English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Standards in science and other subjects are a recent phenomenon in education, with most of them having been developed within the past 15 years. In 2002, Kimberly Tanner and Deborah Allen published in the first volume of Cell Biology Education (CBE) an important article about national science education standards for Grades K–12. That article likely provided for many readers of CBE their first glimpse of the standards movement in K–12 education and the potential impact of standards on higher education. The article focused on the two national science standards documents, Benchmarks for Science Literacy, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS; 1993 ), and the National Science Education Standards, published by the National Research Council (NRC; 1996 ), and what those standards specify about what students should know and be able to do at various grade levels in cell biology. Tanner and Allen (2002) also provided what have turned out to be some prescient ideas and questions about the more general roles of science standards in education in the United States.   Much has happened in K–12 education during the past four years and, for the following reasons, an update on the standards movement is warranted.   Tanner and Allen reported how the national documents were designed to serve as guidelines for the development of state standards and pointed out some of the issues involved in translating the national standards to state frameworks. In the four years since Tanner and Allen published their article, all states except Iowa have developed their own standards. Indeed, some states are now in a cycle of revising their standards documents.   During the past five years, the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has become much more a part of the fabric of K–12 education. Most people who are familiar with this legislation identify it with new expectations for testing and accountability. What is less known is that states are also required to align standardized assessments and classroom instruction with their standards documents.   To date, students have been tested only in reading and mathematics as part of NCLB. Science will be tested for the first time during the 2007–2008 school year. Thus, science will take on a much greater level of importance in public education in the ensuing years, and this increased attention could have important ramifications for higher education in the sciences.    This article addresses all of these issues and also provides readers who may not remember the details from Tanner and Allen with a more general and updated introduction to national and state science standards. It also provides a brief overview of the science content standards movement in the United States, insights into the forces that have caused the adoption of science standards to be contentious in some states, discussion of why college faculty need to learn more about their own state's standards, and the roles that professional scientists might play in shaping those standards in the future. For a more comprehensive recent review of national and state K–12 science standards, see Sunal and Wright (2006) .

National and State Standards in Science and Their Potential Influence on Undergraduate Science Education