For the idea that several processes contribute to the changing surface of the Earth (Idea b), few phenomena are presented. For example, students watch a video of the eruption that created Surtsey (7.4.33, Video Index), as well as several videos showing different types of volcanic eruptions—including Mount Saint Helens, Mount Parícutin, and Kilauea erupting (8.4.25.1)—and one video that mentions that the Himalayan Mountains were formed from the collision of continents (6.1.4.3). Unfortunately, most of these phenomena show or discuss the formation only of volcanoes and mountains. There is not a wide variety of contexts in which students can see other processes that change the surface of the Earth.

Only one phenomenon is provided for the idea that some processes are fast and some are slow (Idea d); the video showing the eruption and formation of Surtsey briefly mentions that the island formed in several years (7.4.33, Video Index). However, no other phenomena are explained in terms of the time frame of changes to the Earth.

The only phenomenon for the idea that slow but continuous processes can create dramatic changes to the surface of the Earth eventually (Idea e) is given in the context of continental drift. A video shows how the continents are believed to have moved throughout the history of the Earth, and the narration explains that the continents move so slowly (1–3 inches a year) that humans do not notice the movement (6.1.4.3).

For the ideas related to plate tectonics (Ideas g, h), a video shows an underwater eruption along a midocean ridge (8.4.25.2) and the formation of Surtsey (7.4.33, Video Index). No phenomena are presented for the ideas that matching coastlines and other evidence suggest that today’s continents were once part of a single vast continent (Idea f), and that the processes that shape the Earth today are similar to the processes that shaped the Earth in the past (Idea c).

The review teams were unable to reach full agreement on the material’s rating for this criterion. The rating reported above is a Project 2061 compromise based on evidence in the reports of both teams.

The software component allows for an incredibly vivid presentation of phenomena, such as the formation of Surtsey, an underwater eruption along a midocean ridge, and the volcanic eruptions discussed in the previous criterion. Unfortunately, only two of the key ideas are addressed with such vivid phenomena—that several processes change the surface of the Earth (Idea b), and that the Earth’s plates move past one another slowly (Idea g).

The review teams were unable to reach full agreement on the material’s rating for this criterion. The rating reported above is a Project 2061 compromise based on evidence in the reports of both teams.

Often terms are defined and introduced with an accompanying diagram or photograph in the software. These photographs and diagrams attempt to connect the technical term to a relevant experience. Unfortunately, there is no caption, legend, or scale for any of the interlinked photographs, making them difficult to understand. For example, a photograph of a coal seam (6.1.4.2) looks like a layer of rocks. Nothing in the photograph clarifies what a coal seam is, and there is no caption to explain what part of the photograph is the coal seam.

Sometimes, lessons begin by asking students (in small groups or as a whole class) to brainstorm a topic and formulate a class definition; for example, students are asked to come up with a list of the attributes of a desert and a class definition before they continue the lesson (5.1.5.3, LP3, p. 17).

The use of complex and technical terminology is not restricted. There is an extensive glossary in the software in which terms are interlinked. The software-based glossary contains terms that are well beyond those needed for effective communication about the key Earth science ideas and those needed for science literacy. For example, the glossary includes the terms “lithification,” “silica-rich magmas,” “iron–magnesium silicates,” “lahar,” “beta particle,” “radionuclide,” and “pyroclastic flow.” Although no attempt has been made to limit the number of technical terms introduced, one benefit of this glossary is that the resource is linked only to those places where a term is needed or used, and students can return to it whenever needed. Furthermore, terms often are linked at several places in the glossary. The review teams were unable to reach full agreement on the material’s rating for this criterion. The rating reported above is a Project 2061 compromise based on evidence in the reports of both teams.

