The more I thought about it, the more odd the wording of this standard that came up yesterday seemed:
CCLS: RL.6.6 -- Explain how an author develops the point of view of the narrator or speaker in a text.
It is an outlier in the literature standards, mostly the key verb used is "analyze." It seems that typically "explain" is seen as being lower lower level (particularly in terms of Bloom's Taxonomy) than "analyze." This kind of simple verb... analysis is pretty common when people try to evaluate a corpus of standards.
I think in practice this mode of analysis is fairly useless. For example, you're "analyzing" the standards by counting verbs and looking at a list. Is that easier or more difficult than explaining to someone why one set of standards is more rigorous than the other?
Put another way, "analyze" standards can legitimately be evaluated by multiple choice questions. Can "explain" standards be evaluated by anything other than an actual explanation by the student directed at an audience?