You are on page 1of 142

'

':. , : :"

,,:1.

/..4 í":.'.\

MCUKffiN RË$IJffi ED 338 ??r.
rT$T,E

TK
Staå6Lng SgenÉe,rd6

tI?

653

TNSTT$T'TTON RËPORry
T{Õ

gor &m@ri.êä,n nðucetåen" A R@port to eonçmesBr bhe SæereÈ,#y of E:ducä.g,S6ns blr,@ NåbIöneL Edueê.få6n Geåls pðnêL, end bhe &fferåeen pêöpJ"e" ¡{etlo¡?êJ. eôuncll on E&ueettrn seenderüs end Tðsgj.nge
Wåsh$ngbonu æ"

PI.¡E DågE

rsBH*t-16*036û97-8 ?& Jen 9?
&4?p. Ðocumenf,B,

worË åVI\ILAALH ffiOH

U"S. Government Prånbår¡g Off.t"eeo gup€rtntenê@nt, of Haål $tops SgOp, Washlngbonu IF
2040?*9328.

PUB TYPE

Legat/teglsletÍvé/R@øulabory Hatêrùals (09CI) Reports - WFluatlr¡e/Feaslbllrty (Ló2)
I

-*

EDRS PRTCE

DnscRrpf$Ës

ffrCI1/pc06 PlÌ¡ß pösge$6" &öed6mLe &cr¡fêv6menet Ê&råêemJ"r gtå,ndä-rd$å AdvLsory CrmmltgeesË E$ucåelönaL Assessnenbt Þiór.rc8.tfonal Ëhenget Educatåonel Ieprôv@ment.¡ *ffiuse6fonel Õbj€ebåv@st Elê!ßenuery Sèûondery Edueêti"ont Feestb*lå€It gguÉå@så egenegäm€n8 Ingorüågåsll Systemst
*NagÂÕneL Pr6€tre!ôs Net,åonB:. eouncål ffiÌ Eduëeeåon

TÐENTÏS'ÏMS

stengår8s TeseÍngt *wati"onax Inforeetåön sysbenst *gta¡dærd settlng

eBgrRÃcr

Reeômmendet,fons þ$r thê NeLÍonâL eounctL on Educetltn stendêrds en6 Íe8t,$-ng (NCEST) erê prÔv$êed cÕnËérnfng wh@gher natÍonal ste¡¡dards enê a system tf ec6essn@nt,Ë ðr@ dësfreble enð gsasfþLe ê$ð how ne,båona,X stanêerds ef¡å a syêg€m of asgesenents are to be 66\¿€Ioped enô åmp1ee€nbed. ghe NCSSB founå &'hêt' t'h€ e"bs€nc@ og €rpu.clt, neeÍonet gtandards hByÈd Èo wÖr}ü*Ëlðss levels clg perf,ormaneB sÉvere3.y ltåfrPer6 th@ eþi.tggy Lü Aônlgor the natfÕn0s progr@ss towærd bh€ sl"å{ naLÍonêl eduë.eblôn gÕð'ls" WtthÕub wsJ.t*def,å"neú en6 d@Eending 8bênúerdsu &meråËen 86ucêtttn ha$ Eråvlgeted gowð,rô Hds gðdbow neÈåenåL nsnfmuffi e¡dp€Çtðgions' wj.th curr{ëu}& fsËuÊåsq on ltu-}ssP@I r@eêln$ end erLghs¡eglÇ BHfI}s &nd on 6trå11" &mounb$ of fectuel- m&berieL J.n Oeh6r cÖnbenu ð.rêe.s" HÖst' çurrent. å6ss$s&@nt, re@ghöds cennoL ðetêrffifne lg stuéengs 6,re eequfring tttB skåtås/mnowledge ghey ne@d tQ pFosper tn &he f,ltbüfe. TlreEe ågseB$ff@nÈB r€ånf0rëe ghe emphesr.s ön 1ö\Àt-l6veL skåIås end proËesslng þ1bs of €ege rêbfi8r f,hån ôn Probl@rü Bo}vång ênd crlgåceL thLnhf¡îS" IS Ís crn6åudÈ6 ehet h¿gh neeíon&l edu6etlon sceBdðrds enð e vÕluerbery LinMed EyÊE@m tf ass€s$m@ntÊ &16 deslrable end f@eBLble meöþån$Bms för re,LËåRg expesgetl"on8, revågeååstng ånsgrucËåaÍ¡r e&d rejuvenetlng @dueðtåÕn ref,$rm efförbB for all &merl"can 8Ëhsoxg ð.n6 sbud@ng6' rhø NeËgT wåIl worh bÕ$dârü 3oêe1 öÕnmi-tm@nt t'ô hågh nêtlonal e¡€p€æaelon for echå@v@m@nb for all. stuó€n8s; end bowand dsv6}opånç F€8&r&1, Bg&ee, ð,nß I6Ëe1 pot$csee bhab en$ure hsgh qxåaåtby resourees (tnaeruegl"onet megertels ênd welt*prepereå Seaehers) ' Âëknowl€úSmenb$t euthÖrltetÍen fôr gh6 HCffiSTf publla som$engs¡ the sJ.¡Ë nebLonel eduüebåOn EeäIÉt end r€PôrÈs of, the 8t¡qr¡derê8r as8@s6msnt,, åffiplemgnbeb*ün, Enqllshr KethemattcB, 8ÇLen6er hlBtory, ênd geogråphy gesk forëes of bhe $€Egf ar6 êppend€d" {Rtë}

ttibþt:e,l Þv

DyÌEDBS

ii.

I
|.r
llr,

[:l

ll,

NATTTNAT CTUNCTäTN EÐUCATTTN ST}\NÐ"ERÐS ANM TÐSTTNffi
Ã
xÆgryËR

g0

cÕÏü6&gss, nffi $mm&w&RY Õ&" Ë&wc&trrtw, ffffi s&TrÕN&e ffiwqA$xow @eå"s pffiMl,, ewÐ uHg

MRrC&}q

p&Õpr-H

¡ !
f

'if

As co-chairs of the Nationa| Council on Education Standards and Testing, it is our privilege to present. Raising Standards For American EducaËion" We believe this report is an imporLant contribution in moving the Nation Loward the adoption of high national. education standards for alL students and a -

>

Ë
ìRi
!i:ir:

voluntary, linked syst.Èm of assessments Through its deliberatíons¿ the CouncÍ1 found Lhat the absence of explicit, national standards keyed to world class leveIs of performance Séverely hampers our äbility to monítor the Nation's progress Loward the
NaLional Educåt,íon Goqls" We presently evaluate sLudent and system performance Iargely t.hrough measures that t'elI us h<¡t¿ many students are above or below âverage, or that compare relatÍve performance among schools, dístricts' or staLes. MosL measuremenLs cånnot tell us t¡heLher sLudents are actuatty acquiring the skills and irnowledge they will need Lo prosper in the future. They cannoL tell us how Eood is
t'good enough" " In t.he absence of well*defined and demanding standards¡ education in the United Stabes has gravitated tov¿ard de

liìi
li,l,
l:.:¡.ì

,,in

:9

.rn
:i.ll

:ll
.,il¡ì

.:È

',lil
).!f

fåcto national rninimum expecLatÍons' with curricula focusirlg on low*level reading and arithmetic skills and on small amounts of factual material in oLher content' areas. Most current assessmenL met-hods reinforce the emphasis on t.hese low-Ievel skills and processinE bÍts of Ínformation rather than on problem solving and crit ical thinkinE " The adoption of r*orld-class standarcls r¡rould
force the Nat.Íon bo confront todayr s educat,ional performance expecLations that are simply too low.

Januarg 94, l9g2
a-þ

{

and high performance standards an appropriate yardstlck provicie could against which students, Parents' teachers' ãi¿ otners could measure individual and system progress toward the Goals ' This iñeormation would also help Eo better and time' direct the use of resources a cornmon provide would Explicit standards as areas such in reforms for anèhor assessment., curr.iculum, instructlon, and piãiã"sional develoPment' thereby promoting svstemic rather than piecemeal reform' oiñ"-*United states ênjoyqa unique and complex blend of state and Local control of eduðation and national. purposes for educatíon. We Propose to buÍtd on this ;t;i;- by settins in moti?n lhe appropriate

Explicit

mäcnanisi¡s

that will .'esult in loçal äå**it*.tt to high natiooal expectations for achievement ior all students' Ilg-qlqot

piãpã"" a national curriculum' Standards that ftã"ia provide the basic understandings not but acquire' to need all stúdents everything a student should learn'

Siandards and assessments musL be accðmpanied by appropriaÈe federar' "-t1?. and tocal policies that seek to ensure nlgn

L.

quality resources, including instructional teachers' The ñãiãiiåiu and wetr-prepared political and technical ãðnsiaerable are.detailed in ãt.ff.ng"s of going forward fu.rry cognizant wrrite tirã-cortí"it, s iepoit. the NatÍon and urge rì'e ãi-thè". challenges,botdty and decisively móve to leaders its endorse ;;;";l imptementation' l'te strongry a anci standards national äducation voluntary system of assessments as åppiãptiåte focar points in ongoing
education reform.
SincereIY,

f

CarroII A. CamPbellr Jr' Governor of
South Carolína

Roy Romer

Governor of Colorado

Suprlnrcndcnt of

For rrlc hy thc U'S' Clovcmmcnl hlntlng OffiÙd ntr. Mutl Sup: SSOP' Wurhlngrorr' DC 2(11{l!'912t

tl*ut

ls¡,| 0-'t6-0!ó09?-t

Toble of Contents

Llstof

CounctllllembereørlrI/,ffilløtlons

lo

Executlve

Summarg llestrübtc?
to

I I
21

Pørt Otæ: Arc Nø,tla,nøl Standø,ñs and ø Sgstem
qfAll*,eæmelnts

Pørt lloo: Is lt

Feorslble

Dlrlvelop Nøtionor|

&arrnorrcs ønd ø System

olAæeesrrwnts?

Pørt Thrce: frow Are.l{etlonøl Støt$øtd's

anda

Deoelo¡ndudlmp'lemented?
Appendlcea

Sgetem of As'sescments tobe

gÍ,

A. Acknowledgments B. Authorization for the National Council on Education
Standards and

Testfu

C. D.
E.

Public Comment National Education Goals Reports ofthe Task Forces

_L,

Caser i,llustratiøn bu Mark Nørdini'

January 24, tggg

?.1,N

t.

iJ

DlttlJàuted

by

DybEDRs

Nqtionsl Council on Educotion Stondqrds ond Tesling '
Co{hoir¡
Governor Carroll A. Campbell,

SouthCa¡nlitn
ÀlcÍtbcr¡

Jr.

Governor Roy Romer

Colnrodo

Gordon Ambach Council of ChieJ State Schnol OÍfi¡ers Uniu ersitg oÍ C alifornin, Los Ang ele s Eva L. Baker Ect¡nø¡tds Scltool Dislric¿, Washi,ngton Brian L. Benzel

MaryBicouvaris HamptonRoadsAcad'eþy,Virginia
U.S. Senator Jeff BinÉaman

Committee on Labor and, Humnn Resou,rces

Eve M. Bither

Iris Carl Lynne V.

Cheney

Mairæ State Depanmentof Educøtiøn Nationnt Coutæil oJTeanhers oJ Malh'emntins Natitnnl Endowmøntþr the Hunn'nities
New Metico Senate

State Senator Carlos Cisneros
Ramon C.

Cortines SanFrancisco UnirtedSchttol Di'strict

Chester E. Finn, Martha Keith GeiSer

Jr.

Fricke

Vanderbilt Uniuersitu Ashtanl' Scllæol Boatd, Nebrcska N atiûnl E ducation As so c int iott
Committee on Educøtiottand Labor

U.S. Representative William Goodling

'

State Senator John Hainkel Sandra Hassan

LouisianaSenate Beonh1hantøtÛigh School, New York
Committee ar¿ Labor and Humnt¿ Resoutces Daz¡id W. Hornbeck and Associates lJ. S. Departmørr't oJ Education Committee on Education and Labor N otial¿al S c ien c e Foundation Llnit¡ersitr oJ Kansas
Soutllø nt Regiona I Ed¿¿cttti ott Board Il rti rc rsi I y of Teu nesse'e

U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch

David

Hornbeck

David Kearns

U.S. Representative Dale E. Kildee

-

Walter Massey Edward L. Meyen Mark Musick Michael Nettles
Sally B. Pancrazio Roger B. Porter

Lauren Resnick Foger Semerad

IlIi ¡¿oi sSlfl Í(' ¿ ¡t¿ il'r'rs¡tU Th.eWlúte Houst' IJ n i ue rsi.l y of P i t t sbu tg h
RJR Nohisca Ame ri can Fe'de ral
i

Albert Shanker
Marshall S, Smlth
irr

o

n of Te ac h e rs

SlanJord U¡tipersitU

tlai.¡irtg lllortrl¿rtls Jor Aucri con lld ucalion
{,i

Dlrtrlòuted

by

pyn¿ons

ffiww*axffåww ffiaxmmruæry

,,Ë
T

rFq
å"hu N*tio*al Council on Educatio¡l Standards and Testing was created !n response to interest in national standårds and assessrnents by the Nation's Governors, the ,&d.ministnation, and tongress. In the authorizi¡¡g le$slation (Fuhlic Law 102-62), Cong¡ess charged the Council to:
o advise on

the desirabilit¡¡ and feasibility of national standards and tests, and recommend iong-term pol.icies, scructures, and meehanisms for setting volunt'ary education standards and planning an appropriate sYstenn oË tests.

@

'.,

,,,,1

The work of the Ûounci.Ì follows and corn¡rlements the President's Hducation SunÌmit wl[h the Governors held in tr989. This irnportant collaborative effort, led to the adoption of six Nationa! Hduaation Goals designed Lo engage aìI Arnericans, (: ir from yowç chüdren to adults. The National Ðduca[ion Goals /\i t ' Fanel was created to neport anntlally CIn prtg¡"ess toward t'he Goals. In its first year, the Fanel consluded that to meaningift{}y ' measuf,e Progress an Goals 3 and 4, consideration shor¡ld be --'ç¿îlti-wirationaleducatiosr

'

alttsthatdefinewhat,
to identifylng and

y

students siiou-ld knqlw and be able tü

clü and

.f,,,
ì:¡:,

.lanuørg e4,

tr

ggÐ
Þó,1

¡6

NæeåmmM ffidasmæffiåæsx ffiffiMffi ffi mmffi 4

M & : fifrr*dmu& ÅeþøM¡ €ntffiþÅ wM $ë;t'tøønasÊadp - Wy *ffiS, Ámer$emn studer¡ts dll Ïeave #sedË$ fotm, t¡te
eÍghd s¡td furelve lmvlng deroo¡wtruf,ed üe-ltwets¡xey lrt

v**u

ffi¡leüg¡xtg ffiåU¡eet rnætger fneåuding Httgååeh! !$&t&esvt&Hcs' w¡l *deYl;";hñt*ry:esrd gesgrepÏÌe end every sehCIo$ $n Âmeriee so they well, rnlnds ;;*¡¡*-th8$.ftähx*ent teåm Eo use thek

*-y

U- p*e*--¿ for res@ns$bte citlseltnhip, ft¡rt'trer trearnlng' snd prt&å*ffiore employnrent [n oun modern ecorstcrÙy'

Sciøæe ø'nÅßßø$wwnÊiøs,i, *GwÅ&: - -Ey world fut Ure vear åSt0, U.S. studertts will tú mr* irr me science astd ffßethemeffic$ aahieve¡nent'

del,eloping nnethods to assess studente'success in meeting¡

them.Tkrehesident,similanlyÌrascdledforthecreationof tests on Vf'or"ld tlass $tandards forstudents and hig},-qudity
standards. which they can demo¡"¿strate achievement of these issLles' ln carrylnglout its change to exanrlne a broad rar\ge of l$91' the Council met eight tinT es between June and Ðecember' were created and produced background papers t'hat
Task forces

the inforrned [he Councit's discussions' In response to

congressionalcallforbroadpublicparticipation'theCouncil

and sotiaited and neceived pubtic comment from expert's and constltuents organiuetitns nepresentlrg a wide nan6¡e of of Hdr'lcation' interests. This report to Oongtess, the Secretary

thelsationalEducat,ionGoaÌsFanel,andtheÅrnericanpeople provides recornmendætions reached after intense deliberation wonk end includes confierfls that must be addressed as
progtre$$es on devetoplng st'atidards and assessrnents'

ksirmbËüfl@wff ffiËgh NwËËemwå ffiwffid@Ms ffiffid $psffim *$ &ssæssffi@ffiË$

@

In the couvse of tts research and discusslons, t'he CIouncil concluded that hi8h nat'íonal standards tied $o assesscnent's are desirable. Ín the absence of well-defìned and d'emanding süandands, educatïon ïn the Unfted States has 8rævitated toward
d'e fant'onatlona] miníxirt¡tl"t expectatÍons.

xcep[ fon students who are planning to at,tend seiect[ve four"yean colleges, curreng
ffi

Nui.si.ttg $ls¡rrdærds

for

Anze'tie

an þld'utnticttt

IJ

education staTrdãrds foclis on low-leveÏ reædit4¡and anit'hmetic skills arÌd on sntail aisrourrts of factual material in other aontent arees. CIonsurners of education in this eountty have settled for far iess than they should end for far Ïess than do their counterparts in other developed nations. Hig}"r nati¡rnal st¿ndards tied to assessments can create high expect"ations for âll students and help to better tåYget resúurces. They are criEical to the Nation !n three primaTy \,vay$: to promtte educational equity, to preserve democmcy and enhærce the civic culture, and to improve economic corcpetÌtiver¡ess. national education standards would trrelp to pnovide an

F'urther, i

"

increasingly diverse and ntobile populafiion with s]rared va]ues !i t and The ûounciÌ recommends standards for students and standards fov schools and school syslems. Srudent, standards what, srudents should incÌude specifÏcation of the content and the levei of performarice that know and be able to do how good is good enough. students are expected to attain The CIouncil envisions t}tat the national standands wiü include substantive content together with complex problenn-solving and

knowiedge.

*

-

-

kr{g}ier order thinking skills.

To ensure that süudents do not bear the sole burder¡ of attaining the standards and to enctumge a-ssurånces that the tools fon success wilt be available at all schools, the Council also

re_c,qggç-e¡d¡!¡aj-gtä!,e.qqsþþlishsqhg-9ld,-elverVstff rdards System performance s8andards shou-ld also be established. sehool delivery and systern perfomlance standards would attest to the provision of opporf,ruriligs !o iearn and of'appropríate instructional condirions tô enable all chjldren to reach hþfr standards, ln endorsing the concept of national standards for ail students, the Cou¡rcll stiputates several characteristics these ständards should have:
e Standands nrust neftrect hi8¡x expecbations,

not expectations

of min[ntal cornpetency.
e StantÌa;ds must pnovlde focus and

direction, not become a

n¡ational c¡¡rnict¡lurn.
ø Standands

rnust be natlonal, nob fedenal.

6 SÈanderds n'¡ust, be volt¡¡lt'aryo noù mandated by $he federal

goverrunertt.
ø Standarcls nnust, be

dynamic, noü stntic.

,lawwøry 94, l99g

The Council's intent in recomrnending the establishment of national standards is to raise the ceiling for students who are currently abûve 8,vera8e and to lift, the floor for those whs now experittnee the least success iÏt school, including those wit'h gaps in speclaT needs. States shot¡ld work toward reducing siudents'opponlunities to leam and t¡'r t'helr perform&nce, such those novtassociated rviLh råce, inconte, gendef, and
as

geograPhicaÏ lCIcation. the Having reached consensus that standards ære desir:able, just to set council then determined tliat it, is not sufflrcient

-

skndards. Since tests tend to in-fluenae what is t'aught', new hi,gh asseesments sho¡.¡td be developed that embrodv the Nafion the effort standards. The considerable nesotlrces and expends on the eu-nren& patchwork of tests should be nedirected toward the development of a new system of assessments' t'he best ,{ssessments should be state-of-the-art, building on t'o tests avellable and inconporatin8 new ¡nethods. In order l'fleâsure individual student PrÕg.ress and t'o monitor the new achievement in attaining the National ÐducaLion üoals, ._ system c¡f assessrßents shor-¡ld have Ëwo cornponents
ø individl-aat student, assessrûents,

ånd National

e large-scale sarrrple assessments, such' as t'he

Assessment of Educational F\"ogress'

The key features of both components wouid be alignntent

withhighnallonalst"andardsandthecapacitytoproduceuseftrl, comparable results. In addition, the syster"n of assessments should have a n¡rnrber of olher features' o The system of assessments must consist of rnultiple
methods of n'leasuring progress' not' a sing$e t'est" e The system of assessments must, be voluntary, no[
mandatory"
ø

'

The system of assessroents rnuet' be developmental' not

static.
Ås these features are put in place, teehnical and equity issues

' i
,',','

need to be resolved, and the oven"iding iniport'ance of ensuring¡ fairness for aH children needs to be addressed. Resolvin6¡ lssues of validlty, reliabillty, and fairrîess is criticâX to the suctess of the new systern, The Cowncilconcludes that the ljnited States, wit'h

qppropriate safeguardsn should initlate the developrnent of a
R

a i's in

û

S

l,

a

w

d ø,r

ti.

s

fo

r

lt

meri

tc

¡¿ &lrd

l¿

c¿g

¿

?:

o ¡'

åU

lì{L'r'Þr.¡ca¡'

volurtalv systern rf &ssessments Linked to high national
standards. These
ry_q-e'qsm..e-ry-ts

should be created as

expeditiouslyaspossibleby.a.wide-.ryry-e_y'._CI..{_-q-qy-gJg_p".g"Aandbe

rnade avaiiable tbn adoptlon by states and ]ocalities. The Council finds that [he assessrnents eventuaily ceuld be used for such lrigh-stakes purposes for students a$ hÍgh school graduatiott, college admission, continuing education, and certi-fication for employment. Assessrnents aould also be used by stâtes ênd locallties as the basis for systenn aecountability. ìn the Cot¡ncii's view, it is desirable that, national content, and performance standards and assess¡nents of [Ìre standards be established. Doi¡g so will constituLe anr essentlal next step to help the cCImtry achieve the Nationai frduCation Goals.

Moreoveç developing standards and assessrìlents at, the nationaÌ leveÌ can contribute to educational renewal in several ways. This effort tras the potential to raise learning expectations at aÌl levels of education, better target hurnan and f¡scs"l resou¡ces fon educational irnprovement, and help lneet the needs of an increasin€ly mobile populatiovl. Finaily, standards and assessments T.inked to the standards can become the coÌTrerstone of the fundamental, systemic refotm neeessal'y to improve scl"rools.

FcwsüfuË$üry ç6 ffineæffimg MwÊüwmw$

$wmdwwds æmd m

$yskm

æff

&ss€ssmemß
touncil recommends that standards be

As a ftrst step, the

developed in the flve core sr-Lbject areas set out in the Nat'ional Ecåucation üoats* Hngiish, maEhematics, science, history, and geographry with other subjeets to follow. The feasibility of setting national sLandards and their effectiveness in prompting slate and loca] reforrn and experírnent^ation is demonstrated b5r the work of several ¡rational professional organizat ions, a nutnber oflstates, and other countries. The experiences of the National ûouncil of Teachers of Mathernatics (NCTM) and of severaÌ sî.ates dernqlrxstrate that slandards-seLting !s feasible it, beitg and states done. SÏowly buL surely acrûss ttre country, 'is locçl dåstrÍaLs are respondirìg to the NCTM standards by ehaqging tB"te curricuh*m and style of teaching to neftrecb the 'challen8¡ng new stasìda¿ ds. T!'¡e ûotmcll recomrnends nætional ,support for such efforte ancl e¡"rcouna$les the work by

-

-

:;.l1.;,,JnnuarU

Ð

A,

g

pg ¿

,(

profesclonel organiuations, st&Ëes, and )'¡cal' :ies in al"ticulating stendards, cuyricu-lum frameworks, and ir¿stn¡ctiosraÌ Suidelines. To make natlonal standards rneæningÅul, !t is inrportøilt that

the Natiotr he able

rneäsi¡re prtgress toward tTiem. bÏew ferwrs are envisioned. "4 tests wo,rth teachin$ to of assessments system of studenl asses$ments linked to wonid-clsss stendårds t"vound provide furfonmation that eould be used to:
Èo

-

*

ø

exemplify for stualents,I¡a.nents, and teachers the kfurds end levels of achievement exPected; e irnprove classroom lnstructiol't and learning outcomes for all
students;
ø

infovm students, parents, and. teachertf¡about $t'Lldeftt

prtgfess;
@

st*ües, measure and hold students, schools, schooÏ dlstricts, performance; and' the hJatioyr accountable for educat,iona}

and decisions' assist education pol,icylnakers wi.th Þrog¡'amfnatic be accomplished It, is unlikely that all of these pl-irpÜses cot¡td
ø

'

neDability, ' with the s&rne &seessrnent. Requírements for validity, of the reviews and failr"iess necessltate on-going, hdependent

assessrnerttsalrdtheiruses.Flrrther,parliculanlyforclrildren such who have historicalty experienced less success in schools' wittrr djsabilities, as the poor, etlrnic rninorities, and st,udent,s critical schools should erïswe the opport'l'rrtity to learn as a
condïülon for valld and fair use of assessment' results'

$omee:dstingasses$mentsmaybenetained,whileotherswii-l paÛchwork' need to be replaced to avoíd adding t'o t'he current by states' wellas Fromising effo:i.fis are under way rrationally, as Iocal.ïties, research institutions, and. test publishers usin€inew proËress against more a-qsessrnent rnethods to me&sure student . dernandin€icumiculurn content. Tnvesting !n a national system of use of assessments cuuld Ïead to rnore effective and economical :, availabie resrurces since it, would pnor¡ide directlon ænd focus to

'

reforrn efforts. The touncil Llrges support for necessatY research and development so that the critical need fon assessing students agains& the yardstick of national, wonld-class st'andards
cån be rnet.

