Being a fifth grade teacher that loves science and teaching science, I apprehensively welcomed the fifth grade science End of Grade (EOG) exam. It is my bargaining tool for including more time for science instruction each week. In three years, I have moved from teaching science for 40 minutes every three days to teaching science for 45 minutes every two days. This is an increase of 40 hours of science instruction per year to 67.5 hours of science instruction per year. For comparison purposes, I teach 270 hours of math and 270 hours of reading instruction per year.
Photo by Giovanni Spina
Although science is a tested subject, in most states it does not contribute to annual yearly progress (AYP) calculations. North Carolina is one of the 11 states where science contributes “appreciably” in accountability calculations; however, it still does not contribute to AYP (Judson, 2010). Due to lower accountability standards in science, the pressure to make growth mainly falls on performance in reading and math. As a result, teachers are pressured to spend more instructional time in these two subjects. Surveys conducted by Griffith found that 59.1% of teachers “indicated they decreased the amount of science instruction in their classrooms since the implementation of NCLB” and 70% of these teachers removed between 31 and 90 minutes of science instruction per week (2008). Including science assessment results in AYP would rebalance time spent between math, reading, and science instruction. This would positively affect all students.
Judson shares that “when it comes to implementing statewide assessments to millions of students in an impartial manner and in a reasonable amount of time, the idea of administering science assessments that are predominantly authentic to all students is essentially unreasonable” (2010). This means that although science should be taught using inquiry-based instruction, it will likely continue to be assessed using multiple choice tests. Although this seems incongruous, Judson points out that “research shows that students who have been taught in an inquiry-based science classroom outperform students from more traditional classrooms on conventional multiple-choice science tests.” (2010). Professional development in science instruction needs to continue to focus on inquiry and its positive effects to ensure that increased accountability in science does not lead to “teaching to the test”.
Griffith, G. (2008). Initial Impacts of No Child Left Behind on Elementary Science Education. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(3), 35-48. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database
Judson, E. (2010). Science education as a contributor to adequate yearly progress and accountability programs. Science Education, 94(5), 888-902. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.