Living By Chemistry On-Level Chemistry Program
Core Code Alignment
Science
Chemistry
08030000010: Chemistry (9-12)
Chemistry
08030000010: Chemistry (9-12)
Recommendation
Reviewed, Not Recommended
Evaluation
It is a chemistry textbook with poor assessments. It does well to show chemistry content.... and that is about all. It does not do nearly enough to help students or teachers with the science and engineering practices (SEPs) nor does it properly embed the crosscutting concepts (CCCs) throughout. It's not designed specifically to align with our state's DCI's, standards, or curriculum. It does not assess in the format of RISE, ASPIRE, or ACT. It's a really nice-looking, easy-to-read, presentation of chemistry content including observations and explanations of real-world content. It's just another example of a pre-2013-style of textbook and assessment. I don't think it can be used as a teacher resource as a person who passed their PRAXIS in chemistry in Utah should know this content and then some. It has good examples of phenomena and how to relate lessons to phenomena, but that alone shouldn't justify purchase. Also, as chemistry teachers are generally taught chemistry knowledge in college, they're not necessarily taught good nature of science and scientific method/process. This text does not do well to help those teachers with teaching scientific method to students. As a student resource, it can only help with content knowledge, not any test preparation or development of the science and engineering processes. Although it provides chemistry content, it's not very core aligned as the SEPs and CCCs make up 2/3 of the core... and the MOST important part of the core... as content is no longer the primary focus of state and national assessments like RISE, ASPIRE, and ACT.
Educators Using These Materials
No educators found.
Rubric : Science 2025
Compliance with State Law (Required)
| Item | 3 - Extensive | 2 - Adequate | 1 - Inadequate | 0 - None | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitive Materials and Prohibited Submission 53G-10-103, R277-628 | This item has not been graded. | |||||
| Prohibited discriminatory practices 53G-2-103-5, 53B-1-118 and 67-27-107 | This item has not been graded. | |||||
| Maintaining constitutional freedom in the public schools. 53G-10-202 | This item has not been graded. | |||||
| Free from advertising, e-commerce, or political interest | This item has not been graded. | |||||
Standards
| Item | 3 - Extensive | 2 - Adequate | 1 - Inadequate | 0 - None | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Presence of Three Dimensions of Science: Builds understanding of the science and engineering practices (SEPs), disciplinary core ideas (DCIs), and crosscutting concepts (CCCs). i. Provides opportunities to develop and use specific elements of the SEP(s) ii. Provides opportunities to develop and use specific elements of the DCI(s) iii. Provides opportunities to develop and use specific elements of the CCC(s) | 3 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 2 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 1 of the Criteria Indicators are met | None of the Criteria Indicators are met | ||
| This resource does provide opportunities to develop and use specific elements of the DCI(s). The resource comprehensively assesses many components of a standard chemistry curriculum. It's content area focus could even be used for an upper-level/honors course. However it lacks in its ability to assess CCC(s) and SEP(s). The SEP is the most critical element for assessment in Utah, with the RISE and ASPIRE exams being interactive modules of 6-7 questions each, including paragraphs of text, diagrams, graphs, and other data. The SEP is the foundational task underlying all questions included in the assessment module. This textbook has strongly followed some of the SEP(s), such as analyzing and interpreting data, developing and/or using models, and obtaining/communicating information. It is quite weak in other SEP(s), such as planning and/or carrying out an investigation, constructing arguments, and evaluating design solutions (some of which may be seen in online simulators, like PHET). CCC(s) in this resource are not living up to their name as "cross-cutting," meaning the specific Utah CCC should be the driving force and theme behind an entire unit. With that said, it is a poor resource for any teacher seeking to hone and develop skills within students to make them successful on Utah state assessments. Also, I don't know who created the alignment document, but just taking CHEM 1.1 as an example... Unit 1 Chapter 3 Lesson 11 most closely follows the essence of the CHEM 1.1 standard and it's not even listed as a chapter being in alignment. This means the person putting together the alignment document for the bid doesn't even know the background of the standard, including our state Core Guides, OER guides, and curriculum. | ||||||
| Integration of Three Dimensions of Science: Materials integrate elements of the SEPs, CCCs, and DCIs for student sense‐making: Three dimensions of science (SEPs, CCCs, and DCIs) are integrated (consistently utilized in conjunction with each other) to help students make sense of phenomenon and solve problems. | Three dimensions of science (SEPs, CCCs, and DCIs) are consistently integrated. | Three dimensions of science are integrated in certain portions of the instructional material. | Three dimensions of science are rarely integrated in the instructional material. | Three dimensions of science (SEPs, CCCs, and DCIs) are separated and not integrated for student sense making. | ||