,'
.,

'

The counciÌ notes that i.rthey are to be usefulu comparable resuìts shoulqX he available bo ali key Tevels, lncludirw i¡rdlviduatr strideìits and tireir parents, schcols, dislråcts, st&tes, ancl t'he
Rai

s i'rt'g,9d

e¿'¡¿

rdc r¿Cs

f o r,4

tn e

rit

tc

ï' E d w t a I i rt tt

?, '¿u

Nation. Assessment outctmes tied to the standards should be widely distribrrted and ccirnrnunicated in a fors¡i that is neadily comprehensibie to students, parents, potricymakers, and the pubüc. States and locaüti¿s shouJd report Eesu-lts in the context of relevar¿t Lnfonnation on Ëhe condi[tons of leaming and students' opportr.mities to learn.

ffieveEmpü

rrg

ü md-

g

sffi pBemeæm$üm

g

Nw$Ëømw$ $gw mdw

rds

ømd ru $ysËm wfi &ss@ssffieffiçs*
To ensure that development of netional ständards and a voluntary system of assessrnents is done effectiveiy, a coordinating structure needs to be agreed upon and put into place, This str¡rcture shou-ld benefit from and nol dtlplicate work
"f

already beÍrq done by existfurg enúities. The touncil reconrmends that a reconfigured National Hducation Goals Fanel and a newly created National Educ¿tion Standards and
.Assessments

touncil q9$ iqql|y

!*o-

perf orrnæree,.qþn{a,rdsandc¡ite;9þ{q¡as.,-s,-e-qqrnqn!s-asw-o¡}d class, The Council fu¡ther recornmends that to ensure strong piitilic acaountability in [his rvork the Fanel would appoint rnernbers c¡f ì,he Natio¡ral Hdueation Standards and Possessntents tounci.l, which would !'¡.ave tl'te respox'lsibility to coordinate trris national effori. Þligh national standands and a system of assessr¿rertts, whlle criticatrly important, are ntt paneceas fsr the Nationþ educational problems. Other required elements of refonm include stnte curriculum frameworks tied to the stanciards, professional developntent opportunities for teachi¡rg t'o fihe obandards, new roles and responsiÏ:üities for educators, tcehnology that enhences i¡lst¡r.lctional oppoffiunities, assistance to famjlies and conrmunities in need, incentives to inspire bet'ter efforts by students and educatorc, early hrteryention where problems are identified, and the reduction of health and socla!
ha¡.riers to ìearning.

-e-e¡!i$,

c-onJent 45t"$stg$ent

€wmeåsjsåwrå

, l'..:
':.'l,

The ec,untry is engager:lin a natÍonal debate on what students shquld know ayrd he able to do and on how to measure
'f

llr..','

ørt'ua"ry 84, t tlgg

7

* ._ -à q-a

IF.l ,'\

't. achievement toward those ends" This debat'e ås part of fundamenta! shift of perspect'ive acntng educators, policyrnakers, and the public frorn exarnining inpu'rs and elemerrts of the educatisna. process to exarnining outcornes and resuits. The CorlncÍl inttlally discussed st'andards and essessments as a way to help measLlre pÍ'ogress t'oward Ëhe National Hducarion Goais but, cärfte tt see the rntvemen[ toward itigh statlOálds as a rneans to help achieve t'Ïie Ûoals' -S/hìtd-ñdfut ôf'tne technicat and politlcal challenges, the of ûoumcil concludes that, national standards atrcl a system ralsing for assessmen¿s are desirable and feasible ¡¡rechanisms expectations, revitallzing lnstnrct'ion, and rejuvenating educational reftrrn"l efforts for atl American schools and ion St'andards stuclents. Thus, the National Council on Educaf standards and Test,ing endorses the adoption of high national measure [o assessments and the developrnent of a system of
progress toward those standards'

a

.l

.i i,
,a.:.:4.

,:::,:l

,ilrt
:::r,l:

t
R

tt i.t i tt 11 .$ ttt ¿td<¡

rtls fot' ¿lnt t'lt't¡ tt

É,'rl

¿t(ttl t('tl

å.'Å

&wæ Wm&&æmMffiËæskdffitrdffi æmffiæffiw&æxarumff Åwmærummæxa&m ffi wmkmfuåæ?
:l

ru$ Åh* Crun.il

finds thaL setting ¡taLional stanctands ancl cleveloping a syste¡n of Assessmer¡ts nneasuning progress toward the c:,¡ndards are desirable. The council discussect r¡ational standards and a system of assessn¡ents as {å rneens of trackitig progress toward [he Natlonal Etlucation Goaþ Elandands ancl ássessùrents are important, tools to help the Nation achieve the
Gsals by ralsing eNpectsliûns ancl providíng info¡mation so that, available resot¡rces can be better targefed. In addlt'ion, r'¡at'ional standards and a system of assessrnents tiecl to l,hern can play key roles !n addnessin$lthree nationa! priorities. F'irst, they can help
us extend [he oppot

{'

'

!

tunity for

a high quality educat'ion t'o ail

,Arnericans. Second, they can strengthen dernocraf ic inst'i|utions and valt¡es while ena'nting ail citizens to participate rnore etfectively in ttre potltical process. Third, they can enhance

ecorç¡nåc cornpetitivcness by lmpnoving Lhe Natlon's human capital- tlre abilities and ski.lls of the coun[ry's wonkers anci

entrepreneurs.

Jçùuar!.j;ì+, ltì$N
atð

f&e Need fur
&ssæssmcmß

Næeåæmw8 $ewmdmrdw æmd m

$ysffim ø$

KqwEkM* 6dwffiffiÕ8wg @petwedffi

fu

Â!t Å!æ@rtuwsus

Fligh nationaå education standards * d a system of assessments tr measure thein attainment can play a vital nole in feis¡itg expectations, especialþ for yo¡:ngstem frorn g¡roups'that' have

historically e:rperlerrced less acade¡'Ìlic success' Whjle the
tor.lncil. reco8nizes lhat trew s[andasds and a'ssessments alone are not a eomplete edueation refonrn stratpgsr, wonld-class fon st¿ndards arrd quatity assessments can bdpowenfr-rx catalysts

inrplententing the systemic chqnge necessâqy bo brirlg ãll qtudents,teqyiq-g-nooneþehind,tgllryþp-grf ornrançesq11$g¡dg' ttre Cormôn nas cò¡rôtude¿ ttràt sta¡rdards and assessmer¡ts ha'¿e who are the potentra! ûo boost, &he performance of studen[s the least norv atre who eurrrently ab*ve averd.ge as well as those successful. By ennphasizin6 their appticability to all students,
ståndards and æssessntents wiltr help assure t'haf' adequa&e Ïrelping ali resÕ.rffces are availahle and appropriately targeted to students att'ain the s8andards. To achieve thÍs arnbitious putfptse, there are three important' not be co¡"¡siderêtions, F'irst, poor initial penforniance shor-rld lower with cowses used to divert s¿udents into less dernanding but rarher must ]ead to improved instruction and

expeclations redoubied efforfi. second, policyrnakers should seek to en$ure that sckrools provide all their s$t¡dents with opportunities to
mast,en t,he de¡nandir¡€|new

rnaterid in the standards irr an witl"t atnnosphere where achievement is prized. Thjrd, students pro:¡ided be should profî.ciency disabifities or of lirniûed English opportunÍtíestolear¡randtodentonstr¿ttet'he{rmasteryof' n'laterial under cireuimstanaes &hat take into aecount' their
special needs,

Suthwøiry fuCffiüw&runw
þrigh"qLrålity national standards and a systern of assessntents have tlie potential of helpry all students acquire the necessalry

' ,

knowledge, skiÏ-ls, ancl shared values to deepen alid renew or*v eivic eultuse end of enabfjng aif aitizens to part'ielpate ¡no¡"e

effectfve3y tn tlie politlcætr prrsesses of de¡'nocracy. [-ra reeeurt' :decades, ,'' tl"te populationr hæs grown increasi:gly diverse. The Councllçanefuj-Ïy co¡rsidered the aoncerns that, ståndat"ds e$d ,'.'

.,.,ð,qsessFneftts rfti$ht, Ïrave the effee[ of ]ronnogenlzlW [he
r¡¡,¡'

cttlture'

fn

ñwisdrog Stø,ndørd.s f,ar Atnericsn EcJuaø'&ivrt

å

{

(.)

-

the tor.rncil's inten"c that the stegrdärds reflect ånd be enrlched by Ëhe Natlon's pÏuraüstic herita8e as ç¿elj as its shared democratic values and institutions. Tk'o important consideretions have help'ed shape a nl,urtber of the CouruciÌ's recovrrmendations. Flïst, the Üouncil decided that the standards shsuid not be used as a national curriculum. Rather, they should serve &s a basic core of important understandiqg¡s that all sûudents need ts) acquire, hut certainly not everything trtrat a student, should learn, $tates and local jurisdictions need to retaivt the capacity [õ mclude a substanüial amount of additiona! material reftrecting their pa$lcular interests anrå emphases. Seeond, the system of assessments the Ûouneil is recommending is not, a sin6Je national test' Ïnstead, states, lndividually or cotrleatively, wiìtr be encoruuged to develop or acquire their own instrì.rments to assess pro6re$s Ëoward the nationaÌ stendards. In these Ímportant ways, ühe Ì'{ation's legal and historiaal tmdltlons of state and local cûntrol of education at'e presezued white still developing common ground on key aspects of education tÏrat are vit'al for all Arnericans. T'he UniËed States has historically dernonstrated a remarkable abitity to bi.nd together a wide variety of groups into one natio¡r' A comrnon undeistanding of the knowledge and skills future gerrerations of citÍzens shol"¡ld ptssess has the potential to serve as n powerfuf foree for national unity, social vitality, and cult'urai
It, is

våbrancy.
ffi eew*mr¡[ø

CemryftivereøCI

F{igh standards for student, âttairuaeÏ'tt, are critieal to enhaitcil'tg

Arnerica's economie competitiveness. The quality of huntan capitaÌ, f;he knowledge and skills of labor and rnanagerìnen&, helps detennrine a nation's ability to corrpete in the world rnarketplaee. [nternational companisons, howeveq consisten0]y show thnt &he aaadernic pet{orrnance of American studenl;s is utr*,he, below that, of students in many other developed aountnies. nelative deficiency in ,4vneriea's humarr capit*i cosrtnibutes to the

inability of marny fi¡"rns in the U¡riî,ed $t¿tes to contpete in[drnationeJ]y. L,ow skill levels ryray ælso be impeaåing A¡nenica¡t brlsifiess froln shifting tr newer, rnore efficient rnethods of prodllctÅcn tÏ.tat, rec¡t-ilre ËFeaten nesponsibüity and skiï] on the pant of front-üne workers. These deficíenaíes ìikely affect, the standard . of tiving of all A¡'u'¡erieans, but the eflfects are felt most ,'rkeenly by tltose wÏ¡o do noE ïrave adequage skiìls. The Cct¡-clci"l
,!awurt.r¡4

94, î ügg
' $"ry
^êis

xt

thus concludes th*t,world-class stanelards for student performance and away of assessång progyess t'oward t'hem can the ldation's ue nast of edt¡cstion's contribution to addressing in lhe deficit in huma¡.r ca¡:ital aneå incneaeing cÚwrpef:itiveness
giobal nianket¡>lace"

that The oouncil fincls, as do many in the buskress corfijlQtinity, include should sfandards set, in speciJÎc aaademic subject areas in t'he U'S' ttrte lype of useft¡l workplace skills described

Departmentofl,abor'sS0AN$(secneffi'stomnrissionon the academic Achiel,trg Necessary skill-s) report. Ir¡ addiüîon tt personal and skills knowledgeide*tified rn the StAi-¡$ repoft, in qualities, such as äaquirir€,and evaiuatilrgdat"a, working
penformance, selftearns, rnonitonxtg and correctlng how to learn are manâgement, solvångg problents, and knowing fon success aü work' To the extentpossible' these

irnportsnt,

tyfes of skiìis caEr and shoi'úd be lntegrated into Lhe wlt h high-qlxälity t echnicai *t u**c*c* ¿nd assessrnents.'rûgether t,rainingandthebroadknowledgeprovldedbyasolidac¿demic t'he *C***tî*n, sucti skills cmn go a long way [oward creating
a product'ive literate and competent wot"kforce necessary for

national

ecûnOfny.

Nwßüwmqxü $CwmdwådB

ffiffid w $ysrcmm w$&ssæçsffieffi€$

hig¡t The touncil Lras come tû the conclusiotl t'hal developirrg the natlo¡lal st^andards and a system of assessrnents nteasrtning provide to pot'entlal deg¡ee to whichthey are attained has t'he families, educators, and policymakers witli tÏ'te informaÛion necessäry Lo rnake wise etÌucatioxral decisions'
a smñ,l,ar¿J, true Únítea smlóf Ìiäs gmvitated towar{ fayi¡g state minimu¡n /ac¡o rnmhatr slqilis currlculunr" Tlte rnany

I¡r.!¡he,a.bqe-nceqfdqmandingcontqn[andpenfcrrnrance, ds

óompóien*Vtests, the iovrei leveï skills orient'ation of ntost textbooks, and state avtd. Ïocal Poliales t'!'ta*" do no[ adequat'ely prtrnote quality are examXrles ûf this ¡"nir¿irnal approach' The

touncil finds ttiat

v¿Trat,

has beeyr dernanded Ís insuff,rsien[ ln that

it csvens fan too ìittTe oflt]re l<nowle@¡e and skålls stt¡dents need [osueceed in the modern workp]ace and to paffiicipat'e tn Ëhe ' deniocrabic prtcess. $uch losv expect'ations short'ahan$e , sLuden[s and []l-seüve []re counbry. Vet ss longas t'oday's low sÈendards rennain in place, the perfonnmce of the rnajorit'y c¡f

'' J#

#t¡d.ç¿¡lg '984¡i¿le¿rrd'ç

Jor

'4wtet'icttw

lJdwr:ç'lâ'on

A$

't t"'

ffM$ffæmåæûwæmrehfuxg
SÊæffem*mfi
€tr

mxsWemæffi#s
æhilËty &o

åVfutf¡ernsfical povrer, whieh icrvolves tlte

díseern

mxthemadeal reÌøtionshrips, reæson trogi.eallp, und use nrsthesnaùicel teclinÍqr¡e* effeefrtvelyo rn'$$t Õ€ the c€nlrel eoncern ofnnæüttematies edwcahÌon and ntust be frhe context ivl whieh skilh are developed.

Esceryted

lrwn:

Ca$forr¡la Msthematics

F

ranneworlq

CwÅ'i,forøi¿t, Sttztr- ÐsWvlrr¿ørøt øf ffi&¡pa&'døw'

{ I g g }.

students is unlikely to impnove substantlally. $tandards developed at the natio¡ral and state levels should [-rave a nurnber of speciftc components:
ø

Åw oasrarcfui'W sî'ø'r,errt'e'{tÊ for each subject area to provide agurding vision of its contexrt and Purptse;

* Cw¿tewt, stn'ruln'nls that describe the knowledge, skills, and othter understandings that schools should teach in order for studenls to atûain lrigh levels of competency in challenging subject, rnatter;
ø stu.dewtþesormnnre sf,ünd,d,rds that defi¡re various levels of cornpetenee in the chællenging subject rnätter set out in

.

¡Ì¿.*

the eontent

sT;andands;

ø Sckøol, d,ei,iaer'A sta,nÅnrds developed by the Ptat-çs

¿ouóctiveri ffom wläðh eách ffiäõöifð seiect the criteria that, it finds usefi-tl for the purpose of assessing a schoÐl's capac[ty and perfornraticei and
ø

Sgsterwpetfownønæ stçnfu'td's that. provide evidence
about, the success ofschootrs, local schûol systemsr st&tes'

and the Na.tion in bringing all students, leaving no one
behÍrnd, to high perfonnance standards.

TÏre Council concludes that
t

r-tationæT

standarcts should have

he fol-lowång charact erisLics: ø l'{'àgll eæpectøt'i,rms

'
a

eupectat'i'twax of rndrciwøl covwpetemcg. The Oouncit nuted that edr¡eatlonal eXpecLatio¡ls are cun'ently too low and that,, as a nesult, too ffieflS Aå'nerlcarx students perfonnn etcordlrwly. Sett,ing

*'{ttt

ì..

Jtttttturil;t4, tt)tìl

,t

Íi

NCTM Standård
L
str¡dents can'

õ:

$lgebra

gr"do g-i2, the mathematics cuniculum shoutd include the ;;fitü.d st"ó of algebralc concepts and methods so that 8ll
r rep¡esent situetiofrsttr¡t involve va¡iable quantlties with
"

áþressioru, equadons, inequalides and matrices; uË t"ur.t ó¿ ãraphs 8s tools to interpret erprcsdons'
eqtrations and

.

õ"ttü"

ineqr¡alitles;

anã mabices, and solve equaüons and

.f

. ãppãi"te dtr power of mathematical abstrsction ôfid
synùolism;
students canand so tlrat, in addidon, college-intending
o

"tpt*dions inequs¡ities;

. dñ;r,rt riã

txe matrices to solve linear systsrn$ æct nicat ru¡u¡tv with algebnic transfoÍn8dof¡s, ¡trcii Oitg tu"t t tques based on theory of eq¡atioru'

B*rrpþd frr^ Cl¡rrlculr¡nr and Er¡alu¿tio¡ Sta¡rd¡rds for s"úiú;tit"*àtlo,Notior*lcq¿nøitolfieonlø¡sotf
Møtlønntìcs. (1986).

world-class standards will purposefully address this will be deficiency. Students, regardless of background' challenged to meet these high standards'

o Focus on d d'irecti'm,
standards set

nor all inclusive. would be They should be viewed as a common core that enhanced through considerable state and local flexibility' within the broad framework of the standards, schools and teachers would have the discretion to develop their own detailed cu¡ricula, determine subject sequencing¡, choose materials, select pedagogl, and add content reflectin¡¡local and state interests and diversity' Nati'anaf
The standards, arrived at throt4þ eonsensus, wilt be natlonal in character and applicability' It would be inappropriate for the federal government to create

twt a nø¿iØnl would be neither exhaustive

cu¡rinulum'

o

-rntJedniø|.

or mandate the new standards. St¿ndards'setting must involve the widest possible participation in the process from indlviduals and groups at the natlonal, state' and local levels'

ßo isíttg .5¿artrla rd's lor A¡netìcctt¿' Ed'u calirttt

¿ù B[$rmPTåUffltBt[

ixqø9,iir:¡i:ti

T@i

&66f 'fr8 ñ.¿'Ðnxtûfl
'padtlbnap atæ ssaqS
pe,o.o.{dll"l1

8e sorìhl&ll'{Ðal J$aLA.r€Eäs$€

Fw?p,¡orL¡o;¡q pue $pJçpue?s aaueu:"ro¡*ad
{Ð!.Ã01?Ët¡

pus 1uatru03

aqx q?lie Suawu8¡trw Sun4etru¡eu
n1

nauill.eaao 6a1or{a ¡lue apuer¿o pplot{$ aq ppciqs u¡a1e.{s ,}qJ, '4,?æls

'¡4uaLa"ldo¡anap îr¡Ptt'studø'ianadl ø 'slsa?
"¡aF;1?.¡cd

8ûu"-

¿{rre ldopm sa?e?-s treq3 axenhaa lou ll{!s 3uauru.lanoB I€JapaJ aq*1,'Á,xelunlon ðq fipn s?uaffissa.sseJo walsÁs ¡euopgu

aq? t4 uol3edgalX.red a3€?S 'fr"eayryw"øea'

yu¿t"* fianSurana¿

ø

'waqtr aqnbas Áæu Áaqtr *o

sluau$sasss aq3 e#¡sop ts€a sa?€4g 'spJæpt¡r"¡s Isuol?Pu at{? 01 på{!q1 s?uaui$sa€s€ Xdope oB'sdno¡S rn "lo Á¡lunpratpuS'sa3e¡s s3?lâ?,¿4ssassr? a'¡d:tgyn¡t¡ oX dn aq XI ?sa? a1ttxøs w îøt;,
IIIåtu

*

ø

aì{3 ÐAeq

'$unl"rua¡go suo¡lgpl.Ioa îirÉAaläJ puü LLIBai
sarX¡1€ool

osp pploqs sXuau.¡ssas$xr¡u maieds FLroTlËu V cl Álllrng.¡oddo

-

sa.ãn?eal $u,rmo¡¡og

sp qans uol?eurrogu1Jo lxasuoo aql u¡ slplsa; x"loda.¡ ppoqs ptie sala?s'aau€tu.to¡;ad uo s?¡¡au¡8pn[ pauruo¡.4

Fwdo¡anap
a"re AeqS

u1 3s¡ssts oJ,

'uo¡1eN aq3 pue'sa3Ëxs'sXOIJlslp's¡coqas

oqua*ed pue qoqf sluðpn?s Sulpnlau¡os¡ana¡ Áail Tie o3 aTqellsÀ€ {[rryasn aonpo"rd otr Átrlcedtso aql pue $lnsa; a¡qe.rvcluuoc

6p*Epu€?s aoLrBuJJoJJãd pue Stla?uoc 1æuolîeu q1¡,ra Suaun@p aq p¡noat sXuauoduoo q?üqJo sa.mtrea; "{04 aqÅ .(dg"dÌq} ssa"e8o.r6
T€uoltrecnpm Jû 3taßu^Issassv ¡uuol?e¡{ aH3 se qans 'sgtlatussa$sæ

oldue's a¡ecs-aF.ne¡ ptre isluapn?s Fnp1rtîpt4.IoJ s?Flsal appo.ld
utsc Xæq? sr.uarussðssts 3uêpn3s :s'¡uor-lodtuoc o,Ttl suJ€?Lroc Xeqî

pal€aJc

aq,

p¡noqs s?uar*ussasse 3o ua3s,{s Fuol?çu V 'eiqefisap

sr uJêr,T1Su.rupXp w ssaaons,üLrapn?s Ft4ssasseSo u¡aXs¿{s æ let{? pðrqlri.ra3êp sBÌ{ T}3mo0 aqx '¡ngffi4ueê{u SpJBpIIE?s aqsur oJ,

"spla$ Xaafqns aqX ul afua¡naour4¡o Suapdogaaap aI{3 qtrttn aoed daa>¡ sp"mpuels

tn.{l

.:il.rl? Jê/\o ?uauroulJa"r pLrE ?uauaÂo.edu4

*^$tn;doutt u¡ ?J 'ss'€ln^pl.rÐ/$a *TBr-ilaJ ol Jap.¡o t¡l nFu¡offi"o

ffi¡uiua

aq

¡¡pn ssoco;d aqx*Sasxno aq? uJo"¡J spJepLlals dlnenb do¡anap aptnwañg ø ot ualT€x êq pTnoqs ôræ a[.ItL&,\ s!?M1s

