Iowa science panel recommends standards without tweaks to climate change, evolution

DES MOINES - A panel of state science experts has formed a recommendation for science education benchmarks for Iowa's public-school students.

Iowa's Science Standards Review Team, a panel of 16 science experts and educators, made the decision during its meeting Tuesday at the Science Center of Iowa. The review team plans to recommend to the Board of Education that the state adopt the Next Generation Science Standards with only minor alterations, including none to the standards themselves, which include benchmarks dealing with climate change and evolution.

The Science Standards Review Team must finalize its recommendation, which could be ready in time for the board's next meeting on May 14.

The Board of Education will review the recommendation and determine what action to take.

The Next Generation Science Standards were developed in 2013 by multiple national science, education and research groups to identify science learning benchmarks from kindergarten to high school. Leaders from 26 states, including Iowa, participated in the development of the standards.

The Science Standard Review Team, charged with updating Iowa's science learning benchmarks, voted 9-2 to use the Next Generation Science Standards, as have roughly a dozen other states.

The review team plans to recommend adopting the science standards as written, with tweaks made only to which standards should be met for students in grades 6 through 8.

'Nothing changed in the wording,” said review team member Dean Lange, an engineering teacher in the West Des Moines school district. 'It's just when they're taught.”

That means the recommendation includes standards that deal with climate change and evolution.

Some people during public feedback opportunities expressed concerns with the inclusion of those subjects in the standards, as did Board of Education members Michael Knedler and Mike May at a recent meeting. May called the topics 'quicksand areas.”

Lange said the number of people who expressed those concerns was minimal.

'The responses either for or against it were so low, percentage-wise, that we decided it was best to leave it as is,” Lange said. 'It wasn't a big issue. … It was relatively insignificant.”

The review team plans to meet once more in May prior to the Board of Education meeting.