| When I develop my lessons in accordance to Utah state standards and curriculum, including the SEP(s), CCC(s), and DCI(s), I follow a format: A cross-cutting concept (CCC) is the underlying theme behind a unit that is applied to problems more than once and drives the unit. The science and engineering practice is the task by which a student is to be assessed at the end of a unit. The SEP(s) are directly related to the processes and skills involved with the scientific method and the engineering design process. The content area is upon which the student is applying the CCC by using the SEP. Textbook and assessment makers outside the state are struggling to understand that modern science classrooms are no longer just learning and regurgitating content, but must actually also teach and assess scientific process. This resource is very poor in assessing students in such a way that mirrors our RISE, ASPIRE, and ACT testing - in the SEP-CCC-DCI format in conjunction with our state SEEd standards that are linked to the ACT College and Career Readiness Standards and NGSS. It's description: "Living By Chemistry, Third Edition, is an on-level chemistry program whose inquiry-based, activity-a-day approach, grounded in NGSS standards, allows students to develop scientific-thinking skills and apply them to chemistry in the real world" - where is that in the assessments? Remember, it is the STUDENTS who are supposed to be asking the questions, designing the solutions, and planing the investigations. The textbook helps the teacher plan investigations and ask the students questions, but it should be the other way around. | ||||||
| Alignment to Standards: The DCI Concepts (science content) in the instructional materials align to the Utah Science with Engineering Education (SEEd) Standards | DCI concepts (science content) in the instructional material align to 100% the SEEd Standards for the Grade/Course. | DCI concepts (science content) in the instructional material align to 75% the SEEd Standards for the Grade/Course. | DCI concepts (science content) in the instructional material align to 50% the SEEd Standards for the Grade/Course. | DCI concepts (science content) in the instructional material align to less than 50% the SEEd Standards for the Grade/Course. | ||
| The DCI concepts mostly align to the Utah SEEd standards. In many areas, the alignment is strong, but in some areas, it is loosely associated. For example, CHEM 2.1 is well represented, with assessments across multiple chapters focusing on the strengths of attractions between substances, types of attractions, and the probability of certain attractions occurring. However, our DCI's can be very specific, such as that of CHEM 2.4's use of synthetic chemistry to solve a problem, which could have been much better assessed in this resource's chapter 17 or chapter 24. | ||||||
| Scientific Accuracy: Uses scientifically accurate and grade‐appropriate scientific information, phenomena, and representations to support students’ three‐dimensional learning. | Instructional materials are scientifically accurate and grade appropriate. | N/A | N/A | Instructional materials are NOT scientifically accurate and grade appropriate. | ||
| I have not seen anything inaccurate or inappropriate. | ||||||
Pedagogy
| Item | 3 - Extensive | 2 - Adequate | 1 - Inadequate | 0 - None | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus on Phenomena (Science) or Problems (Engineering): Making sense of phenomena and/or designing solutions to a problem drive student learning. i. Student questions and prior experiences related to the phenomenon or problem motivate sense‐making and/or problem solving ii. The focus of the lesson is to support students in making sense of phenomena and/or designing solutions to problems iii. When engineering is a learning focus, it is integrated with developing disciplinary core ideas from physical, life, and/or earth and space sciences | 3 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 2 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 1 of the Criteria Indicators are met | None of the Criteria Indicators are met | ||
| When it comes to pedagogy, both the textbook and the assessment support students in making sense of phenomena. The textbook is great at delivering content-area knowledge in an interactive way. The textbook also ensures a comprehensive understanding of phenomena, whose content is assessed by the assessment program. But again, the lack of student sense-making and problem-solving. The engineering design process is almost absent from the resources and nearly fully absent from the assessment. | ||||||
| Scaffolding: Identifies and builds on students’ prior learning in all three dimensions i. Provides supports to help students engage in the practices and gradually adjusts supports over time so that students are increasingly responsible for making sense of phenomena and/or designing solutions to problems (Required) ii. Explicitly identifies prior student learning expected for all three dimensions iii. Clearly explains how the prior learning will be built upon | 3 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 2 of the Criteria Indicators are met (i MUST BE MET) | Only Criteria Indicator i has been met | None of the Criteria Indicators are met | ||
| The resource scaffolds the content area. It is written in such a manner that would allow a student reader to build foundational content knowledge and then expand upon it to ensure maximum understanding. For example, in Unit 5, students are to "observe" energy. The unit starts out by introducing phenomena involving energy in our world. Then students progress into "measuring" this energy and use the knowledge to "understand" energy - bond breaking, formation, enthalpy, systems, surroundings, etc. Which is good. BUT again, this is scaffolding content area knowledge. In this state, our state assessment and standards are written in such a manner that puts the nature of science and the scientific process as the central focus of assessment, not content knowledge. The science section of the ACT and the ASPIRE exams are not content knowledge tests. Where's the scaffolding for the scientific process and nature of science? Where do students observe phenomena, ask questions, design a solution, evaluate design solutions, identify constraints in the design process, run trials, determine how many trials to run, and optimize design solutions? Where do students plan experiments, choose independent and dependent variables, constants, and controls? Differentiate between studies, research, and experiments? Most importantly, where are students ASSESSED on these items? | ||||||