?ru*

'pasn Á¡apma aq UïÂ{'ssa'.¡o.td

uado pr-re peo;{q e q$nc"iql padoianâþ'spjepu4s r{1¡pnb-qfu Seqt sa3ædtor??ru IIourìoO aq¿ ",{.rqunlÐA ðq I.¡.gS s-pJ€pyg?s lguor?'su aq3 Bupdopv 'ñ¿.oqsyu.rvwgou* fi^twtrun'¡a¿

ø

'Fcuno3
sgt{î Flry{$ffiqælsa uotSæisffial aq? u¡pô?o}'Ã s'aq ssa;r$uo3
sre

for reliabllit¿ validity, and fai¡-r¡ess. Frofessional stzurdards exist b*"paid resolving ma*ry of theee lssues. Færtiaular at'¿enLion nirest' to the Eeliatritlty, val-idity, ancl fairness of aseessment, insÙni"rnents or and testtng condifiolts when high stakes for students educatorc are attached to test' results'

Assessrnents must address important technical issues

of

yhe

wmd w $ysgwrw &ssessmæmËs ñm Kdwewtüæm Ræfurm
KwBæ wË NwBüæmøå $gæmdæqds
'.,r

æ$

and a A national initiative to develop worTd-clJss st'andards progress systern of high-quality assessmer¡ts that m€âswe

towardthernisvital,forreforntingAnrericaneducat'[on,forthe
following refrsons. an organized American education would be well sefl/ed by beæis and t'o attempt to provide direction on a nationwide

det,eri.rdnesonneoftheirnpclrtant,skillsandknowle@¡ethat,all t,heir educa[ion, wit,lrout, st,uden[s shouj<{ rnaster at key ståges in standands trying to specify a 1q!!-onaÏ cu¡q¡cult¡ry' '4lticulating provide educatons and and cleveloplrtg asseîärnents that t]teir efforts can students with [aryets toward whic]r to ntarshal resoun'ces' contrihute to mc¡ne efficient' use of aveilable EducatorsplacediffenentempÌrasesonwhatst.udentsshould increasi$glv ' leam at, va¡.ious polnts in thein schooling. Tn an of different' mobile scci.ety, meny stude¡rts at't'end a nun'rber ofte¡l in different schools over the crurse of their education, not know what comrnunitles on slates' Frequent'ly, t'eachers do before learned they can neasonably expeat' st'udent$ to have wi-ll be {'a¡'igårt entiring their classroorns and cannot be sure what

, it,uougt a nationally coordinated ,eflfort. \Mhile nespeeting locaÌ ,,,, ;ilË-gil--r oåio*r*ity, such an effo"rt could take advantage of the .r Ì¡sefLt! work already *du* **y in nrany states and localities' '" i' sharins lessotts and avolding Lånneces$äry dupücation' ,:'.r' NeJstandards arid assessrnents t'hat provide lnfonnat'ion , useful to ånrprovinglinstr'r-tctloft and str¡dextt leaming would [kely t.t 'i bu per*elved t'heabsence as valtrable tools hy many teachens' Tn siË{ndaå'diaed ct-¡-rrent, .t.i of Å*biosìal ständards, blte restdf.s f¡"on'l of confusíorì t'han a .':'.l.t . âsseeements are sorcreLirnes mone ¡ Bstll'c€ surneti¡rtes feel
,,,
..

t,:ìrl.

tool

fo¡',

irnproving lnstructïon. Teachers
fle¿'dsdari .9f ¿r¡d¿¿r'rls

ior

¡1

r¡¿t'rl<rr¡ ¡¿

þ)tlurut'irtw

d]

61

6d d*t

f":i
LT

ã6{;
Áq

t, t ë Ít ¿t>n t¿.¡f.l

*

û"¡8 Xeq?

ae¿j Ána"runhs sse.rp¡)s

uo¡jua3?u leuor?eu gla?uåpaaã"rdu¡¡ 'x¡eg puæ'a¡qeg¡a¿'Þ¡¡eÁ , s?uau;ssasse FuldoxanapSo sên$sl IEaF"¡qoa? ¿t¡essacau g 'Ái¡gqununoaae jOj:::'l pTnße g.sßJJa ¡etro,?eu
,

pasn aq L{Ba ?qq? safiìseâLl¡ au;or?rlc] Á31¡unh-q$gq W ?msa* plno/l¡ a^¡3€r?rl¡r palelnp;ooo Á¡ieuoltreu s 3sq? spulr ilDurìo3 aq,L 'sairnseaui a$aq3 ?.¡0 aoweuuopad.r¡
o? paqcs??u a;e s.{û?eânpa Jo stLlspn?s,ioJ saouanbasuoc aJaqÁå anlX Ágegcadsa $1 6Tr-ÍJ, 'aîueLu.{oJ"cad p*errto¡',:

pasncoJoJ Ðq 01 spaau .Á3¡¡¡qeltrnoace 3€r{? s anaryÐq í!ãmo3 ar{J, 'slTiqs {Ëut1irît¡l Á¡"lo Fuinrsuaw str!.1awssêsse wo"U e?ep o?

;o suóllefn$a"l þue

sann"x

q?m{ aauu[du;oc o:! ÁE"iæu4:d pan

$qâq.ì
:

ÁX¡¿¡qelrrcooôE uT pãXgxsa; ?sed ôq1 u¡ seq u;at{x p.¡e/\rol ssa¡Eo.¡d

a.{nseã,fi SeqX s3uauÅssasse Á'¡Eenb pue sp;epu4s Eff{qJo 4ae¡ aqX, 'r{laneunço¿u¡¡'3uads ilaJr\ a.ra s.leTlop,s¡o¡fsdxel 3eqtr Suunsua
¡luæ slsrõgJo pa?Ða¡a'sair.Xg
.-. ¡/.-..-

qlpô pauJaouos uaaq Átrqepr.r4s.lapurù êÂet{ s*e4wur,{a¡1od palpß arp u1 uoÌtreanpa.{"anpuoaas

pue.&enuau.rpla uo spLmJ ?[tqrxdJoÁe13no ¡e¡3ug.x$qft6 aqx uaAlÐ
r'
L

.t

:r:

.,.,.

I i.

\

'säu!Ðâino pa,¡-Ìsap FàJ€A{q3--s99JBo.t{ ;o aauap¡na 03 $assacÔJd puu slnrlul 30 sa"rngpa_-W W9 q {fry5.ÁXq1lqelulx$ccq ¡sutl3Ëanpã io sÏs€q êì{1ïTqs o? paôu € spult Jôq?.rnJ ncwûoc aqJ,
'a¡qeædu.uoa pue ÁX¡gertb EF.q q?oq are

tet{}

E?Ep apnno.ld p1noo s?uãttissasssJo ruaXs^ds

e¡o 3uawdo¡onop

aq? alPu-rpJooo pue sp"IBpuB']s ?ês ox usJJa ÏæuolSsu € xBt{1

sapnlouos naunoS aq-L 'sauJos?no Jeq?o ue uo¡?.€l-ll{oFl] s€ ïIaar sB spJepusxs Á3¡¡unb-u8nr 8l430aul u1 ssa'180'ed 3!.Iêpn3s uo s?Ep alqeilal paau rt1.m¡puls rualguu:{cp$od pue sJoxBonps '3uau;Fpn[ paur,¡oJu3 aslo.{axa oJ,'spJ€pue?s PJe*toS sso.¡So¡d,s?¡Japn?s uo uoT?€uÍ.{o,¡ffi a1q¡suaqa*dtl.roo paau plre ?uei}a sal¡Tuiud 'ìJo11EN

ffi

aq3 pue'sa3e1s'sqot"l3s¡p's¡ooqcs's1ua;ed "qôE? pux sllrapnls TEnpTÂlpm :uol?€?nps m slã¡ral lug3rodun aÀlJ ol alqelIçÂË aq sp"rcpuetrs ¡ng$urueaut lsu¡e$e sluopn?s Jo aaweuuoE'iod

er{r uo dlsp atrqwedu.loa prre älq*ïa{ ler{l.gpqagryiroear ncwnog êrT,l, ¡.Ãol3??npa,a$uuqa 03 aÅl?uaal¡Ì aue?¡odu4 ue aq
,,-

rr {l
,,,

\.

pptom s¡eop yol?ænl)ã ï€lro$eÑ áql Sqna¡qce pre*toissa"r8o;rd uo uolxeru;ogtnJo $aoJnos a¡qepuadapu pu€ a?eJTìlce ðJol&
,

.., :.

t.

Áeat "laPun r'urol: q.¡offi SLrsãCIdu-q aq:l uo pßnq ppoqs spoJ.{a ¿tlau p{lu 'u"reaX o3

aJe sguaFrn?s leqn* &q"m.$ü*txJJa' s,(e-.na an¡neu:a3p paxoielxê a/\qq s3rãêM$$asse 3uaãêJ leq? sa?ou Tla¡-TnoCI ðq,1, 'uot3eril1su1 apçtifr
o3 pau$rsap ?&u a.EB $gsa? a3êq3 Jo.Áuæyg '$?sê1 Sua"rJnr auJo6 Áq pa.mseaw sffi.rqs 1eumrru: ôÌ{? uo snsoJ pL¡e uopcnfilstq }Âoåreu o? s?Frsal trsô3 s? paqam13€ saar¡anhasuoa aq3 Áq pa.mssa.ld

pubüc testing experts, educattns, policymakers, &nd the

*

of tåìe c*u-ld be focllsed. on.¿he systen"t of.çssessrnents and use

results for accotmto.bi-litY. raisårgi $t¿ndards ancl assessmeftt$ täJl strve å,s caLalysts for expectaÈions. In many stetes anct Tscalit'ies, the mlnftrr'urn and early competenc:,r sküls s{randards put in piace !n the trsïÜs yÔungÉters rvrany 198Ûs resüIted !n changes that have helped

att,ain'atleastÛheselow-Ieve}sk-it!s.Theworkofttiet.üationa] standar¿ls cou¡rcil of Teachers of ldathematlcs to create content i¡ mathematics has atri"eaily inftruencecl the developrnent of staôe Board cu¡riculi:¡tr fra¡neworks aud assesssttenß" fte tolTege AdvancerlF}acernentprÛgrarfi'gcousseguidesartdexaminat,iorts arewådelyrec*gniøedasvaln,¡,äbleandusefultoolsthathave of $t'¡idertts Ïrelped to provlde qr¡ailtv lnstructlon to rcri]liot'¡s assessment across the counflry. In Caüfornia, cu.rricu.lunr and plan that educatio¡'n reforras are ühe cornersLone of a str*tegia
il^tst,ructional i:re}udes cha"læång prclfessiOnäl clevelo¡¡rnenË, meteriaÏs' classroanr other methods, texübooks, technology, and of Settittg s'cu¡ncåerds and developing quatits¡ assessments

pr*gr***

thern should be a nat'io'nal effort' Ån be io***¡rgÌy globar econorny requires that national stavrdards initiative in thïs set, et wo;ìd_class ¡eveTs. Suah an unprecedented wat'exs relat'it'tg t'o country rnusfi find its way Èhrough uncharted

t***d

djfficutttechnicatrandpoÏicyisgues.TJrrdent,akmgthiseffof.at hetp to achieve the nat!CInal na[her than st'ate ov local levóis can cost-effectÍvelte$sandrnarçhalthe[alent'andsCánCópubhc issues' needed ûo cleat adequately wit'h these resources ^'T#-üÑfi t*os á qualitv systeftt of r1átional sËsndards and assegsrrtentsennbodyingt.heiittportantqualitiesdlseussed!nthis education sevves section to he ffilrty desirable' Given th*t irnportant,vrationelptxlposeslincludfutgequttwT¡leopportunit'yfor and all,4vnericans, enhancing the Ïdat'torl's civic cultune' åmpvovÍ¡tgtheeconorniccornpetiÈlvenessoft'heUnitedStat'es' developirß ffi-queÌ$ty asld becs.r.lse rneny of the diffÏcuït'ies of
gtandardsandassessnìentgcanbegddresseclbestatt,henat,iox.¡al
¡"lational effort t'hat' Ïevel, [he Üot¡¡rcil regomryends e ÛoÛrdinâted students ros¡lects loca! pnero$ativ*land cl{versit'y lEr educating next step ln t-i *òrm"*l*ui*"*tu- g**Ìi a¡l eff'ort is [he vrecessary

achievi¡wfihea¡nbiticlugNat,fonælHcÌuaat,lox"lGoa}san$hasthe eduaaålonal renewa1. e¡;eã¡il*ît* spur a ¡ragåûcrwide þùecess of

RatlterthanthreatenTocaläuÈtntrny,st'andandse&d quali$y cfl asses$r,terugs ,catt sup¡lort efforts t'el lm¡:rove []re
f?

c

d

s d tr

g,9

t

c¿

t¿ ci

o r el'ç

f o t''4

rn

e'r i t: w pt Sd

l¿

c

r¿

f do

¡¿

ft$

6¿*

education. St,andards and a natlonal systeni of assessmen6s would provide those eiesigning state curyiculurn a¡'¡d tes8fueg systerns with e valuable !'esor"$ce developed through a nafiiena] consensus præess. They fufcher provide a foct.ts on improvíng student perfonnance and cor.rld lead to inore effective and. effieient alloeatícn çf nesources at, [he local, s[ate, and natio¡ra]
levels.

,.ß

t

I I I I

I

å

å

fl
a

å

ã g
Ë

g ä

fl
H ffi

ä
ffi

K &
ffi

ffi

ffi
m

ffi

ffi ffi ffi ffi

ffi w ffi

ffi ffi

ffi

ffi
ffi

dr¡r¿ie{¿îN 94, I 9sg

dr, 9.
û!.4
q.-È

i$

tu
¡,", llqw@ ,.¿¿!Ê€.]
.1)y

-.-.--..---.-'-*'-*',*^Æ
UJ,r¡llÃs

ämaffiWæmmåMæffiæ ffiwwæåmw Nmffiæsamå ffieffiääffiffitrdffi mmd

æffipmffimæff Ammwmmmæffi?

,f

ry $-he Council

f"rnds

it feasÍble

as well as desirable to create

natiot.nal education standands and a system oflassessnÊents

Iinked to the s[*ndards. Precedents set b,y st&tes, Iocalities, !., professional organizations, änd other groups cÌemonstrate Lhat,

thls undertaking is feasibÏe"

$æffiäang

SMandends

üm $urb$eaË As"ë@s

The process of seLtlng s[ar¡dards is at, vanious levels of developrnen8 in the five subjects emphasized !n the National Hducation ûoals and should be expanded into crther suhrjects, such as citiaenshi¡i educaflion, foreign languages, and the visr¡al and penforruling am,s. Åttentlon shsuld also be given to devetropíng¡ stendards for [he ap*¡rlicatiotr oË knowledge to compllcated, reatr wonld pnoblems t hat, denqand int egrat ing student knowledg¡e frcm severaÏ diseiplines. The Cot¡nci! reconunends thæt, sLanciara$s be developed ghnorylt æ bnoadba^ced prmess that icivolves educa[ons, including scholans !¡l eaeh field. Teache¡s should play a key nole ín this pnocess, So, too, shor.tld nepncsentativcs CIf b¡:sistess ar¡d tlte puhlic, The
Jc¿¡r ttt¿

ry :l 4, i lllì2
æ

t.'

t

óq3

¿'e

11¡r"ffi

'lt

il

ffiseffiÞåffik åm MæSmæ*m Üæxxrxrä#$a

üæræ ætrKæmxøuumg
tudents wiLh a côntmÐn dore of knowÏed6e'.'
e Are farniliar wittr contemporary avlcÌ enduring¡works

cf

Arnefican ü$ersËure and høve * sense of howinrporta:rt thenres of A¡nerican experience lrnve devenoped l;hroryh tir¿te wox'ks e Ave fawrilkr wifh works of diverse líterary tradiÙio¡ls g¡tups cultuml atrd e&hnic, by women and ¡nen of rnarqy raciaÌ, parts woald, of the in d.if-ferent ti-¡nes and þeluding $hakespeare, ehe Bible as llter*ture, arsd elå-sstts.l rmytholoEy e tomrnunicate elearìy oraìly, ín writins, and with graphics * Þlave a strong comrnand of ståndåYd oral and writte¡n

-

*

-

*

language conventions Demor¡strate basie proofneadì¡rg and edltíng

sltìlk

Use handbooks and reference beokc &s locate language

termjnclçgy and ruies
Eøcerpted,f,rwrø: Malne's Ûommon Ûore of Learnirtg: An
Investn¿ent irr Maíne'$ Future.

standards-setting proeess should be infor"med by work in otrhen industrialized countnies in orden to ensure that t'he new standards are world class. The process envisioned is a dynamic one with standards updated to r.leet, cha'nges in saholarslxip anri t'o remain worlcl class. trVork that !e under way dernon$tïätes empirically that' standards-setting is feasible and that the process itself nray contribute to educational renewal. The þJational Assessme¡rt Governing Eoard's process for developing guidelines is an example of professional consertsus-building and natioliwicle parlicipation. The oouncil reconr¡nends t hat natiortal eclucat lot l standards builct upon the ÍoilowinÉ cLrrrent professionalefforts'
Hurglish

Literæture is the subject matter specific t'o t'he Hnglish curriculum. I¿eading and wtiting, speakittg and list'ening are processes communication skills that urder'Ïie it" The confent and of the Ðnglish curriculurn enrlch life experiences, increáse

employability, and enhance communicat'Ìon' S¿avtdards developcd in [his subjecfi have hnoad appliaal¡liity in every subjecl of the currlculum.

22llcisirrg¡.9fn¡rrdt¿rtls/otAwtt'¡'i¿'rl'tпdl¡r'r¡fitr¡r
ßûry
6.ø

ib¿ted by

DtùEDRS

Aï students, regard.iess of baekgrCIund, shor¡Id læve access to both the crnterxt, and processes of Ëhe Flnglish curnicuium and be able to respond tho¡"rghtfr¡lìy anc$ k&owledgeablSr abor-rt, a wide variety of rnajor wonks of h[qh"quâ]ity literature. $t¡¡dents sontetiÌnes have r¿ot been intnor{ueed to Literature because thre focus has been on bhe basic ski.Ï.ls. Often, writfuxg is little rnore than filting in the blanks on composi.ng a slngle sentence. Important worl< has beexr done in ¿his area hy a nurnber of states and organizations. Fon exantple, the assessment frameworks for reading and wa'iting created by the Nationa] ,Assessrnent Governing Eoard fon the National Assessnlent of Educatlonai Frcgress (NAÐP) and the cur#cr*um gr¿idehnes created by the state of Malne may be useful to exar¡'line !n any
st¿ndarcls-set
t

ing effo'rt.

Mreetue
foundation in malhemåtics that goes beyond simple ani0hmnetic and lxtclutfes analytical and problemsolving operations. Of all the subject are&,s, rnathernatics is now the one in which the United States is farthest along !n the stsndards-settuçf process. The NatÍonal touncil of Teacher"s of &fathematies hes developed cunniculu¡n standa"rds thrr¡Wh an extensive iterative process with broad pubüc input and professionalreview that, has resulted [n unprecedented consensus, These are gaining wide acceptance in education and in the public arena as a f'ramework f,on the ma[hematics that schools shouid teach, Defìning s$andards for Ïevels of student, mathematics perforrnance - what, knowledge and skills students should masLen stitrl remains lo be done. ?hat, process should build upon Èhe irnportant work under way in rnâny sLetes and cot¡ntries.
ALl students need a solid

kMe
tiven the
'\nological developnnent, a[.] st udents fast pace of need a firm grasp of the concopts anc{ t}tinklng skills involved ic¡ science. Stuclents can lea¡'n informabion about, the wonlcl around thent fur e mätu.uer that, also teaches thenrt to reason and
investigate sci.entifically. lNith the su¡rpont of the {J.S. Ðe¡rartment
of, Hdt-¿cat,ion, t&re

t'

INal.iona! Aeademy of Sciences has necetltly started a ¡¡'rajon effort to develop world-class stånctards for wha[ students should &enow Jrt
r¿

r¡c¡ r

¡¡ l!

4, .tì

l!

. ry<] r ç,, 6dt"J
li;.*.¡ñäîñffi

Science For All Sh¡dents
o World norms

.

forwhet corutitutes abasic education håve clranged radicatly in response to the rapid gowth of scientiñc knowledge and t€chnologie¡l power. Sweepirg clr¡nges in the entire educational system from

kinde-rga¡tent¡roWh twelfthgradewill have tobe rnade if the Unit€d-States isto become a n¡tion of scientifitally liærate
citizens.

o A necess¡ry ñrst sæp in achieving sysæmatic reform

in

science, máthematics, and technologt education is reaching a literacv' clear understandi¡rg of what constitutes

Tientiñc

Escerptedftvnt: Science For All Americar¡s: A Project 2061 Repori On i¡eracy Goals in Science, Matlìematics' and Teõhnolos¡, funir*:at¿ AssociationÍot tlæ Ad'auæenent of 9cierce. (1989).
and be able to do in science. Such promising work as that

of

Project 2a61 oîthe American Association for the Advancement of science (A.AAS), the NAEP science framework, the National
Science Teachers Association's Scope, Sequence wtd' Coordùnti'ott projects, and several stat'e science frameworks will form the basis of the consensus-building activity to be

conducted by the National Academy of Sciences'

H¡dory
understandinglthe past provides a context for understanding

thepresent.Thestudyofhistoryismorethanasuperficial

of recognition of names and dates. It lnvolves indepth knowledge the ùport¿nt people, ideas, events, and trends that have helped to shaie the world. In addititrn to major political events, history over includes such areas as social and economic developments links The time, civics, art and music, and the history of ideas' should between history and 8eo8¡aphy shor¡ld be explicit and ot demonstrate the roots of events in time and place. Knowledge

thehistoryofothernationsandtheirculturesbroadens students'perspect,ives.AsolidgraspofAmerica'shistory and the teaches students an appreciation for both the divenity
its unique chamcter. to Given the size and diversity of the country, it is difficult craftaplanforhistoryeducationÙhatbalancespluralismand

given the united states shared experiences and values that have

24

Raising Slandard's lor A¡nerican Eduealiott

us
or",,rrìIñffiõi!

fum
Wc

ffie ffiæ#åffiæmåm äfrm€æary-

fuMffiwåæsamæþkmew*wk
w*stt erus &tud*Ðts üû undersge¡rd ghe waåue, tlte importanee, scrd tlte fuåg$åAey of dcmowffie [mstftce&å*ns...to develop u keen sentse of et"buies und eåtiz,ertsFrtp, nnd to care deepþ øårcuü the qtmlåey of &åfe $n theie etlxmntunis, their naÈåon, andtheårqvoråd.

ffiwørptød fwwa: te,!Ífonftíø F{istory-$echt,Saåence Fkwrrewor"k,
üæÅ,ifær¿l'fu

StMø frøpç;t"&nwrut af

M deææ&ùbø

{ Å WU.

col8rriosl values" ln CaÏ¡fornía, a state wiÊh a very diwerse

poptdation,

t?re É/tseo4g-.9cceo{ Scd,erwe Frw'w¿,sapo'rk has

been

widely acclairured fon scholanly lntegrity and sïttd&icultLweå Þerspeatlve. "ffie h{ational tenten fon Flistqry in the Se[Ìoo]s st UÛX,.A has emhanked os¡ a two-year effont to develop wonld-ciass . histoiy sl,s,ndnwls wiåh suppont frorn ûhe l{aÈîonal Endowrner¿t foy the F{urnanities a¡rd t}re U"$. Ðepavl;snent of HdLrcation.

trryK&@
Educated cltlzer¡s need bo ¡.urderstand t]reir geogr¿Phic setÈlng !.n the world avrd rhat of othen pecples. Geograplty, understood bnoadly, includes Êtistorical, poiltical, social, eeonornie, and physical inter*ctlon with tïte EaT"th arrd its envilonrnevtt. \ffhat we now expect ou.r students to know [n geography is minimal when connpared [o w]ra[ other cleveloped nations eNpeet of their students tn t^his suhiect. There is st¡bsLanÙfal coltcern about' ühe nregative consequences this rnaSr have for oun ability Èo rßerket Àmerica¡r Soods artd services In dlfferent parLs
of ûhe wonÌd. Wonld-cÏass standards slnould he developed ixt geography, broadly defirted. T'he leaders]dp of the Næ0ionaÏ teoguphic Society has provlded intpetus for u.r¿ork on settirng gutidelines,

.

designing fiew niatec"ials, and provid:&g professional developnteng oppCIrt ufüties fon [eachers. I'öre Gwidel"i,ra'e s Geagwpþø'iæ Nd'¿Åeüâdrv{u deve}oBed by the NaÈior'¡al Ûounc$} fon Geograptuc Education and tl"re ^4ssociatien of Ameråcat^t

f*r

Geogruphens, wourld be worlhr exa*"liniw [n the ttl-¡ffie oSsettin€l standavds for this suhjeat.

