Document Resume Ed 356 240 Tm 019 649 Title
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 356 240 TM 019 649 TITLE Information for National Standards for Education: What They Might Look Like. A Workbook. INSTITUTION Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ. Policy Information Center. PUB DATE Mar 92 NOTE 133p. PUB TYPE Reports Evaluative/Feasibility (142) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC06 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Academic Standards; Advanced PlacementPrograms; *Curriculum Evaluation; *EducationalPolicy; Elementary Secondary Education; Engineering; *Evaluation Methods; Foreign Countries;Mathematics; *National Programs; *Policy Formation;Sciences; United States History; Workbooks IDENTIFIERS British National Curriculum; Canada; England; National Assessment of EducationalProgress; Standard Setting; Wales ABSTRACT To facilitate the discussion of nationaleducation standards, this workbook extracts examples ofeducation standards from eight documents that describe whatstudents should be taught, or what they should know or be able todo in various subjects. These examples illustrate and documentsome existing standards, and should help policy makers sharpen their thinkingabout standards as they help people develop common concepts ofstandards. The examples are: (1) curriculum and evaluationstandards for school mathematics, issued by the National Council of Teachersof Mathematics in 1989; (2) standards in physical andinformation sciences and engineering defined by a project of the AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science in 1989;(3) a science framework for Californiapublic elementary schools and secondary schoolsissued by the state in 1990; (4) th' Advanced PlacementExamination in United States History of the College Board;(5) objectives for the 1972-73Science Assessment of the National Assessment of EducationalProgress (NAEP); (6) Toronto Berchr.arks, a standards communicatingsystem issued by the Toronto (Calada) Board of Education in1991;(7) objectives for the 1988 NAEP Geography Assessment;and (8) the national mathematics curriculum of England and Wales establishedin 1989. Test materials for each example are included. An appendixcontains some comments about educational standards by T. H. Fisherof the Florida Department of Education. (SLD) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRSare the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** a U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Often of Edzeahonai Reserveh and trnprovernent "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY CENTER (ERIC) Pttrus document has been reproducedas received 'torn the person or organization orIginating 0 Mrnor changes have been made tO anon:lye reproduction quality Points of view or opimons stated thisdocu men! do not necessarily represent official TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES OEM portion or policy INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) =iliNWIS1111K NM" If Information !Or 40 National Standards for Education: What They Might Look Like .4Workbook AO- ' .. a4 4116.1alli S gl ANA gaLt, ; 4 t o. , 4.. :5 -AL S. - _ d _a11111V . fir Mil. WI Policy Information Center I\:-11V.. 1 EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE . "Allrifio II BEST 17 NAME ADDRESS SCHOOL CLASS PERIOD ] PERIOD2 PERIODS PERIOD4 PERIODS PERiOD 6 PERIOD 7 PERIOD 8 >.SUBJECT Preface and Acknowledgements, p. i 4. NAEP Science Objectives, p. 81 ZROOM O INSTRUCTOR >.SUBJECT Introduction, p. 1 5, Toronto Benchmarks, p. 93 < 0)ROOM w D IINSTRUCTOR 0SUBJECT 1. NCTM Math Standards, p. 17 6. NAEP Geography Objectives, p. 103 ci) wROOM a I'LlINSTRUCTOR 2. Project 2061, p. 35 7. National Curriculum, <>-SUBJECT England and Wales, p. 119 ti(i)ROOM INSTRUCTOR 3. Advanced Placement U.S. SUBJECT History, p. 51 8, Appendix A, p. 135 <>- 0ROOM cE u_ INSTRUCTOR Copyright © 1992 by Educational Testing Service. All rights reserved. 3 Preface Policy Information "Workbooks" are issued from time to time as resource materials for people working on national education goals and education reform. The last such publication, "Information for National Performance Goals For Education: A Workbook," was issued in 1989 while the national goals were being formulated. This Workbook is directed to people considering, discussing,or formulating "national education standards." The idea of national standards in the United States is a new one, an idea that would have been untenable only a few years ago. As a result, we lack a common vocabulary to facilitate the discus- sion -- the word "standards" means different things to different people. This "workbook"extracts examples of education standards from eight documents that describe what students should be taught, or what they should know or be able to do