# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
DRAFT K-5 Integrated Scope & Sequence Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gail, Ryan, and James will be adding new content to this page throughout 2016-2017. These links will need to be in a different location eventually, but this format allows us to quickly make changes and updates.  Session Slide Deck - from OnebyOne 2016 Integrated Scope and Sequence Overviews (K-5 ...

# data[].attributes.body
crosscutsymbols.weebly.com

# data[].attributes.body
Part 2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Tom Hathorn
Critique these Lesson Plans
Yesterday I argued that the NGSS Crosscutting Concepts can represent types of reasoning, especially to be used when students are making and critiquing arguments. When students use the Claim-Evidence-Reasoning framework for arguments, their reasoning is usually the most challenging part. I presented an example vignette in which a teacher helped a student to improve their initial argument by using one of the Crosscutting Concepts as a specific type of reasoning to revise the reasoning part of the argument.

Today I've got two "literacy-in-science" lessons (one for K-5, the other for grades 9-12), similar to what you might find at the Literacy Design Collaborative. These plans are works-in-progress, so you can help me out by being a Critical Friend. How well does each lesson plan use the Crosscutting Concepts to address the reasoning problem?
Lesson 1: Wolf Management (high school)

Students gain a broader and more specific understanding of what constitutes "reasoning."

Students get the opportunity to practice identifying and using specific types of reasoning.

The first lesson uses close reading of part of an article that questions wildlife management policies and practices in the U.S. The overall task for students (see NGSS performance expectation HS-LS2-7) presents an engineering situation (design a solution to a human problem):

"Propose a solution for managing wolves in an environment that includes National Parks and livestock range. Your solution should offer the best chance for long-term stability of the ecosystem, including living, non-living, non-human, and human-designed factors."

To complete this task, students will need to read carefully to understand the different solutions to the wolf problem, but it is the cause-and-effect reasoning (NGSS Crosscutting Concept #2) that will help students to distinguish strong evidence from weaker evidence and emotional appeals.

Here is a summary of the lesson plan:`
Lesson 2: Mary Anning, Fossil Hunter (4th or 5th grade)

1. (first reading) Teacher models reading the article excerpt, and students mark the text for difficult and important words to be clarified.

2. (second reading) Students read to identify the competing points-of-view. How do various stakeholders define the problem and the criteria for a successful solution?

3. (third reading) Students identify and diagram the many cause-and-effect interactions, including normal ecosystem interactions and unintended/undesirable interactions.

4. Students rate the relative importance of each point-of-view, with respect to long term stability and minimal unintended cause-and-effect interactions.

5. Students propose a solution to the wolf problem.

The second lesson also uses close reading for part of the children's biography, Mary Anning: Fossil Hunter, an early-1800s story of a 10-year-old girl who collects fossils and grows up contributing to the scientific discourse about life on Earth long ago. The overall task for students (see NGSS performance expectation 3-LS4-1) is to act as a paleontologist:

"Use fossil evidence to infer about past organisms and environments where Mary Anning lived."

To complete this task, students will need to read carefully about the structures-and-functions of each fossil organism (and study drawings) that Mary found, then continue to use that structure-and-function reasoning (NGSS Crosscutting Concept #6) to infer what kind of environment existed long ago where the coastal town of Lyme Regis, England stands today.

Here is a summary of the lesson plan:

1. (first reading) Students do a "cold reading" (very little introduction) of several initial pages about how fossils form, marking the text for difficult and important words to be clarified.

2. (second reading) Teacher models reading of a passage that includes a description and drawing of an Ammonite fossil found by Mary Anning. The teacher models how to make a "fossil card" for Ammonites that uses structure-and-function reasoning to describe (1) a similar organism living today (Nautilus), and (2) the type of environment that the Ammonite must have lived in long ago.

3. Students continue reading on their own about other fossils that Mary found, and make additional fossil cards using structure-and-function reasoning.

4. Groups of students pool their fossil cards, and build "Argument Blocks" of talking points that follow the argument pattern of "Claim-Evidence-Reasoning." Their oral argument will be about the type of environment they think must have existed at the time the fossils were alive.

5. Groups present their arguments verbally and visually, and give constructive criticism for other groups' arguments.

These lessons-compared to other argumentation tasks that I've used-add something extra: the texts that students read provide models of using a specific type of reasoning (cause-and-effect; structure-and-function), and then students continue using that type of reasoning to build their arguments.