Jwnatærg 94, i99E ùj

<)í;

ti

;W
i
-'"cì rl¡rr
cc¿

hy

D),nrDR!:

C'eograPhY is Vital
Americans'þorance of theirown countryand
of the world strength, welfate, nation's for our will have dire õonsequences

andglobal interdependence and forthe efrectswe haveon people in other nations. Our very livelihoods depend upon products, ideas, and even weather and climate that orlgin¡te democracy þat Aistances from where we live and work. ln a policies public effective and lhe development of compassionate broadly wt¡o are participation citlzeru of depends uion active øi¡cated ãUouttheirown soctetyand þ relations withthe entire world. All events alfecting sociéty occur within a geograptric cont€xt. To underst¡nd these events fu¡ly we must subject them to geograplúc scrutiny. Excerptcd fn¿¿; Guidelines for Geograplic Education: Elementary and Secondary Schools, Joint Co¡t¿tn'irbe urÙ Geagî@tiß Ethnatitm ol thc Nariowl Couttci$or Geúmphi¿EttutationandthcAssocíntionof Amørinarc

Geqnplwt,

(1984)'

Towqrd o System of Assessing the Nqtionol Stondords
To make national standards meaningfut,

it is important that the Nation be able to measure progress toward them' The Council recommends a system of multiple assessments linked to the national standards that will measwe the progress of individuals' schools, districts, states, and the Nation' The system of assessments r¡"ould have t'wo m4ior of componlnts: individual student assessments and assessments about repräsentative samples of students from which inferences
of programs or educational systems cor.¡ld be made. (NAEP) is an The National Assessment of Educational Progress example of a large-scale sample assessment' Both components

thl quality

would be aligned with the national standards'

fuçoloaof A¡¡o¡¡tltcrtt
system tn endorsing assessments to mo¡titor individual and
is progress toward the national education standards' t'he Council the advocatin¡¡a system that will provide information for following purPoses:

26

Pa

i.,r

d rr

1¡,5

ta

rl tl a r d s J'o

t' A

t¡t

t' t

Íc

o

n

þ)

d tt t' tt I i o tt

ó'r JI

@

tû exemplify for studentso p&trents, and teaehers lhe kinds and }.evetrs of achievernent thal sl'rould be expected;

e

to impnove clessroorn instn¡ctio¡'c and improve the learning
outeor¡res Ëor alt students;

@

to infrnn students, pan€rtts, and teackrers about, str¡dent prrgre$s toward the standards; tû mea,sure and hoid sttrdents, schooisu disíriats, states, and the Natisn accountsble fûå" educationai penforreratrce; and
fur

"l

@

s to äss!$t,

education pro6l:em decisions to
.4

hre

rnade by

policy nnakess.

r

The Couneil notes that it is unlikely that, all of'these purposes can be accornplished with the sarne Lest orassessment,

instrument.
$wdËv#¿wü

$ftdene

Assss$ffieüÈ$&

þtew student, &ssessrnents will rteed to be developed by states,

disrricts, co¡runerciai publishers, and others in o¡den to measure student perfontance against the nationaS contenl and performanee stendards. To facititate the sound development, of such new assessments, the Council recornmends the following:
o New

student asses$rfteftts shou.ld iitconpoe"ate the best thinldng and sound reseanck¡ and cteveloprnent. work together in developlng assessmenl Ulsfrunrents in order [o use resources effeaÛüvely and tq¡ improve the quallty of the assessftlents,
others shoulcl examine various approaches in rÌesigning student, assessnter¡ts of rhre natlonal standards and also develop innovative rnethods of administratio¡i and in'rproved pnocedures to repo¡"0 [o L]ietn multiptre audiences'

e States shoulcÏ

ø States a¡rd

e Different assessrnents rftây be developed for different, curricula. Thele will be diverse inter:pretations of [he

content, standards that lead [o dÚ'feri¡ìg cunaicula and

teachíng practÍces.

* l{igh stakes sþluld

"

with t}^te nesuhs of any assessr¡rent ùnt it the qualitles ofl valldit3¡, reliability, and
nof; be associaÈed

fairness have beenaddressed. The touncil finds, however, that the e^sscssments ever^tiually cot¡ld be used flor such hfgh-stakes punposes for st¡.¡dents es hi6h school grâdLtetitn, colle8e adrnissior¡, cotttlttuing e dt-¡cætlono or

,fattuur¡tr l¿4, !9$g

üÁ;

d]

11

òi',,,,r,,[]Çî[îñ

oe$ifficåtion for en'rployxrent. A.ssessffients cotdqì also be t:sed by ståtes and ioeali8ies as the basis for systent acaourttabilåty.
&seesemmûs

d fum@

M $ftÆ#ttgs
ü:e

The üouncil reeomrnends that the }dational Åssessn'Tent of
Educational, Frogpess (FtAfrP)

reautltorised axld ass¡.ued ftmdir"g to nnonilor the Nation's and stateç'nro$reesJowïd Cóafs g a¡rO 4cf tlw National Hdueatioxt Gtels" NÅEF is the natÍorral program begu¡r tn 1969 to bÍannuaÌJy test, representatil'e samptes of stïrdents in grades 4, 8, and 12 in core subject areas and ieport achievemeyrt trends over 6inte. As natlonal standards wlj} are developed, there should be efforts t0 eÉsÌ.¡re tha¿ T{AEF be aligned w$th these stffidards"

kkskæE $sww Ass&sfuM vdde 8mnwfiwËmg &øwørtwtu Ûurrently, a substaxrLiaì arnount of t'esting is eonducted in
t'est'ed schools" lt, is fnequen,¿ry said that Âynerican str¡dents are rnore than c¡thers in the wonld. Despite aLl the te$gs, susprisingly fittÌe useful inforrna&iorr ls available to s&udents, p&trents, educatorso and policymakers. Dlssatlsfaation w!t'h shortconiings preseurt practices has led to a rich variety of efforts to impnove

in

assessrnents. ¡\ national effont is needed to facijit'at'e and eoordir'¡ate these aetivities. and The newassessmertts shotild cha!-lenge all st'udents

for educators Lo do thelr best, open up new opportunit'ies quallty of t'he students, artd provide neal l¡rce¡"lt'ives t'o improve t,he pronrise of Arrtenica's schoo}s. Thene [s sigrrifrcaxrt, lnt,erest, in and portfolios performærce-based sssessmen[s, such as projects, äs ways of coltearirg evidence of what' students kr¡ow rlse oÞt]n-ended tasks, áruc can do. such assessrnenLs fi"equentiy
require focus on h{gher onden or connplex thinkirg skills' significant student time, and may allow st'Lådents to choose perforrnaurce of antong alterna'Live tasks; sonte examine the groupãcilvities' WIhiIe irnportant' issues nernatn t'o be nescìved'
inrtovatlvet,echniquegusedbyst.at,eszutd}ocalit,iesrnaybe it"¡s&rumer¡ts irnpor'|'ant, elerrtents [¡l 0he mix of assessÍc1Ûnt,
t,hat,

will ruake tlp the new natioc-tal systern'
Imp<lrtent,t,echrrlcald!.ffict¡trtiescon'fno¡rt,t,Btosedevelopijlg

suahanewsysÈernofmssessrnent,s.TheÜot¡r¡cildeliberatedon speeia! precautions be tÏ'tese cornplexitiee and recomrmends t'ha$ syst'ern mLlst' hontr tal€en Ín the developrnet'lt, process' Flrrut', amy and' the trs.dittons of loaa! and stat'e nesponsibllity for edueat'lon

ffiËlcisiar¡¡'50e¿r¿tdt¿rrdsiu't'Ån¿e¡nict¡¡r#c/l¿ccido¡¿
È.,9

ryì {-,

¡4st¡ibu¡ed

by

DvnDDI?S

Gradingthe Advanced Placement Examination
A,¿rnnced Phcement grading prccedures were developed with
certaÍn features lntended to ensure hi8h seore reliability. There

isa"Chief Reader"who has primary responsibility forthe gradirg in eaeh subject. In consr¡ltation with the æst development committee, the Chief Reader creates a tent¿tive
set of ståndards by whieh the a¡u¡vvers are to be iudged. Tt¡e Chief Reader oversees all the other "Readen ' in thåt subject. ln most subJects, the Chief Reader receives helBin assignirg grades ftom tåose who desþed the questioils and others so as to ensu€ that the standards e¡e b€W applied consistently. Readers are trained bygrading "samples'- copies of actual answers distributed among all Readers of tl¡e same section of

h\eexam.
The readi¡rg and scorir¡g of "live'papers does not begin until consistency has been achieved in the gfading of the samples. Throughout the gradinS, samples are used d¡ily at frequent interals to ensure that the scoring¡rcmains uniform. A constant check ofrandom papers from each Reader is made to further ensu¡e consistent appücstion ofthe standards. Grading reliability studies are conducted for all examinations. Ttre final grade on an examination is the composite of the score on the muttiple-choice section plus the seores given by the Readets, weiShæd and combined. Using Suidelines estsblished for this purpose, the total composite score is translated by the Chief Reader into the scale used for reporting the grades: I through 6 (5 = extremely well qualilied;4 = well qualifred;3 = qr¡alified;2 = possibly quaüfred; I = no ¡tcommendation),

Sum.morizedfrcm: School Administrator's Guide to the Advanced Placement Program ThP Aduon¡ed Placement Prcg¡ørn, Tlæ College Board'. ( Editittt H).

consequently, must, provicle flexibility and room for local adaptatit¡n. Second, there are difl¡culties in produci¡tg assessnrents of high technical quality and faimess. Third, acknowled$ng!that an assessment systent of the scope imaginecl is a new enterprise for the Natio¡r, care must be taken to avoid the unintenclecl and undesired effeets of somc testing practices,
such as narrowing inst,ructio¡t and exclt¡tling certain stuclents from assessnìents. Sufficient safe$uards must be built into the systenr to protect stuclants from negativc conseque¡tces while

the system of assessments is being refitted, especially for

Juttttttr¡ t4, l99t

:,.1'i

J\

I

$tÌ-¡dents who Ïrave not been vse}l served by testiry in frl¡e past' It wi]Ì be teelt"ticaÏ1y diffiar¿lt br:t esset"¡tlal to evlsuve that new a.ssessments ase vaTid, neliable, and fair. This recguires ongolng reviews ot" üire ernerging assessreiecìts and Ëheir uses. Ft¡slh€r, '-,

particularly for ehitrdren who have historlcatly experlenced Ìess success inschool * sllch as tke poor, ethnie minorities, and oppoi-tunity to learn is a cnitical students with disebiTities conrlition fonvalisl and feir use of assessmertt result's'
FårsþRç$e $ysMm

\

-

d

Assessmeetß

The development of a fÏrct-n¿te system of, assessrnen[s wili be an evolutlonary, ongoing prraëss. The Üounpitr frnds the following acrivities to be cruclal in this effort:
ø

a quallty Qu,aðitl¡ ü,sswrü'ù?Ée. The Üollnail recomrnends ässessmerÌts â.scufance process to ensune that nev¿ student are appropríâte rûeasures of the netional st'anclards and and meeË the feclunical considerations of validi¿y, neliability, fairness, particulanly itl conjunct'isÌ'l svit'h any Ïtigh- stekes

uses. Judgments of validity,l'eliabiåity, and fsirness deperncl

inpxl"luponhowt.heresu]tsofÈheassessmer.¡'t,sareused. ø Quni'ilg Ew'id'el'itzes Jat" assessrwert't deuel'aprnøt¿ü' The council recornmer"lds qualitSr guictelines flor the developnient
and use of student assessníxents such as t,he Sto"rzdn.rdsþ1" criteria Ed,uaati'rv¡¿s.l awrl FsgcttoloEdca!' Testdtzg ancl the descrihed by f,ï.re T{ational Forum on Assessment.. Revised and additionai gluidelines fi'Ìay be lteected as wonk
progr'ðs$es"

ø carnpc¿rc¿büi!.g. The Ûouncil f incls it essentiaï t,hst, different of as$essnnents prccåuce coritpamble rwsuits in attalnment.
tkre standards'
e ûo¡'rerø¿d øwd,'i,r4fot.wtø,1tit'e ¡"es¿¿dd.ç, Ûne key

ctljcctlve of fon itlformation t,he assessmgnt, efforL is to provirle eccuraLe students,Parents,ant-tteachersabout't'heeducat'ional pfCIglessofint"tividr¡a}st,udetits;artot,herist,oitlforrnthe putriic about the nationalacïtic'entent ievel, Fon students, ¡latlo¡tal systern of assessrne¡tls ¡JarenLs, ancl teachcls, Lhe shot¡ldproviclcinforniat,lc¡raboutarrincìivirtualstudent's

penflonrnance against, gtational sta¡tclards. st,at,es atrd lq}calities o| shoulrl report, results !rt thc conLcxt, ot" tlre collclitions

lcaming and sÛudûcrts' opport'utrities t'o lcænl' I'lr't¡ rr il tl tt t ttt i t¡ ¡t

30

/frr ls

r rt

g

.\'{ r¡ r¡ rf r¡ I'tf s .fir

diÞ

C\ r"

I

¡tr rt¿ a'

Djsl¡ilutecJ by

DynEDRs

c

l¡tdspenÅmf ratìsuss. The Council recommends periodic,
independent reviews of the assessrnent system to examine its impact, to ensure alignment with the national standards, and to ensure comparability of results.

o

Better lmnuledge base. The Council recommends continued research on developi¡rg, interpreting, and reporting assessments and ensuring test comparability. efectiitenass. Detailed cost estimates for a new system of assessments are not available, but the Council recommends that assessments be cost effective. They shor¡ld seek to build on curent efforts at the st¿te and local tevels. The Council does not intendithat the assessment system add to the net bu¡den of testing, but rather that much current testing be replaced.

c Cost

The Council finds precedents which indicate setting hi8h st¿ndards and developing a quality system of assessments can raise student achievement. The Council advocates moving at¡ead to create high national standards and a voluntary system of assessments with careful and ongoing oversight of the process
and its results.

./arrrra

ru l!4,

l99l

Õ.n
r.1

3t

Dlst¡j¡ured by

DynEDRs

(

f{'

fi{jdj

d 'tíi

fi.t.ÐN

tê.Ð1,

.a3eld
otrrJISnd pue rfrodn paaJEB aq o? spaalr aJ{ìtr}ru?s Sulte¡4p¡ooo

e'r{¡arrtjca¡¡a auop ${ $l!"{1?eq? aJnsuê oå'$pJ€pus}s asoq3 ?aêui slooqcs pun s?ÌiapnSs dtraq o? s?ua&¡ssêsse3o woisÁs lelnorieLr
,fuexunlon e do¡anap pus sp-{"rprre?s uorlsarxpa

purrîeu

?as

ol

glJç,r,\"ÃoJ o/\o¡-r.r $)l¡.rc¡t{s ucor?eN

aq? ?"*Lll paalßv sgt{ I¡DrnloO aq,{,

e",må3nùi&s

ffiu¡4mulpa$ffiþ pe6#d@rd

'[eÂ$aLral ¡eüorîçJnpa
pt re suor?B?oadxa ;aqffiq "roJ uintruaüour pappe apmo"ld otr Á¡a4i¡ aJH s?uaLussasse ft"aldo¡aÂap pue spJÉp¡lp3s ¡euortreu

qfiq
oJa.a

Bu¡rtas go satS{l\r?au [*al3fl

rd pue ¡€n3ca11aìui aq?'paaButr'rrfi

pr-tor3eo¡npa onlsuaqatdmoc¡o Ued aq p{not{s Xnq uox?elos! ul aav¡d a4e? 3ru pÍnor{s $uailrssasse;o ma3sÁs B pTrÐ spJepue3s puorleu Jo r.[orlrluauia¡du;1 pue 3uawdo¡anag'Auauldo¡anap

luawssêsss pue Fu¡tr3as-sp,rspue?s ôor¡€Àpe

otr

aca¡d u1

ind oq aJnlan ¡is ffmSeurp.lcoa s 3Ëq1 spuauÃuirloa.r

¡rouno3 aqä. LåJ

¿
ffiq

åffiffißKKæRåÃffi@

ffi

Weffigmæffimgæmæry ffi&eÃæwffiffiæffiffiw#{Þ

EAKæäffiÆffi

ffi

Wffi

ffiffiÆWPEffißffi

wAAmffiqMæryffiffi&ä

Pdffiü@
ø

Nryw-Federøl. To rnalntai¡l t}'te Nation's trudition of stete end iocal autlEoråty oven educ*tion, e$y new oversight' errtit'y should be Þarü ofa cooperative nationaÏ effovt'
T'he process sh*trld beneftu fnorn and ¡toË

ø Nsr¿-fui,p&dÆ6g'Ès{e.

atterftpt, to duplicate wcrk L:eir4g done by existiilg ent'it'ies' ø Brosd-Bwed. The coordinating stn-rcture shouüd be blpartisatr, enga.ge govem:ntertt æt alì levels, alrd involve bhe mäny cÕrrstituencies that hawe alt lnterept, in ixnproving

educat$.ott.
ø

'f

Aocoumfnþtûdtg. The coordinati:ng strucüure rnusL nevertheless "oe aecoumtable Èo the publ"ic. In addirion to a publla appolntnnent process, appropnlat'e cons[raint's ort rules qlf dettheration, reportu'tg, and contraating can help
prov$de such aecountabilitY.

øTdw,i'w.Muchgoodwonkhasalreadybe6unandmuchrgrore he needs Ëo be done soon. The coordlnating strucLure sho¡¡ld inplacequicklyandactasacatølyslforprogressraLhertharr re[ard cwre¡'¡t, efforts"
Fe$w$Êæ'¡ts

t!'¡e A nurnber of fu¡retioyls need to be perfornted to ach¿,ieve

developrnent of standards and assessments' They ane descrihed as follows:
,9Éøndærds
e Coordinate the developmenL of ¡iat'ional st'andarefs ø Develop al't overarching stätefiíient * D evexsrp c q$Js$!*gH$'d--qsds

,.ì

eDevelc,psrudels-tpe.rf-o,ryqe$ggql4ïdryds
eDevetopsgro-vu-S_eJxs-y_l-Fn$",q1$.qe Develop s-ystent perfotmance st'ändards
e Certif,y

world conterrt nnd stxiden[ penfomartce standards as

class
f&gggéd&8üã@dr$ers
A -----.-s-6è.à

oCoordir.uatet,hedeveloprrtenlofasyst,en'noÉ'assessRrerr[sfor studen[s consåstent' with &he national stendsnds

individual eDevelopapnogram/syst'ernmonit'Ûrcnnslst'entwit'h¡ret'ional standards
åcr d s'i ri gt,9 I rr rç{

ords f rs t
t."þ

A nt

r r i r c ¡¿ f"td l¿ c (¿ I ? (} }d

ei

d

e Fnovide reseærch and developnner¡t, 9or bneak-t&¡e-nr¿old

assessmenfs
e Ïscue guidelines f'or assessrfterìls
ø Ensure't ecT'wrical rne$t,

(validit y, reliabilit y, fairuess)

e CertÍ-ff â$sessrnen$s e ÐstabHsh procedures and

criteria fo' "chievhg

eomparability
$ffipafurCI

The National fiducation toals Panei would be recon{igured to be políTicaüf báianCriii, nepresentation woul¡flinðiucó rw urîó,ornéru 'ð' f rorä dfi A-ôTr{i}ästùãt ion ; eig'at Govem ors wit h t h re e fro¡rn ühe same poiiûical party as the Presidenb êppointed hy fihe chair or vice chair of the National Gôvêrnons' Åssociation, whichever represents the same political pârty, ín consulûatio¡-t with each other; four mernhens of tongress appoinued by the rna.jority and ininodtyleaders c¡f ri¡e {.J.S. Senate ancl L-i.S. it-[ouse of Represen[atives. T]te role and function of the Fanelwould rem¡ai¡r the sarne as seL out i¡r its charter. In addition, !t will anlpoint, ¡nerurbers to a rrewly created body called the Nationa!

fidùcaiton $tandarOs ánO ¿ssessments üouncil, and ¡t wi¡l certify standards and cri[eria for assessnnents. Work on several of the fuvtctions iclent!fied above l-las aiready begun. Fc¡n instance, prCIfess,ional gnr{ips i¡ the five disciplines are clevelopilp¡ rmtional cont e nt standands wit h f'tnanclal suppofi Ínom the [J.S. Departrnent of HducaLion's tffice of Hducational Rcsearch a¡rd lmprovemerrt, the Nalionai Ðndc,lwment fon the F{u¡o.anit ies,Nat ional Science FoundaÉion, and ot hen exist lng feder¿l and ¡ron-fiedera] agencies. The Nationaï Assessrnent of Ðducaüionai Proggess, with oversight. hy the Natlonal ,4ssessn'ienl Gover"niegi Eoard, is developing a,sgessmtn[s which wourld function as the pnog:rare/system morìiLor; and the fecteral gûverrusrent, is funding thrcugh the Ûffice of Ëclucationa! Research and TmTpnoveÍnenL important, research anc{ clevelopnrent fon bneak-the-rnold assess¿'nents. This work lvoultt continue ancl in fi¡cL would neec{ to be aqg.rnented a¡lcl acceleraterÍ. Othen work, sttch as the school and systern stu,nciards, wot¡ld be c{eveloped by stetes working co}lectiveÏy t hnough organizat [ons llke t he N'at lonal Govern$ns' Åssociation, the Hducalion Co¡runissiot'¡ of the SLetes, the Üor;neiÏ of Ühlef State Schoo! ûfÍicers, ancl state leglslative organizmtiolrs, Neveilheless, a coorellnating'u*tiy is sti!Ï needed to eitsure'¿hc
,ler¡tr¿¡¡

t'll ;,4, l$!t'J
dl t\
,¡,3
*,.þ

,91¡

¡.i.5

t¡-il)ùtðd by DyùI:Dll|

eshblish¡rnent of nationai educetion st'arldards ar:¡d a s}¡stern of assessments. This body would be a cautiyst and provide overs!.qftt, asrd leadershin. {þe.þo-dy, woulcl estah}lslt gurdelånes fqr staq¡dandslqett!-ng and assessment develop:ttent and general criteria to deterrnåne the ap¡lropriatenéss of standards and ass¿ssments iócomrnénded. This body would be the National Hducatiotr Standards and Assessrnerlts Ûouncil (NESÅÛ). It is vital ûhat th¿ere be strorrg public accountøbility in this wor:k. For this reason, NÐ$é'C would be appointed by the Fanel' tertification of content and studen'c peyforntance standards and
criùeria for assessments as world clæss shall,pe the.ioint responsibi-lity of thre Fanel and N&S,qÜ. b{órcentificætion will be issued by the Fanel except, after approval of NÐSAC and in [he even[ the Panel denies certtfîcation to alt or par[ of a NHSÁ"Û proposal, altr on part of that, proposaÌ shail be reburned to NÐSAC

with the re&sor¡s for de¡rial. It, is desirabXe that Congress anc{ the President. co4ify the reconsti$uted toals Fanetr and the National fic{ucalion st¿ndards avrd AssessrnenLs Council, consisLent with the Panel's charter and thls coordinating strucLure, and appropriate licìe-itern fu¡rds for tl"neir operation to be adn-tinlstened througtt the U'S' Departrnent sfl Ðducation. F{owever, the Goals Panel and NÐSAÛ would he aÏlowed substântial latitude in their opera'tion and would be as lndepende¡rt, of the U.S' Congress, thre U'$' ûepartment of Education, and other federal agencies as perntissible u¡.¡der federal traw. "tr'he Fanel and Nfr$AC will r,ach be able to his'e staff, ezlter lnto conLracts, make glrant's, receive funds broth private and Public, fornt committees, hire consultants and have gift, authority. To the extent prac[icable, the characteristic of these entilies as voluntary partnrerships comnrittecï to transforming Amenican educati.rn by encouraging the Natlon to strive for and achleve [he Nationai ]Ietucation Goais and World Class Standards wottld
be nnaintained.
ffiermfurshåp

1

I{ESAÛ would consisl of

3l nle¡Ïbers

to include tne'third pub}ic

oflficials, cne-thlrd educaLors, ancl one'third mernbens of t'he ge nernl ¡rublic i¡cludi n g corìstlmers of eclucat ion. The mc'¡1tt¡ers

wouÏd be ap¡loiarted for thrcc-year terfirs, with no i¡¡dividual seruång nlore tþan six colls8cutive years' Ûfficens would be

.',6

ffr¿

islr¿t/,5{rt

¿¡tdru

r'rl's,/ìr t' t\ttt

tt

r i rn

n

þ}t!

urt!

i tttt

.c

t)

DisttibùLed by

DynEDRS

*d

elected for one-year temrs. No person ran serve on both the Goals Fanel and ldflSAt. Because þJïüS"eû willbe making deÙe¡:rrinatlons ajnd necommendatiotis on [he merit of st¿ndarris and assessrnents, the appointrnent prûcess rnust take ¡rotential coniiict-of-intes"est, consideraticns into car'efirT äccoLrnt.
AppietÊmem$ Fmaess

Naininatlons fr:r pnsitions on NE$Åt would be sought fnom ùhe genera"l frublic and frorn tl'iese ncffidnatiorrs the flanelwould :nake appotntments according ùo [he estilå]lis]xed categonies. The Panel would esleblish inj[lal tetrns fr¡r inúividuals of two, three, or four years in order to establish a rotal,ion in which one-third of the rnembers are selected each year. As vacancies arise on NESAÐ, the FaneÌ would seek nomurations frofiì the general public and tl"le Fanel wouid nrake the appropriate appointments.

