Common standards on national agenda again
By Del Stover
Fall 09 -- A state-led initiative is well on its way to creating national academic standards -- a step with potentially far-ranging implications for America’s public education system.
As School Board News went to press, state leaders -- working through the National Governors Association (NGA) and Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) -- were preparing to release a set of “common core academic standards” for math and English language arts. Standards in other core content areas are planned later.
Although state adoption of these standards is voluntary, the goal of what’s called the Common Core State Standards Initiative is to replace the patchwork of standards among states with a single set of universally accepted benchmarks on student learning.
“This initiative is a significant and historic opportunity for states to collectively accelerate and drive education reform so that all children graduate from high school ready for college, work, and success in the global economy,” says Dane Linn, director of the education division of the NGA Center for Best Practices.
The initial standards, which will be released this summer, are designed to serve as general guidelines for local schools and state education departments. They will outline what high school graduates should know to be ready for college and a globally competitive workplace. By December, grade-by-grade standards should be available.
If the standards are embraced as hoped, state leaders say, more accurate state-by-state comparisons of academic performance should be possible. Some states will be forced to raise standards to levels that are as academically rigorous as those of nations where students score higher on international test comparisons.
“Common standards that allow us to internationally benchmark our students’ performance with other top countries have the potential to bring about a real and meaningful transformation of our education system,” Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas, chair of NGA, said in June when it was announced that 46 states, the District of Columbia, and two U.S. territories had signed on to the initiative.
Concerns to address
For local school boards, the push for nationally accepted standards won’t make itself felt this year. But, if states begin to adopt these standards -- perhaps as early as 2010 -- districts eventually will find themselves revising their curricula and professional development programs.
“If the standards are really going to be different, if they’re really going to be advanced and progressive, what does that mean for infrastructure changes, recruitment, professional development?” asks David Griffith, director of public policy for ASCD, an education group based outside Washington, D.C. “There are a lot of things that, after this, are going to have to happen.”
NGA officials agree. “It would be a mistake to raise the bar for students without developing a comprehensive system of professional development for teachers,” Linn says. “We’re also going to need [instructional] materials that are really aligned to the standards.”
One concern still unaddressed -- and likely to remain so for years -- is whether the move to a common set of standards nationwide ultimately will prove less voluntary than promised.
In 2005, for example, the nation’s 50 governors agreed to report high school graduation rates using what was called the NGA Compact formula. This, too, was a voluntary standard, but within three years, the U.S. Department of Education issued new regulations on graduation reporting that mirrored the NGA compact.
In essence, the voluntary standards evolved into federally mandated standards.
The Learning First Alliance, a group of 17 leading education associations, including NSBA, has offered cautious support for the initiative -- as long as the standards remain truly voluntary. NSBA also has voiced its concerns directly to members of Congress and the Obama administration about future attempts to mandate standards or tie federal funding to a state’s adoption of the standards.
For now, both Congress and the White House appear willing to let state officials take the lead, well aware that past efforts to create federally mandated standards fueled opposition to intrusion on the states’ traditional responsibility for public education.
As a state-led initiative, however, the current standards effort has gained formidable political momentum in recent months. As of July, the governors and state education superintendents in 46 states, the District of Columbia, Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico had signed a memorandum committing to the initiative.
While state leadership has been key in this success, other factors have created a “perform storm” that “makes national standards more palatable now than ever before,” says Michael Petrilli, vice president for national programs and policy for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
“No Child Left Behind has exposed the startling differences among state standards ... people are convinced that the gap between, say, Mississippi’s standards and Massachusetts’ standards is so wide as to be appalling, even unjust,” he says.
Funding tied to efforts
Meanwhile, political support from the White House and Congress offer the promise of financial incentives for states to embrace the standards initiative, he says. In June, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan promised $350 million in federal funds to help develop tests to assess the new standards.
For much of the summer, the standards will be subject to scrutiny from the public and a “feedback committee” of outside experts selected by NGA and CCSSO. These organizations hope to wrap up public comment on the grade-by-grade standards within weeks of their initial release in December -- and begin work on state adoption of the standards by early 2010.
With significant work still remaining, however, “the timeline is very ambitious,” Griffith says.
For one, it’s unclear whether the standards will stand up to scrutiny. Many organizations, such as the International Reading Association and National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), were disappointed with NGA and CCSSO this spring for failing to involve them in the early stages of the standards’ development.
Yet, the past work of these education groups in developing content standards was reviewed by the work group developing the new state guidelines, Linn says. And NGA and CCSSO are responding to early complaints by working to improve communications with outside education groups as the standards undergo review.
That’s a smart move, suggests Mark Kepner, president of NCTM. The new standards “are not going to be perfect ... We hope we will be able to help them.”
Critics line up early
Almost every standards effort has come under attack in the past for their failings. In the 1990s, a push for U.S. history standards was killed by criticism the standards were anti-Western and guilty of political correctness. But at least that criticism came after the standards were released.
Attacks on the NGA/CCSSO standards began even before they were released, when an early draft was leaked by Core Knowledge, a Virginia-based education group founded by education professor and author E.D. Hirsch Jr.
“At first glance, these language standards are, despite the brave descriptors, very similar to the dysfunctional state standards already in place,” Hirsch is quoted as saying on the group’s blog page.
How others react to these standards likely will determine whether states ultimately agree to common benchmarks to student learning -- or whether the effort will fall by the wayside as have past initiatives. Agreeing to develop joint standards is not the same as actually adopting them.
“Not a single state has promised to adopt the standards, for good reason,” Petrilli says. “The major obstacle to this is working out is the quality of the standards themselves. If the working groups do their jobs well, and publish sound drafts, this process might succeed. But they could easily misstep and spark a culture war that could bring the whole thing down.”
How quickly states adopt these standards -- and how seriously they follow them -- also will prove critical to their influence. Some states, such as Texas, have invested significant time and resources into developing their own standards, and some will not be in a hurry to make a new investment right away.
Although having little say, school boards probably will feel the same way. “Many school boards over the last few years [for example] have just adopted a math curriculum,” Kepner says. “Teachers are going to say, ‘Wait a minute, we don’t want to go through that again.’ They’re going to need board support.”
Also often overlooked is the reality that common standards mean little without a common assessment system -- otherwise a state can “water down” its tests to boost student scores. That would undermine the accurate state-by-state comparisons of student performance that NGA and CCSSO say justify their efforts.
Both organizations already are looking in that direction, Linn says. Agreeing that standards, in and of themselves, will not help ensure that more students are college and job ready, he says, “We have to act on developing a common core of assessments.”
With Duncan already promising money for that effort, Petrilli adds, the ongoing push for nationally common standards means a nationally common assessment system.
“We’re heading toward a national test, no doubt about it.”
Reproduced with permission from School Board News. Copyright © 2009, National School Boards Association. Opinions expressed in this newspaper do not necessarily reflect positions of NSBA. This article may be printed out and photocopied for individual or educational use, provided this copyright notice appears on each copy. This article may not be otherwise transmitted or reproduced in print or electronic form without the consent of the Publisher. For more information, call (703) 838-6789.