Some representations are likely to be helpful. A video shows the crust of a lava flow to represent how the Earth’s tectonic plates interact (8.4.24, Video Index); the narration explains the analogy. Students are required to make models and simulations as well. For instance, in grade five, students make a model of a mountain with sand and pour water over it slowly to simulate the continental divide and drainage patterns. A follow-up question asks students how well the model represents a real mountain and how the model is different (5.1.15.1, SI5–1, p. 2). This type of follow-up question engages students in thinking about the limitations of their models. Although students are not typically asked to critique their models and other representations, it is useful to link models to the real objects they represent.

Even though Science 2000 incorporates the use of technology (laser videodisc) to present moving images of changes to the surface of the Earth, the still photographs and diagrams draw the same criticism as regular textbooks, namely, that there are no attempts to show before-and-after diagrams of processes that change the surface of the Earth. Thus, it is still possible that students may not comprehend that the surface of the Earth has changed and continues to change. The review teams were unable to reach full agreement on the material’s rating for this criterion. The rating reported above is a Project 2061 compromise based on evidence in the reports of both teams.

Very few questions enable students to practice the idea that the processes that shape the Earth today are similar to those that shaped the Earth in the past (Idea c). Students see photographs of landforms and are asked to infer what happened in the past in that location (6.1.4.2, SI4–2, p. 4). There are very few questions that help students to practice the idea that several processes contribute to the changing surface of the Earth (Idea b). Those provided include: “Why are volcanoes destructive?” (7.4.33.1, SI33–1a, p. 877), and “How would weathering and erosion affect the layering of rock?” (7.4.33.2, SI33–2b, p. 883). Lastly, although some questions ask students about the movement of continents, very few questions focus on the key ideas related to plate tectonics (Ideas g, h). Only a few questions are included for these key ideas. One of them is: “Compare your map [of earthquakes] with the Map of Tectonic Plates. What similarities or differences do you see?” (8.4.24.1, SI24–1–A, p. 1); another asks students to compare earthquake and volcano activity patterns to the Earth’s tectonic plate boundaries (8.4.25.2, SI25–2–A, p. 7).

Most of the practice tasks and questions require students to recall what they have just read or to use a database to answer questions. Very few of the practice tasks and questions are novel. Furthermore, there is no increase in complexity of the questions or gradual decrease of feedback to students in the practice sets.

Most activities are followed by a set of questions. Typically, these questions may help students to make sense of an experience, a demonstration/model, or an activity. For example, students use a jar to collect water that has drained from their model of the continental divide and add other sediments as well; then they watch for sedimentation. The follow-up questions include: “Did all the sediments settle to the bottom?” “Did any layers form? If so, which layer formed first? Which formed last?” “Which sediments are the heaviest?” “Which sediments are the lightest?” and “How might you apply the results of your experiment to understanding or explaining layered sedimentary rocks found on the Earth?” (5.1.5.2, SI5–2, pp. 7–8). Another example follows an activity in which students compare separate maps of earthquake locations, volcano locations, and plate boundaries. Among the follow-up questions are: “Where has most of the volcanic activity in the world been during the 20th century?” “How do the areas of volcanic activity compare with those of earthquake activity? What are the similarities and differences?” “How do the earthquake and volcanic activity patterns compare with the boundaries of the earth’s tectonic plates?” “What do you think this says about some causes of volcanism?” and “How do your answers compare with what you thought before about where active volcanoes occur?” (8.4.25.2, SI25–2-A, p. 8). Both of these examples may help students to relate their experiences with the phenomena to the key Earth science ideas. The questions are sequenced in increasing levels of complexity.

The review teams were unable to reach full agreement on the material’s rating for this criterion. The rating reported above is a Project 2061 compromise based on evidence in the reports of both teams.

There are no opportunities that encourage students to monitor how their ideas have changed in grades five and six.

