A Standard of Measure

1. A Standard of Measure Melinda Butler EDCI 650

2. Standard of Measure • Something established by authority, custom, or general consent as a model or example • As Christians we are held to high standards on how to live a life of service to God and others • Proverbs 3:5-7 • Colossians 1:10, 3:5-10 • We are given detailed instruction on how to • Make decisions • Carry them out • Assess how we’ve done We are also provided with rewards -- 2 Peter 1:8-11

3. Standards in Education • Skills and levels of competency that all students must possess in order to move through the educational system. • Statements that identify essential knowledge and • skills to be learned -- taught. • Set by local, state, federal groups` • Goal: set clear, high expectations for what all • students should know and be able to do at each • grade level. • Assessed through standardized testing.

4. The Wave of School Reform National Standards Meets World Class Standards America 2000 Goals 2000 A Nation At Risk No Child Left Behind 1983 2001 Criticized schools Linked decline of U.S. Ability to compete globally With decline in school quality Accountability

5. Higher Achievement For All Aligned Professional Development Better Teaching School Flexibility More Instructional Time for Remediation. Guide for Improvement Motivation To Improve Theory of Standards Based Reform Clear High Expectations For Students School Accountability Ambitious Standards Aligned Assessment

6. Changes in expectations and accountability needed This designholds the greatest hope for improving student achievement Supports good learning and assessment High expectations Provides focus for educators Reinforces “best teaching” practices Establishes accountability Benefits of a Standard Based Design Proponents State:

7. Important Structural Guidelines • Standards need to be: • Clearly stated • Free from jargon • Succinct • Assessment need to be • Aligned with standards • Remedial tools • Teacher Quality needs to be: • Highest quality • Supported by professional development

8. Opponents state: Little empirical evidence of effectiveness Difficult for educators to define what students should know Top-down standards don’t consider “How” children learn Test driven methods lower quality of education overall Areas of Concern

9. Leading Opponents Alfie Kohn -- W. James Popham • “rhetoric of ‘standards’ is turning schools into giant test-prep centers, effectively closing off intellectual inquiry and undermining enthusiasm for learning and teaching” (Kohn, 2000). • “standard” is being misconstrued; tricking us into thinking that it will become the new panacea in education while implying standard-based assessments becomes a tool that promotes students’ mastery of these content standards (Popham, 2003).

10. Making students accountable for test scores works well on a bumper sticker and it allows many politicians to look good by saying that they will not tolerate failure. But it represents a hollow promise. Far from improving education, high- stakes testing marks a major retreat from fairness, from accuracy, from quality, and from equity. --- Senator Paul Wellstone (1944-2002).

11. High Stakes Accountability • Concern over high stakes tests: • Culturally biased • Not objective measures of ability or achievement • Used to pass judgment on teaching and schools • Affected by inequitable dispersement of funds and resources If bonuses for high scores are dangled in front of teachers or schools – or punitive “consequences” are threatened for low scores – chances are far greater that a meaningful curriculum will be elbowed out to make room for test-oriented instruction. -- Alfie Kohn, 2000

12. Standards and Curriculum Design • Bottom Line - How to align curriculum with standards to improve student learning. • Curriculum alignment - the “match” or fit between the curriculum and the assessment

13. Benjamin Bloom • Bloom’s Taxonomy • Higher Order Thinking Skills • Cornerstone for establishing Behavioral Objectives • Earliest form of curriculum alignment • Programmed/Mastery Curriculum • 1960’s early 1970’s • Detailed Learning Objectives formed basis for lesson planning

14. Curriculum Alignment Design Fenwick English Leading Advocate in Curriculum Alignment Curriculum Continuous Connections ` Frontloading Backloading Testing Teaching

15. Frontloading • Alignment established by working from the curriculum to the test • Develop curriculum first then select,adapt, or develop the test that fits the curriculum

16. Backloading • Alignment established by beginning with the test and working “back” to the curriculum • The content of the test becomes the content of the curriculum Easy - Inexpensive • Favorite process when concerns with High Stakes Tests

17. Combining Frontloading/Backloading • Backloading • Aligns curriculum with test objectives to raise test scores • Frontloading • To develop classroom assessments that are in alignment with existing classroom curriculum

18. Popular Designs • Standards Linking • Judy F. Carr & Douglas Harris • Succeeding with Standards • Backward Design • Understanding by Design • Wiggins & McTighe, 1998 • Curriculum Mapping

19. Standards Linking Reporting Current State Comprehensive Assessment System Curriculum and Assessment Plan Action Plan Vision Student Profile School Decisions Supervision and Evaluation Resources Professional Development Plan

20. Backward Design • Identify Desired Results • Enduring Understanding • Essential Questions • Determine Acceptable Evidence – • Assessments that are ongoing, varied • Plan Learning Experiences • Activities, Materials, Resources that guide students to enduring understanding Develop Lesson Plan

21. Curriculum concepts Curriculum Mapping School Calendar Events Widely used by school districts Activities Teachers use it as a tool to keep track of what Has actually been taught throughout the year then Modify and refine next years curriculum Assessments Standards and State guidelines Collect Data Use Calendar Based Format Review Data May involve Individual or Group Identify Changes Neededto Align Curriculum Major Benefit: School wide input and involvement

22. Conclusion Important - Development of curriculum based on clearly established standards. Problems - Accountability through Increased State and Federal Pressures and High Stakes Testing Effects: General School Structure, Classroom Environment, Teaching Strategies,Student Well Being Assessment

23. References • American Federation of Teachers. (1996). A system of high standards: What we mean and why we need it.http://www.aft.org//Edissues/standards/higstan.htm • (Retrieved February 3, 2003). • David, J. L., Shields, P. M., Humphrey, D. C., & Young, V. M. (2001). When theory hits reality: Standards-based reform in urban districts, Final narrative report. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. • English, F.W. & Frase, L.E. (1999). Deciding what to teach and test: Developing, aligning, and auditing the curriculum. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press. • Gandal, M. (1997). Making standards matter: An annual fifty-state report on efforts to raise academic standards. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers. • Gandal, M.& Vranek, J. (2001). Standards: Here today, here tomorrow. Educational Leadership, September, 59 (1): 6-13. • See notes below for continuation of list