Assessing the Role of K-12 Academic Standards in States Workshop Summary (2008) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Analyzing State Standards
3 Analyzing State Standards
Pages 17-32
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 17... ...
3. How and to what extent does the implementation of K-12 state content and performance standards in multiple academic subjects in classrooms vary?
|
From page 18... ...
Porter described the method as a way of producing a visual representation of the relative coverage of various elements of a particular field that is similar to a topographical map of a geographical region. Using the content language, Porter and his colleagues have divided each subject into general areas.
|
From page 19... ...
Using this tool, for example, one can determine not just whether or not linear equations are covered, but also whether students will be expected to memorize one, solve one, or use one to solve a story problem. To apply this language analysis to a state's standards, trained analysts review and code the most specific available description of the standard for a particular subject and grade level.
|
From page 20... ...
First, they found little evidence to support the hypothesis that there is a de facto national curriculum. The degree of variability they found across states, and between state and national standards, does not support that hypothesis.
|
From page 21... ...
is generally greater than the degree of alignment across states in the material they cover at particular grades. The repetition, Porter suggested, sends students the message: "Don't you dare learn this the first time we teach it; otherwise you are going to be bored out of your skull in the subsequent grades." Porter and his colleagues did find some indication that there are a few core areas that are covered more consistently across states than the overall alignment data would show -- or a small de facto common core curriculum.
|
From page 22... ...
TABLE 3-1 State-to-State Alignment, 4th and 8th Grade Standards for English/Language Arts/ Reading (ELAR) 22 SOURCE: Porter, Polikoff, and Smithson (2008, Table 1)
|
From page 23... ...
VARIABILITY IN STATE ASSESSMENTS Assessing the extent to which the performance standards that states set come close to defining a de facto common standard for proficiency was the impetus behind another study, described by Michael Petrilli. This study, conducted jointly by the Fordham Foundation and NWEA, was designed to address three questions: 1.
|
From page 24... ...
TABLE 3-3 Alignment Among States on Mathematics Standards for Grades 1-8 24 SOURCE: Porter, Polikoff, and Smithson (2008, Table 7)
|
From page 25... ...
To illustrate the kinds of differences these numbers represent, Petrilli provided two sample 4th-grade items from the NWEA assessment, each with a difficulty level at the cut score of one of the states. For the Wisconsin cut score, which they had calculated at the 16th percentile on the NWEA scale, the sample item asked students to select from a group of sentences the one that "tells a fact, not an opinion." To represent the comparable cut score for Massachusetts, calculated at the 65th percentile, Petrilli showed an item that asked students to read a complex, difficult passage (excerpted from a work by Leo Tolstoy)
|
From page 26... ...
26 3-3 Broadside 3rd Grade Reading Cut Scores 8th Grade Math Cut Scores FIGURE 3-3 Difference in difficulty of state tests. SOURCE: Petrilli (2008)
|
From page 27... ...
First, state performance standards need "an overhaul." If the goal is for standards to progress cumulatively from kindergarten through 12th grade, states should begin with rigorous high school graduation requirements and work backward to develop vertically aligned standards. Second, Petrilli believes that the objective of bringing 100 percent of students to proficiency has become a perverse incentive that has the effect of lowering achievement.
|
From page 28... ...
The researchers also found that the position of a state's adequate yearly progress standards on the NAEP scale bears little relationship to that state's performance on the NAEP assessment. In other words, students' performance on NAEP cannot be predicted from the relative difficulty of the state's own standards.
|
From page 29... ...
Discussant Barbara Reys drew on her experiences cochairing the standards development process for mathematics in Missouri to highlight some of the practical challenges of working toward common standards. Apart from the requirements of states that prize their autonomy, she noted the limitations of existing national standards, which may not be grade specific and lack other critical details.
|
From page 30... ...
. 3-6 FIGURE 3-7 A comparison of proficiency standards in grade 8 mathematics.
|
From page 31... ...
Discussant William Schmidt characterized the variation among state standards as "enormous." He believes that both math and science standards display "the maximum possible variation at every combination of grade level and topic." He suggested that this is particularly bad for mathematics because that subject has an inherent logic, so that it is essential that students learn concepts in a particular order if they are to develop sound mathematical thinking. The problem, he said, is that because so few standards establish coherence and vertical alignment in mathematics goals, the result is a mishmash, with many concepts being introduced far too early and then repeated over and over in subsequent grades.
|
From page 32... ...
However, McWalters identified what he sees a major stumbling block to a national approach to standards, that "no state would trust the feds after our experience with the beginning of No Child Left Behind.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.