$'sendmnds ffiffid m $yskm æ$ fusessffiremå$ ms PqsråB m$ Çærmpneheffisãve frdu¡cwgåæmæã ffi,æ$wrs?t
Nmg6ærns8

Stmctures and processes not, only have frc be put in pÏacc to develop sfrandards and assessments but are aiso needed tr¡ supporl, their use by schools throughout ùhe þlatiotl. Sou¡td prûgranis of msflnuctisn must, be tied to stav¡dards and assessrnents" The Cr¡unciì recogniues that states, local corrrrnuraities, and schools set inrportant policies thaù establish the aontex'c i¡'l which standards and assessrnents wiü operate. These inclusÌe policies and practices regarding curriculum, professional development,, school rest ructurlr¡g, and cornrnunit y ancå farnily supports, Such refor¡ns should not' t¡e piecemeal. To be rr-rost effecti.re, [hey rnust oSrerate fut an integratecl fashicn" üonnprehensive systernia nefonn should affect, aXi elements of the education system. Families, ecìucators, a.nd policymakers must, all work together. Thein effo¡-ts st the school, r{istrict, stale, a¡rd national levels should address four reiajar dirnensicl¡'¡s of educaüion*l nenewal: reflonnirçq sch*cls, engäging $an¡ilies al¡tt cornrnunities, crealing incentives for hÍÉh performance, arìd providing equitabls cppoltutiities tCI nahieve the ttew stanclards.

,!ou.u.nrv

$4,

!{),9:)

S7

.åJ

Djstri¡ruted by

DvnEDRs

.; s

Mffi*e$rw

r

áÐ

T

&e,rË$sË$

,eJ ahtlcåren ¡r-rusi have the cpp-ortunit¡1.to Lgarn the rnatenial new stc{ndnrds wiil indicete they s}rould know¿' trrnpnoved

thaf

instructronaT rnare¡:ials and iil$truatio¡r based *n tt¿e startdarc{s arc essential. S*hcois t¡¿ill need cunriculurn fralt"leworks orie¡rted to Túgh levels of pòrfor¡'nance Lhât are baserl cn ¿he na¡ionaT

educalior¡ standards.
New assessrftents shoulcl be designecn to guide instruction ancl learning. What !s ÐKpected shouid be clear enough t'hat' t'eachers can pi"eï)are $ìludeïx¿s J'or Lhe assessiì'lents and teachers shor-lici teaching. be able to use the resuils to revise ancl irnprcve thein Teacl'iers musl, Tle B.ctive participant's in t'he des@'n of curricula and assessments tied to Lhe srnndarcls'

its imptications Í-or how Amenica prepare$' licenses, and certifies teachers. To teach successfuììy to t'he new sta¡ldarcls' teachens witl treed a deeper ìrnowlee{ge of subject rnatter anc{ a Ï¡etter fronn urc{erstanding of pedagogy. Subslarrt ial coopenaiion teacher l¡l sclcnces' unive¡sities, especial¡y colleges oflarås a¡ld preparatioxr udllbe requinecl. Thc t'traïional Boart{ for
Professio:rælTeachlrrgstandardshasenltrarke<{o¡ranafÍor"1lo voÏunÈary standanals for t-x¡l'eriertct'rl leach*rs that
set na"r,ttl¡l¿rì,

I-{ighstandardsofachievernen,cforalls[ttclentiwitr}have

woulii prÕrûo'Le quali ty insl,ntct ionsl p r¿lct ic'cs' tt"llt  compr":hensive inservicc professiostal' clevolopn stt¡tlt"ttts heltr'r 1o initiativc,is also esse¡ltlal !n prcilnriilS ï¿'í¡chers

attalttthe¡rationaieclucatioslstaclrlards'Íiiatcshaveacritical itl noie in hclping to ntake the ntoqt sttc':q Û5$ful practices pnofessioltatr developnrelll ilcccssiille io ail personnel' to scltool a¡tt{ Frofessional llevrlopmc¡i1, fixttst also bt'availabla ¡'olt's i¡t st'hoÛl dist.rict adrui¡risl.ratol*s, who play kt'y lcadersh!p
rcforn¡.

$chools,sc}ictlï<iist,ri.cTs,alitisti¡lesshr¡tlltil'lct.ttl'ilttragt'cllrt ac.ltit.lvt' experimertt \,qitn aiter¡latiVû straTtþlies 1,o Tielp stutlents arc !lkcìy to be' the new stanc{ards. Ncw rolcs tlnrå resgrotlsil¡ilities ¡lccessaryforgucccss.llcfcrltlsth¿¡tseckt.on¡akecclt.lt:aìt¡rs ¿lct:oi¡nïal¡lc aluo need t * p'rovicle t hertl rvit h cofiìrlìolilìtùräle
authoritY. sttlt{t,¡tts ¿lttrl flråuciir,io¡l l,ct:hlto}ogy ltol<[s glro:tiíse f.clr lre!¡liIrg rt'tlttit't'¡¡tetll schools achicve thc sta¡ic{ancTs ancl willl¡e ¿i basit' åes i¡i('iucT(' t{isÎ'a¡tt'<' f'or ecluca.lt.ioil in the 2 I st, cettl uny, PcssiTrillt

¿¡¡td s{ucltltts lu lcarirlng ïhat prrnlils 8,rûâ1er ilccÙsis fa¡" t*at:htrs ¿¿llt{ vietct¡ cour$es oiÍerec{ i¡t <{ifr-ryr*elt l*citï,iclts, attd cotn¡rutt'r

,';18

Èlrti.'irrt¡¡ ,5/rlr¡ri rllrls '/rr t'
..*

,:

"1

¡ttt'tittttt

þ)¡ì

"r'rllr"t¿

çr

Djs tribLtted by DvotDíts

&

technologies for lhe delivery of enriched i¡iteracl;ive learning. T'eachens and pnincipals in aål schocls wili ¡reed pnofessional developrnent, rn educat iona! technoiogy. l.Jew t echnologies aligned 0o the standarrås and syslem of assessrnents inay be tncluded axno;14 the curricu-lufin res*urces designed to achieve the standards.
tsm6w3ru

ë

r$åüî$B$Så @$?tr q"6Éiß3åtrr9-ffiåi'Þså

sro

The condrtlons of clxiidhood are charlgiiË and sonte of the rnosL significant charges have to do çq'rth aharactedslics of farnålies. f"{elping fainilies sr tkiË¡t they rnay help sludents al,tai¡-¡ the hlgh startdards will nequire new srrategies for coordinating the effo¡"ts
of home and school.

Ë

6 ü

B

the 'orttext, ìn wïriclt schools a¡¡d farniiles func't ion. Corr ce a'rced corri-r,¿iuitities value ìeanúng alid ¡xovtde necessary s¡-rppûrt to far¡lilles so [häÙ leanníng aan thrive. ,A:l imgrorLan[ community service that is aiso supporùed by sta'i,e atrd
Üomrurunit.ies create

Ë

g

federal gûveffiunerr[ is to provic{e the ear}y childhooc! prograrns that heip prepere childrerr for scïtool" The Narional frducation Goals set, objectives relating l.o nu.trili<¡xr and heantli care, access to..qres-ç-hools, ancå pårellt gqilaqtion. fuograrns have begun aÍ. the national, ståte, ancl local Ïevels to foster coordinat.ion of farnily health care and soclal senvices. ldationaÌ standards aan ciarify tvha[ a community can exn]ect of its schools a¡Td help defîne a need flon public action. Too frequently school neforflrs falì shonï, of expectaÙio¡ls because n"lern'oers of the palblic do not r¡ndersùand how they can play a constructive role tn improving their schools. Ðfforts a¡:e needeci to enhance iocal awarer*ess ofl the ¡teeci fon change and to creaLe shared understandixigs of er{ucaûional problems and potential sohrtions,
€ww$Ëmg Smcmgfums $se å$êgfu eenfu,rumæ*w*

fi

å

Meeting hÍ€,h stacndards qvill evltalì cornpnehensive chan$e, altc] the stude¡'lts, fzunilies, educa'cors, a¡'¡d co¡n¡nunities involved wltrl need to Ïrave a tre&stn to charge. Cu;rently, ir¡centives fc¡r sludents and eafuc*tors âre overly fccu¡erlorl compliance with nules and regulntions. Trcey sliouåc$ be foct-¿sed on âtt"ainirng lnlgh penfonnance. lvhlle intrinsåc rewarc1s such as Sove of lear¡ling ane
nnot'ivat'ion, it is cleaa' Lhat lhc best, _- and ortcn prin"rary play an lmpcrLant role in how ha¡"<l boÙh exl.ernal factors also students asnd e{.åucators wor}<. lBewards å'o¡" sucaess attcå
Jt¡ ¡r¿¡¿r t'¡l J

4,

I fi9;J

:jíl

,ift
s
\-å

Disttibutëd by

DyñDDRs

constrLÂative intewentio¡r in cases of persistent failure rnay he

tied to stuEient outcornes for both studesìts and educat'ois' $ince leam@ nequires the active particlXlatio¡'l oËhoth, it. would be u-rl.fair to focLts incenflives only on one tr tl¡e other. Today, studeftts ¡rct, applyfug t0 highly selective coll*ges ofi.*n feil lo sEe a reä$s3.ï to enroltr ift dernanding higft sehool coutrses ancÍ [o do their best,. ¡{ll stucients should be provided incentives fov meetrng worìd-class standnrds. fncen[ivæs for educators skrould focus orr improvernenÈ, i:ietru<ålng success in eduaati.ng t'hose studenls whn have been l,-*asÈ weTÌ served ini Ûhe past'.
ffimsnsräry ffiq*¿ery

Froviding ge¡ruine oppontunity for all students to achieve higj-l stat"¡dands is a national rnoral impenative. The standards that, the council prop0ses wo¡.rld apply Èo the errtire edtlcation s3/$tern. All stL:.dents m¡.¡sff have [he oppo¡"tur¿ity to achieve then'¡ and to he assessed fairly on Ùheir attainntent" Te¡ hring t'his about',
equitableeeluca'ðionalopportturitlesrtìult.heP{--orli.q9.5{,. Tixe Úörirxõif td¿õ$niceå'tire'cóilcertrs of those who are feargul of the trrulnte¡rded ctnseqLrences of iïs proposals' Vet high

standards and knowledse gaineri fron"l appropriate assessn'¡ents could senve as ruJlying points to secure t'he schooland corrunrmi$y effo¡"ts needed to reach $her. High-quality ' 'the standards and assessr¡'lerrts should rnohilize educators ar¡d
I

ewase farnilies ancÌ comrnunities, genuine creatÐ {ncentives for high perforrnance, and provide oppontunuLy for all students.
pubüc
bo refonrn schools,

:

:

ffiæËsüetg S$wmdmnds $sn A'mes'åemm #du¡esååæm '["he National Ðduaation Goals Fa¡"¡el has cal]ed upon At'nerica to kreconne n ¡ration of leanÌer$. Nat'ional st'arxdardg and

assessments linå<ed to thenn, developed through a broacl consensus prûcess, zue a critical ¡'¡ext slep in revitalåzing Amenican education. To su¡cceed, standards and assessmen[s

schçol rnust, be part, of a fE¡ndarne¡rtaï refr.¡nn of scliools and

systtrns. The rnove $owand high standards will

r¡tobiliulng the entåre cú[Ån[cy, Famliiies, comr¡runit'ies, sch*ols, educators' t'o ermployers, policpnaketrs, and st¡¡dent's Brave irnport'nnt' noles fasï'¡iom new staerdards and to efay m the cornpreÌ"¡effisive effort to
neqneire

4Ûffcis¿i¡¿$,51¡¡¡¿d¿¡nrdsforAm*rirr¿¡¿fid¿ds(¿¿¿{'}f¿

4"å

D.is l:t

i blt tecl b./ DvnEDRS

see fhat they are atta{ned.

The goal is arnbiülous and the siakes are high. R.aising standards car¡ t¡ansforrn what, is tåught and how i.ns0m¡cticn takes place. Raistng standards can change 0he viewof nesponsibilities in education.Raising starrdands can irnprove the quality of perforrnance, not just, in the classroom¡ but, on she job, in the marketplaee, and in aTi aspects of Anneriaan iife.

"./ç¡lur¡ru 94, 1992

sJ

4'

tjsrr.iþuted hv

DynËDRs

Disttibu¿ed by

DynEÐRS

/

tTt
Ihis report was prepared by the National Council oIt Education Standards anrt Testing. The work of the Council was supported by reports from eight task forces and expert testimony. In this process, many individuals gave generously of their time, experience, and knowledge. The Council wishes to thank all those listed in tNs
appendix.
Ttre Council wishes to thank its staff for their extraordinary efforts in assisting the Council in its work and in the preparation of this

report.

Jnnuttrt tl, lllllt

4'ì

A-t

Ðjs¿ljbuted by

DynEDRs

Stoff of the Notionol Cou-ncilon räîàot¡on Smndords ond Tesling
Francie Alexander Esecu,tiae Director
David L. Stevenson

Depttg Executiue Director
Amy Leigh Hatfield

l¿wrence
Poling

Feinberg "/ DeuelnPmøzt

Associa,ls

Theodor Rebarber ResearchAssocinl'e

ProgramAssistønt Linda E. Martin Consultønt
Paula A. ShiPP

EmityO.Wurtz S enior E dur atin¡ ¿ As so ciøte
LÞ Bames

Praprvln'Assistnnt
Michael F. Smith

PrcgramAssistant
Nancy Delasos

PragrømAnalYsl
Ron Myers

Executiue Assistant
Charles J.Walter

OÍline Assislnnt G. Moniqueliladdell Secrelary

Esecutiue Officer

from the following The st¿ffreceived editingand technical assistance individuals: JoYce D' Stern C. Claire Carter Nicely

Smith

Tosk Force Members

iJ;;;in"

Eighttåskforceswerecreated,eachtoadvi¡etheNationalCouncilon
discipline or an aspect of standards' testing' and

focused on the topics StandgLdt' ;*Gñ"t. ftre eigfrt tasf< io""t History' Ãr*"**unt, lmplementation, Englislt, Mathematics' Seience' gacn tåsk foice was chaired bv a member of the .. ;Jc;;d;trv' additional council members as well as

ñ"ìi"""rtóî,".iland
Llîut

"nd "iputt, follows: MembershiP Task Force

repr"tentatives ofconcerned organizations' The

included

$qndord¡hltoæc
Marshall S. Smith

Tosk Force Clwit'ct¡td Cctuneil member' Stanlo¡d' Slatdord, CaliJonùa
.- -.--L-... vv'^"çLL lllell¿.t(',

Ilttit'ersilil'

Gordon Ambach .,
|-;oull'cll

..¡nt¡ì! n!'Allittf Slnle I,y vrr!v vwwr'

School Olficers,

Wæh'ington,D'C' Brian L. Benzel
Vllashittglort'

Lynnwootl' Qoll¡rcil nwntber, Ed¡notuls School Distnel,

A-9

flaisilg

'\'l¿rtdardu

[or Amtriean ])clurallott

4B

Distrfbùted by

DyhEDRs

ChesterE. Finn,Jr., Cowrwit rnzmbetr,'{ar¿d,erbilt Uw'iwercdtg, Lauren Resnick

Waxfud'rtgtooz, Ð. C.

Counnil tnënnber, Fenrægluanin
John Ândevson

IJnduers'i.t p

of

Pdttsburgi'¿, Pittsbuþ'gh,

! E M, Wash'i;rtE totz, Ð. C. Ernest Boyer The Carnegie FownintdonJor tke Adztance"nw:nt of Teaúitt'q,

Frimtetnr4 Nøw "lerseg WilliamDemmert Stønford. {Ìniaers'ítg, Stømford,,

C aLilotfrin

Marian Wright Edelina¡r and Denise Alston C hild.ren's Defense F wrzd, Waski'rqtova Ð. C. Susan Fïluman

Rutgers {.}ndaersdtg, Netþ El,u'tvßwick, New' "}erseg
Janis Gabay

"Iwni.pro Serro,

Higþø Sct¿ool, San Diego, CaliJarnda

Jack Harr AEC trnt., New York, Neztt York

Eill Flonig

Catüornin State Ðøpørtrrwnt oJ Ðd'ucat'ian', Srit rantw¡¿to, Cali,fomin
Barbara S. Nielsen Soutk Carotinn State Ðepat'twønt oJ Edwcaëdon, Colwrrtbi'a,

Soutlt,Carotina
Conrad$nowden
D.C. Con¿m¿ttee on Fubüc Ðdwcation, WøsÌtiwg;tn,Ð'C. Roberto Zamora

La Joga lndeperaMtt Sctrcol Ð'istt"ict, La Joga, Tetas

&sse$sg$w8tWkWw
Eva L. Baker Tøstc Force Cal,i.fo¡min,

ttwir

and Çounciè mÊrnber, U'C'L.Å., !"as

ArzEetes,

David Kearns Couræùt mtetnbe t, l-1.5. Ðepartrnent of Etl'ucatdan, Washi'ttptott,

Ð.c.
Edward L. Meyerr tou'r¿ti,t rftørnber, uwdz¡ers'ity aÍ l{wæas, {"awr€nce, ffol¿sos
Joan Baror¡ Con'npctinug
.9tæüe

Ðeparttww I of Edttcøtion, Warlfo

rd',

Camncticuï
Curtis Banks llowa¡tl tJniuetsi't A, Wuslt'i,tzglrnt, D'C.
Dale Carlson Cæti,fom.in State Depatt"me'n't a! Educat,i ort,,S¿¡d rr¿r¡te¡¡fo,

üaë'iþrnia
"fe¿rru¿ary

Ê4,

199Ê
-a

4"9

'Ä3

Di

:r

L

)tD

l:t:d )tY

DYòliDRs

ûeorgia Earnest Garcia U tlit, e r s it U oJ I I tir zo'i.s, {J r&;an Edmund Gordon Vale {.i ni t¡et'sitg, New
Dan Koretz
Æ.,4ND,
Í ! ttt¡(t

ü- C l¿Qm¡tai E

v

t,

îIIi

w

o

is

t, Cotnrcct i ct¿t

Wttshin gtott., Ð'C.

Ker{iHakuta S ta rufo rd IJ t ti u e rs i t E, S ta nJb r tl, C a I ifo t'tt i'tt
Robert L. Linn
[.J

tzi'ue rs

it

A

of

C o to rael.o, Bo

w ! r! e

r,

C o I o ¡c.t'l o

George Madaus
ø

Ãrcn

st C o lle ç¡ e, C Í¿e

¡

¿w

t I I i t t, ht as sqðl¡ t¿s¿:tts

Eduardo Rodriguez Mesqw'ile, Ne tt, ivlet;ico

'

Luther\tr. Seabroolt
Sou¿l¿

Carolitta Stu'tr' Ðeptzrltn|'t:.t tf Edueot iott, Col rtmbitt,

South Carol'it¿tt'
Sheila Valencia

uiu e ¡rsd A of Dennie lVolf
Ll
î.

Wash

i ttE

tow,

S e at

Lltt, W as

I

t i t tg¡ { o

t

t

Í'{ar¿tard tl

t

t iue

rsi't', Com bñ dgt:,

M asxrcl¿

¿¿

seî

t

s

Bm$wwffi$fum ksk Fwree
David [Ìor¡rbec]< Tt¿sk Fot ct, cl¿ui.r.¡\.ssoc

cot¿nai! nu,Ùtbt,t"f){t|id w. Ilo¡"tt.lteck a¡¿d dcÍsrs, Bolt i rtt <t tu:, ÅÅ a ry I a nd
u.t¿cl.

Jeflf Bingaman C ott tl.r i t ùt e n t be

r,

Ii tti

ttcl

5f r¿lt's'Se lttt f e', N ¿' u' M e¡' i t' o

Michael Netlles
Co ur¿c i I
m

en tbe

r, tl

t ¿ i'

re rs

itU

oi

?'<'ll lt<"sse¿,

/(t¡o't't'

¿f

le,

Tet¿t¿essee

Roger Semeracl

öoul rci t
Ctt¿¿¡¿c'¿f

m e m be

r,

llJll

M¡ åisc tt,

I

t¿

c', lVrtsit

i

tt

g to t t,

I)' C'

,{lbert Shanker

nzetnbet,Anericuttþ'edtralict¡try'lc'rtrlle'lls'

WashinErom, D.C. Betty Castor

Fiordfa
FTenrY

Stute Ðepn.t'tt¡tt,t¿t
Ç ol td
rru

rl'Ðth]"atitt¡1,
tt dat, Stt tt

?"r¿ll¿¿i¿r¡ssq.'t"

Flarit¡t

Cautlten E;fV J ott t ttt i s :ii o t,
t

llt

A u ¡'tt I i t w t

Dal¡ Chennow

Fttc iJit' Th c'ü t. rß C rt t'¡t., Lr ts A r t çy'le s, &

¿

I

i'li t t"t t i t t

Davitl Cqlten

Mit:hi,Eww$'fr¿de ð/¡¿¿.r't'rslf¡¿ Åkrsl /-atrsing¡,

Mirhig¡tttt /'

Waylun Hdwarcls

ia.xt¡n,i''Cottttl¡.¡.5'r'l¡oolfJdstriet, Ûltt'yt'ttttt',Wyrttrtittys

Å4

ffo i.,{i rtf/ ,$fr¡ r¿rlrt rrds.li¡ t' t\tttt t'it'tt tt $t! tttttl itttt

i;
Di s

{..}

l:t.jIùl:ed

by DynÈDRS

Sonia C. Flernandez

Office aJtlw Gottentor, ,4ustitt, Tetas
Miguel Ley Ross E tenunü
a

tg

Sc h

ool, Wt*lt

it t gtcttt, D. C'

Dotty Luebke

Ëastmmt Kodak, Roclrcstet,
Phillip Schlecty P rofe s sional
Lee S. Shulman
D

Ns¿¿'

Vol*
r, Lo
tt i st t i
II

tt e o p n s¡
t

¿

t

C e¡

¿t e

e, l{ t' u î w a k y

Strnzþrd
Jim Steyer

IJ

ni ue rsi tg,

St

anþrri, t ul iJo n tia

Ch,'itrlren. l¡s¿il, Oaklcttrrl,
.IonaLhan

Caliþntia

Wilson
Fomee

..,

Lqw

Fi.rn¿ oJ Dauls, IÃocka"ttbet¡¡,

I

I

ts Moines,

/o¿¿rr¿

ffimgãüsh&*

Martha Fricke

Tosk Foræ Chni¡ rm.d Cott¡tcil nember, Asl¿land' S'cl¡oo/ Bontd, Ashtamd, Nebraska
Mary Curtiss Tru ntbull. Íliglt licl tortl, T rtt w
b

ttll, Cot t rcct
¡

i<' ¿¿t

Kristina Elias
G

rcenuti.ch

P

ubli c
Lz',

S'cl¿

ools,
Yo ¡'Å'

G ree n u' i c

lt, C t¡ t t t

¿

t'

ct

i

<:

¿

t

I

Janice llaynes C I M S/C A, B rot

lür:¿'

Barbara Kapintts M a ry ktncl St ate De pu

t'l

t¡t

t'

t

¿

I

r$' E tl u ca I k t n, I I y tt

tt

s t' i

I

lt"

Murylattd
Lean¡ta La¡tdsnta¡t¡r

l.atrcls¡nant¿ & Sehutz" Nstu Vot'k, Nru'Yotk
State Un

Judith Langer

it

ersif.y cfM're ' Vt¡rk, Albutty, ly't'tt' Hr¡¡ k
oJ'

furit¿ Mt¡ss U nit'e ¡.sit lt

N o t, t I t

cu

rol i n o, c I m rlot I tt, N o tt
l t <r t n

I

¿

C rt ¡,ol i

¡

t

tt

P. David Pearson IJ r¿it etx;i l lJ of I l I i t t o i s ü t LI rt¡t¿ il t t-c

¡x

e

ig

r

t, /il
t rt
r

i r¡ o

¿.s

Fran Perkins IJ¡titte tsi tU of r\k t hn m u,

B

i ttrt i t t g I ur r n, A'k tlto

t

Winifred M. Rartigatt Brooklyrt I'liEl¿ Saltot¡ls
Barbara Schnridt.

t[fiu', t]ruoklyrt, Na't¡' Ft¡r'L'
iîa¡tt itt

Califont.ia Stute

{-Jt¿

ipr'rtdf¡y, Srlc'ln I nettîrt, Ct¿l

Mmt{wrwståcekek Fercw
Iris Carl
Ttt^sk

Force Clnüt at¿tl cot¿t¿cil ì¡t'tttlN,t" Nr¡ldgarrl cottttcil Tt'a c h ¿,':; oJ' M a th e n x tti rs, Ifo¿¿ sltI ll, Ît
"I'nli

ttJ'

,!rtnunrt 14, Illll!

tl-!í

[; " üÅ

tjstr.i.buùed by

DyùDDRs

W

ffi ûailBurrill
ïVt¿itmlrtt ,Arnold

t{igh

Sekaot, Gteæ¿fietd, Wisc'onsi¡z
S t.

