grade level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
none
None
tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

like to
comment?
level.)
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
None
none
Just reduce
None

tting concept.

Climate?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
none
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
5
2518
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
e. Parent
e. Parent
e. Parent
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
b.
a.
b.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
a grade level.)
comment?
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
e. K-12
e. K-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
d. 9-12
None
What is this?
none
Way too much!!!!
Just reduce
None
Be more specific


tting concept.

Answer Options
Keep as is
Change the
wording
21
21
21
21
1
1
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Eliminate
0
0
1
1
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
22
22
23
23
23
2500

25
20
15
10
5
0
ESS3A
Natural
Resources
ESS3B
Natural
Hazards
ESS3C
Human
Impacts on
Earth
Systems
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change
d Human Activity
SS3C
uman
mpacts on
arth
ystems
Keep as is
Change the wording
Eliminate
ESS3D
Global
Climate
Change

Resources?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
a. Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
f. Finish Survey

None
none
Just reduce
None


tting concept.

Hazards?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
1
2522
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
d. Higher Education
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey

None
see above
none
Just reduce
None

tting concept.

Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
e. Parent
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
b. No
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12

None
see above
none
None

tting concept.

Climate Change?
Response
Count
Answer Options
answered question
skipped question
3
2520
Do you
currently live
in Iowa?

Response to
Other
Are you directly

involved in
Science
education?
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
a.
e. Parent
b. No
e. Parent
b. No
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
d. Higher Education
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
e. Parent
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
a. Teacher
a. Yes
environmental educ
a. Yes
a. Yes
e. Parent
b. No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
a. Yes
On which grade
range would you
like to
comment?

a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
a. K-2
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
b. 3-5
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
c. 6-8
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
d. 9-12
f. Finish Survey
e. K-12
None
see above
none
None

tting concept.

Answer Options
Yes
No
Response
Percent
17.9%
82.1%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
5
23
28
2495
range options?
Yes
No

If you are finished with the survey, press submit
Answer Options
Submit
Return to grade range options
Response
Percent
99.3%
0.7%
answered question
skipped question
Response
Count
1597
12
1609
914
If you are finished with the survey, press submit
Submit
Return to grad
options
press submit
Submit
Return to grade range
options

SURVEY TOOL Iowa Department of Education Next Generation Science Science Standards Review Team 5 March 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SURVEY TOOL Iowa Department of Education Next Generation Science Science Standards Review Team 5 March 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Next Generation Science Standards Survey

1. Do you currently live in Iowa?

3. Are you directly involved in Science education?

7. Please comment about your response to the middle school standards.

13. On which grade range would you like to comment?

14. PS1 Discipline sub-ideas

18. PS2 Discipline sub-ideas

22. PS3 Discipline sub-ideas

27. PS4 Discipline sub-ideas

31. LS1 Discipline sub-ideas

36. LS2 Discipline sub-ideas

41. LS3 Discipline sub-ideas

44. LS4 Discipline sub-ideas

LS4A Evidence of Common Ancestry

49. ESS1 Discipline sub-ideas

ESS1B Earth and the Solar System

53. ESS2 Discipline sub-ideas

59. ESS3 Earth and Human Activity

ESS3B Natural Hazards

64. Would you like to return to other grade range options?

65. PS1 Matter and Its Interactions

66. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1A Str

67. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 B Ch

68. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS1 C Nu

69. PS2 Motion and Stability: Forces and Interactions

70. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2A For

71. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2B Typ

72. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS2C Sta

73. PS3 Energy

74. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3A De

75. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3B Co

76. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3C Re

77. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS3D En

78. PS4 Waves and their Applications in Technologies for I

79. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4A Wa

80. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4B Ele

81. What, if any changes, do you recommend for PS4C Inf

82. LS1 From Molecules to Organisms: Structures and Pro

83. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1A Str

84. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1B Gro

85. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1C Org

86. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS1D Inf

87. LS2 Ecosystems: Interactions, Energy, and Dynamics

88. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2A Int

89. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2B Cyc

90. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2C Eco

91. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS2D So

92. LS3 Heredity: Inheritance and Variation of Traits

93. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3A Inh

94. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS3B Var

95. LS4 Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity

LS4A Evidence of Common Ancestry

96. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4A Evi

97. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4B Na

98. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4C Ad

99. What, if any changes, do you recommend for LS4D Bio

100. ESS1 Earths Place in the Universe

ESS1B Earth and the Solar System

101. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1A T

102. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1B E

103. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS1C T

104. ESS2 Earths Systems

105. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2A E

106. What, if any changes, do you recommend for ESS2B P