The controversial discussion over who should be in charge of planning curriculum and how to implement some uniformity across states is brought mind after reading this article. I was shocked at the results of a study showing that "exams in some states may be as much as four grade levels below the standards set in other states." It seems rather obvious to me that when the requirement of a subject is simply proficiency, then the idea of what proficiency will look like is wide open to various interpretations. I would be in favor of concrete descriptions of required skills at each grade level to be set at the federal level. It would create a road map for where a student should be by the end of a year. To take into account the fact that each individual learns at a different pace, schools should have a window of time (possibly a year) to get a student to that level before any negative repercussions would apply.
I agree with statements in the article insisting that states should bet on student success and not assume failure, by lowering standards. Some states may have lowered standards to stay in compliance with the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. This is why I feel there should be a window of opportunity for students to meet the goals, rather than a specific date.
Elizabeth, I too find it distressing that there is such a gap in the standards. I have felt for a while now that I like the idea of a federal guideline for what kids need to know grade by grade. This would also help for when students move a lot...making education more equitable for these students. I agree too that students should be able to have time to raise to these standards due to students learning at various rates. Oh and yes Oregon should be commended for taking the lead.
ReplyDeleteI assumed that there were differences between the various states' requirements to meet their standards, but had no idea that they were that discrepant! The actual research report is posted at: http://www.air.org/files/AIR_Int_Benchmarking_State_Ed__Perf_Standards.pdf
ReplyDeleteI found the graphs comparing the states on pages 11-13 interesting, along with the following section on pages 15-17 about world-class standards and what % of students might pass in each state if that was the bar.
Correct me if I am wrong but I think it is interesting that by it's own standards S. Carolina has a very low performance rating on many of the charts listed, but by international standards they are consistently a ranked among the highest. Though I don't understand why there is a difference between the first set of international standards and the international benchmarks found on page 17. I find this very interesting and it shows that not only does it depend on who is doing the ranking but also what the states own ideals are. Maybe by setting such high standards for them selves S. Carolina is staying ahead of the curve.
ReplyDelete