ûutler
FauI,
M int¿e

Moultds Vinza N iEtt Sckoot,
Wesley Ðay

sata

Nortaatk Í'!iEk Sckool', Í'lonøaLk, Íowa

lilalter Denhæn

ffi
ffi

Cøtiþrniø
Co,lifonún

State ÐeryITrttt.t¿t af Edwcaêio¡2, Sa'crarnsttto'

John Dossey Ittinois State U wit' e rsit g " N o rmal, Illir¿ois
Paula Duckett vtEtott' Rizter Tewace C otnm uYú t y Ð tænentarlfsc hoai, Wv'aski

Ð.c. Shirley F{ill
Uzziz,ersita of fuf issouti, ffor¿scs Cily,

Missouri

Jeremy Kilpatrick Unituersitg of Georgiø Att¿ens, Georgda Pandey Tej -Ceti.iornia
ts

slüt e Ðeryttmeut

oJ

Ðducat'io¡¿, Sat rc'Pwen î o'

ffi

Cal'ifornia
Dorothy Strong
C

å

hicogo Fwbti.c,Schools,

Çh

icago, I llittois

ffi W
ffi w

å
å

å

å â g

$eMee&& Fwe
Mark

fl
ä

Musick

v'

6

il
ffi

TaskForæCkairwxlCou.nciln¿ember,So¿l.t'hernfteg'àonal Eclucation Boa,rci,,Attanta" G eotgia
Eve M. Bither

å

s

ffi

ä ä

towncil rnsrnber, Maine State Department A,ugztsta, Maine

oJ

Edttrat'iolt'
K
K
H

K

ñ
ffi ffi

Carlos Cisneros Metico cauncil ynentbet, ¡vEæ' Me¿ ¡co slate senate, Q¡¿esfc¿, Neu'

ü
ø

H

ä
K
ffi

Walter Massey Counciltne.rnber,Ìü¿¡fro¡¿cl.gczerlceFoulttløtio¡z,WastzilzElolt'.
D,C.

firnra,4nderson

ffi

Congressional

Feitðow',

Needmare, Pennsylt'awia

ffi ffi

ffi

Mary Eudd Rou'e Sia*zford Ll w i ¿'e rsit a" Stanford, Califotwia Thonias Cech ol o ra d o l.ì ¿d u e rs it g af C o ! o rød,o, I o t¿ kie r, C
t

ffi ffi
*K

AudreY CharnPagne b¿-,ü {-ln¿t'eÑW oftVaæ' Vork, Albang' rVetl GentrY Fielding -'

Yor"Å'

ffi

Siuir-¡u*ior

|-{igtl.9cl¿oot, Washittgtott' Ð'C'

ffi ffi

Charles R' È{ogen J e rse a The MerckbaT w PenA Fa ¿n¿dat'iott' Nett¡

ffi

A.6/{eia'sdrrg.gfcl¿darcds./'orl\¡n¡erlcür¡Fjtfl¡caSiolt
SÅ Ád

r;]

Di sttil>uted by DynDDRs

Maria Lopez-Fleennan ¿\cl¿deuetvwrul t oux'cd\, !"os Ãng ei'e s, Ca'li'fornia'
James Minstretr]

Mercer lslnnd I{'igh Sch,ooì, Mercer [sln'Y¿d, Washircgtow
Je'rry Pine
Cal,i.Joweiø, lT
¿st

itute af Techrwlagg, Pasaden q Cali;forniø
f,ot' Innpt"ozrdrtg Scieræe Educatdovt,

Sente Raizen

National

Cere,ter

Wasìti,Wtow,l').C.

&{üsMry&sk

Føæee

Lynne V. Cheney Tasls Force Chndr av¿d' CawncilTn'amberr Naliov¿nl Ënrdowtwænt Jo'r î,he Hwrnnnities, Wosþ¿iWton"Ð.C' Mary Bicouvaris

I

Countil,

ïnÊtrr¿ber,

Í{arnp\on

fÌoaÅ-ç

Acatlemg, Neu'poa? ¡\çurs,

Vi.rgi,nin "lohn Hainkel Coww'i,l wÈmber, !'oudsdww,
Lowisia'v¿ø,

S iat

e

Settnte, Bdttn

R oug e,

Samuel L. Eanks

Ealti,mnre

C¿¿A

Pub¿ic Schools, Baltitwre, h$argtand
Ge a

Jim Ereedlove Ee ll$ ot ¿¿iz, Attantw, I-lank Cotton
C h,enV

rg

ia

Creek,Scl¿oods ( retirerl), Ertgle woati, C ala rado
I'os Ar rye \es, C alifon ú'w

Charlotte Craboree
t l. C. L.

A.,

Claudia FÍoone Røëplø Waldo Emersan School, lnclianapolis, !ndiat¿a

\üllliam

FI. hdcNeill

lJ wùt e

rsit g oÍ

C hic ag

o ( tv t i, re d ),

t

kic tzg o, I lti t oi s
¿

C. Frederick Risinger I nd,iø.na IJ nù¡ e rc it A, B lo o nn i n g ton, I ndi'n

n

ø

Ruben Zepeda Gramt F|igl¿ School, Va.n Nw.t¡s' Cctlifonria

Gwrynwfo&skFww
Sally ts. Fancra¿io Task Force Chai¡'an.tl' Ço't¿r¿c'i[ ?n{!n[)eï, /Cli¡¿o¿s {-}w'i.ue rsil,y, Nat'mttl, f JC¿ ¡¿o¿s Sandra Flassan
$dr¿&r

t ounail rnen
New Yotk
I tlir¿ois
S t.t¿t e

t

l¡e

r,

8ec¡ cl¿

th

u.

t

t

t

¿e

l

[ { i g i t S t' l

xxil, ffo(.kn t'0ruy Prt r k,

Nonn Eettis
{.

Ì wù t e

r s i t y, N o rrntet, t{r
{'.l w

I I lù

ta i s
Mr¿

Richard Eoeh¡lt
So u t tt w e s l. fle,? {Ìs,9f
r¿

dt ut t's it

y, fik¿rl

r'r'os, fle" t"ff s

,ir¡¡ta¡c

t'y P4,

tÍltì|
_

Å'7

f$#

)is tr ibùted hy

DyttEDRS

Muncei Chang
Nat ion al Cot
tttr i
t

Jo t' G e rsç¡ ra plz

i

c

Flcl u ca t

iort,

/tlrC

ic ttrr,

F<+tttsglt'an ia. Roger Ilorvns

Þentzsglt,artia Statr: [/¡¿.¿l,r,rsifùr, Uttll'eluit¡¡ Fn¡*',

F¿'rtt¿,ç

ylt'ttttitt

ûindy Hansen
TRW, Ctet,elattd, Ahia Rita Duarte Flerrera

Alwm Rock (ittict¡t School f)¡,ç8rzcl, '5ntt Corine O'Donnell
C

'y'o'se,

CuliJr'tnt ía

am p

be

It E le r nran ta ry, ¡{
it

¡"¿ rr¿

t"d¿¿, C o I o

x t dts

Kit Salter
U n i ue rs

li

oJ Ìul isso

t.t

r i,

ûol

tr

tnbi n, M i g¡;:att t'i

Terry Sntith

I

N at iot t tzl G e og ra p k i t Joseph Weaver

.Soc rø'1.t7,

Waslt.ittglon,Ð.C.

Aqk

Hi.U IJtEll Scfuool, Co?il'ellsc', l¿¿rJia¡¿¿t
¿or¿¿.li

Torn Wilbanks
Cruk RitlEtttr/r¡f

Í'nttarutrtt-¡¡, Ouk lÌidgy', fl{"¿}¿¡''$''i{'r'

ffiresæmMrs
ilì Thc Coul¡cil reqrrest.ed fornral presentations frtllit nialtS'atl[ltorities olt Coultcil the illforttted their areas of expcrtise. Theseltrelselttatiolis the status anrt córHplexities of efforts to set stalttïartls atrd intprove \\¡e assessme¡rt. Their corttritrutiott hel¡rect the rvork of the 0ot¡rtcil'

i,¡"t

w'!ro nrade pvesc'xtatio¡ls to tltc to tha.k t¡e followirr¡q Courtcil on t he dates noteci: 'eopie "ßwre

ä4,
¿

IWST r¡ol Olir
r
t

Gordon Anlh¡ach
C r¡ w ¡ c i I oJ' C h i eJ' S t r tt¡r .Sclt

rs

Flva L.

Ilaker

cf{¿".9.9?" t i.c. l-.

^. E<¡n¡tie Brutrkhorst
tVcl

tiortal

S¿'

ir'¡¿cc
t

TE,ttcf¿

¿'

lls ¡ts.s<¡r' ir¡
i rt

I i o l¿

tharlotte Crabtree
Nat¿or¿cJ Ce
r

te r Jo

r Í! i srr-t tg

Sarah WarshÍìuer l¡rec(lnlaÌt Ñaüa t¿ t¿l {)t: t t te r.Í rt t' flet"st t*rf y t ¡f

lù' t' i l i

t t

tt rt r t d [' i lt' tu r ¡ ¡

Fldnlund (iordo¡t !z¿¡fq' {h¿ I'e'ais ldll
¿

['aul Gag,ttott
rVrrt icr¡¿t¿l Ctt
t

t

tt

t' i Í.Jr t

t

I { i st o

t y ftd

tt

tttl

it¡¡

¿

kennetl¡

Edofftttalt

rVttl ¿orlr¡ I Ítt'st'r¡ r¿'ft Cor¿

¡lcll

¡l<S

/{rllsi

rr1¡ ,5f

r¡rtt/r¡r'tds Jìr

r

Årut

''rlr¿ir

þ)tlttt'ttlttt¡t

Þ'*.w
{

G,i

Di s

L):

j.ltÐtecl by

DYîEDRS

Mary Lindquist

Natiønnt toumci,t
Gail ï,udwig
Nati,a'rznl Cawzcdt

oJ Toøchøt's of lufat'lvrrmt dcs

ior

Geog raph.dc Ðd uca ti.o'tz

Þliles Myers

l{a,tional Councit oj Teaclters af Englislt
F. David Pearson

Uniuersitg aJ Íl,t'i.nok
James Rutherford

at,

{^l

rbat m-C lvs m-pcti E t t

Arnprican Associ,ation lot the Adva¡zce lTlr:ttl af Sc i <trt rc Ki[ Salter Association af Anæñcarz Geogra'pizers 7 Terry $mith Nat'iar¿al G eag rW l¿i c S o c io t g

Juþ T&, TSSI
Joa¡r Baron t onwe c ticu¿ Sf oúe Ð e p a.rt'rnat ü t$' E d Ross Erewer
u cr ü i o t t

Vermnnt State DepartmøLt t)f Edzt.raliott Jeremy K.ilpatrick Uniuersi,tg of Georgiø
Magdalene Lampert M i,ckig 0,n S tate U zù'u e rcd/ g

Tej Pandey
Oø\,í,forruin Sî,ate Ðepart'{rættt of Ed ucat ío t t

Thomas Romtrerg
t lniaersi,tA oJ

Wisco'ræi'n, M atl,i sr't t, [4/¿sc,rr¿sd¡¿

&wgus&

lS, lçPT

Phyllis Aldrich
Nat'dorwl Assess vrwll¿ Gauo n¿ù¿g lloa rrJ Fascal D, Forgione, Jr. Nati.øt al, Edwcatiot¿ Ina Mullis
E d,wc at
G

oals Fts¡ze I

ionnt

Te

s

tittg

S t¿

n

ic e ( u'lsa ¡t te se t û e d a t S t ¡ t t t ) w t ts t: t' 2 Íl

'rrweting) Clairc Pelton
Nati,onal Board

lor

Prq{essdonot Tt:aciú ttE,5'¿r¡r¿r/o ¡v/s

Ramsay Selden Counci,!, aÍ Çþ¿ief State Schoat

tÍfiee

¡'s

fupkmhær äS,
Totn Eoysett

lçgl
tli
Ðd'uea,l'ì t'¡t

Ítcntucky
Dale Carlson
Cal,i,fo

Stul'e ÐepartïnrÁt't¿t

¡nia

St'rtttt XlepørlvnÐ?Lt

oJ'

Erl'ucatiotr'
A-!t

Jauuarg Ð4, t!)9ÍJ

&rr q-f c,

Di s Lr

ibuted h,/

DvijÊDils

ffi
ffi
.!ohn Dossey
! Uùvt ois S ts.t

e

U

ni

¿¡e

rsdt'U

Ernerson Elfiot8
N atianat C en,t et fo Ðanbara Kapinus

r

Educat'io

v¿ Sû¿¿f ¿sl

ics

ffi
ffi
ffi ffi

Margtand

Stæte

Ðepaftw¿rtt¿l oî Edwtatiort

Archie Lapointe
E d.wcatdonat Te s ti rzg S e n' ic e

John Murphy
New Val'k State Ðepartlneøt of Educatiotz

ldorrna Faulus

treEorz State Ðepartrnent of Ed'wcüÍiotl

ffi

8@$V,$çql
Linda Darling-Flammond Teaclærd CttlleEe, Coluw¿bia
Ë{.D. X"{oover
U tti ue

rsit 7¡

ffi ffi ffi
ffi ffi ffi

tl "r¿ fu e rsi"t li of I ou' a

Srw$6 w$ Çwusrtcü$ ffiswh#rs
å

ffi K
ffi

å ã

Criticalasslst¿n¡cewasprovicledbystaflfmemnersoftlreCo-Chairsof the process' froln thu Cour,cit. Their help was invaluable throughout Specia! report' ot'rhe finalprodltctiott the initial meetings to the
thanks goes to these individuals'

å u

ffi

tr
ffi

å
Þ

Nikki McNanree

å

Office oJ the Ga¿'e¡'¡wr, '9r.¡u{l¡ Carolitta
e ¡"t
t

ffi w

g ä
Ð

Ja¡tice Trawick AfJ'i re of t h e 6or

o

t', .5¿r

¿¡

¿l¿ Cct

¡vl

i

¡ t

a

Ë

ä ß
ffi

Nancy Sanders Office <¿f thc tot'rt'ttrtr, Aolc¡¡'ttclo
B.J. Thorcrberry

ß
H

& $

tffice oÍ tkt' {}orervot', Colotvwi'tt
staffs t' ,{ll members of the Council have re lieci o¡t t heir ¡lersonal

&
ffi

ffi ffi

ii--,lf-

ffi

work of the matty of the intpoÉant cletaiis [nvolved in the suglgestions arrd n¡acie and ôàr¡r,cit. surr rnember! attended meetiftgs report' We th€' final into were incorporateri

r

*.onr*,err.lutions that
dedicatiott'
Lida Ïlarrctt
N¿¿l drrrrr¿l,9r"
i

ffi ffi

ancl *iuf.r to thatrk the follo'rvitig inttiviciuals for their ¡rrofessionalisnt

ffi

t' r¿t'c Fr ¡ t¿ nr'ittt ìtt

¡¿

ø

ffi ffi

Launie Chivors
C<¡ tt t. t t t

.!
ffi

il

tqu' o

t

¿

I't t ho t tt ¡ d
¿

{{

t ¿

wt rt

t

t f,lt'$o l¿'t'(''';
it¡
I
¿

Ðotty Olark
I/ri
t ¿ t¡
I ¿e¿

f ,9cl¿ool /lt¡r¿ rr'l'ç ¡t ssor:
&rr

dr¡ f

Å-lo ffi

tsirr¡¡ 5t t¡ tt dtu'tds ./or

rt

l¡tr'llt'tt l &jtlt¿t't¡f iort

ffi ffi
D.í s f

fi

q;

| Í b\i tecl b\t l)vnDDRS

Glert üur.üs, Naødawì, Ðdwat'ipw "{ssoc'iÆt¿cjn
EÌnnerson

Hlliot[
C s{ù te r fo

N øtinønl,

r E d'zt c st

i,

ov¿

S¿@ t ¿s ¿?¿s

Fascatr D. Forgone, Jr.

Nat d.cøuzt ffid,estatiw¿ Goa.ß Fa'¡tnt

Ed þfuentes
Naùdrvrw! Ed.z¿aøtinn Goais

Fanel

Mjiton Goldberg
Un'i,ted, States Ðepa'f,w¿e'rzt o:f Educatdon !.,anny

Griffiltl
Stætes

l-tnitød
June

Ðepat"t.nønt af Edwcatiom
a,r¡"d

Fåarris

Cwnnnittee w¿ Mducat'ipr¿
Susan Greene

lnbar

f

Nati,o¡tøt Gaue ww'¡x' Asso cíntinr¿

Andrew

F{avtvnar¿

Cwv¿"rr¿ittee

an Edwcatisn amd i'aba'r

Charles Kolb tfi,te af I'oLicg Ðs¿teto'p'{Ngrzt, 'fÊw Wkdte House Jack "Ierunn'rgs
Cvm,rni.ttee on Edweaeiw¿ anÅ Løbor

Martharose laffey N g,&i,avwl, ScP¿¿¡od ßoærds Ássoc iø t i.o n

Emno Manr¡o
Uw'dted,9tæüøs Ðepartwzøn.t'of

Ed'ucat'io'tt
Il

"/

Jerry Martin N ationn!. Endaw þlcFarland "leff Edwcøtiaw l,ynn Munson

rwst¿

t

for

t

he

urr¿tmit ies

Swþawwit te e o't¿ I lemeç

¿tai' !1, S e rct dte

rg, amrt Vttc a t í on'al

Nca\iorw!. Ðr¿doePzner¿t

fot

the tiwrr¿unities

Rae Nelsorr

tffine of Foticg

ÐeL'eto'PwrÊ'ìzt,

'fke

Wt¿ite Nause

Rey Ra¡nirez tffdee af Serwtor Ûi'ngarn'am, Neu' Mes:'i,r:o

Bella Rosenbeng
"4T

np

ric an

fu de rut iw¿ af Te ar fue rc
for
f'ke
&{

Jeff Thomas
Naedur¿al Evd'owm'sr¿t,

wnnv¿dti'es
SecwztÊav'g, u n d, Vatatdowa{'

llsmia¡-t "fhomtan
Swbto'rn. nitte€ Ðd,wcatdnr¿

t n Ðtetnmetantg,

Ðoreen Torgerson tffirc af PaliaA Ðsuelvqwvrtt, T!¿e V{kite Êlotætt

,ltnur.trU t!6, !Û9Ë

A-il
€,J d

P: rv

,t;
D1

w-*."

str.íbùted by

DynBDRs

Susan Traiman
Nttldov¿ttt {} tn'e n o þs' A'çsr¡c
¿

¿o8 ¿ oa¿

Wilhe͡n $usan s
ø a

i o*,*i,fi ee a n Etewt,tt
al, Sc

t ü t"¡tr,

s eco

rr

rin a"¡¡, t¿ n d vt¡ t e t ir n t a I

Edutution
Lutlrer Wiiliams
N øtdrvn
ie nae
F o t¿ ¡¿d¿¿¿o

¡l

$pæe6wü$wppæn& Wewoultlliket,oexpressourapprcciationtotherollowingisxdlvidt¡als
and orglanieaûions who assisted
Lls

at various trnres cluritrg

t'!"re

cot¡rse

ofour
ø

wonk;

I

in frnal UrcnaraligltThe lnlatio¡¡al Geog¡aphic Sociegy for t'heir help r'v<¡nk' David Griffitt ühe of oi ii',. ,*po*t: Tutrv .d*itft fut coordinat'ion art; cover the for Nardirri fuÍark for layouï and design, and

øDianeRavitch,Ass¡sLant$ecretaty,OÍficeofÐdr¡cationalResearch -

;Tffiiffir*ffi;;Ü.slbõ;¿rnent

or-Eoucario*;.roseph

tonary,,/
¡'1

Impiovement, LI.S. Departrnenr oI Ecìttcation; .s .Iinr Bneedlove, Bellsouth; Gil G¡osvenor, National Geog¡raglhic anct walten sä.1-iv, giu Í_Íånig, catifornia Ðepartnrent -of Ðducat.ion; of the Fu¡rd Trust Week cience anc! Technolog

DesignatedFeEferalOifi"ùî,Cfnceo,'Fldr¡catl"naíResuärchanEi

Ñ;-y;

a*cl resounçes; r,luii"*ár science Fou¡rciagion co¡ltrihutecl thein tirne

hlatio*al

ssusanFuhnnratt,Rutg,erstlniversity;atrctHc{rvartlÍ}'Fis}tel'orthein
edi[orial suggiestiotis.

t\-

l!

/t'o

rs

r lr

¡¡

S I tr tt

tt ttt'tCs ./ir r"'!

rl¿

r'

I't rr¿

tt

i')

d

t¿

r u I i tt tt

fib
Dis

ttibtcecl bv

DyDEDRS

fuffimwkmffiåæsa ffæwtrfoæ
fqffiffiåffiffiM ffiæexsru*åå ffiKk

ffiasmmیmm ffiemmdmMro

æmdWffiMåW
f'

Pwnpsæ
The Natlo¡ral touncilo¡t E<tt¡catio¡t fìtanclards ¿]nd Test'illg rvas createcl by Public Law 102-62 ott "it¡ne 2?, ! $9 ¡ . The pur¡rose of t !tc' Council [s to provide aclvice oll the rlesirat¡ility ancl teasibility of n¿tional sta¡tdafds altd testilìg in education. The Council was ereated in response to fin<iirgs of Cotl8ress that:
o Org,anizatio¡ts have

bcgttn developilrg ltatir,nal education st¿ltdanls for various subject areas and gratie levels; ø Grouf¡s !"rave called for the expatision of ¡tal,ional test iTW for sr:hool

cliildren;
ø

Decisions regardiilg lhe rkrsirability antl fe'asibility of atlditir¡ilal nationa! testirq shouTd foltrow stlch tlecisiol¡s t¡tt ¡tatiottal staltdarcls for educatio¡-r; s Ufforts rcgandlng ¡tatiottal staltclarcls and testing shot¡ltl be ur¡r{r'¡-take¡l with t,ht" t¡noarlest possible pantit:i¡ratiotl t¡y the [lt¡blic;
anr!
o A nrajcr tr¿lt iûrrai cou¡¡ciÌ is r¡r'r.'derl to asst¡rt' trruati Srurt ici¡rat iolr try the pilbrlir., to ¡lrovirle a foc:rüs f<rr ¡rati<¡nal detrate o¡t ¡lntioslill

edui:atio¡r starttlartls ltrtd t,cs{ittg' ¿¡¡¡ci ttl pnovitte utlvicc'on tlte rlesiraþility n¡tt fc¡islT:ilit,y {}f rlt.veloping tuttiotlill s{an<l¿¡rt{s atttt

testlng.

