Setting Standards in Our Schools: What Can We
Expect?
President Bill
Clinton has called for national education standards and voluntary achievement
testing. Read about the past, present, and future search for effective
educational standards.
"We finally have accountability in the schools for academic performance.
We are now measuring our schools based on students actually learning the
basics."
With those words, Virginia Governor George Allen recently celebrated
the passage of new public school accreditation standards requiring students
to pass state-mandated subject-area tests in order to graduate from high
school. By the year 2007, a school could lose its accreditation if 70
percent of its students do not pass tough new math, English, science,
and history tests.
But students in Virginia aren't alone:
In Maryland, the school board has unanimously approved the development
of a new series of tests students will be required to pass in order
to earn a high school diploma.
In New Jersey, Governor Christine Whitman recently announced that
standardized tests for eighth- and eleventh-graders have been upgraded
to reflect revised core curriculum standards.
And last month in California, the State Board of Education adopted
new academic standards emphasizing basic skills.
All across the country, states are mandating more rigorous academic
standards and instituting strict assessment procedures to ensure that
students meet those standards. And with the stress on accountability,
many teachers are demanding a say in setting standards and developing
tests. Teachers are making this a negotiating point in contract discussions.
They say if they're going to be held publicly accountable for what students
do and do not learn they ought to have a say in determining what that
is.
Critics complain that new standards often unfairly penalize schools
with high concentrations of disadvantaged or ESL students. Some states,
such as Maryland, consider indicators other than state-mandated test scores
-- for example, attendance and dropout rates -- when making accreditation
decisions.
And, critics add, if schools are to lose accreditation, it is essential
that they be helped to improve. Financial support and assistance in developing
reorganization plans -- including help from teachers and principals from
successful schools -- are a must.
Matt Gandal, assistant director for education issues at the American
Federation of Teachers (AFT), points to the state of Kentucky as a good
role model. In Kentucky, Gandal told the Washington Post, the focus is
on a school's "improvement over time rather than setting one target that
all schools must meet."
So what has prompted the national demand for stricter accountability,
and why are so many states establishing new academic performance standards?
CLINTON CALLS FOR NATIONAL TESTING
"My number one priority for the next four years is to ensure that all
Americans have the best education in the world."
The President's call for educational reform, though controversial in
some of its specifics, is not a new mandate, but rather the continuation
of a movement that has its roots in the 1983 report, A
Nation at Risk. That report stated that "the educational foundations
of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity..."
and it spurred a national effort to stem that tide, including
the 1989 Educational Summit, at which the nation's governors adopted
National Education
Goals to be achieved by the year 2000.
the establishment, in 1990, of the National
Education Goals Panel, an independent federal agency charged with
monitoring progress towards meeting the National Education Goals.
the 1994 Improving
America's Schools Act, which provides funds to ensure that all students
have access to the resources necessary to meet more rigorous academic
standards.
As early as the mid-1980s, many states -- notably California, Maryland,
and South Carolina -- had begun to develop more rigorous educational standards;
and, by 1992, 45 states had developed content standards and revised curriculum
in core academic areas to address those standards.
WHAT ARE THOSE STANDARDS?
"Treat people as if they were what they ought to be and you help them
to become what they are capable of being." (Goethe)
Effective educational standards define a common core of learning for
all students and require students to reach common levels of performance
and achievement. Most education experts agree that standards must include
the following components:
content standards, which identify required knowledge and skills.
performance standards, which define required levels of mastery: How
good is good?
proficiency standards, which assign value to work based on students'
developmental levels.
In a report prepared for the National
Educational Summit held in March of 1996, fourteen educational leaders
were questioned about their views on standards. The experts agreed that
effective educational standards should
improve the performance of all students.
initially concentrate on the traditional disciplines -- reading, writing,
mathematics, science, history, geography, and literature.
be developed at the state level.
be implemented and overseen by each state to ensure improved student
performance.
be related to reforms in assessment, teacher education, and the allocation
of resources.
In addition, experts say, standards should be clear, realistic, and
challenging, requiring specific knowledge as well as the ability to apply
and communicate that knowledge through demonstrated thinking and problem-solving
skills. As one of the participants, U.S. Secretary of Education Richard
Riley commented, "Without knowing where you're going, you certainly
cannot get there."
WHERE ARE WE TODAY?
"If we do not change our direction, we are likely to end up where we
are headed." (Chinese proverb)
Forty-eight states now have, or are developing, common standards for
core subject areas and some of our nation's brightest students have already
made important gains. Combined math and verbal SAT scores are at their
highest levels since 1974, and the number of students passing AP (Advanced
Placement) exams has tripled since 1982. But too many of our students
still do not meet minimum levels of proficiency in core subject areas:
Forty percent of 8-year-olds cannot read on their own.
On tests developed by the National Education Goals Panel, three of
four students failed to meet suggested reading and writing standards
and four of five failed to meet math standards.
Quality Counts,
a special report by Education Week online, revealed that, on National
Assessment of Educational Progress exams, only 28% of fourth-graders
scored at proficiency levels in reading and only 21% of eighth-graders
reached proficiency in math.
Although students at our country's most competitive schools outperform
students from many other large countries in international education
competitions, minority students attending our nation's poorest schools
score much lower than their peers in every subject area at every grade
level -- and the gap appears to be widening.
Why haven't higher standards helped?
According to Making
Standards Matter 1997, an American Federation of Teachers report on
the effectiveness of academic standards, although the commitment to standards-based
reform is strong, that commitment is not always reflected in real gains
or real educational change. Too many states, the report says, fail to
attach assessments, consequences, and interventions to their standards.
The AFT report concludes that schools must
supplement their standards with clear teacher guidance.
be sure their standards and assessments are aligned.
establish plans for phasing in incentives and consequences.
provide extra help to students who do not meet the standards.
In other words, standards alone are not enough.
THE DEBATE OVER NATIONAL TESTING
"The spirited horse, which will try to win the race of its own accord,
will run even faster if encouraged." (Ovid)
President Clinton and Congress recently reached tentative agreement
on the development of voluntary
national tests to assess student achievement and monitor the success
of individual schools. That action has sparked debate among educators
about who should devise educational assessments.
Critics of the plan believe that what is taught in schools should be
a local decision and they say that national testing will put those decisions
in the hands of the federal government. They also fear that teachers and
school systems will be penalized if they fail to meet national academic
test standards.
Others, however, believe that a national assessment program will result
in greater public awareness of educational issues, a greater feeling of
responsibility and cooperation among teachers, parents, and students,
and result in the allocation of necessary resources to poorer school districts.
Related Resources
Raising the Standard by Denis Doyle and Susan Pimentel. This
guidebook and CD, developed by the Coalition for Goals 2000, features
five school districts and their efforts to reform their schools. Funded
by the Walton Family Foundation, the book and CD are intended as a guide
to help other communities develop more rigorous education standards.
For information, see the Coalition's
Web site or call (202)835-2000.
Related Sites
Improving
America's Schools: Standards One of a series of Newsletters on Issues
in School Reform funded and distributed by the U.S. Department of Education,
this site provides an overview of the standards-setting activities occurring
in elementary and secondary schools in the United States.
The Coalition For
Goals 2000 Located at the George Washington University School of
Education and Human Development, the Coalition is developing a set of
self-guiding tools which school districts can use to develop their own
academic standards based on national and state benchmarks.
President Bill
Clinton has called for national education standards and voluntary achievement
testing. Read about the past, present, and future search for effective
educational standards.