Understanding the Standard
Chapter 5
Understanding the Standards
And I’m calling on our nation’s governors and state education chiefs to develop standards and assessments that don’t simply measure whether students can fill in a bubble on a test, but whether they possess 21st century skills like problem solving and critical thinking and entrepreneurship and creativity.
—Barack Obama, March 1, 2009
Learning Outcomes
By the end of the chapter, you will be able to:
• Explain the development of the Common Core standards movement.
• Describe the basic elements of the Common Core English language arts standards.
• Discuss the basic elements of the Common Core mathematics standards.
• Recall the basic elements of the Next Generation Science Standards and the National Educational Technology Standards.
• Analyze how differentiated instruction applies to the newly emerging standards and the technology standards for students.
5
iStockphoto/Thinkstock
Pre-Test Chapter 5
Introduction Differentiated instruction is built on a foundation of effective teaching practices. Quality cur- riculum is one of these defining principles, as what is taught serves as the basis for how it is taught. Quality curriculum has its basis in standards, or descriptions of student outcomes in content areas. The standards in the United States are undergoing major changes with the adop- tion of the Common Core State Standards and new standards in science and social studies. Initially developed by a consortium of state governors and state superintendents of instruction, they have been vetted by professional groups, state and local education representatives, and parents within each state.
These standards mark a departure from past practices, which is good news for differentiated instruction. States had previously been responsible for developing their own standards, and the creation of assessment systems based on those standards immediately followed. While this approach assured an articulation between standards and assessment, there were unintended consequences. The effect was a narrowing of the curriculum. In practice, the assessment sys- tems began to drive the curriculum and often resulted in teaching methods that were drill based, had low cognitive demand, used bubble-in-the-answer assessments, and relied on a stand-and-deliver means of presenting content. (Kendall, 2011). The new standards aim to rec- tify that approach. They describe student outcomes in terms of college and career readiness, and encourage increasingly complex cognitive tasks throughout the K-12 experience. Moreover, the manner in which they were written and adopted has encouraged districts and teachers to develop curriculum first, rather than waiting until an assessment system is in place (Kendall, 2011). Since their release, the authors of the standards have vetted a number of resources that assist teachers, parents, and community members in understanding and planning for imple- mentation (Millar, 2012).
However, some educators have concerns about these new standards, especially as they relate to accountability, or find them complicated to understand at first. This chapter unpacks the standards initiatives, examining the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards (social studies is still under development). Additionally, the National Educational Technology Standards for Students and their relationship to the core and content standards is presented. The relationship of these standards and teacher accountability systems concludes the chapter.
Pre-Test 1. Common Core State Standards are a result of
a. a federal government mandate to build a foundation to work collaboratively across states and districts.
b. a Department of Defense education activity. c. a state-led initiative in collaboration with teachers, school administrators, and content
experts. d. a Wall Street coalition that funded a grant to allow pooling of resources in education.
Pre-Test Chapter 5
2. A strong emphasis in the Common Core State Standards is that instruction in English lan- guage arts (ELA) a. requires significant changes in our nation’s teacher preparation programs to provide
highly qualified instructors. b. should focus on the early years and that formal reading and writing instruction should
begin much earlier that in the past. c. is a shared responsibility across all subject areas and that all teachers must teach reading
and writing. d. needs to focus on the basics of learning to read and write without the distractions of
technology. 3. The standards for mathematical practice focus on practices that
a. encourage students to set aside curiosity and persistence until they understand how mathematical processes work.
b. focus on procedure and tedium while moving toward the beauty of mathematics. c. encourage students to question how and why mathematics works the way it does. d. engage students in mathematical content in abstract ways without regard for real-life
problems. 4. Teachers can best support the learning of science and engineering concepts by
a. structured learning of factual information. b. doing the practices of science and engineering within the context of the core disciplines. c. reading and talking about the practices of science and engineering. d. studying the behaviors of scientists and engineers as they engage in inquiry and
discourse. 5. Which of the following are NOT used to measure teacher effectiveness?
a. classroom artifacts b. observation protocols c. NET-S standards d. student achievement
Answers 1. c. a state-led initiative in collaboration with teachers, school administrators, and content
experts. The correct answer can be found in Section 5.1. 2. c. is a shared responsibility across all subject areas and that all teachers must teach reading
and writing. The correct answer can be found in Section 5.2. 3. c. encourage students to question how and why mathematics works the way it does. The
correct answer can be found in Section 5.3. 4. b. doing the practices of science and engineering within the context of the core disciplines.
