Implementing the Common Core Standards

David Coleman, Founder of Student Achievement Partners and a lead player in the development of the Common Core Standards in literacy, spoke at AEP’s 2010 CEO Roundtable about the implications of the standards for educational publishers and curriculum developers. He presented attendees with a first draft of key criteria to ensure alignment with the standards in ELA and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects for grades 4-12. Below are highlights from Coleman’s presentation as well as details from a new Center on Education Policy report, “States’ Progress and Challenges in Implementing Common Core State Standards,” which concurs that implementation is years away.

Highlights from the CEO Roundtable

• The ACT report “Reading Between the Lines” shows that the key predictor for career- and college-readiness is not just success with individual reading skills but with the level of complexity of the text. Many students hit a wall at highly-complex texts–they cannot comprehend and gain knowledge at a certain level, but that is where the breakthrough is to be had. Anyone who can reliably show that they can accelerate a student’s ability to understand complex text will be a winner. In the Common Core Standards, Appendix A discusses text complexity, and Coleman believes it’s essential for all publishers to understand it. Appendix B shows sample complex text and is a primer for publishers on what is needed. A work group is aiming by the end of 2011 to create an industry set of standards for publishers and educators for determining grade-level text complexity.Coleman also advises publishers to be careful that the instructional materials are working towards student reading independence. Materials must scaffold kids to encounter more complex text and then render the readers more independent as they progress. The criteria also call for shorter, more carefully deliberate reading as complexity is increased.
• While some research has shown that if kids encounter a difficult text they stop reading, these studies have had an unintended effect. Coleman says this has created a publishing environment where everyone publishes just a little further of where students are. Of course, the kids will never catch up if they continue reading on the same level–repeated encounter of that which is difficult is the only thing that accelerates the learning. Materials should scaffold students to help them progress to reading more difficult texts.Coleman cautions, though, that scaffolding should not replace reading of the text by telling students what they will learn–it should not become a simpler source of information. In other words, the summaries, videos, etc., that tell the student what they are about to read can be detrimental to the process, especially regarding assessment. Questions should force students to have to read the text, encouraging critical thinking and high-level arguments. In other words, students should be asked questions that require them to have read the text rather than a summary.
• Increased fluency with complex texts is also important. Publishers should design materials to help teachers understand the speed and accuracy with which students read.
• Finally, publishers should focus more on helping students understand academic language, also known as Tier 2 words, which help them decode text. (Tier 1 is everyday language, and Tier 3 is subject-specific–the focus of most vocabulary lists in current texts.) Students need to understand these cues to understand complex texts. Coleman says students should “read like a detective and write like an investigative reporter.”

In addition, the Standards are very clear on the new range and quality of texts. Publishers should be aware, though, that the biggest change is that K-5 is shifting to 50-50 between informational and literature (e.g., history and science). While literature is crucial, equally powerful are historical and scientific texts. Look at the curriculum page in the standards on the human body for an example.

Coleman believes the transition to Common Core Standards will be finished in 2014 or 2015 when the assessments aligned to the Standards are complete. These assessments come from two consortia funded by the federal government (“Next Generation Assessment Systems Proposed Under the Race to the Top Program,” Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management; “Common State Assessments,” ETS).

For now, customers will probably need materials from publishers that help students do well on existing state tests as well as helping them transition to the new assessments.

Findings from the Center on Education Policy

• Most states plan major changes to assessments, curriculum materials, professional development and teacher evaluation as part of the new standards.
• Most states expect to make changes in professional development by 2012 or sooner, but it will take until 2013 or later to fully implement major changes in assessment, curriculum, and teacher evaluation and certification.
• Twenty-one states said that developing a teacher evaluation system that holds teachers accountable for the standards is a major challenge, and 19 states said that finding adequate funding was a major challenge.

“States are making progress and see strong support for common core standards, but this is going to take a long time and a sustained effort to see through,” said Jack Jennings, CEP’s president and CEO. “It’s also noteworthy that states vary on approaches to higher education policy and on how much they will require districts to do to support the new standards.”