The Wall Street Journal, April 13, 2006
Five years ago San Diego’s school district, the nation’s eighth largest, began overhauling its science curriculum to raise performance of minority and low-income students.
“But parents in middle- and upper-income areas, where many students were already doing well, rebelled against the new curriculum, and a course called Active Physics in particular. They called it watered-down science, too skimpy on math.”
“A resistance movement took hold. Some teachers refused to use the new textbooks, which are peppered with cartoons. They gathered up phased-out texts to use on the sly. As controversy over the issue escalated, it played a part in an election in which the majority of the school board was replaced. Now, further curriculum changes are under consideration.”
The issue speaks to a wider battle over how to make science accessible to all. Many states are increasing the number of science courses it is requiring students to take. By 2011, just over half will require students to take at least three science courses to graduate. But the issue irks parents whose children are already doing well in science.
“Such disputes are likely to erupt elsewhere as more school districts try to spread their resources for teaching science across a wider array of students. Kati Haycock, director of the Education Trust, a Washington-based advocacy group for at-risk students, says parents in affluent schools often resist changes that affect students who are already thriving. ‘People with privileges fight to keep privileges,’ she says.”
The No Child Left Behind law, which mandates that students be tested on math and reading, appears to be the root of the problem causing some elementary and middle schools to teach less science. According to a recent study by the Center on Education Policy, “in 2005, 29% of the nation's school districts reported significantly reducing the amount of time devoted to science instruction to make way for additional reading and math, up from 22% in 2004…”
Kim Bess, San Diego’s director of science, says “San Diego high-school teachers were largely free to teach what they wanted. While top-performing schools offered specialties like marine science, those in low-income neighborhoods offered less challenging fare such as a course in cooking with chemistry aimed at preparing students for food-service jobs.” Adding fuel to the fire, a 2000 report indicated that less than one-third of graduates had completed course work required to gain admission to California's state universities. In addition, it was reported that about “one-third of its freshmen failed biology, and that fewer than 20% took chemistry or physics. “
The new program de-emphasized textbook learning in favor of hands-on activities designed to engage students with little science background or limited English skills. They also worked to make all students take the same courses. "The thrust was to say that all kids have the same access to the same quality materials," Ms. Bess says.
“Under the district's reform plan, all high-school students beginning with the class of 2006 would have to pass three science courses to graduate, up from two. Moreover, students would take them in a new order: physics first, in ninth grade, then chemistry, then biology. “
The physics courses at most San Diego high schools have been a “calculus-based elective for high-achieving juniors and seniors.” In 2001, the science office unveiled the new science program to be put into full effect that fall. The district retrained teachers, hired new administrators, and trained teachers to serve as team leaders. “By the fall of 2002, the district had 368 high-school science teachers, up 50% from 2000.”
“The curriculum San Diego chose for ninth-graders was Active Physics. Developed with funding from the National Science Foundation, its approach was far from conventional. The course employed breezily written booklets focused on physics in arenas such as sports and medicine. They were full of short blocks of text and cartoons, including recurring images of a pint-sized scientist with wild Einstein hair.”
Arthur Eisenkraft, a professor of science education at the University of Massachusetts, designed the curriculum with the goal of providing all students with an “ appreciation for physics, even those who didn't have the math skills usually demanded by the conventional course.”
Affluent areas such as La Jolla, whose high school had a long tradition of winning science awards and is the districts highest achiever on state tests, expressed great concern about the program. One group of parents and teachers developed a plan for the school to become independent. The district gave La Jolla academic independence, enabling them to ignore the science curriculum, but the backlash caused other protests.
“Some teachers found that the new physics course made a difference in the classroom. Stephanie Rico, then a science teacher at San Diego High School, says the new activities were engaging for her students, many of who had little background in science. ‘Several commented that this way of learning was so much more interesting for them,’ says Ms. Rico, who is on leave this school year but plans to return. ‘I think it's a good idea. I'll fight for it to stay.’”
Even though the district mandated the physics course in 2002, the resistance continued. One parent protested saying, "it was wasting a whole year of science" for her daughter. A parent activist at Scripps Ranch High School, Mitz Lee, organized opposite and made it the platform of her 2004 campaign for a seat on the school board.
Opposition remained among some veteran science teachers. “Tom Deets, who teaches at Patrick Henry High, argued that freshman who hadn't passed eighth-grade algebra weren't ready for physics. Rather than teach the new course, he switched to math until the district offered him an administrative job.” Many teachers squired away old physics textbooks so that the district couldn’t collect them.
In 2004, three critics of the district's curriculum changes, including those in math and reading, were elected to its five-member school board. The winners included Ms. Lee, who was elected by a wide margin.
“Although all high-school students now take science, the new curriculum has done little to raise test scores. In 2005, only about 2% of Hispanic and African-American students scored at proficient or advanced levels on the state physics test, up from 1% in 2003. Overall, 10% of San Diego students scored at proficient or advanced levels in physics last year, up from 6% in 2003.”
But nearly two-thirds of the city's students continue to score in the below-basic range. Officials are discussing the option of offering additional instruction in basic math and science at the beginning of student’s freshman year.
District officials will decide next year whether to adopt a different physics curriculum. “As it stands, Ms. Bess, the district science director, estimates that fewer than 30% of her physics teachers rely solely on Active Physics in their classrooms.”