Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the K5 Science Pilot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Germantown committee previews K–5 science pilot, selects Smithsonian materials for spring test run
Summary
District staff told the Teaching and Learning Committee they narrowed three elementary science resources to a Smithsonian curriculum and plan a spring pilot to evaluate teacher usability, alignment to Wisconsin standards and student outcomes before any full adoption.
The Germantown School District Teaching and Learning Committee on Jan. 13 received an informational update on a proposed K–5 science pilot that would test a Smithsonian elementary science resource this spring.
Jake Niziak, the meeting presenter identified by the committee, said the district used a screening tool to evaluate three candidate programs — OpenSciEd, MiSci and a Smithsonian resource — and recommended piloting the Smithsonian materials because of better alignment and classroom usability. “We narrowed pretty quickly 2 resources that had that focus… and that was the 1 from Smithsonian,” he said.
The pilot is designed to measure implementation readiness: how easily teachers can use the kit, whether lessons align to the district’s expectations, and whether embedded assessments show student growth. Niziak told the committee the district does not have a standardized science MAP test to measure growth so the pilot will rely on teacher rubrics, pre/post assessments and classroom walk-through data. “There isn’t necessarily an external tool that we can lean on to measure the growth,” he said.
District staff plan to pilot at least one unit per grade level and to expand participation beyond the review committee by recruiting grade-level colleagues so teachers can collaborate while implementing new materials. Niziak said elementary units typically take about 10–12 weeks to complete; the timeline presented calls for implementation this spring with additional observations and data gathered in March and April and a full report back to the board in April–May.
Committee members asked whether pilot results could be compared to non-pilot classrooms. Niziak replied that some current materials are not aligned to the standards used in the selection process, which limits direct apples-to-apples comparisons, but said the district could collect baseline engagement surveys and other disposition measures to compare pilot and non-pilot classes.
A board member asked about fallback options if the selected resource did not meet expectations. Niziak said the immediate option would be to re-evaluate the two previously screened resources and to consult neighboring districts that have used the Smithsonian kit; he described those district conversations as informal supports rather than a formal selection factor. “If it doesn’t go, and this 1 isn’t, that would be the fallback position is to reevaluate,” Niziak said.
The committee did not take action on the pilot at the meeting; staff said they will bring a more detailed request to the full board in February for approval and noted ongoing professional development and teacher support would accompany any pilot.
