Common Core Standards

Porter, Andrew C.; McMaken, Jennifer; Hwang, Jun; Yang, Rui

doi:10.3102/0013189x11405038

Cited by 357 publications

(133 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

123

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Like the Michigan Merit Curriculum, the recently adopted Common Core Standards state the "content of intended curricula" (i.e., what is to be taught) but not the "pedagogy of curriculum" (i.e., how it is to be taught) (Porter, McMaken, Hwang, & Yang, 2011). We fear that the problem will be repeated with the NGSS, which focuses on standards, leaving curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment to local control: "The NGSS are student performance expectations-NOT curriculum.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failure, The Next Generation: Why Rigorous Standards are not Sufficient to Improve Science Learning

Bair

2014

IJEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although many states in the United States are adopting policies that require all students to complete college-preparatory science classes to graduate from high school, such policies have not always led to improved student outcomes. There is much speculation about the cause of the dismal results, but there is scant research on the processes by which the policies are being implemented at the school level, especially in schools that enroll large numbers of historically non-college-bound students. To address this gap in the literature, we conducted a four-year ethnographic case study of policy implementation at one racially and socioeconomically diverse high school in Michigan. Guided by the structuration theory of Anthony Giddens (1984), we gathered and analyzed information from interviews with administrators and science teachers, observations of science classes, and relevant curriculum and policy documents. Our findings reveal the processes and rationales by which a state policy mandating three years of college-preparatory science for all students was implemented at the school. Four years after the policy was implemented, there was little improvement in science outcomes. The main reason for this, we found, was the lack of correspondence between the state policy and local policies developed in response to that state policy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failure, The Next Generation: Why Rigorous Standards are not Sufficient to Improve Science Learning

Bair

2014

IJEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the context of standards-based education, it is critical to consider the alignment between summative assessments and the standards they purport to measure (Darling-Hammond et al, 2013;Porter et al, 2011). In other words, assessment items should closely reflect the content and processes that are articulated in standards.…”

Section: Classroom Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematics Audit of the DoDEA Schools: 2014-2015

Karam¹,

Stecher²,

Tsai³

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest.RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1272Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2016 RAND CorporationR® is a registered trademark. Cover: Constantinos/Fotoliaiii PrefaceThe Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) operates 181 schools to educate military dependents. The schools are located in 11 foreign countries, seven states, Guam, and Puerto Rico. DoDEA is committed to providing a high-quality education for the dependents of military and civilian employees. The Community Strategic Plan for school years 2013-2014 through 2017-2018 commits DoDEA to implement the Common Core State Standards in mathematics (to which DoDEA refers as the College and Career Readiness [CCR] standards). Efforts to change from the 2009 DoDEA mathematics standards to the CCR standards began in earnest during the 2014-2015 school year, with the CCR mathematics standards to be rolled out in elementary schools starting in school year 2015-2016 and scaled up the following school year to middle and high schools. This study was designed to support the transition to the new standards by examining the extent to which DoDEA's existing mathematics program was consistent with best mathematics education practices and by offering suggestions for improving the implementation of the CCR standards in mathematics. Some of the recommendations, such as aligning the CCR standards with new assessments, appear dated because, by the time the report was completed and reviewed, DoDEA had already taken some steps. The study employed a qualitative approach to examine the existing mathematics program and the initial efforts DoDEA was taking to align the mathematics program and practices with the CCR standards in mathematics.This research was sponsored by the DoDEA and conducted within the Forces and Resources Policy Center of the RAND National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the Office ...

show abstract

“…First, important groups of users of scores may have different intended inferences. For example, Porter, McMaken, Hwang, & Yang (2011) found that the alignment between the Common Core standards and the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is only modest. If policymakers accept the Common Core as limiting the domain from which test writers can sample, they will have implicitly deemed content included in the NAEP frameworks but excluded from the Common Core as not part of their targets of inference.…”

Section: Possibilities For Changes In Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adapting Educational Measurement to the Demands of Test-Based Accountability

Koretz¹

2015

Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accountability has become a primary function of large-scale testing in the U.S.The pressure on educators to raise scores is vastly greater than it was several decades ago.Research has shown that high-stakes testing can generate behavioral responses that inflate scores, often severely. I argue that because of these responses, using tests for accountability necessitates major changes in the practices of educational measurement.The needed changes span the entire testing endeavor. This paper addresses implications for design, linking, and validation. It offers suggestions about possible new approaches and calls for research evaluating them.Adapting to accountability 1 Over the past several decades, accountability has become a primary functionarguably, the single most important function-of large-scale educational testing in the U.S. The transition has been gradual, dating back at least to the minimum-competency testing movement of the 1970s, and the nature of the accountability systems and the characteristics of the assessments used for this purpose have varied through several waves of policy initiatives (Koretz & Hamilton, 2006). Nonetheless, the pressure on educators to raise scores has increased markedly from one wave of initiatives to the next.The current situation, in which rewards and sanctions for schools based on scores are ubiquitous and consequential evaluations of teachers based on students' scores are in place or planned in a large number of states, represents a tremendous change from the typical uses of tests 40 years ago.The premise of this paper is that the current uses of tests for accountability require major changes to several aspects of educational measurement. The needed changes span the full sequence of measurement practices, beginning with test design, continuing with the activities needed to maintain testing programs, in particular, linking, and ending with validation.

show abstract

Common Core Standards

Cited by 357 publications

References 13 publications

Failure, The Next Generation: Why Rigorous Standards are not Sufficient to Improve Science Learning

Failure, The Next Generation: Why Rigorous Standards are not Sufficient to Improve Science Learning

Mathematics Audit of the DoDEA Schools: 2014-2015

Adapting Educational Measurement to the Demands of Test-Based Accountability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About