Hi Sarah, thank you for your interest and questions! I worked with Mike Lim as a professional learning community facilitator during his Interactions implementation. While Mike always worked to lead engaging discussions, he reported that Interactions helped him transition to a "teacher as facilitator" where he would consistently push their understanding by asking more questions rather than giving them answers.  The other change he made to his teaching was implementing literacy into his science classroom. He used the articles embedded in the Interactions curriculum to promote deeper understanding of the three dimensions of NGSS, and used writing to give students varied opportunities to share funds of knowledge. Mike also gathered evidence of using this approach, and presented on his use of literacy to promote understanding of the 3 Dimensions at NSTA in Los Angeles this year. 

Hi Sarah!

Please see Mike's post below regarding changes to his classroom.

Hello Breanne, thank you for your comments and questions! Perhaps Dan can speak to the use of particular units. I have worked with over 20 teachers implementing Interactions across the country - and there seem to be varied perspectives on ease of use. As one teacher put it "How easy it is to adopt depends on how many curve balls we experience". For example, teachers with some NGSS knowledge who are comfortable with technology and are used to project, or inquiry based-instruction seem very comfortable implementing the curriculum. However, teachers who are learning NGSS, transitioning away from the traditional lecture style of teaching, and learning to use computers in the classroom seem need more support in implementation. 

In general I would say that teachers enjoy and appreciate the curriculum, the changes they see in their classroom - and their students. For many teachers, Interactions serves as a curriculum that supports learning NGSS by doing it - both for teachers and students - and a few teachers have stated they are better able to develop NGSS lessons for other classes because of their participation with Interactions. 

Regarding usage numbers, those can be a little deceiving. We updated the version of these investigations and assessments several months ago, so those numbers are related to just the most recent versions. In general, teachers have been adopting the curriculum as a whole and work through it from the beginning. It was designed as a coherent progression that continually builds on previous knowledge. The course was designed as a 9th grade physical science replacement, using atomic and molecular interactions as a framework for understanding much of what we observe around us, and providing a framework to support more in-depth discipline specific work that follows in later years. That being said we make connections to physics, chemistry, and biological phenomena, so some teachers are using particular Investigations in subject specific classes. 

I would say the ease of use and adoption of it was challenging for me because I had 7-8 years of traditional instruction conditioned in my mental muscles to unlearn. I had 7-8 years of telling my students explicitly when they were right and wrong which negated their own ability to develop their own understanding of the California Science Standards. 2 years ago, I taught Instructions for the first time and discovered that students can drive their own learning when it's spring boarded on phenomena sense-making NOT my end-all be-all socio-emotional approval of their responses. 

My students are accomplishing what they have never done before: using the 8 Science and Engineering Practices to figure out phenomena.

This is what plays out in Interactions:

1. A phenomenon in the classroom 

2. Teacher and students ask questions why or how

3. Students develop explanatory models with prior knowledge to answer question(s).

4. Class evaluates anonymous student models with teacher facilitating ideas (not validating!)

5. Class investigates limitations of explanatory models in a real-world lab/activity.

6. Students gather, analyze, interpret data from the lab individually, in groups, and as a class. (Possibly argue with evidence)

7. Students revise initial explanatory model. (Compare with articles written by experts)

8. Repeat steps #4-7 until gaps in initial model are mostly filled.

*At this point I assign a 1-page essay that requires them to respond with a claim, evidence, and reasoning to the essential question of our Unit--which they do with vigor.

Your last question can be answered with one word: vision. Once I saw the vision of NGSS through Interactions, I was a changed educator FOREVER. Teachers and students must experience the joy of discovery again. Interactions did that for me and it can for our country.

The "joy of discovery" was exactly what students and myself experienced in using the Interactions curriculum.  Interestingly students who have struggled with reproducing lists of science concepts in past science courses, had excellent insights and asked some of the best questions as we used the models, simulations and experiments to develop an understanding of the phenomena. Almost everyday during discussion, students brought up real-life experiences that could be explained by what we were doing in class.  Things like, "I was eating at a restaurant and I opened the crackers and the wrapper stuck to my hands" became something they wanted to investigate or explain.

Thankfully I began my teaching career in the 70's when Science education was all about discovery to aid in the space race, so this curriculum felt like a return to my roots.  My students always say, "you only answer our questions with another question or ask what's the evidence?"