Unlike previous research, Schmidt analyzed the link between states with standards that were similar to the CCSS and their NAEP math scores. He used cut scores aligned to NAEP as a proxy to determine if states were serious about high expectations and implementation of standards. The preliminary results showed states with standards in line with CCSS combined with higher cut scores also had higher NAEP scores.
I don't think the whole study is online, but I was not reassured by the chart which shows a five level rating of "Consistency with the CCSSM" where Vermont is at 3, New Hampshire at 2 and Rhode Island at 1. That'll help get the results described above, but it is objectively bogus.
Also, Dan might be surprised that Callifornia gets a 5 and Massachusetts gets a 3.
Common Core will mean very little unless there is reform to high-stakes testing. Once teachers/principals/parents are aware of how the standards will be tested, the standards themselves become essentially meaningless. Teachers are highly incentivized to teach the representations of content as they appear on high stakes exams, and not the content itself.
Consider the following three questions, which all come from standard 8.N.4 in New York: “Apply percents to: tax, percent increase/decrease, simple interest, sale price, commission, interest rates, gratuities.” All are multiple choice (and I have removed the answer choices).
1. “Mustafa buys a book that costs $12.50. If the sales tax is 8%, what is the total cost of the book?” (2008)
2. “Sarah earned a 4% commission on all of her sales in March. Her total sales were $80,000 in March. How much money did she earn from commissions?” (2007)
3. “Sarah went on a one-day bus tour from Las Vegas to the Grand Canyon. The cost of the bus ticket was $80. She also paid 15% of the cost of the ticket as a tip to the bus driver. What was the amount of the tip that Sarah paid the bus driver?” (2010)
Who cares what the standard says? A student has to know how to multiply one number by another and then, well, you're good.
"Also, Dan might be surprised that Callifornia gets a 5 and Massachusetts gets a 3."
Baffling. One of the architects of California's standards (Ze'ev Wurman) is staunchly opposed to the CCSS-M.
They cite word count in favor of CA and against CCSS-M, though. ie. Fewer words makes for better standards. Suffice it to say a lot of these analyses of alignment aren't exactly bowling me over.
Nobody seems to be very motivated to do deep analyses of ELA either.
Post a Comment