| Teacher Supports: Supports teachers in facilitating coherent student learning experiences over time i. Provides strategies for linking student engagement across lessons (e.g. cultivating new student questions at the end of a lesson in a way that leads to future lessons) ii. Providing strategies for ensuring student sense‐making and/or problem‐solving is linked to learning in all three dimensions (e.g. Claim Evidence Reasoning-CER Framework for communicating sense-making, teacher probing questions) iii. Provides additional resources for student learning (e.g. Models, simulations, and/or data sets for students investigation) | 3 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 2 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 1 of the Criteria Indicators are met | None of the Criteria Indicators are met | ||
| I thought the Teacher's Edition was well written, informative, and easy to use. It provided a lot of support, explanation, and resources, including ideas for labs and in-class exercises. It also provides key guiding questions that can help a teacher drive learning and conversations in the room. It could have done more to support the teacher in planning lessons that guide the students through experiment design and engineering design. | ||||||
| Assessments: Includes formative, summative, and guidance measures for interpreting student performances that assess three‐dimensional science learning. i. Embeds formative assessment processes throughout conceptual development that surfaces student understanding to inform instruction ii. Embeds summative assessment processes following conceptual development that evaluate student learning and measure understanding iii. Includes aligned rubrics or scoring guidelines that provide guidance for interpreting student performance | 3 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 2 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 1 of the Criteria Indicators are met | None of the Criteria Indicators are met | ||
| This is a no. The resource doesn't offer a variety of assessments, nor does it embed each step of the learning process with assessments that help understand student growth. The assessments do not align with the format and standards of the ASPIRE and ACT exams. It doesn't provide proper competency-based rubrics. | ||||||
Accessibility
| Item | 3 - Extensive | 2 - Adequate | 1 - Inadequate | 0 - None | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relevant and Authentic: Engages students in authentic and meaningful scenarios that reflect the practice of science and engineering as experienced in the real world. i. Students experience phenomena or design problems as directly as possible (first-hand or through media representations) ii. Includes suggestions for how to connect instruction to the students' home, neighborhood, community and/or culture as appropriate iii. Provides opportunities for students to connect their explanation of a phenomenon and/or their design solution to a problem to questions from their own experience | 3 of the 4 Criteria Indicators are met | 2 of the 4 Criteria Indicators are met | 1 of the 4 Criteria Indicators are met | None of the 4 Criteria Indicators are met | ||
| I see that the resource does engage the students through authentic and meaningful scenarios, even more so than other texts of its type. I can see that this text goes out of its way and puts in extra effort to make the science as practical and real-world as possible, with a heavy focus on observing and explaining real world phenomena. However, it is lacking on the engagement of science and engineering practices. 3 of 4 criteria. | ||||||
| Teacher Supports for Diverse Learners: Provides guidance for teachers to support differentiated instruction i. Includes appropriate reading, writing, listening, and/or speaking alternatives (e.g., translations, picture support, graphic organizers, etc.) for students who are English language learners, have special needs, or read well below grade level ii. Provides extra support (e.g., phenomena, representations, tasks) for students who are struggling to meet the targeted expectations iii. Provides extensions for students with high interest or who have already met the performance expectations to develop a deeper understanding of the practices, disciplinary core ideas, and crosscutting concepts | 3 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 2 of the Criteria Indicators are met | 1 of the Criteria Indicators are met | None of the Criteria Indicators are met | ||
| The textbook, but not really the assessment tool, provides pictures, picture support, highlighting, embedded vocabulary links, diagrams, and a moderate level of guidance to support a diversity of learners. The language is not too elevated to allow for understanding of the content. It also provides extensions for students with high interest. | ||||||
| Accessible for all students: Engages students using methods, vocabulary, representations, and examples that are accessible and unbiased for all learners (e.g., Deaf and Blind, English Learners, Gifted and Talented, Special Education). | Instructional Materials are accessible for all students | N/A | N/A | Instructional Materials are NOT accessible for all students | ||
| I am unsure what it could do for deaf and blind, etc. | ||||||
| Physical Characteristics | This item has not been graded. | |||||
| Technical Standards | This item has not been graded. | |||||
| Ethnic Studies- (Ethnic studies in core standards and curriculum should be a narrowly tailored incorporation of age-appropriate opportunities that naturally arise through education without pretextual effort in courses, programs, or activities where ethnic studies is not a primary focus. The material should incorporate a curriculum of people and cultures that reflect the state’s various demographics without commentary that seeks to violate the neutrality standard established in codes: 53B-1-118, 53G-2-103, 53G-2-104, 53G-2-105, 67-27-107, | This item has not been graded. | |||||
| Shared Values and Character Traits | This item has not been graded. | |||||
UTAH STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
250 East 500 South
Salt Lake City, UT 84111-3204
Phone: 801.538.7807