The correct answer can be found in Section 5.4. 5. c. NET-S standards. The correct answer can be found in Section 5.5.
The Common Core Initiative Chapter 5
5.1 The Common Core Initiative The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are the result of a state-led initiative. Development began in 2009, when the National Governors Association and State Commissioners of Education agreed to create a set of common state standards in K-12 English language arts (ELA) and mathematics. These standards were published in 2010. The Next Generation Science Standards were released in April 2013, and committees are working on the creation of core standards in social studies. Adoption of the standards is voluntary. When states adopt the CCSS, they agree that those standards will comprise at least 85 percent of their state’s standards, while state- specific standards may comprise the remaining 15 percent. As of 2013, 45 states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity have adopted the CCSS. Their implementation is based on the timelines and the context within each state (NGA & CCSSO, 2010).
The federal government was not involved in the development of the standards but supported their implementation (IDEA Partnership, 2012). The United States Department of Education made acceptance of the CCSS as one of the criteria for awarding competitive grant funds to the states (e.g., Race to the Top). The Department of Education also funded the centers that are developing assessments aligned to the CCSS.
Why a Common Core?
The CCSS address college and career readiness skills that will prepare students to succeed in education and training after high school. They are aligned with college and work expectations and include relevant, rigorous content with the intent of applying knowledge through high- order skills. They are internationally benchmarked, or compared to similar skills in other coun- tries, so students are prepared to succeed in a global economy and society, and to ensure that they are globally competitive (NGA & CCSSO, 2010).
The CCSS evolved from earlier state standards-based movements, where disparate standards made it difficult to communicate common progress among the states. With the CCSS, expec- tations are consistent for all. Moreover, they form a foundation to work collaboratively across states and districts, allowing for a pooling of resources and expertise to create curricular tools, professional development, and common assessments. A common set of standards ensures con- sistent expectations for student learning regardless of the geographical location or socioeco- nomic status. It provides the framework to develop a quality curriculum for all students. The broad goals and principles aim to ensure that receiving a quality education is not dependent on a student’s zip code (Kendall, 2011).
The CCSS are research and evidence based, and informed by practices in top performing coun- tries to provide a clear and consistent framework. They were developed in collaboration with teachers, school administrators, and content experts, with multiple rounds of feedback from teachers, researchers, higher education professionals, and the general public, and a review by a validation committee. The standards focus on conceptual understandings and procedures starting in the early grades, and are repeated throughout the grades, providing teachers with the time needed to teach core concepts and giving students the opportunity to master them
The Common Core Initiative Chapter 5
(NGA & CCSSO, 2010). English language arts and math were the first subjects cho- sen for the CCSS because they build skill sets in other subject areas and are the most frequently assessed subjects for account- ability purposes (Kendall, 2011).
Concerns about Common Core
Some administrators, policymakers, and families have expressed apprehension about these new standards, though most concerns tend to be not about their content but about their implementation. Several political leaders mistrust the “common” part of the Common Core State Standards, believing that local control is the best way to meet the needs of learners. Some educa- tors have watched as other promising edu- cational initiatives were poorly applied, misused, or unfunded. They are reserving their enthusiasm about the new reform until they have seen it in action. Still others wonder whether the standards are developmentally appropriate, or whether enough thought has been given to how they will be met by students with special needs. Finally, teachers who for many years have worked with the previous standards may be anxious about the sheer volume of new information to learn and implement, and some fear they will not receive adequate preparation, resources, and support.
