Social Science
Assessing the Role of K-12 Academic Standards in States
The position that there should be a single set of academic standards in core subjects that states would be encouraged or required to adopt or closely model is not new, but a number of groups have recently advocated it. The discussion surrounding renewal of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has focused new attention on the effects of the current model, in which states adopt widely differing standards. As Judith Rizzo of the James B. Hunt, Jr. Institute for Educational Leader- ship and Policy noted, in explaining the impetus for the workshop series, NCLB has shined a “spotlight on the incredible variability of state test scores, both within and among states.” Several groups, including the Commission on No Child Left Behind, the Education Trust, the Fordham Foundation, and the American Federation of Teachers, have argued in favor of voluntary national, or common, standards as a means of improving both achievement and equity (Goertz, 2007; Massell, 2008). Yet others have argued against common standards on the grounds that states, school districts, and teachers need flexibility to serve their students’ needs and that reaching consensus on the shape and content of common standards—and even on a workable process for estab- lishing that consensus—would be a formidable challenge. Complicating the discussion is the fact that evaluations of existing state standards in core subjects by such groups as Editorial Projects in Education, the Ford- ham Foundation, and the American Federation of Teachers have found many of them wanting (Editorial Projects in Education, 2008; Gross et al., 2005; American Federation of Teachers, 2003).
No copy data
No other version available