New Findings from Quality Counts 2010: Fresh Course, Swift Current
Fresh Course, Swift Current—Momentum and Challenges in the New Surge Toward Common Standards provides a timely, in-depth investigation of the latest iteration of the national debate over common academic standards. An on-again, off-again fixture of the education-policy landscape since at least the 1980s, interest in developing common academic standards and assessments has again swept the nation during the past year. Through a unique combination of original journalism and research, the report reviews the origins of the standards movement and highlights the challenges that current initiatives pose for administrators, educators, and state and local officials.
Key Findings
Over the years, states have established firm foundations that may allow them to move toward common academic standards.
As of the 2008 edition of Quality Counts, all states had adopted academic-content standards in the core areas of English/language arts, mathematics, and science.
By the 2009-10 school year, about half the states had developed grade- or course-specific standards across all grade spans in English/language arts (27 states) and mathematics (26). Slightly fewer have such detailed standards in social studies/history and science (23 and 22 respectively).
States have also provided educators with supplementary resources or guides that elaborate on the official academic-standards documents. Forty-two states have such resources for all core-subject areas, while 39 states have tailored supplementary materials for particular student populations (e.g., English-language learners, special education).
More recently, states have engaged in a variety of efforts to better connect academic-content standards to day-to-day instruction in the classroom.
For the 2009-10 school year, 49 states made assessment frameworks in English/language arts available to educators, while 45 states released sample test items.
Thirty-eight states provided curriculum guides in English, with 31 states also offering sample lesson plans in that subject.
Findings were nearly identical for mathematics.
States already look beyond their own borders when developing and revising their academic standards, with many seeking guidance from the same sources.
In 45 states, academic standards for mathematics were influenced by some outside source, with 39 states reporting such influence in English/language arts.
National organizations such as the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics and the National Council of Teachers of English were the most common external sources of guidance, cited by 42 states for mathematics and 37 for English/language arts.
Roughly half the states examined the frameworks of other states when developing their own standards, with even fewer states engaging in some form of international comparison or benchmarking.
In all, 30 states were referenced at least once by their peers as an influence on their English or math standards. California, Indiana, and Massachusetts led the nation, with each mentioned at least 10 times.
Although 48 states and the District of Columbia have signed on to the Common Core State Standards Initiative, states anticipate a variety of both political and practical challenges associated with adopting the initiative’s recommendations for common standards.
According to an original EPE Research Center survey, 18 states raised concerns about the high level of stakeholder input and support required to move a common-standards agenda forward in their states.
Also frequently noted as potential challenges were: disruptions to ongoing state efforts (17 states); misalignment between state expectations and common standards (16); insufficient quality, content, or rigor of common standards (14); and complex testing and accountability implementation (14).
Very few states, by contrast, reported expecting difficulties related to the initiative’s aggressive timeline or possible conflicts with local control over schools.
COMMON STANDARDS
States Cite Hurdles in Path to Common Standards
Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have agreed to take part in the Common Core State Standards Initiative. This process, led by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association, seeks to develop a set of high-quality, common academic standards in math and English/language arts, which then would be adopted by participating states.
The Editorial Projects in Education Research Center asked states to describe the challenges they expected to face in adopting Common Core content standards and implementing the common assessments that many see as a necessary complement to the standards initiative. The word-cloud graphic below illustrates the words and phrases most commonly used by the states to describe those challenges. Expressions mentioned more often appear in larger text size.
High stakeholder input/support required (18 states)
Inadequate information to make plans (13)
High financial costs (11)
Common Core process too top-down (5)
Timeline overly aggressive (3)
Conflict with local control (2)
Disruption of ongoing state efforts (17 states)
Misalignment between state and common standards (16)
Insufficient quality, content, and rigor of common standards (14)
Complex testing and accountability implementation (14)
Need to coordinate with other states (7)
Timing considerations (4)
States bound by pre-existing testing contracts (3)
Navigating Politics and Process
States often cited concerns related to the process of developing the common academic standards themselves, as well as the larger political and fiscal landscape surrounding these efforts.
Pointing to Practical Concerns
States also cited a host of practical concerns about the quality and content of the standards or assessments, as well as the feasibility of implementing them in practice.
Common Standards
States Look to Their Peers
Many states look to their neighbors to inform the writing and rewriting of their own academic-content standards. In fact, 30 states were cited as influencing the way in which their peers defined expectations for student learning and performance in either English/language arts or mathematics.
The standards of California, Indiana, and Massachusetts were most frequently mentioned as models, with each cited at least 10 times by other states.
States Look Internationally
In an increasingly globalized economy, education policymakers now frequently note that U.S. students must be able to compete with students from around the world. To better ensure that their students are learning at the same levels as peers overseas, states are beginning to compare their own academic-content standards against international models.
Standards from eight nations were cited as references for state standards in English/language arts and/or mathematics. States mentioned Singapore’s mathematics standards eight times, making them the most commonly cited model.
No comments:
Post a Comment