The Gradebook blog notes that a bill filed in the House for the 2010 session focuses on math and science requirements for graduation. The part concerning science in HB61 states:
Beginning with students entering grade 9 in the 2011-2012 school year, one of the three credits must be Biology I or a series of courses equivalent to Biology I as approved by the State Board of Education, one credit must be a physical science or a series of courses equivalent to a physical science as approved by the State Board of Education, and one credit must be a higher-level science course. At least two of the science courses must have a laboratory component. Beginning with students entering grade 9 in the 2013-2014 school year, one of the three credits must be Biology I or a series of courses equivalent to Biology I as approved by the State Board of Education, one credit must be chemistry or physics or a series of courses equivalent to chemistry or physics as approved by the State Board of Education, and one credit must be a higher-level science course. At least two of the science courses must have a laboratory component.
We’ll have to keep an eye out for that next year. Thanks, Brandon!
Hi Brandon,
This is something that Todd Clark and I have argued for since ’07. The fact that a student can currently graduate with all of their required science classes in one concentration – like biology – does not promote a well-rounded science education. My only reservation concerns the lack of support for requiring earth/space or environmental as the third required course. A student can always take physics or AP courses as an elective.
Now if only the legislature would pony up the dough for the professional development that the teachers will need in order to ensure that the “equivalent courses” are truly equivalent to high-quality biology, chemistry, or physics instruction. I have a sense that we may be seeing something like forensics as an equivalent course that can be taught by any one with a general certification who has seen a few episodes of CSI.
While Rep. Fresen’s HB 61 is an improvement over the corresponding bill that he filed last year, it falls short of the recommendations of a large group of science faculty from Florida’s colleges and universities as given in a white paper, which can be seen at
http://groups.google.com/group/florida-science?hl=en
The white paper was also featured on the FCS blog:
https://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1057
HB 61 does not require a course in Earth/space science, and does not require that four science courses be required for a Bright Futures award, both of which were recommended in the white paper.
It’s worth noting that our neighboring states, Alabama and Georgia, both require four science credits for high school graduation.
And to elaborate on Lance’s comment that something like “forensics” might be counted as one of the “higher level science courses” specified in Rep. Fresen’s bill: Last year’s bill was amended to specify “Agriscience Foundations I” as a higher level science course. The white paper includes a very specific list of courses that should be allowed to count for graduation, and it doesn’t include either forensics or Agriscience Foundations.
Rep. Fresen and his colleagues who support HB 61 would do well to consider the recommendations in the white paper PDC is referring to. Although it stops short of calling for four mandatory science classes for all students, it does advocate for programs of study that require all students to successfully complete 1 life science, 1 physical science, and 1 earth and space, with a mandatory 4th science for any student pursuing a bright futures scholarship. The course list that PDC is referring to maps out logical HS science progressions for students at all levels of interest and academic achievement.