[Formative] assessment offers guidance for improvement and is an ongoing process. It can be formal…or informal…. Because many students work independently or in groups during Science 2000 lessons, the teacher is able to circulate in the classroom, observe students, and get informal feedback…. During lessons, teachers are encouraged to informally assess students’ comprehension by observing their progress at the activities. [grade 6, p. 19.3]

In the Teacher’s Guide, however, there is no explicit mention of this instructional strategy and no specific reference to questions or tasks. Assessment is discussed in the Science 2000 Instructional Approach (p. 8.1–2), which states that questions in step 1 are for preassessment and that they should be used to “guide the teacher in building bridges to new content” (p. 8.1), and that those in step 5 (Evaluation) are for the “final step in a constructivist learning sequence.” The paragraph notes that Science 2000 “outlines a variety of strategies for assessing the conceptual understanding achieved by students” and that “there are structured assessment questions or assignments after many lessons and after each cluster.” It further notes, “Many of these engage students in the applications of concepts and knowledge” (p. 8.2). However, the role of these assessments in instruction is not made explicit. Likewise, Chapter 13: The Science 2000 Software includes a paragraph on assessments that notes that

Science 2000 includes short written tests of student understanding of each cluster.… Some of the assessments ask for quite specific information to check problem-solving and mathematical skills while others ask for more formative responses such as ideas the students had while conducting an investigation. [p. 13.8]

However, no mention is made of the function of the assessments in instruction.

Although not explicit, Science 2000 does include some opportunities for students to express and apply relevant ideas (see the criteria entitled “Encouraging students to examine their ideas” and “Providing practice”) that can be used, in principle, by a well-informed teacher to diagnose students’ remaining difficulties. However, while some relevant questions are included, Science 2000 does not include suggestions for teachers about how to probe beyond students’ initial responses to better understand where they are, nor does it include specific suggestions about how to use students’ responses to make decisions about instruction.

The material provides some sufficiently detailed answers to questions in the student text for teachers to understand and interpret various student responses (e.g., 5.1.5.1, SI5–1, Teacher Answer Key, p. 4, Part I). However, there are some limitations to the responses provided in the teacher’s notes, which are sometimes brief and require further explanation (e.g., “Accept all reasonable answers,” 7.4.32.Assessments component, Assessment [32–1]: Teacher Answer Key, item 5).

The material provides minimal support in recommending resources for improving the teacher’s understanding of key ideas. The material includes lists of mediagraphy (film, video, and software), teacher articles, teacher books, and organizations in the Resources component of each cluster. However, the lists lack annotations about what kinds of information the references provide or how they may be helpful.

The material provides some suggestions for how to respect and value students’ ideas. Teacher’s notes state that multiple student answers should be acceptable for selected questions (e.g., 7.4.33.1, SI33–1–A, Teacher Answer Key, p. 880, item 2), and the student text explicitly elicits and values students’ own ideas in some hypothesis and design tasks (e.g., 7.4.33.2, LP, p. 4, Procedure, item 6).

The material provides a few suggestions for how to raise questions such as, “How do we know? What is the evidence?” and “Are there alternative explanations or other ways of solving the problem that could be better?” But it does not encourage students to pose such questions themselves. Specifically, the material includes a few tasks that ask students to provide evidence or reasons in their responses (e.g., 6.1.4.2, SI4–2, p. 4, items 1, 2; 7.4.32.Assessments component, Assessment [32–1]: Cluster 32 Assessment, item 3).

The material provides some suggestions for how to avoid dogmatism. Introductory teacher’s notes emphasize the role of the teacher as “a facilitator and a question-asker, encouraging students to articulate what they already know and to draw on their knowledge as they pursue an investigation” (8.PD, p. 6.2). The student text portrays the nature of science as a human enterprise in which students may participate (e.g., 6.1.3.2, SI3–2, p. 4, item 4), highlights the work of some current scientists in the Scientists in Action component (e.g., 7.4.32.2, LP2, Procedure, item 2, the dynamic nature of our planet Earth video clip) and illustrates changes over time in scientific thinking (e.g., 8.4.24.2, SI24–2–B, Earthquakes Database, Early Earthquake Explanations).

