Summary
High-quality instructional materials in science go beyond NGSS alignment, integrating three-dimensional learning, phenomena-based instruction, and student sensemaking into a coherent learning experience.
Key takeaways
- Districts should look past what a program says about itself, because only evaluation can determine whether materials support deeper learning.
- What matters most is what students are asked to do: investigate and explain rather than receive information.
- Teacher supports, access for every student, and practical usability often decide whether a program works as intended.
Almost every K–12 science curriculum on the market today claims to meet the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), but does that automatically mean these programs are high-quality instructional materials (HQIM)? The short answer is no. NGSS alignment is a starting point, not a guarantee of quality.
The National Research Council framework behind the NGSS is clear that if both the spirit and the letter of the NGSS are addressed in the instructional materials, students are guided to deeper, more critical thinking. But it has fallen to districts to determine if resources go beyond simply “covering standards” to also support deeper learning, equity, and measurable student outcomes.
Research shows that sustained use of HQIM can lead to meaningful gains in student achievement over time—compounding year after year when implemented effectively. However, in science, “high quality” carries unique meaning. It is not just about alignment—it is about how students engage in learning itself.
Here’s what defines HQIM in science, how it connects to NGSS and three-dimensional learning, and what district leaders should look for when evaluating programs.
What are HQIM and how do they look different in science?
While definitions vary slightly across states, HQIM generally:
- Align to academic standards with clear learning outcomes
- Reflect evidence-based instructional practices
- Provide rich, coherent content
- Support all learners through inclusive and accessible design
- Include a comprehensive set of teacher and student resources
One of the fundamental shifts with the adoption of the NGSS and similar state frameworks is the move toward three-dimensional learning. Instead of learning science primarily through memorizing facts, students actively make sense of phenomena and solve problems by applying scientific knowledge, investigating questions, and making connections across concepts. Three-dimensional learning brings together three interconnected dimensions:
Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs): What scientists do
The skills and practices students use to investigate questions, make sense of evidence, develop explanations, and design solutions.
Disciplinary Core Ideas (DCIs): What students know
The foundational science concepts students develop and apply across grade levels to explain phenomena and solve problems.
Crosscutting Concepts (CCCs): How ideas connect across science
The ways of thinking, such as patterns, cause and effect, and systems, that help students make connections across different areas of science.
High-quality science materials must reflect this integration as a cohesive learning experience.
Phenomena-based learning
Perhaps the most visible shift in HQIM science is the move toward phenomena-based learning. In this approach, students explore observable events or processes in the natural world and use science ideas and practices to investigate questions, gather evidence, and develop explanations for how or why the phenomenon occurs.
High-quality programs align with phenomena-based learning. In these programs, instruction moves away from a traditional lecture-based approach and is instead driven by guiding student sensemaking. Sensemaking is the work students do to figure out how and why something happens, rather than memorizing facts they’ve been told. Learning is organized around real-world, coherent phenomena storylines. Students are then able to ask questions, investigate, and build explanations, often following the Claim, Evidence, Reasoning (CER) framework—a structure to teach students how to think and write scientifically.
This approach transforms the classroom dynamic. Instead of “covering” topics at a very surface level, students actively work to figure out how and why things happen, deepening the learning and making memorable connections across ideas.
How to identify HQIM science programs
Selecting HQIM can feel complex, especially with varying state rubrics and evaluation frameworks. Below is a practical framework you can use when evaluating science curricula.
Category |
What to look for |
Alignment and coherence: Alignment goes beyond a standards checklist. Look for materials where the three dimensions build coherently across lessons, units, and grade levels. |
|
Phenomena-driven learning design: Look for materials where phenomena are not just an “engagement hook,” but the purposeful focus of learning. |
|
Authentic three-dimensional learning: A critical distinction of HQIM science is whether students are actively doing the work of science and sensemaking as opposed to primarily receiving information through teacher-led instruction. |
|
Equity and access: Connecting learning to student identities, experiences, and communities should be evident in an HQIM science program, and curriculum features should ensure that all students can participate in rigorous, grade-level appropriate science learning. |
|
Instructional supports for teachers: The shift to the NGSS, three-dimensional learning, and phenomena-based instruction requires solid teacher supports. |
|
Coherent, three-dimensional assessment: In HQIM science, assessment should reflect how students learn and not just what they recall. Assessments should provide teachers with the information they need to adjust instruction and respond to student and class needs. |
|
Usability and implementation readiness: Practical factors matter. Usability often determines whether strong materials are implemented with fidelity. |
|
Common pitfalls to watch for
Even well-intentioned programs may not fully align with HQIM expectations. Consider the following common pitfalls when evaluating the quality of science instructional materials:
- Phenomena used only as engagement tools, not as drivers of instruction
- One- or two-dimensional learning, without full integration of SEPs, DCIs, and CCCs, or the dimensions are taught as separate concepts
- Disconnected lessons or “activity-based” units lacking coherence or connection from one topic or idea to the next
- Limited opportunities for student sensemaking and inquiry
- A lack of requirements to express student reasoning as they explore and learn
- Assessments focused on recall, rather than performance and application of learning to new situations
Make the HQIM shift
As expectations for science instruction evolve, district leaders are increasingly prioritizing programs that both meet the NGSS and include the qualities of HQIM, but HQIM in science is more than a checklist. It’s a vision for providing science instructional experiences that match how students learn best.
It’s teacher-supportive curricula that develop scientific habits of mind in the next generation of scientists and engineers.
***
Learn more about HMH Science Dimensions and HMH Into Science—high-quality instructional materials for your science classroom.
Be the first to read the latest from Shaped.
