As incoming freshmen sat down for their first high school science classes last year, some were surprised to find that the biology curriculum did not begin with a lesson on cell structure. Instead, the teacher introduced them to a story about the Serengeti grasslands in Africa, and how the region was in a state of ecological crisis when the wildebeest, a keystone species, was threatened with extinction.

The wildebeests’ decline in the 1950s led to overgrowth of the grasslands, which in turn led to rampant wildfires that scorched the savannah and produced greenhouse gases.  Disease management and anti-poaching efforts helped restore the wildebeest population in the 1970s, and the animals fed on the grasslands during their migration, reducing wildfires and restoring a healthy ecosystem to the Serengeti.

The story captivated most of the students for the first couple of classes, but interest flagged as the teacher returned to the wildebeest week after week in an effort to apply the lessons of the Serengeti to other science concepts. Many students in the class wanted to learn something new.  It was clear that the frustration was not the fault of the teacher, who was following a program handed down from on high. It was a new approach to learning adopted by the Pelham Union Free School District, known as OpenSciEd.

OpenSciEd is a private organization that creates science materials aligned with the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), an educational approach formed by a coalition of states to update the standards for K-12 science education for the 21st century. The new standards emphasize “crosscutting concepts” which “help students explore connections across the four domains of science, including Physical Science, Life Science, Earth and Space Science, and Engineering Design,” according to the NGGS website.

The state of New York adopted the curriculum in 2016, and Pelham has since gradually introduced the new standards. The recent implementation has been coupled with the development of new state exams. The state rolled out the first NGSS fifth and eighth grade intermediate science exams in spring of 2024, with the new Earth and Space Science and Biology Regents following in June of 2025. The NGSS Chemistry and Physics exams are to be introduced in June of this year.

The new exams have sparked some controversy. Students in the Jericho School District in Long Island complained last year that the tests focused more on reading comprehension than the topics that they had spent the year studying. Several districts, including Pelham, do not even list the exam scores on students’ transcripts. The Pelham school district has replaced the new Regents exams in physics and chemistry with a “project-based” final exam.

Despite the shift, the district continues to follow the NGSS learning standards. This is where OpenSciEd comes in. OpenSciEd is a non-profit that produces curriculum materials consistent with NGSS’ values, focusing on “student-led investigation” and “stimulus-based” units.

Each OpenSciEd unit follows its own “storyline,” a phenomenon that the students are supposed to explore as a means of investigating a scientific question, while learning key concepts throughout the process. One such story is that of the wildebeest and the Serengeti. The idea is that students ask questions about the phenomenon and then, in the process of trying to answer them, learn concepts such as ecological balance and interspecific competition.

In interviews or conversations, some 10 sophomores raised doubts as to whether this style of  learning made sense for the classroom. Some were more outspoken than others.

“The OpenSciEd curriculum is negatively impacting everyone in the class of 2028 and younger, specifically students with an interest in STEM,” said sophomore Katie Howard. Howard said she has been interested in pursuing a career in science since childhood, but feels that the new style of learning has hurt the quality of science classes at the high school. She said she worries that the new teaching approach will discourage students from thinking about careers in science.

There is also a fear that the change will impact students’ abilities to perform in higher-level science classes.

“I think that it is important for future generations to be able to come up with solutions for future problems that drive their curiosity,” said sophomore Sananda Nagesar in an email.  “But OpenSciEd is not doing that effectively, and this teaching method actually stresses me out…In the AP science courses they go more in-depth on many topics that we were supposed to learn in the beginning of high school, but because of the new curriculum, we have not.”

The Pelham Examiner asked several science teachers for interviews about the OpenSciEd curriculum. They all declined. According to Pelham schools’ communications director Alex Wolff, the district’s policy is that teachers should refer media inquiries to a supervisor or to him in order to determine who would be best suited to respond.

Dr. Claire Comerford, assistant superintendent of teaching and learning for the district, defended the new approach. “The old curricula went almost 30 years without revision and we believe it was time for an update,” she wrote in an email. “With the advent of the internet and now AI, it makes sense to deemphasize memorization and put a much stronger emphasis on critical thinking and problem solving. Pelham has long been a leader in this area and the new standards are much more in sync with the experiential learning that we have been trying to provide for our students over the past several years.”

Comerford said the changes give students a more well-rounded view of the sciences, and show that subjects such as biology, chemistry and physics do not exist in isolation. Comerford said the new curriculum brings real-life phenomena into the classroom, and demonstrates to students the importance of questioning and curiosity in the field of science.

She also emphasized that the standards themselves are backed by evidence, stating, “In essence, many of these changes are modeled after the very successful approach that science research programs have taken across the country…The research is clear that this direction will benefit students in their learning of science.”

Despite these assurances, some of the sophomores who began taking this new curriculum last year are struggling. Several said they’re not finding the same “spark” in science classes that they have in the past.  Others said that science class has gone from being their favorite period of the day to one that they dread.