The material provides a few examples of classroom interactions through brief vignettes in the Science 2000 Professional Development Teacher’s Guide that illustrate appropriate ways to respond to student questions or ideas, etc (e.g., 8.PD, pp. 1.1-1.2). In addition, a limited sense of desirable student-student interactions may be gained from procedural directions for laboratories and cooperative group activities (e.g., 8.PD, pp. 19.6–19.10; 7.4.32.4, LP4, p. 10, Procedure, item 3; 7.4.33.1, LP1, p. 1, Procedure, item 3).

The material provides some illustrations of the contributions of women and minorities to science and as role models. Most of the contributions of women and minorities appear in the Scientists in Action component that lists names of scientists who have worked in the subject area with links to biographies (e.g., 5.1.5.Scientists in Action component, Beckwourth, James [1798–1867]) ,sometimes including video, still photographs, and links to other databases. In addition, some Extension features highlight cultural contributions related to chapter topics. For example, students are asked to research and prepare written or oral reports about Native American tribes who lived in the Great Basin (5.1.5.3, LP3, p. 18, Extensions, item 1). The cultural contributions within these components are interesting and informative but may not be seen by students as central to the material because they are often presented separate from the main lesson plans and student investigations.

The material suggests multiple formats for students to express their ideas during instruction, including individual investigations (e.g., 7.4.32.3, LP3, pp. 7, 8, Procedure, item 8), journal or log writing (e.g., 7.4.32.3, LP3, p. 6, Procedure, item 2), cooperative group activities (e.g., 7.4.33.2, LP2, p. 4, Procedure, item 5), laboratory investigations (e.g., 8.4.25.1, SI25–1–B, pp. 3–5), whole class discussions (e.g., 5.1.5.2, LP2, pp. 12, 13, Procedure, item 5), essay questions (e.g., 5.1.5.2, SI5–2, p. 8, Questions, item 6), and visual projects (e.g., 5.1.5.1, SI5–1, pp. 1–3). In addition, multiple formats are suggested for assessment, including oral discussion (e.g., 5.1.5.2, LP5.2, pp. 11, 12, Procedure, items 1, 2), essay (e.g., 6.1.3.Assessments component, Assessment [3–1]: Cluster 3 Assessment, item 1), and performance (e.g., 6.1.4.Assessments component, Assessment [4–1]: Cluster 4 Assessment). However, the material does not usually provide a variety of alternatives for the same task, but often includes additional optional activities (e.g., 7.4.32.3, LP3, p. 8, Procedure, item 9, Option).

The material does not routinely include specific suggestions about how teachers can modify activities for students with special needs. However, the material suggests that Extension activities may be used in place of parts of the lesson if deemed by the teacher to be “more appropriate for the class’ ability, background or interests” (8.PD, p. 7.1) and are later designated as suitable for gifted and advanced students (8.PD, p. 7.3). In addition, the material suggests that teachers provide opportunities for students to explore the database individually (8.PD, p. 18.4). For Spanish speakers, background descriptions of lessons, story lines, key concepts, many database entries, many student investigations, and other materials are written in Spanish and English (8.PD, p. 7.3). For hearing impaired students, the audiotrack of the videoclips has close-captioning. For visually impaired students, some text is written in large type. Teacher tips provide additional suggestions for supporting limited English proficiency and bilingual students (e.g., 8.PD, pp. 19.5–19.6, Computer Instruction with Language Minority Students).

The material provides many strategies to validate students’ relevant personal and social experiences with scientific ideas. Many tasks ask students about particular personal experiences they may have had or suggest specific experiences to have. For example, students are asked to study the formation of sediments in local water sources such as lakes, streams, or oceans, and then provide evidence of the sediment formation and further identify the sediments or determine the rate of formation (5.1.5.2, LP5.2, p. 13, Extensions, item 1). However, the material rarely encourages students to contribute relevant experiences of their own choice to the science classroom and sometimes does not adequately link the specified personal experiences to the scientific ideas being studied (e.g., 6.1.3.1, LP1, p. 6, Procedure, item 3).