in various subjects. We hope that these examples will: 1) illustrate and document some existing "standards," 2) help policy markers sharpen their thinking about "standards" by reviewing and reacting to them, and 3) help people developcommon concepts of "standards." Paul E. Barton Director ETS Policy Information Center March, 1992 Acknowledgments We wish to thank the organizations that published the eight documents used in this workbook for their permission to reproduce materials from them. Archie Lapointe, Steve Koff ler, Ina Mullis, Nancy Mead, Dale Carlson, and Tom Fisher helped identify these examples of standards. Carla Cooper did the desktop publishing. Albert Benderson did the editing. Introduction In one way or another a central conversation in education reformhas revolved around "stan- dards." In the last few years it has becomecommon and acceptable to call for "national standards," a concept that had almost no support a decade ago. The development ofnational standards in education has become a principal objective of the NationalEducation Goals Panel, and these domes- tic standards are intended to lift us to "World Class" standards. Yet the discussions remain very general, and when theseconversations last very long, it usually becomes clear that not all parties to the conversationhave the same idea in mind as to what does, and what does not, constitute standards of the kind theywant America to have. Several ideas seem to exist about what standardsare: A clear statement of what students should know and be ableto do at particular points in their schooling Performance levels that students should be ableto attain or demonstrate, an idea that begins to 171end "standards" with "assessment" Specification and definition of thenecessary and desirable core of knowledge in a subject to be taught Achievement of a particular point ona performance scale or a passing score on a test' We have not had the years of experience with national leveleducational reform and leadership that would produce some common understanding ofwhat it means to have national standards and what they might look like. But we have hadsome experiences that might help inform the discus- sion. Some people are aware of a few notable examples ofstandards in individual academic fields, but few have actually read the appropriate material.Who in these discussions in national forumshas actually read the new mathematics standards issuedby the National Council of Teachers of Math- ematics? Who has read the "objectives" booklets of theNational Assessments of Educational Progress? Who has read a syllabus of the College Board'sAdvanced Placement Program? The exist- ence of these sources is relatively well known in the circles discussing standards,but they are spe- cialized documents, likely to be in few offices of thegeneralists, educators, and policy officials engaged in such discussions. Thus this volume. It is simple in itspurpose, with no admonitions as to how to do standards. It has no researcher's conceptual schemes of theeducation system, and no exhortations to action. What follows are eight examples drawn from existingdocuments. They are reproduced here for three purposes: 1.To make accessible the experiencewe do have with careful efforts to write down what students should know and be taught. I For a discussion of how the word "standards" is used different ways- in one state, see the letter from Tom Fisher,Director of Testing in Florida, to the Policy Information Center, in theAppendix. 1 2.To help the parties to the discussion sharpen their own concepts of whatstandards should be like, by reading these and reacting to them. 3.To aid the discussion by helping people develop common images of what they meanby standards, and what others mean. None of these eight approaches are offered as recommendations, either as to theirform, the levels of proficiency they imply, or the content they embody. All are respectableefforts for the purposes they were designed to serve. The examples are drawn from 1.The Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics, issued by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics in 1989 (page 17) 2A Panel Report of Project 2061, of the American Association for the Advancementof Science, covering Physical and Information Sciences and Engineering, issued in 1989 (page 35) 3.The Science Framework for California Public Schools, Kindergarten through Grade Twelve, adopted by the California State Board of Education ir,. 1990 (not reproduced in this volume, but a description and example is on page 6 and 7). 4.Advanced Placement (AP'), United States History, a program of the College Board (page 73) 5.The Science Objectives for the 1972-73 Science Assessment of the National Assessmentof Educational Progress (page 103) 6.Toronto Benchmarks, issued by the Toronto Board of Education in 1991