Jft¡tuut'u;J4, l9lll

ur 'À E/ q/

i*,

t

DjFc¡j.buted

by DynEDRS

ffiwüËæ.s

The ducies

Õf

astotr

the CoLütcil sheü be to adsise the

A-menåcan Xreople

)

Vdhether suitrbTe specifÏc eelucation standarqfs shoi"tid ænd can be est¿bllshed, such as world cìass eLsrtdards, for (a) [he knowled$e arrd ski]-ls 0het stt]dent$ should possess and that sctrools sÏ¡outd i¡npart in order that Árneric¿rn studenf:s leave grades 4, S and å2 demoi"tst¡u&iT¡g etmpet'ency in chailenging subject nßågter includfurg Ðnglislt, maülrerna[lcs, scÈe¡leeo hisEory* and geogræ¡ihy; and

*

(b)

every sahcol [n Anrerica

Èû

ensÏire flþnt

axl

use their rnínds rryell so that, the-y Wfi nesponslble citÍxenshrlp, ft¡¡"tf¿er leamting, afl d pnoductive
Ue

stìfdents learn prepared for

Lo

â) '

enrplopnenL in our n'¡c¡de¡"n econorny; and \&4tetþrer, whitre sespectins $tete and local contro! of eelucation, an apprrrpniate cy$tefü oivoluntary national besÈs on exarnimatio¡is shoulo and aan be est¿t:üshed, such as Arnerica¡l achievevne¡-lL tests, thâÍ w!J-i provide prÕffcpE, accuvåte ûnfomwatlorr to p&tren&s* ed,t¡eâtqlrs, and pollsy r¡lekes:s on Ûå¡e progress being wrade qowqrd the speei.flc educgtion st,ændards by indivldual Studen[so schco}s,

scl'¡oolsystenrsos[a8es,andtheldatior¡asawhole(ifst'lcÞ"t

stai.rdåyds can tre establisþ¡ed). The SoaJ of any sueh systern shatrl be ts f'oster $ood teaching and Tearning, as welÌ &o n¡oni[or

perfo¡-¡nance.

FümwBffieryr€
31, The Oou¡rcil shall, as sûrn &s possible, but nor later Lhan lleceniber Edtlcation' 1991, st¡bmit å report [o the Congress, the $ecret'ary of and the þ{ationaÌ HdtlcaLíon Goals PameÌ thal cocÌt'eÍns recomrnendations re$arding Ìong-tenn policíes, sgt"tlctLlres' [o Lhe rnechanisrns, and o¿her lrnp-ortant consideråtions with respect. costs and Í"aim:ress, nellabiliLy, valídity, ofihe Á discr¡ssto¡'n exanttnatiol¡s or tests "ùjã"ui"èu. national voluntaiy of systern of"impternentingla

shal! also be incÌuded in sueh repûrfl.

Þc)

fire ds i rigt ,9úe¿radc¿ rd's

{ar

,4¡ttt:t'ica¡¿ ltd't¿crzî'daw

1¡-.n
R} L9

Ðj s Í:r

j.b! l:ed by

Dy))ÜDRS

ffiffiKåcffimmmæmffi

',þ 'í

he hJnlional Council on Ðducation $Landards and Test¡ng hes sought purblic comment. The cornrnents iË has received have helped to shape this reptrt. Ttre Cotlncil wishes to 0henk the furc[ividr¡a-ls and organizat[ons listed below for their strggqestlons a¡'ld observations. The Cou¡rcil recognizes that, wh.í3e sorÍìe sþfements subtni[ted to it, represent officlal posi0ions taken by a¡r organÞ,atlot't, others were submitted as the views of a¡r individual who does ¡rot claim to represent the Lnstiùueio¡r with w!'tich he or she !s afäliated.
o Sbate

delegations attendirxg the ÌdationaÍ Ëducagiun Fonrrn im Des Moirres, Iowa, $eptemnben 3?-28' I 991 o Advseates fon Childnen of Ïdew York, lnc., Diana Auti¡t Ajüance fon üurricuh¡rn Refonn, Gorclon Cawelti -}'hernpy e Ârnenican Occupalionatr .{ssociation, Barbana thandler o f,r¡lerica$ Fsyckrolo$cæÌ AssociaÈlo¡r, Wapte Camaraancl Oerald
ø

Sroufe

* r\FFLÐ ûotps, Sallíe lVeddelå s ,{riaona StsÈe University, Carole Edelsky
ø

o

Arkanças, Offîce of the Governor, Dehorah Walz Assocfatlotr s)flP,;fierlcan Fulrllshers, Test, Cosr¡ffitttee, Michae! F{' Kean e Assoclation ofl Black Fsycholo$sts, Sandru Cox atld l-lanoki Der¡t, ø of ÜalIfor¡-ria Sahooi .4dmIn¿stregtrs, h'telinda Melena{ea
^Associafr!o!"!

Jcrr¿r¿¡r'¡¡

Ð4,

199;)

t-!
€;a

tjsú¡i¡uced by

DYùnDRs

o Associatlc¡n

staüerftents by the national onganåuâtíÕn, süi*te afflliat'es, a¡ld lndividuæl mernbens

for Supervision and Cunriculum teveloprnent position

Autism Soclety of Amenica¡r, Davtd þIolmes e Brain-Eased ÐducaLion Tdetwonk, l,eslie låart
ø

* Brigham Young {Jniversity, Utah, Ruìon Garfie}d
ø

Eusiness Rounclrable ancl Nati0naì ¡\jlta¡rce of Eusiness, Þ"nite

Edelstein

eCarnpai€nforGenuineAccounuabllit,yinEducarion,Morttyl{eill
6

Canton CiEy Schtols, th!o, Wayne Denny o Centrnl Færk East, Secondary Schoo!, New York, Ðeborah lsteien
e o

College Boand, Donald

Stewail

i

ûonsurtiurn ftir CiLizens wich Ðisabilities e Council for Ðx.ceptional Children, Joseph Balla¡rtr and Mary Cohe¡r
e Dlstriet, ofl Üolumbia, Jzure[te HosLon I-[avris
ø

Easton Public $chools, Mass¿chusetts, Ise Keftal Zirnmernlan ø El¡'nbrook $chool Distnict, Wisconsin, Ronald Lange s F oxfire -feacher tutreach, Flilton Srnitlt
e Ilirna Intersnedìate Scl"rool, Ì-Íawai!,,\my l-Jyecni
ø

indiana lJni,versiLy, Leonard C, Eurrello

ø Kamel'¡armeha

Hlernentany $chool, Llawaii, Kahele Kukea s' Mariernon[City Schools, Ohio, Þonald "l'hompson e Mexican Âmericatr Legal Þet"ense Fttnd, $t'ephen Carbo
ø

Midland Fublic Schoo!, Mlcltigan, tarol S"eider National ,4lliance o[ Business

gMississlppiEendAreaÐtlucat,ionÀgency,Richardl-lanzclka
ø

e NAACP Legal Ðefense ar¡d Ðducation l"'und, Julius e National Ceftter on EducatÌocx Out'comes

thambers

ç llational Coali[iolt of Educat'ion Activists, f]ebi Ðuke e National tonference of Stare Legislat'ures, Ðducalton and Job

Trainlng Cornmittee
e NaLional Ûor-¡nc!l for thre Social $t'udies, Charlott'e 'A¡tderson o New Vork Oity Eoarri of Ed, (Dist'rict' l )' Susan l"Tarman
ø

hüorfolk Fublic Schsols, Vi'eginta, Geonge Raíss lffornble Jetrkins o North Carolina, Ûffice of t,he Governon, -}ackie
e

Steadma¡t Nor¿ttwes[ Assoclation of Schocls and Ûoiteges' David e Fanaso¡lic Foundation, Sophie Sa
s Farkway Sct¡ool Þistnict, Misseiuni, Wülliam Fnanzert e Fennsylvatlia Department of Educatton, Jose¡rh Eantt
e Fonta8e Üount'y Board of Edueation, Ûhis' F{elen Gless e Punahot¡ School, F{awæi!, Ðuatte Yee and Hlai¡le Eht'rna¡t
ø

Ûrace $outhentl A,sssclatlott on thlldren Under Såx' ÛaÙhy Marcta Klev¡bort'

o Sst¡Lhe¡¡t f{e$lionei Councû!,

C-C

ffcdsirlg¡

'91¡¿¡¿tdt¿r'eCs J'o

r

Åmt'¡'i<'tc ¡¿ Åitf ttt'aiit'¡¡t

#ì,J KE ð€,

Djsl:rjbùfê.1 by

DYtlgDRs

Advocacy Center, Ruth Zweifler e Teachers and Parents flor School Renrewal, Oregon, Bill Resnick
e S0udent

e University of ûalit'ornia, San Ðiego, T'racy Strong,
ø

Urban Superiníendenls' lrüetwork (ÛffTce af Ìlducational Rest'nrclt and. Improvernent,, U.8. Ðepartment of Ëducation)

The ûounci! aiso thanks the foilowing organizaLiotts for [heir help in requesLing public eûnlmenl:
e Association flon $upervision and Ûurricttltmt Ðeveloprneltt
o
@

Eusiness Roundtable

Fai¡test

ø NaLional

,{lliance of Business ø National ÅssocÍation ol State Eoards of Educa¿io¡t
e
ø o

?

National tor"lference of Stare Legislattlres National tovenrons' Associa[ion National ,4ssociation of Schoal Br:arens

,Ju ¡t tt

t¿

r

¡¡

t!

4, Mll;l

K.jnb

{'r\

û.9

Djst¡j¡uted by

DyDEDRS

ffiæKmffiåæmÆ
ffiffiesffiffiffimxa ffiffiffiåffi

î

ffi@#Ë I r ffiwdä'mcss Fwr

$shmü
åm

kM"

ffiy

fu ryr ßffi,

e[ë

ehiWw

&mwrfuw

wå86

swrc w$sæd

r@

Objectives:
o A.!.ldisadvantøged

and disabled children t'uill have access to lxigh quality and deveìopmentally appropriate pneschool progrems thðt help prepare ch.ildren for school. Every parent, in Anrerlca v¿ill be a ch-iid's Srst teacher end devote

@

tirne each day helpi¡t8 !'tis or her preschool child trearn; parents will haveaccess to the trainimgand support they need. ø Children will receåve the nutritio¡r and health care needed to anrive at school with heaitlty rni:'¡ds artd hodies, al.ld rhe nur¡rber of low birtlnwei.g¡trt, hauies wiitr be sl8niflieantly neduced t]irough en]ænced prenatal healtlt sYst erns,

tu$ ft Þ€6gh $chæBffiæmpHæBåwm
ffiy@pæryäWu ffiefu@e k@eþ@s8Wpffitå"
CIb.fectlves:
e

MgMw#ww

ffiþwW

åutssww

The trattor¡ xnust dræmatlcally Eeduee lts dnopout, næte, alld seventy-

Jao¿a¿nrU

84,

'i99:Ì

i>t
q}.å
É1
Ê

DisúibuLed by

DyùËDRs

fltvepercentofthosesludentswhododropout,wíl}st¡ccessfuliy
complete a high school degree
ø

on iLs

equivalent"

students The ÉaÞ i¡r hjgh school $raduation rates be[ween Arnerican witrl coutrterparts fnonirnìrr"øty backgror.lnds and their ngn-minonity be elirninered.

ffiææ$ &v Éfu

ffi:

$gaædæmff

ÅehËevwffiæürå rurnd ffiüffiswutshËp

kmre grwdæs 6æar, ffir äff&&, Amæskmn sMws wEð Ëm qw-wp@ry d*sæmstruæd ;fuüð:d'#ßua,&"kgffi mIÞffie{e€ffießå€$, ffiWgg#; FmekdËry *fffu ;ilffiffii* saß$@þ .
"

eË€Ërury#Ep, fu rtëwr bæ rmËrng' ffi.ffi ä'ffi 6b" uestr#ffisåM æd @mfrM ww@wtr Ë;n æær å@sffi @€@èwffiY'

ffiffiffi-ffi'ffi**

tbjectives:
e

st,¡¡rlents The acade¡nie perforlnance of elerneng.ar'/ and seconcÌa,ry of distribution che quarLile, and *ütr i**ru*u* siþ#ificently in every st¡¡de¡¡t tìre reflect ciosely will rnore mi'ority stud*ãm in each level

PoPulation as a v¿h,ole'

gThepercent,a$eofsLudent,srvhodernonsl,ra[etheabilityt,oteasÐn'

råi"åptãt r**î, app:y knowledge, and wr¡.ite and cornmur$cate eifectively will increase substant'ially'
ø Åll students wilÏ be involvecl in âct'iviÙies that prontote and
I

C**oirnt*t*

gootÌ clLizenship, col'llmuttity service' arttl persoltaÏ

responsibilitY' eThepencen[a$eofstude¡tt,srvfttoârecÛrnpet,el¡t'ittntt¡trt.thatiotte la"nguage wil! substantially increase'

i
fi

eAlIs&udcr¡tswillbeknowledg¡eableabout'thecliversecultura! iãtiû-É* *f rflls nation and absut the world comniuttily'

ä

ffiw@BÆt $cãwme@ ffiffid ffiwffiwmwÊiss
ffiw 8&w
üffi &@ w@# wær ßW&, &$,$" smfu& wåfi& M ffiuuÊ 6€hMwffiI8" trk#d *F-U Mi*¡mmtæ$
ürð

å
H

fr

ä
H

CITrjectives:

&

ffi

ghdat,handsciegrceeducationwillbestreng[hettec{thrclrrglrotrtthe sys[em, especially in the early gnacles' itt ø The nl¡mben of [eache''fs with a st¡bst,*ntlve backgroi-¡nct

percetlt' niaittematics and sclence will increaseroy 50 gnaduate slt¡dcnts' ø The nurnber e¡f U,,$, undengraduat'c and ttegreesitt contple[e who mlnãrities, ancl wo'rnen é*p*tl*tty sl8nificnilt ly. w!il increase *.t*ir.á, urr.l engineering

*ucrc*är*$,

ffi

/¡fJ

f{rcisirr¡¡,\ir¡ ¡rdrt tils
' ,

.!'tt

r

¿\tttt'

¡'

i

r*n

þ}d

tatttl io

¡t

fuå$

fs t"'

tjsùrj)Diied

bY DYtlEL)lls

ffiffiffi8 S; &dwËe Ë.Ëeærwcy æwd ê"åffe$wæg fu*ærwtümg
&v ffie *ræss ßfos&€ä #w

äffffi,

@å wwp
d{MhËp.
ûïr,!ecüives:
ø

kewMse

wv

ødufu &"*uvmsmct w€ffi M Eftffi*ü @ffid wäûf emd #E$s ew€ffin#sv fu e,**trs#ç Em s

æmdäwweüçæ

fu

rfuåt{iø

s¡#

respæsrs,übã8#k

d

Eveq¡ n¿ra.lor.Arnerícan Ï¡usiness wilÌ be involved in strer¡gLhening the connection between education er¡d work.
A.ll r¡¿o¡'kers wlti have the ûpportunity to acquire the lcnowledge and skllls, from basic to h¡q}rJy lechnical, needed to adapÈ lo emerging new tech¡rologies, rvork rnet,Í'iods, and markqls through pubTic and

private educaL$oIral, vocaíÈc¡ral, t,echnical, tdorkplace, or tther
prû8rerns.
e

The number of high-qualigy pnograms, lncluding Lhose at libraries, that êre desi6¡rred tû serve ärone effectively the neecf s of the grolvittg numtrcr of part "tinre and rnictrcareer st,udents will i¡rcrease

ø

substantially. The proportion of those quaiified stuctcnts (espccially nrinorlties) who enïer co[]eËe, rt'ho complete at ieasl two yeärs, artd who complete their c{egree pro€iräfiìs will it¡crease sutrslantially.
The pnoportion of coilege graduates who derno¡tstrate att attv¿¡Itcetl ability to tl'rink critically, comnrunicate efÍeccively, attd solve prohrlerns will increase substs¡itlallS/.

e

ffiwB&: $æfu, ffiüseËpßËercd ffiffid ü3trerg-#reæ
øfu vffismaæ e# MMmfimg"
ûhjecÈives:
ffiv

$shwwfis

fu wr ãffi, ffiw
wuü88

dfu're

ec$¡ød üm &mssws wüïÊ be kw æ& drwe dËseãSår'# es¡øËrwmmuwge#Æfu@

e EveW scttcol will inrplerne¡rt a flimr al¡cl fair policy on use, possessiort, s.nd distributiûn of druÉs and alcoho!.

Parents, huslnesses, ancl corxlmunity organizaLions will work together to e¡rsure that, schools are a safe havell for allchtltlret¡. e Every school distriat, will deveiop a comprehensivc K- i2 drug alul alcohol prevention educa[ion prograrn. Drug and alcoholcurnicult¡m
ø

shot¡ld þe taught, as 8n in¿egrül ¡rart of health ecÍtlcatiop. Ïtt aelclitiott, comnrunity-ìrasecj tearns shouk{ be onganized to pno,vide sttldoTlts
ancl teachens wtth needect support.

Tlre Natiotral Ëriucatioli Goals Fanel was fornred to re¡:onL attnually urtl the progress of t he NaLio¡r and [he stnLes towand achieving f:he t,lational þklilcatio¡¡ ûoals, lts first, t.haír was tover¡tor l{oy T?onter cf' ûoiorarüo, who çvas succeeded in August 1S#1 by Gove¡non Cnnroll

cenrpbel[of south carolina, Thc Goals Panel was originally compost'd of slx govcr¡runs, three Dernacrnts and three Republfcans; four ¡nenibers of"råte Fnesiden['s Ael¡nlntstnation; actd four ex officio

,!ttnt¿rtrU 94, iljSJ

î,4
I {¡f

,r

tríl L,
s..p

ni.etrj,bùted by

DyûEDRs

avrd the rnembers, tkre nrajority a::d. minetrity leadeys Ûf the u.$. senate ¿Votdov¿c¿l the U.S. l{ouse of Re*resenrcatives. Its first report', w*s ñducatùav¿ üottls {tepart: &zt;d'!.d"i.tnE ø Ne¿td'aw of Leæwøts'

issueel $eptember ß0,

lg9['

',2

I

f)4

Rrli.+ürty

'9¿r¿¡¿¿do

rds J'rtr A?n(ri¿'t¿rr

&jtf

t¿cctior¿

'dj

Ê\

,"1

d

Distt ibùted Þv

Ds,ngPns

ffipmffiæffffiæ
dffiMffiTfuffiå{ffiw*æ'
.,'ì

t

ËsrËY#wqÊåwst

This neport responds to lssues perflaining to Lhe desirability and feasibit-ity of narional educ¿Lion standards posed in the legislative and supporting language of IlR 243õ, the enabling Tegislation for t'he Natir>naÏ Council on Ëducation Ëtandands and Testing' The report specifically addresses questions raised i:t F{ouse CommiÈtee Repoflc l-Og-tû¿, wlilch acconnpanies the enabåing legislaÊion' This intnoduc[ory secLion ofl the repo$ Eeviews the pentinent legislation and suppc,rtírr6larrguage cottcerning the desírebility and feasibility of r¡ational educa[ion sl.endayds, pnovldes a bnief descri¡rtion of the three oLhen parts of [he report, and higiriights three ilnpÛrtøn[ unclerlying assu-rnplions of our work'

The ilrnort wus srr¿.traretl hy M¡fshall s, snrith, altleri try susarr Fr¡hffnan ¿u¡(l,l('iln[('r ií t'*i-i i*g,elv otr two one-riav nrt etl¡tqs of thc st¡rxl¡rrls T¡¡'sk orr $eptt'nrlx'r lf) ¡¡tt¡l È;;¡;;äúì: tùìtönïrbóúä.tii'ri erluiatiorr Stnnrlartls untl Testlrrg heltf pn'prr<'tl tirr lno òì.iòhi ZO. ttro reÞon dr¿ws on a ¡rn'llmitrtty ¡u¡N:r of the Task Force a *unrma'ry olthe reporl ¡tn'paretl fi)r tllsctts-sloit ð,ì;;;ilÑ Æ;c*[rirt dlit (;ou¡rcli, tneellrìA of the touncil, sntt dlscttsslons {)f thû óùir:"i..t for tú": O"to"U"'. ¿ ¡"co,irrttl, ffifiúËrñ;liil* gi,rXumt"" ,o¡,,i {Ë.tolx'r tru,r.tlngs. lttsofirr irs ¡xrssl!rle '1hlslnrt'ptrrl ul Nllslílll{'{'s. hipr<.sents a consl'¡rsus of tho Tssk l'rrrt't' trt¡t a consnnstls wH$ ¡lot Íx)selh¡('

cf tha Natirxtirl ()otttrt'i!otr tJl.lr-fl ,hi.*,,W;;*;pt.1"*.if* tll.*Itsitír'¡¡tlrrlt "f arxl Tesrlirg at thgir ()ctntrt'r, Notemhn'r, ,ttrtt l)ctt'nrtx'r,. l9fll t¡tt't'tittp,s. äi,,iätfäriSi"l¿irhs ( ] t,r¡]".

Tü;;;irü;';iih;i,;i-i

Tëte túeu¡s eaVtresised. dt¿ fi¿tls appewtl,i.a t'e\tort reJîecl l.i¿tt uto't"k gftose oJ tfw: üt¡ptp¿ci.i. tî¿,is Tæ¿k þaice arwl. aftt wat r¿t:cessuri.!,g

oJ
!,;-

,/

..Ì

d

¡¿ t¿tt t,

U

Ð

4,

I 9!) lJ

t

{,K}ú

l{' r

l

l).í.

i

l: r:

i bu

ted bY

DYtI:DRS

üryfis$øt8træ wmd

$upprÐimg

bmmgumgw

å.nd sec, 4 trl1¿¿tiesof the Natioyral Üouncil on Ðducation standards American Lhe advise shall il "?"he tou¡re (Hft,2a3ä) states: Testing Àct peoptJon whethen srrit .bt* specifrc eduaation stanriards can be esteblished such as v¿orld-class standards, for

-

o

the knowledge and skills that students should pr3ssess and that grades schoois should irnpart in order lhat,tmerican students leave
4, E, and t2 demoñstratir4lcornpetency !nchallenging subjec0

*utî*.
o

inciuding English, ntathematics, science, history, and

geography; and
use their evefv school in A-rnerica to ensure that nlì sLudents ieartt to citizenship, nesponsible prepared;for wil1 ¡e minãs v¿eli so that t!'rey further learnlng, and procluct!"ve cmplofmenL in our modern ecoftorfty; änd...'u

specific The Ftrouse Report elaborates on Sec 2 cf t'he ßill with very larguage:

['t"lreCouncilshail|.....provid.earlviceon(t)tvhethersuitable and..." äpecific educarion standards shou¡l and can be eståìrlished,
with the b!lÌ's staled purpose (see section Z(a)of the bill)'" -"...Lhe Commitlee in no way endorses the proposition that n¿tional

"ltistheintënt,of[heComnrit[eet'Lrat'Lhetounciladdresseachof theseissuesint,emsofitsdesirahillt,yarrdfeasibilit}tcoltsistent,

educationstandards...areelllrerdeslrabletlyfeasible'lt,isthe

ÑtË&

oflt'he Council lo exantirte a broad range olconsideratlons ioitlt regarqt to Lhese two issues and neport their t'indi¡igs and to the tongresso the Secretary of Ðcft-¡caLion artd

recom:'nendat'itns the National Goals Fanel".''

Srrui€$æe% w$ Él'te Regawr*

Thisreportrespondsdirect,lytot,heissuescottcerttittgthede'sirabilitv in I'lR 2435 an<{ or nationat education s[anrlards Set, oul
end feasibility parts: ín the House Report' The report has [hree remeinirxg

øFarcTlpr0posesadefinitionofedr-¡cationstaltdardswhichpays att,entionLot'heconceplualizat,ionc¡feducationst¿ndartlssetoutitt section 4 0Íthe EÍll. oPart'Illconsiderst,hedesirabiliryoftlrisNatiorrhaving'.nat'ional the questions $eÙ lJucation st$ndard;." This discussion responds Lo out in the l-louse report on the T3i1ì' øPartTVconslderswhe|her!t,isfeasiblelorthishÌationt'oltave
naLionaTeducatio¡rsta¡tdarcïs,"!]hisdiscussionalsorespoltdslot,he House Eill rePort.

llhuw e$*d*#*W

&sswmPBiwstø

t'o undcrsconc t'ttre* Befone corrsideringlthe detinit'ions we 'É¿an[ report' in this lntporlan[ assumpíions rnade

Ã1,c)

i?r¿isír¡r¡

.5f ct¿tCt¿r¿ds

J'rr rlner'ir:o rt Ëtl ttttr itttt

frJ
Djs Lt i!1ùl:ed bY DY¡EDRS

e iy'¿¡l¿or¿r¿/ ¿'s.

