The National Association of Scholars (NAS) deeply regrets that the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE) has published draft science standards that largely preserve the poor model of science content standards previously imposed on Oklahoma by educators who adhere to the lax, politicized Next Generation Science Standards. While these science standards include some small improvements, they combine bureaucratic unreadability with substandard content that will not prepare Oklahoma students for college, career, or informed citizenry. We urge Secretary Ryan Walters, OSDE, the State Board of Education, and Oklahoma legislators to push for better science standards. We urge Oklahoma citizens to provide public comment in favor of systematically revising these standards and we hope that Oklahoma’s state legislature will likewise require their systematic revision.
We make these comments to a public that already knows that OSDE considered using alternate science standards informed by NAS’s The Franklin Standards: Model K-12 State Science Standards. We break no confidentiality if we say that we consider those alternate draft standards prepared by OSDE to have been far superior to what OSDE has now issued as its draft standards. We believe that Oklahoma citizens, the State Board of Education, and Oklahoma legislators, if they had a chance to compare those alternate versions side by side, would find the version informed by the Franklin Standards to be far superior, for content-rich rigor, for clarity, and for depoliticization.
The draft science standards, alas, do include far too much politicization. The new engineering standards, for example, direct students to find “engineering solutions” that will solve “global challenges” defined by a progressive agenda:
Emphasis is on analyzing a global challenge (e.g., sustainable energy, air quality) and specifying the criteria and constraints for potential solutions, which could include societal needs (e.g., health, economy) and wants (e.g., technological advancement, lifestyle preferences), as well as environmental and social impacts.
[HS.ETS1.1, p. 243] So too the Environmental Science high school course, whose requirements are pervasively tendentious: e.g., “Thus sustaining biodiversity so that ecosystem functioning and productivity are maintained is essential to supporting and enhancing life on Earth.” [EN.LS4.6, p. 191]
The contrast in lucidity and content knowledge between the Franklin Standards, and hence the OSDE draft standards informed by them, and OSDE’s current NGSS-model draft standards, can be seen at a glance in a side-by-side comparison between the two. It is enough to say that Oklahoma’s draft standards require an explanation for how to read them (p. 9), and that the draft standards spend an extraordinary amount of time telling teachers in Assessment Boundaries what they do not need to teach students. Oklahoma’s draft science standards spell out their low expectations on virtually every page.
The one bright spot in these revised standards is that OSDE has included a section on “Scientific Literacy,” which includes several scientific principles championed by NAS. It is indeed an improvement that Oklahoma teachers and students will learn that, “Scientific inquiry is characterized by a common set of values that include: logical thinking, precision, open-mindedness, objectivity, skepticism, replicability of results, and honest and ethical reporting of findings.” and “Most scientific knowledge is quite durable, but is, in principle, subject to change based on new evidence and/or reinterpretation of existing evidence.” These are important truths—and truths which we have championed. We are grateful to OSDE for listening to our advice in this area, and we believe that here they have done solid service to improve Oklahoma students’ science education.
Alas, this improvement is the exception that proves the rule. Most of the science standards preserve the NGSS’s old model of mediocrity.
In 2024, in Oklahoma’s science assessments, only “34% of fifth grade students and 35% of eighth graders tested proficient or better.” In that same year, only 17% of Oklahoma students taking the ACT met the Science benchmark—and Oklahoma tied with Mississippi for the lowest science proficiency in the nation. OSDE does a disservice to Oklahoma citizens and students by sticking to its old, NGSS-model science standards, which have failed Oklahoma.
Oklahoma deserves better. Again, we urge Secretary Ryan Walters, OSDE, the State Board of Education, and Oklahoma legislators to push for better science standards. We urge Oklahoma citizens to provide public comment in favor of systematically revising these standards. We hope that Oklahoma’s state legislature will likewise require their systematic revision. OSDE will continue to fail Oklahoma so long as it continues the status quo.
Photo by Oklahoma Legislative Services Bureau - Oklahoma Legislative Services Bureau, CC0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=153249947
