The Systematic Identification and Articulation of Content Standards and Benchmarks. Update. INSTITUTION Mid-Continent Regional Educational Lab., Aurora, CO
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 403 308 TM 026 040 AUTHOR Kendall, John S.; Marzano, Robert J. TITLE The Systematic Identification and Articulation of Content Standards and Benchmarks. Update. INSTITUTION Mid-Continent Regional Educational Lab., Aurora, CO. SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE Mar 95 CONTRACT RP91002005 NOTE 598p. AVAILABLE FROM Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. PUB TYPE Legal/Legislative/Regulatory Materials (090) Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE MF03/PC24 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Art; *Course Content; *Educational Improvement; Elementary Secondary Education; Geography Instruction; Health Education; History Instruction; *Identification; Language Arts; Mathematics Education; Science Education; *Standards; Thinking Skills IDENTIFIERS *Benchmarking; *Subject Content Knowledge ABSTRACT The project described in this paper addresses the major issues surrounding content standards, provides a model for their identification, and applies this model to identify standards and benchmarks in subject areas. This update includes a revision of content standards and benchmarks published in, earlier updates and the synthesis and identification of standards in new areas. Standards and benchmarks are provided for science, mathematics, history, geography, the arts, the language arts, and health. Also included are standards in thinking and reasoning and an analysis and description of knowledge and skills considered important for the workplace. Following an introduction, the second section presents an overview of the current efforts towards standards in each of these subject areas. Section 3 describes the technical and conceptual differences that have been apparent in the standards movement and the model adopted for this study. Section 4 presents key questions that should be addressed by schools and districts interested in a standards-based strategy. Section 5 describes the identification process, and Section 6 describes the format and citation strategy. Sections 7 through 17 provide the standards and benchmarks for 11 separate areas. (Contains 83 references.) (SLD) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Offi a of Educational Research and Improvement ED ATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. The Systematic Hdentification and Articulation Content Sta dards nd e chmarks Update by John S. Kendall Robert J. Marzano March 1995. Mid-continent RegionalEdutational Laboratory., Aurora, CO- .. ' . This publication is baSed on work sponsored` wholly; dein part, by the Office of Educational Research and : Improvement, Department of Educaiion, undei Contract Number RP91002005. The content.Of this publication does not necessarily, reflect the yiewiofOERI or any other agency of the US. Government. BEST COPY AVAILABLE The Systematic Identification and Articulation of Content Standards and Benchmarks Update by John S. Kendall Robert J. Marzano March 1995 Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory Aurora, CO This publication is based on work sponsored wholly, or in part, by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Department of Education, under Contract Number RP91002005. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of OERI or any other agency of the U.S. Government. An earlier version of this report is currently available on the Internet via Mosaicor other World Wide Web browsers. The Universal Resource Locator (URL) is: 4; http://www.mcrel.org/ The standards and benchmarks are linked by hypertext andcan be searched. I © Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory, Inc. 1995 Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory, Inc. 2550 South Parker Road, Suite 500 Aurora, CO 80014 (303) 337-0990 4 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing001CO, Washington, D.C. 20102 Table of Contents Preface iii 1. The Call for Standards 1 2. Work Completed and Work in Progress 3 3. Standards and Standardization 13 4. Implementation Issues 29 5. The Process Used in This Report 35 6. How the Subject-Area Sections are Structured 39 7. Science 41 8. Mathematics 87 9. History 115 10. Geography 433 11. The Arts 471 12. Language Arts 505 13. Health 543 14. Thinking and Reasoning 561 15. Working with Others 577 16. Self-Regulation 583 17. Life Work 589 Bibliography 597 0 Preface As the third and penultimate report on content standards, this update represents a revision, sometimes extensive, for all content areas and includes standards identified in the arts and in health education. The final report will include treatments of all nine subject areas addressed in the national goals, as well as health and physical education, in addition to those areas identified as important by the Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. In addition to the subject-area additions and revisions, readers of the previous update will also find new material in Section 2, Work Completed and Work in Progress, and Section 3, Standards and Standardization. A study as ambitious as this one is always the product of the hard work and creative insight of a number of individuals. Three individuals had major responsibilities for identifying various standards and benchmarks in this report: Therese Sarah shared major responsibility for the identification of standards and benchmarks in U.S. history, K-4 history, and historical understanding and assisted in the identification of the geography benchmarks. Shelly Wasson shared major responsibility for the identification of standards and benchmarks in science, health, and the arts and for the verification of standards and benchmarks in geography. Bradley Kennedy shared major responsibility for the identification of the standards and benchmarks in world history, and for the verification of standards in the arts. The contributions that these individuals have made to this study cannot be overstated. The authors would like to thank the following individuals for their initial reviews of various national reports and documents: Tom Barlow, Sandy Berger, Jan Birmingham, Linda Brannan, Susan Everson, Joan Grady, Toni Haas, Bob Keller, Fran Mayeski, Barbara McCombs, Joann Sebastian-Morris, Diane Paynter, Sylvia Parker, Jerome Stiller, Jo Sue Whisler and Terry Young. Audrey Peralez contributed to the original identification of geography standards in an earlier report. Carol Loredo provided word-processing support. Others have also supported this effort through their thoughtful discussions of issues raised in this report. The authors would like to thank C. L. Hutchins, Alice Krueger, Debra Pickering and Janie Pollock especially, among many other colleagues. JSK RJM iii 1. The Call for Standards Since the publication of A Nation at Risk in 1983 (National Commission on Excellence in Education), there has been a growing consensus on what aspects of school reform are critical to the success of our nation's students. It is now understood that in the past, teachers have relied heavily upon textbooks to determine what is important to teach in each discipline, so much so that textbook manufacturers have become the de facto standard-setting group for the content areas. Coincident with this, testing companies, by virtue of the use to which standardized tests are put in school accountability, have provided schools and districts with measures of what students should know and be able to do in order to reach certain minimum standards in short, testing companies have provided the de facto performance standards for schools. At the same time that the identification of important knowledge, skills, and performances has been relegated to textbook and test publishers, we have entered an age when information grows so rapidly that subject-matter experts are compelled to review their assumptions about the essential knowledge and skills of their disciplines. Clearly there is a need for expert subject-area guidance to determine what students should know and be able to do to prepare themselves for college and the world of work. In short, it is time to establish standards in a rigorous and systematic way. Although there is national dialogue on the development of standards, there is clearly not a consensus across groups as to what form "standards" should take or how they should be used. The result is that the character, scope, and level of detail provided in standards often vary significantly from one subject area to another. Some subject-area groups have argued that the disciplines are so inherently different that a common approach to standards is not possible (Viadero, 1993); though, as one leading education thinker, Christopher Cross (1993), has said, "In real life, these subjects are not as clearly defined as the experts and advocates in a field might imagine or wish." Regardless of how different the discipline areas might be from one another, they each compete for a common ground: the limited amount of time and resources in the school day. Unless standards and benchmarks are presented in a roughly equivalent and useable format,