America’s science education crisis is well-documented: The new results from the Nation’s Report Card show that only 29% of eighth graders are proficient in science, down from 33% in 2019. Perhaps even more concerning is that only 42% of students say they enjoy science, down 10 percentage points in five years. Meanwhile, the number of jobs in science, technology, engineering and math is projected to grow more than 10% by 2033 — double the rise in other occupations — with median pay exceeding $100,000. The gap between what students learn and what they need for economic opportunity and informed citizenship continues to widen.

The irony is that the education field knows what works. Forty-nine states have adopted science standards emphasizing the exploration of natural phenomena that develop critical thinking, evidence-based decisionmaking and problem-solving skills. But too many middle and high school science courses still prioritize memorization over inquiry-based learning. Schools are teaching science as if it exists in a vacuum, disconnected from the mathematical, technological and ethical questions that give it meaning.

The literacy field offers a different approach. The science of reading movement transformed instruction by identifying research-based teaching practices and high-quality resources in specific states that became proof points for wider change.

The nation needs an equivalent “science of science education” strategy.

Just as science of reading research revealed the importance of phonics, fluency and comprehension working together, research in science education shows that students learn best when they engage in designing investigations, analyzing data, constructing explanations and solving problems that are relevant to their lives.. The key is districtwide implementation of high-quality instructional materials and curriculum-based professional learning that integrate these practices with rigorous science content.

The supply of high-quality instructional materials for science remains limited, with EdReports validating only a handful of middle school programs and even fewer high school options. The lack of materials that meet expectations, coupled with the scarcity of funding available to districts to purchase science teaching materials, has contributed to the popularity of adopting high-quality open educational resources like OpenSciEdwhich are freely available. One of the benefits of choosing such materials is that it allows districts to devote more time and funding to help teachers use the materials effectively through curriculum-based professional learning.

I spent the last eight years listening to teachers around the country talk about their use of high-quality curricula like OpenSciEd after receiving curriculum-based professional learning — in other words, experiencing the materials as “students” before using them in their classrooms. These educators report fundamental shifts in their teaching philosophy and practice. They move from delivering content to guiding students in making sense of the curriculum materials, from providing answers to supporting productive struggle, from preparing lessons on their own to solving problems collaboratively with colleagues.

These teachers also report that their students demonstrate striking behavioral changes: They stop seeking quick answers on their cellphones and instead engage in substantive discussions with peers and teachers. They bring real-world connections to science concepts, continuing conversations beyond school hours and seeing the relevance of scientific phenomena in their own lives. Most importantly, all students — not just high achievers — contribute meaningfully when investigating questions and designing solutions with their classmates.

Many districts discovered that traditional professional development approaches fail when they try to implement phenomenon-based science curricula. Generic workshops about teaching strategies cannot prepare educators to teach using well-designed inquiry-based science materials.Instead, professional learning needs to actively engage educators using the same instructional materials and ways of teaching that their students will encounter.

This approach can create resistance at first — experienced teachers often hesitate to engage in curricula as students. However, districts that persist find this discomfort reveals exactly why the approach is necessary. Teachers who experience productive struggle develop empathy for students’ challenges and learn to give them time to work through challenges and help them persist.

This approach also addresses content knowledge gaps that traditional professional development misses. Hands-on investigations deepen teachers’ science knowledge in ways that lectures do not. This engagement with content gives teachers more confidence using the curriculum materials with their students.

Overall, districts find that transformation in science education occurs when professional learning engages teachers as learners first, addresses specific implementation challenges and provides ongoing support for shifting teaching practices rather than one-time training sessions.

What actions should district and school leaders take to make an immediate impact on science education? District leaders need to adopt high-quality instructional materials and invest in sustained, curriculum-based professional learning from certified providers, rather than generic workshops. They must also help principals understand why it’s important to give teachers permission to try new teaching approaches, prioritizing learning how to effectively use new curriculum materials over immediate test results.

School leaders should provide teachers with high-quality instructional materials, adequate planning time and ongoing curriculum-based professional learning for phenomenon-based instruction. It’s also critical that they signal to the educators, students, families and other sin the community that science education is important by enabling students to address local problems and present evidence-based solutions in ways that demonstrate their scientific knowledge.

Science education isn’t a luxury — it’s fundamental to America’s economic prosperity and civic health. The question isn’t whether science education can be improved, but whether education leaders have the collective will to implement what works: high-quality instructional materials paired with curriculum-based professional learning that treats both teachers and students as active thinkers and learners.

Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter