Revising the PA Academic Standards 

1. Revising the PA Academic Standards  A Joint Project Between The PA State Board of Education and The Capital Area Intermediate Unit Mark M. Hennes, CAIU Special Projects

2. Project Overview “Every 3 years, the Board will review the State academic standards and State assessments … to determine if they are appropriate, clear, specific and challenging, and will make revisions as necessary … .” 22 Pa. Code, para 4.12 (i)

3. Revising the standards; not rewriting them Ensuring standards closely align to Assessment Anchors. Focusing on content standards - not content lists, performance standards, or competencies Mission and Vision Conduct a review of the standards by:

4. 3 Phase Process • Statewide, online survey • Advisory teams recommend changes to State Board of Eduation • State Board of Education holds Public Hearings

5. RWSL Math Science Social Studies Science & Technology History Environment & Ecology Civics & Government Economics Geography Advisory Teams May – Sep 2008 Jan – May 2008

6. Key Documents for Review • Survey results from PA educators • Independent evaluations of standards conducted over past several years. • Notable research on standards and benchmarks • Critical analysis of the clarity, rigor and relevance of current standards • Standards developed by professional organizations (e.g., NCTE, NCTM) • Standards identified as exemplary from states across the nation

7. Standards Evaluative Criteria • Are statements clear and sharply defined? • Are they essential, knowledge-based statements? • Is wording consistent with parallel structure? • Is there an appropriate progression of rigor from grade to grade? • Are statements understandable and written in terms understood by both teachers and parents? • Are we able to assess the degree of mastery? • Can they be taught and learned in the context of the classroom?

8. Standards Evaluative Criteria (Cont.) • Are statements logically consistent and holding together as a credible whole? • Does this standard crosswalk to an Anchor? • Is this standard identified in the survey as in need of revision? • Is there a key concept missing in this standard? • Is this illustrative example necessary? • How does this standard compare to nationally recognized standards?

9. Highlights of Recommendations • Clarify intent and focus of each standard • Delete activities & methods • Align standards horizontally and vertically • Embed and spiral rigor through select examples • Introduced ‘knowledge strand’ (Math) • Glossary terms in boldface

10. Questions?

11. Summary “Tough, but very important work” – Dr. Jerry Zahorchak

12. Survey Says … All Respondents said the Standards Always or Frequently: • Guide Curriculum Development (87%) • Guide Textbook Selection (78%) • Guide Classroom Instruction (83%) • Guide Assessment of Student Learning (83%)

13. Survey Says … Of the Teacher Respondents: • 88% were Very Knowledgeable or Had Read Standards In-depth • 86% felt the Standards influenced classroom instruction design • 67% felt the Standards were written appropriately for their grade • 64% felt the Standards were written clearly for their grade • 57% felt the Standards were specific for their grade • 81% felt the Standards were challenging for their grade

14. R/W/S/L and Math Advisory Timeline January/February 2008 • Virtual meetings to initiate team activities (readings, review of state survey, initial critique of standards) • Online team forums • Workshop in Harrisburg • First draft of initial recommendations

15. R/W/S/L and Math Advisory Timeline March/April/May 2008 • Initial draft circulated for comment • Teams consider comments • Final draft by end of May to SBE

16. Science & Social Studies Advisory Timeline May/June 2008 • Virtual meetings with teams to initiate team activities (readings, review of state survey, initial critique of standards) • Online team forums • Workshop in Harrisburg • First draft of initial recommendations

17. Science & Social Studies Advisory Timeline July/August/September 2008 • Initial draft circulated for comment • Teams consider comments • Final draft by end of September to SBE

18. Standard Statement Knowledge Statement Illustrative Example