Curriculum and Instruction - SAS-WASC

from the United States, including Colorado, California and New York as well asthe National Science Standards. The current SAS standards and benchmarks are acombination of the above. The recommendation from that group who reviewed thestandards and benchmarks was to revisit the scope and sequence in high school toidentify redundancy and overlap of content. The 6-12 science task force work beganwith this recommendation in 2007-2008. Members mapped all science subjectsgrades six through twelve. Redundancies and gaps were identified and reports ofthe findings for each science subject are of file in the Science Subject Area EvidenceBinder.As lead-in to the work of mapping, in 2006-2007, discussions of inquiry-based learningand its relative importance to content learning in high school science education wereundertaken by a science action research team. They conducted a review of literature toreview on topics surrounding science education grades 6-12 and reviewed the currentofferings in science for high school, including grades nine and ten.In both grades nine and ten, students study a trimester each of biology, chemistry andphysics. The science disciplines are taught separately, and at the Puxi campus, bydifferent teachers. Students might take physics first, then biology and chemistry – thetrimesters are designed to be taken in any order. This led to some discussion about thereadiness of grade nine students, in terms of their mathematics skills, to begin withphysics.Puxi campus offered data (as Pudong high school had not yet had a senior class –incomplete grade data and no testing data existed) and an analysis of quantitativedata as regards the current grade 9-10 program (e.g., Puxi data on grades, sciencecoursework taken). The action research team followed a data dialog protocol on thequantitative data. The conclusion of the group was that the program as it stands isresulting in high grades and good scores on IB external examinations (for data, seeScience Subject Area Evidence Binder)In 2007-2008, the work began with mapping, an exercise that engendered discussionsof the difficulty of covering all the standards and benchmarks in all grades. Theconversations hearkened back to the 2005-2006 review, which saw the adding onof skills-based standards to standards that, in the past, had been primarily contentbased.Though all benchmarks are covered, a balance of skills and content withina manageable time frame is difficult to accomplish with the benchmarks and draftessential teaching agreements as they now stand. The argument is that the schedule,grading periods, and the curriculum don’t always give opportunities for teachers tocover them in the depth that is needed to do meaningful assessment. Much of thebest practice literature points to greater need for skills and less emphasis on content– but the data that Puxi high school provided the action research team in 2006-2007,suggests that the content benchmarks are sufficient for students to do well on externalassessments like IB and AP. The question remains: how do science teachers maintainhigh results on critical external exams and balance content with skills as best practicedemands. It may be useful to forge stronger links between content and conceptthemes, which would also help students apply skills and connect their learning. Theschool would benefit from outside expertise in searching for resolution to the content/skills debate and how best to address the balance.AtlasAt the time of the task force’s curriculum mapping for science, there were not enoughunits posted to construct accurate maps. As progress is made in this area, it shouldbecome increasingly possible to see what is actually taught in science classrooms –and that may shed light on solutions to the content/skills debate.Shanghai American School Self Study Report 103