A prevalent worry involves how the standards will be used for accountability, and whether students, teachers, and schools will be fairly assessed when it comes to determining how well the standards have been met. For example, New York and Kentucky, the first states to develop their own tests aligned to the CCSS, reported a significant decrease in student scores across all content areas and for all demo- graphic groups (Hernandez & Gebeloff, 2013). These early reports about student declines are disturbing, with many critics stating that the standards are too high, others citing more time needed for teachers and students to adjust to new requirements. Most other states are implementing the standards, but are waiting until the 2014–2015 school year to apply the corresponding assessments that will be available through nationwide consortia and that promise new testing methodologies. These problems with assessment are not a fault of the standards, but they will need to be addressed if the CCSS are to be effective.
Ryan McVay/Lifesize/Thinkstock
▲ College and career readiness for all students are the goals of the new standards. Do you feel that your high school educa- tion prepared you fully for your future?
Think About It
Based on what you already know about the Common Core State Standards, do you feel optimistic about their potential to change edu- cation? Why or why not? What more do you need to learn about CCSS to have an informed opinion?
Common Core Standards in English Language Arts Chapter 5
5.2 Common Core Standards in English Language Arts The standards emphasize that instruction in English language arts (ELA) is a shared respon- sibility across all subject areas, and that all teachers must teach reading and writing (NGA & CCSSO, 2010). The standards in reading, writing, speaking and listening, and language are anchored by College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards (CCR). These anchor standards define 32 broad competencies that form the basis for literacy expectations in K-12 topics that apply across all grades. The standards apply to ELA and also, beginning at sixth grade, to lit- eracy in history, social studies, science, and technical subjects. These standards are articulated at each level, with grade-level descriptions of what students should know. For example, the CCR anchor standard 3 in writing is stated as follows:
Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well-chosen details and well-structured event sequences.
This standard in the writing strand for second grade is stated as:
Write narratives in which they recount a well-elaborated event or short sequence of events, include details to describe actions, thoughts, and feelings, use temporal words to signal event order, and provide a sense of closure (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.2.3).
The same standard for sixth grade describes more sophisticated writing techniques, details, and sequences (as noted by additions W.6.3a-e below), while keeping the coherence of the same CCR anchor standard:
(CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.6.3): Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, relevant descriptive details, and well-structured event sequences.
W.6.3a. Engage and orient the reader by establishing a context and introducing a narrator and/or characters; organize an event sequence that unfolds naturally and logically.
W.6.3b. Use narrative techniques, such as dialogue, pacing, and description, to develop experiences, events, and/or characters.
W.6.3c. Use a variety of transition words, phrases, and clauses to convey sequence and sig- nal shifts from one time frame or setting to another.
W.6.3d. Use precise words and phrases, relevant descriptive details, and sensory language to convey experiences and events.
W.6.3e. Provide a conclusion that follows from the narrated experiences or events.
The standards keep this organizational structure in each grade level, demonstrating that a con- cept that is learned in early grades is further developed later on.
ELA Standards for Reading
The reading standards focus on a holistic view of comprehension as an evolving skill, and empha- size developing meaning from the start of reading. As seen in Table 5.1, these standards are based around the idea of gradually increasing the complexity of text so that by the end of high school, students are ready for the demands of college-level and career-level reading. This requires
Common Core Standards in English Language Arts Chapter 5
progressive development in reading comprehension so students can gain more from what is read. The anchor standards are grouped according to concepts of key ideas, craft and structure, integrating knowledge and ideas, range of reading, and text complexity. Comprehension skills and higher levels of vocabulary are emphasized at younger ages using texts that are grounded in the content areas—science, social studies, history, and others. Throughout the grades and within the standards, reading occurs in classic and contemporary literature as well as challeng- ing informational texts in a range of subjects. While the CCSS has no reading list, Appendix A of the Common Core website (www.corestandards.org) gives annotated examples of sample texts that meet the standards for each grade level, which are intended to help teachers and dis- tricts choose appropriate curriculum.
Table 5.1 College and career readiness anchors for reading
Strand Standard
Key Ideas and Details CCSS.ELA-Literacy.CCRA.R.1 Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.CCRA.R. 2 Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.CCRA.R.3 Analyze how and why individuals, events, or ideas develop and interact over the course of a text.
Craft and Structure CCSS.ELA-Literacy.CCRA.R .4 Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.CCRA.R.5 Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.CCRA.R .6 Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.