That's it for now, Critical Friend. How can these plans be strengthened?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Reasoning Problem: NGSS Can Help! (part 2)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Tom Hathorn Critique these Lesson Plans Yesterday I argued that the NGSS Crosscutting Concepts can represent types of reasoning, especially to be used when students are making and critiquing arguments. When students use the Claim-Evidence-Reasoning framework for arguments, their reasoning is usually the most challenging part.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Problem: Reasoning is Hard for Students (and Grown-ups)
By Tom Hathorn

If you've been teaching the Claim - Evidence - Reasoning structure of arguments, then you've probably discovered that the Reasoning is the toughest part of an argument for students to understand and construct. They are pretty good with making a claim and listing evidence that supports the claim...but how to reason why, or in what ways does the evidence support the claim? That's where people of all ages often get stuck. For example, a middle school science student might argue about kitchen chemistry...

Claim & Evidence: "When I mix vinegar and baking soda in a sealed baggie, new substances are formed, but the total amount of matter stays the same. I weighed the ingredients before mixing, and I weighed the new substances after the reaction, and the masses were the same."

Reasoning: "What do you mean that's not enough of an argument? What else is there to say? The mass stayed the same...end of story."
A Solution Tool: NGSS Crosscutting Concepts
As the teacher, how can I coach this student to understand what "reasoning" is all about? Is there an all-purpose-rule-of-thumb-for-reasoning that can be used in all arguments? Or, are there different kinds of reasoning that can be applied in certain situations?

The solution method I'm proposing will make authentic, powerful use of the NGSS "Crosscutting Concepts," which are sometimes considered a lesser dimension of NGSS. I have found myself thinking, "Golly, it's not such an important dimension as the other two (Science & Engineering Practices or the Disciplinary Core Ideas)."...or..."Jeepers, I can't handle all three dimensions yet, so I'll just put the Crosscutting Concepts on hold until later...maybe much later." Surprisingly, later has come sooner rather than later for me, because the Crosscutting Concepts so nicely support the Claim-Evidence-Reasoning structure.

What are the Crosscutting Concepts? All seven of them are listed below, with micro-blurbs. See if you agree with me that these describe ways of reasoning about phenomena that we are trying to explain, and they also describe ways of thinking about problems that we are trying to solve.
Shoring Up the Kitchen Chemistry Reasoning

1. Patterns-Observing patterns of shape, arrangement, data, and events guides their organization, and prompts questions about influential factors.

2. Cause and effect-Explaining causal relationships and their mechanisms.

3. Scale, proportion, and quantity-Recognizing connections across differences in size, time, and energy.

4. Systems and system models-Defining and modeling the system under study (boundaries, parts, interactions) provides tools for generating and testing explanations and solutions.

5. Energy and matter-Tracking Flows, cycles, and conservation of energy and matter into, out of, and within systems.

6. Structure and function-An object's shape and substructure can help identify its properties and functions.

7. Stability and change-For natural and built systems alike, conditions of stability and determinants of rates of change or evolution of a system are critical elements of study.

Let's take another look at the middle schooler's argument, and see if a little coaching can help.

Claim & Evidence: "When I mix vinegar and baking soda in a sealed baggie, new substances are formed, but the total amount of matter stays the same . I weighed the ingredients before mixing, and I weighed the new substances after the reaction, and the masses were the same."

Coaching better student Reasoning: OK, I tell my student that the Claim identified a powerful scientific principle known as Conservation of Matter (even when changes occur, matter cannot be created or destroyed). I ask my student, "Why doesn't the amount of matter change?" My student says it might have something to do with matter being made of atoms. I say, "That's right, so your Reasoning should focus on 'energy & matter.' Where does the matter come from, and where does it go?" I know that I'm suggesting that my student use Crosscutting Concept #5, energy & matter, which in this situation is the type of reasoning that can support the argument. If I'm really on my game, I've got a wall chart of the Crosscutting Concepts, and I'm pointing to it as we speak.
Stay Tuned for Lesson Plans
Upgraded energy & matter Reasoning: The student's revised reasoning might sound like, "The vinegar and baking soda molecules are made of atoms. Those atoms get rearranged into new molecules, but they do not disappear, and no new atoms will suddenly appear, either. That's why the new substances weighed exactly the same as the vinegar and baking soda."

Tomorrow I'll share two lesson plans that each use the Crosscutting Concepts twice to help students understand, identify, and use specific types of reasoning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Reasoning Problem: NGSS Can Help! (part 1)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Problem: Reasoning is Hard for Students (and Grown-ups) By Tom Hathorn If you've been teaching the Claim - Evidence - Reasoning structure of arguments, then you've probably discovered that the Reasoning is the toughest part of an argument for students to understand and construct.