standards | Lori Andersen

In classrooms across the country, something revolutionary is happening. Students are no longer just reading about science—they’re doing science. At the heart of this transformation is Vernier Connections powered by Penda, an exciting collaboration between Penda Learning, a leader in standards-based science instruction, and Vernier Science Education, known for its high-quality data collection technology.

This partnership is more than just a tool mash-up—it’s a visionary model for 3D learning in action, helping schools bring the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) to life through authentic, data-rich inquiry experiences. Here’s why.

1. Phenomena-Driven, Sensor-Powered Learning

At the core of every Vernier Connections lesson is an anchoring phenomenon—a real-world event that’s puzzling, observable, and immediately relevant to students. Think: “Why do different surfaces heat up at different rates in the sun?” or “What causes a sudden drop in oxygen levels in a pond?” These are not trivia questions. They’re investigative invitations that drive students to ask, explore, and explain using science practices.

Students investigate these phenomena using Vernier sensors—like temperature probes, CO₂ sensors, and motion detectors—to collect real-time, high-quality data. Suddenly, the classroom becomes a lab. Students become scientists. And learning becomes discovery.

2. Seamless Integration of NGSS 3D Learning

Every lesson is built from the ground up to integrate the three dimensions of the NGSS:

Science and Engineering Practices: Students plan investigations, analyze sensor data, revise models, and construct explanations based on evidence.
Disciplinary Core Ideas: The content isn’t taught in isolation—it’s learned as students make sense of the phenomenon.
Crosscutting Concepts: Patterns, systems, cause and effect—all are embedded as tools for thinking, not just vocabulary to memorize.

Vernier Connections lessons don’t just align with NGSS—they embody the instructional shifts that NGSS demands.

3. Engaging, Structured, and Student-Centered

Each lesson scaffolds the student experience from curiosity to explanation. It’s not a lecture or a worksheet. It’s a guided inquiry experience.

Students:

Observe the phenomenon
Predict and question
Design and conduct experiments with Vernier tools
Analyze and model their understanding
Apply knowledge to new contexts

And all of it happens in a platform that supports differentiation, standards-based feedback, and visual tracking of student progress.

4. From Curiosity to Mastery—with Data That Matters

What’s especially innovative is how students use sensor data not just to complete a lab, but to build scientific explanations. They’re asked to defend their thinking, revise their initial ideas, and apply their understanding to new phenomena.

It’s not about getting the “right” answer—it’s about developing a coherent understanding of the world, the way scientists do.

5. Teacher Empowerment with Flexible, Ready-to-Use Resources

Each lesson is teacher-friendly, with built-in assessment questions and clear alignment to NGSS performance expectations. Teachers don’t have to start from scratch or rework clunky lab instructions. The Vernier Connections format offers clarity without rigidity—a balance of structure and flexibility that honors teacher expertise.

Why It Matters

Vernier Connections is a model for how to teach science as it was meant to be taught: grounded in wonder, fueled by evidence, and connected to the real world. In a time when we urgently need critical thinkers and problem-solvers, this approach helps students develop not just content knowledge, but the mindset and methods of science.

If we want students to act like scientists, we need to give them tools, questions, and experiences that matter. That’s exactly what Vernier Connections does—and that’s what makes it a game changer.

I’ve spent a bit of time thinking about Grade 5 science curriculum. How do we make sure that we are creating opportunities for students to learn what they need to progress to higher grades? The K-12 Framework has learning progressions that we need to carefully consider in curriculum design. We need to use them effectively.

We have three NGSS dimensions with many components: 11 disciplinary core ideas, seven crosscutting concepts, and eight science and engineering practices. The performance expectations tell us what will be assessed by suggesting how the components can be combined, but they are not curriculum. However, most curriculum development approaches begin by grouping PEs into logical clusters, such as described in the front matter for NYU SAIL’s Garbage unit. Therefore, the combinations of dimensions in the PEs often affect what is emphasized in curriculum and instruction.

Let’s look at Grade 5. I analyzed the content of the PEs, which revealed:

Of 16 crosscutting concept elements, 56% were not addressed.
Of 7 crosscutting concepts, 2 crosscutting concepts were not addressed at all (structure & function, stability & change)
Of 40 science and engineering practice elements, 73% were not addressed.

Curriculum developers need strategies for addressing elements that are not in performance expectations in a way that is coherent within and across grades. In curricula that focus on students’ modeling of phenomena, the science and engineering practices are naturally integrated. For example, see this figure from Passmore et al. (2017). When students are actively developing and using models, the other SEPs inform and are informed by Developing and Using Models.

But what about the crosscutting concepts? There has not been a strategic way to integrate the crosscutting concepts. In my last blog post, I introduced a graphic organizer adapted from Rehmat et al. (2017) and used it to apply all the crosscutting concepts to a phenomenon. This could be a way to systematically address the CCCs, just as model-driven curricula are a way to address the SEPs.

Lori Andersen (2020). Adapted from model in Rehmat et al. (2019)

The CCCs are the epistemic heuristics, or “thinking tools” of science (Krist et al., 2018). They help students figure out the mechanistic explanations that are needed when modeling phenomena. If we apply all the CCCs to the phenomenon in curriculum planning, we might ensure that students have opportunities to learn about all the CCC elements in the grade band.

More to come as I explore this idea in my work. Do you have any comments about this approach? Please share here or on Twitter.

References

Krist, C., Schwarz, C. V., & Reiser, B. J. (2019). Identifying essential epistemic heuristics for guiding mechanistic reasoning in science learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(2), 160–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1510404

NYU SAIL. (2019). Garbage Unit Front Matter.

Passmore, C, Schwarz, C.V. & Mankowski, J. (2017). Developing and using models. In C. V. Schwarz, C. Passmore, and B. J. Reiser (Eds.), Helping students make sense of the world using next generation science and engineering practices, pp. 33–58. NSTA Press.

Rehmat, A.P., Lee, O. Nordine, J., Novak, A.M., Osborne, J., & Willard, T. (2019). Modeling the role of crosscutting concepts for strengthening science learning of all students. In S. J. Fick, J. Nordine, & K. W. McElhaney (Eds.), Proceedings of the summit for examining the potential for crosscutting concepts to support three-dimensional learning. University of VA. http://ccurry.virginia.edu/CCC-Summit

Lori Andersen

Science Education Research

Category Archives: standards

Revolutionizing Science Education with Vernier Connections powered by Penda