Federal Sf¿¿r'¿¿i¿¿rris. fuVe ass¡¡me from Lhe latrguage of [he Eill anci the Report and fronr early discussions of the Council that Congresslonal inEent. is chat Lhe erjucation standands are lo l¡e national mttrer Lha', federal. We sttpport this interpnetiåtion. We take Ít, Lo rnean ttrat, whíle Lhe process for establlshing a¡rd implenienring the standarcis should be nationaì in scope, it should rtot be ulncåer the control ol the fede¡'al government, though Ðkie variot.s parts of the federal gùvernrnenl (tlie Congress and the adnri¡üstratintr) shoul<f be impontant pasticipants. It also irnplies that the process for establishirg the standards should reach out ßc¡"ûEs the Nation to the many $Lates and their communities. ø Volzt¡¿tarv ¿ts. Mandatorg (imposed) .5r¿¡¡¿rC<¡¡d.s. if statttlarrls ¿tre nationaT nather [haii fedenal, rve âssut]ìe that they are "volt¡ntary" for the stãtes. We support this interpn.etation..pnly the flederal governnrent coultt have the alrthonity to reþr.tire states to use nationai education standards- attci eve¡l thât is t¡nlikely itt light of the language c¡lthe Constitution. Discretiolt fon the ado¡:tiorr of the' standards woulcl conti¡Ìue tt rest r,ç"ith the sts.tes, providing att inq)ortånt tralance of porver antt responsibility. This is an extrenlel¡' ilnportant point. It acidresses the questiori in tlte hlouse tonltnittt'c Report whlch asks "rvhal, the benefits a¡rd liabilities are of intpositrg uniform natio¡¡a! stafic$ards... on al¡ eclucatioli systeltt ''vhere curricult¡nt is tractitiotrally cotrtrollecl ¿rt the state attcl k¡cal level"' The position takelt here i" that "educatiott stattctards" woulti lle vohtntary, not tnandat.or¡ or ittt¡1,:sed nationally. The isst¡c al¡ot¡t the clesinability oflvolutrtary ttatianal st¿t"ldards, t¡ttifornt or ¡tot. is natu!'all} still inrportant ancl svill be fuil.v co¡isic{ered' \lb¡o rentitt<'lthe reader thar being voltttttary natiotrally rvoulti tiot sto¡r itrdivirlttai st.âtes; froltì rnaking the stattriarcls manclatory for the schc¡ol districts wìthin their borc$ers.
s Chalk,¡tgirt$, ?tot mininuil *lt¿t'qtirttt,sir¿¡¿rdr¡¡rd.s. Lltrtlcrgirtlit¡g the ítttcnest it¡ ¡tational edtlcatiott stetl(lardl; is thc irÌca that thc

cû¡ìtent of the ¡lresettt currir:t¡ltlttt itt lttost IJIrilerl States schools lacks coherence, c{epth, ancl qualiry. T}rroughot.tt. f ltis report rve ¿¡ssun'ìe that tiation¿ll eclucatic¡ll stanclarcls rvill ìegitimately lle "rvtlrltl class" in scu¡:e ancl quality. They nrust refle"ct high. rlot rni¡tintal. ex¡:ectations ft¡r all of our Nat iott's stt¡de¡ìt s' If ther- âro lìot chalten$ng and of tltc' high{'sl qtlality, they are guaralttt't't{ to tlo
nrore hamr tl'lan goocl,

ffiæ$Ëmügåæm æ$

ffidascæffiwm $ffwrudmrds

HdUcation standarcls shot¡ld ngspottfl to tht'fttttrtantt'lttal t¡ttt'sliolts: What shoul<.i schoois teach'l What shoulqi stucle¡lt.s learti a¡ttl hots'tç('ll should Íhey lcann it? ,4ncl, in res¡lottse tû t'hÊ text of the enabling leÉislationr What [s t]re quality of a schooß's caTlar:it,y to "ensr¡re that all students learn Lo u$e their rninds well""l" The ternt educatiocr stattdards is gctleric- !t is irfiX)orteltt, to develop a set of sg:cctfÏt' defl'¡nltions for use by the council ar¡d f'on respondlng¡to the intportattt t¡uestions posec! in the içgislatio¡l ant! in [he legislat'ive re¡:ort. Tht' work of tlse ldational Courtci! o¡t E$ucatign Statitiancfs atrc! Tt'sting ott
Jerrtr¿¡¡

t'y 84, i{l$P

l'"a J

f

[-$

Disi:rjbuúed by

DynEDRS

educätion standards has focused pnirnarily ogi fl¡ve sutljecÈ rì'lat8er geography' \ffithin areas; E¡rglish, mathemaeics, science, histoty, and rve can disti¡lguish the cónte"xt of a defrne<$ sutrject mat¿er a'eå out an Ûverall elefinitio¡"1 to flesh several specific cornpoxrentÀ desig,ned of education stactdards.9
sW&$ffieffi€
I
r

The

o¿,e¡'"a¡.t ll,i.vtE statern'a'¡¿d should.

I

$

å

g ä

terms a vision of the'nßture of th¿e pecfago¡åically coherent anea. h. strot¡lci emphaslee a thesret'ically ancl sutrject m&tter up-to-date challengi'ng, and enpgaglng preseîìtatiûn of inciuditg an stt-¡dettts, by al! achieventent a*d hidiiãxfrectations for of' clescriSltion The achieventetti. student g*ål ri,orÌcl-class of, utti*uîu F'ranreworlt ,.rVlathenläcica! Foli"er" i¡l the itew Caliloryia h{¿[hernatics
is ari exam¡rle.

describe in brief acld gt'Iteral edtlcatlon standards fon the cosllenL

ffi

€øffiwe$*ws#eds

&
ffi

u*"***rv

#
H

#
ffi ffi ffi

fon all u¡rc{erstandings thi}t sc}tools should teach ilt orcier suhject tTre in competency Åmerican students to a.tlailt high levels of to expecteel ane schools rvhat Generølly, attcl for "utþ"tpouuu, understatrcling,s other and skills "ì^tr.t. teach is equivalent to thc knowlecigc, The ldatiorraÌ Council that. st,r'¡rle¡lts åre expecteci tû leacîì it¡ schools''i (NCT¡4) C ¿ r tic u l ¿t wt t¿ ¡ ¿tl E ¿'ul a t i o ics h,{athè¡nat ot' of tuÀ"f,*ru Fnanreworks, Ðhe m rr ài.i¿ r Jrr¡.,S cl¿ool l,,4 u t l it m a î its, rhe california college Board, rhe of $vlt;b;_*; í.r rhe Arivancerl Flat.enlent Tesrs
p

Cap¿ter¿lsfru¡¿rl¿lds shoulc! set otit'

tl¡c knorvledge' skills' arxl othen

¿¿

¡ ¿

l

ffi

árrqtthec0¿¡'s¿, oJSrud¡trfot.Lo¿¿,r,¡..$¿'co¡tdtrr¡,¡ the pÌ.¡rposes of the wonk of ;*ll exarrrples at.r¡¡ne¡tl' .sir¿¡¿rfr¡¡'ris. þor the ent"ire range of precover shot¡lt{ ¡¡rd¿tl.rc.s the Cou¡tcil, eo,¡l(,}¿¿ sf<¿ ;;il-'g,;i. t'ornral sch<mling {gracles K-l?) as rlo thc NÜTM t,¡¡¡ Ðr,nl¡¡riÍ¡r,rr s¿r¿ ¡¿¿' rrlsþr'scfu ool fvft¿litt'¡¡¡ttlics
c,ilrï¡r,ou¿,,,r¿
atrt'! t lie Calift¡rltia Fratnervorks'

stlto,l.sinJa¡.,anare

ffi

ffi ffi

$ftdetw'ffiwr$@#wffi ffi€e

$&m#ds

ffi

osta'olisir []re tlegree or ,5t¿¿rlel¿f pr'ü-oì't|l(ttì':(r sf(¿,ld(IÌïi$ shor'li<l perforltrartcc itt the c}talletr¡4irrg sulrject mÍxlter $et t¡ualiï.y

ffi

ffi

or¡tittthecc¡ttîet:tl.sfr¡¡¿r'1r¿¡rds'lttg,eneral'thet$cvelopntettt'ofsuch. of pro[essionally judge"cl sta¡¡rlarrls rvil! require exanrple s uii* rottgu as Lrc¡rchnlarks for assessing the st urlesrt ¡:crfonrrirrrces ivhich scfvc F.on exantple' the Ûollege . äì*iitv.ir- ¡terv stutle¡tt's perfortnattce' a¡e scored eine ( I ) lhrough (¿lr) Tests noor,ínrtuo,rc*t Ir!a.r,nrui.,t Lhat a stut{uttt h¿¡s ä".;'tÀl.tyi,ically, a scort') r¡fìhree (t)inciieates ru Lhe ex¿rnri¡ration level pafìs college a çvcll e, nough to

"i*tr,.{*,',t

i,**lànír,*,î

ffi

t",Ñ;t\¡,1-ltl.tf Iilì- ¡".--b¡,.1 '..tt* ilt,' Ñ,rii,'rt,ul f'lilttr'¡rl iotr (ìoals I'¿ltrll'

tr.lt¡r¡'tl

ttr

th. ¡'Êtslaltt¡r¡ ¡¡ttrl tlt lht'r.'t¡rt

.f

ffi

ffi ffi

'l'l¡rrtr',¡ltll¡t fr¿rtt¡oçrlrk" i¡¡stt'rttl tlf tltt' :i. Íì0nt(. ittttlt(,rs l¡ll(l $titt{,s (¡s(' tllt' l('tlll r,, lri¡v,' iri0rrticill lrrt'iìrri¡t{ str¡ttcli¡ttc's 5;1¡¡¡¡l¡rrts... F",u",,,,r ¡u,r¡,,,r*ir'lr;liì,ùìiiiì,'ì;;;ìtinris rectot I tt¡ t Ir('('r )rricr rl sl ttrlolìt s ¿tr(' I'xl iiti-:ir"' t"iìrììì tt'i"'it*1:ä I ht' t.t trt "¿tt'hit'v,',,,",tr tlrr' (r)¡rtorrt llritt s.hrxrls ¡rt' .r.¡rrro¡'ili;i;ì',iä;;ü"
¡rt gNx'rt'tl to tcnt'h'

ttn¡t "t'iltttt'ltt

'tt" il i,;i'rl tir's¡xr'¡fs rr,¡rr¡r *.hr', rh,, r.n¡r ctltrirriu¡'itt i¡lrrl w* li* li.iiiìiìi"fa ilü,ì r h,, tn',, h,rili,'T .,f.irrrl o¡rt nr* {,r.r{.tr¡rl t(, tú,¡r(.h. ll*r. ,,,.,rrr,.,i,ì'*ürìili¡f i;;;,;ü" i(, tx)th rçh^t sttl{l('rrt ¿!r{'('xi)0't{r'rl ttr lt'¡tr¡t r¡irs rvq, r¡st,tlr. t,.r,, ìüui'*'ii,,i'ii'ti,*¡*
¡u¡1'

ffi ffi

þ;4

fft¡lslrtg'\frtrttlri¡'tls
e¡d

lttr Åtrte'ricuttF"tdt¿t'¿¡{io¡¿

d¿

DistriÞüced by

DynÍDRs

subjecl, ê scrre of fou¡r (4) irrdicates t!'te sLudent would lrave gotten a ß i¡r a coÏlede crLrrse exa¡n¡natiot-¡, and & score of five {S) is superior perfonrnance ðquetifig t{i eft Å lit college. The *ssignmexrÈ of a level of
pedormanee on a¡r "4F Test, requwes atl explåcít cornparison of the exartì!Ìnåt!ûn performanee (essays, an*lyses of text, recond of i-low difficult, calctrlus prohlems are solved) v¿ith üþre prior perfos"rnance sf successful nr¡d unsttccessful college studeirts on "equivalent" tests. The Task Force recommrevrds that, at, Ieas'c a [hree leve] scale of
slu.d.eøt pesa"nv¿xt'r¿.ee stærulnrds

will

!æ necessaEy

forgrading

assessrflent$ based on the ednrcationtaø,lønt sèew¿{iÆYds' These might be traheled "con'tpe[ent perforrrrance," "excellent perfofinänce o" aincl "world-cl&ss perforunance" slandards. In or'der to establist'¿ the criteria for the S¡iaJ leveå, "w<¡rld-class stanc{ards," we wlll need to gather infortnation ahout tÌ'¡e qualitsr of Ûìre best q{udeng work irr other

nations.

k8ffië Mewþ'gruædæse
tuÈ criteria to enable local anc! gtrre public to assess q¡fl performance ir¡ educating their ancÌ capacíty quæÊiry a school's the gl"se by the cû'tzgs,¿t set ouL rmâtLer subiect, ir¿ challern8ing sEudents stav¿d;¿rrjs.ScÊ¿ood de!,iz¡ery s1av¿dat'aÌs should provide a nretric f'or deterrnining svheüher a school'odelivetrs" 8û stude¡rts tlie "opportuttity to leaffix" welì !!re rnaLerial in the cov¿det¿ N. st$'v¿d"sïds.,Are the teachers in Ðlte school trained ùo teacÏ¡ ûhe conteyrt of [he sLandarcls? Does the school årave a¡rpropglate and high qtiaiity instn¡ctional materlals rvhich reflect the eor¿tvwt sÊandærds? Does the acttlal cUt-l.iculu¿m of the scþoûl coven the rna[erial of tlne üo]¿feæf sÍar¿da¡ds in sufficierlt dcpth for the sluden[s tr rnasger it to a hlgh standard of performance? These input, conditiovrs are fundamencal to providi¡'¡g ali children the oppol"tt-ui{ty to leayn the rnate¡"ia} of Ll¡e co¡¿fc*¿f sdr¿r¿do¡c/s. Fittally' or1ilne oulcogne sÍde, dÛes ËÌre ¡rerfoi-rnance sf the sÙudenls i¡r tlte school ind,iasf.e that thre school !s successfully providirg the "oçrXlot"tUt"li'cy Lo leayn" to all s[udenls? Tlre concept of s¿'l¿oo/ drli tu't'V sfàæd¡¿rcds was developed by the Task Force to nes¡rond dinectly to [he language of sec. 4 ( t ) (B) of I-{R, ä435 which calls for "worlE{-cl¿tss stayidard¡¡ f"r... evuay school in funerica tû ensure that ali stt¡tlents learm to r.¡se [heir rßinds well."," {see t!'¡e {.egislatdPe wrl Su¡tpot'tittg¡ f"aw4wage section ol'this neponl fon rnore deteil).
Scfi.ooî,

futiz¡e'r{ stç:wdntds should

set'

state eeiucators and policynrn*kers, pârell[s, and

$pMr

ffiwgMry sMruåe#s

sgsdewo dcli,z,erg stanrf.srds shouid seí ot¡t criteria for establishiti¡1 t!ìe Euaf ity oî'a schor:! systenl's {lccal, st&te, or national) capaclty ancl perfórînance in educæt[ng a]l students in the sutrjecl malter set out i¡t tke cvv¿te'vz3.sdat¿dr¿¡'ds, To soirte degree Lhe sgi$¿slr¿ d'atkv¡"¡! sds¡¿dr¿,'d.e t'or lhe NaLion Trave alneady been deveitlpecl by t'he NationaÌ fficïtication üoals Far¡eléfid Èhe Fresident ïft 60als 3 atld 4, which establish tøngels for stude¡rt achlever¡rent, t"or the year ztCIU' The Task Force trecommen<is that, each sLate end locaì district

est¿blish tFrelr o'*,m echlevemenL tårgets which, when sunlrfled, w'ttulc{ enable åhe NaLåotl [o ¡'eacþ¡ the h{a0lone]Gùals.

J¿¡r¡¡¿ru

r¡¡ Ð4, l!J9P

Èé$

,\ $Ã,

î.:-!t

ffi
ffi
ffiæsËswhäfiãþ æ$ NwÊüæmæB ffidw*ætüæm

Sremdærds

ffi

or the Tlte quesLicns Set û¡-t[ !n [he !{ouse Rep*rt foctls oit the isstses f ¡r rhis st¿n<iards. educatio* ofl national ¿*LiuåUllity *nd feasibility issue of sectlon ** foou* on the series of questioEls which address the the attd the deslraliilily of naticnal standards.'l For krackgrotux{ .ouri4*i*fionïf rnu Courtcil, hûsvevei:, we tirst briefly summarize

ffi

ffi

someofthetypicalerÉurftentsÍora¡-ìdagairtst'eståbl.isliirl8naf.iorral
standards.

Byand}argelheseårsumentsarscal}t'ure{ttryt,}rreeoverarching¡
questions:
LVill't¿ctliatu¡C.sfr¡¡¡r/C¡c/s lì¿¡¿re'o pOslti|e {'cfr ¿¿,¿'{'r}¿e} ¿t uwtl dltc' çltct/tif y aJ tewcf w;p
å å
Ë

rr$ tt/,tt((' tlt¿ '$f ¿¿rd¿'rtl
¿l ¡¿rd

"sc'f¿oofs''

l['/¿r¡f

i.ç ¡]¿¿,

sfr¡ ¡¡olt'nt ia/ t lrl¡rrlrf nJ txet iotxtl

¡¿rf¿¡ ¡rd'ç

o¡l

¿;rf ¿¿t'¿¿l iu¡¿c¿

f eW
t¿f

¿

iI

ll

I

ä $ n

A

t't,

t

¿øt io

n

.sfo

¡¿

rd¿¿ ¡ ¿J.s

tt ¡t ¡t v'tt ¡ t t' i t t t t'

tX

i t' e

t

t

lfte

¡\

n u:

ri

ct t ¡ t t¿'drde

ii.r¡rf itior¡ a.f'locnt crs¡ttrolòlr'ro'ricrlfr¡¡¡t tr:e"s.fo l'c¿ ¡'ir¿f loe¿s ¿ ¡: .'ìl¿¿f¿' tw¿t!. lt¡r'¿rl l't'sou

ot¿rJ

ll¿¿'e,ristir¡l,l
iot¿ ?

r etluuû

ffi
ffi ffi
ffi

ä

ffi
:¡¡ "ü

strllcture tçithitt These three overa¡.ching questiotts alsu ¡;rovicle a þlousc ,r'lri"t to address the toiuressioltal qttestions set ottt i¡¡ the "rl.pical" ¡rro;ln<.! con I.{R U435. After su¡nntarizi¡r¡4 the nåóäot "** angulnelìt'srvetttrtrtoål.lìÛrecontpletecoltsitleratio¡toftltethree
ovenerchittg quest,iotts.
ywÃsæfi&¡rwum,mmtu Fws æmd

ffi

ë
w

Æ

#

*ärüedü
Ærgrøaoaaøoe8s

@istst

þwê6sffi8 ËE$e¡søt$*m

ffi H

s
ffi ffi

w

{}re itìter¡rationa! systent *åììrö-rlrñ**ess of the tlrìite¿ States eco*o*r,",

Wøed &ø'gceppo*'$ f{ec8døææd'984sô6ddefrd6 statttlitrg of thE' Llniter{ Eitates atlct tha'
cr-f

H

set:tttit¡"
ff
fi

H ffi ffi

;;i';Ìieil*_tic ;rìì,ir; nat,lonai atte¡ition
caPital.
clivenst. ¿rnt{ n.rol¡![e

i$fi¡:ence are national, frût s,rate or local. They

to thre developntrtÏt o[rht'nat,to¡r's ]tt¡n¡atr

e Natir:nal erlucation statttlanls n"ill lreip ¿lsfil¡r(\

th¿t ottr ittcreasillÉlS'
amc{
r

ffi ffi

ffi

ffi ffi

r'vork' valucs rìoces$ftry to-mtlke our cleltrocracy ali<l of e Natiotlal stalttlands will het¡r inltr>ruve the quality of-scltools st't corÌìtiloft clear, n toÀrr.to* ¡rrofessional rlevelo¡rnrellt by ¡¡novkling scatrce of t;;;*1fïeine goals ancl crirE riu for rhe allor.atio¡r resüutrces. t !tt' o N¿tliott*l stand¿¡rtls a¡lpli<';iLrle for all chiÌrlrer¡ tq'ill help ¡rnovirte tåtc itc:ross iottal og¡llorttl¡tity inlpet us for rertliaittg t'r¡tt*lit y of criucat N¿ltion.

p"Ñi;il*r

will h.we the'shared kno'.vledge

r

ffi ffi ffi ffi

.l'Tlrissr't,tir¡rltlsrli¡tlrtrt,sst,slll(,(|rlt.Sti(lilssr,t(}tttllltht,|ìt¡rlr'trrlt'r:J{l.l!}t}llr'llt.rttllltt' f'"1.' stirr¿tt.r I l¡tÌ t'lt rr lti.lr {'sst'¡tt i¡rll}' iii'i'xìi' i'ìti ( '.tr r( il fr{ trtr ( ''rrA,r.ssl ir.rr tt' "r "i 'i'ììriiiii tlr,'rrst, iil r¡ rliff|rfttr orrfu'r'

;,ì;ìii;ì; ii;ïlìù,ì;riìii,i'iii rrii,rr,ìiìi;liì;iììì,rii;i'ir;ii,irr,

I

å,"-ti
ffi ffi

/f rr

islr¡7

'Sf

tl trtlre rrls 'lìrr' "! ¡*¿'¡'irn
t$.f l

n

t(cttl it¡¡t

d

ffi
D.í s

'4æw,M

tr ibùt:ed bY

DY\EDRS

ø

The estat:iishmetrt oflchallenËjrrg nåtitnal stantlards will ertcottnage states and localities to naise their educationæX expectat!üns a¡tit
sLandards.

ø

The st¿tes have scarce rosources o[Lalent atlel funcls for the t¿sk of esrabllshir€ their own sta¡rdards and assessrïlettt systems' It. woulc{ be flar ntone efficient for tþe sevenal st¿î.es and lacalities ts aÛûperâte in e natlonaÌ approach [hrarr to areêts thein ow:l stanctards anel
a*ssesstnenL sy$it ems sepanately"

e

üwwemønÆ,ryeameæ8s .46tædæs8 iVæÉúsrcø$,$óøradasa'ds Ðun lrlation's experieltce with ce¡ltrelly esüablished sLancÌarris (e.9., ;at, Lhe state level in educatlon and at ttr¡e s[ate a¡td l¡atiottal levels i¡t olher sr"ct.ors) is that they are gctterally "ininintt¡nt sta¡rciards" which

act to drag c{owrr the eiltire systenr. Tf sucfi hrap¡'rened rviËh natiotial educatlon stanclarcls, the ett¿ire sysÈeln wculcl suffer, o If chailen¡ging rrational standarris are established, but t]¡e $trfltegies apd resoUnces fon enat¡littg stude¡lts a¡tci schools to nleet tht'nt ¿rre: nÕt. tr)ut, itttc¡ g¡lace, the nesuh will tre a disse¡vice to the Natiott's
stuclenEs.
e

Tl¡e estabilshlnc¡tt r¡l rtatlo¡tal sta¡tclancls rvoultt tlnarv attcntiott a¡lcl r.esrur(:es arvay lrOrrt the ntatly, veqy posit.ive $t¿!tt ¿(sìd local refor¡tts that are ¡rovr ¡¡¡ltletway throughottt tht N¿ttiot¡. Natiotral sta¡utarr[s will lead to a natio¡ral currie:rdunt, rvlrich will ilrhibit le¡ca! a¡trt sit¡¡te creâLiT'ity atrrf initiative.
The great diversity oflthe Natiorr, culturalfy aht! ethtric'ally, antt in (:Ûlllnìoll st]t negiottal tratlitiolts, ¡ttakc it ilrtp'ossiblc to have tl sit\g¡le acce¡rtatta'e, widespreact of erlucatio¡r stail(!¿¡rds that woulqi have å\&wfuw$

o

ø

\4fr$$

e€hilffi-t **æ muw æ**{êry d Mkøs

$mÑMs

ffieW w Pwsüüfue

8mffiqe$ffie
æs$d

(Ht $&Mffims

kÞffiwüs9

This artdresses questiotl i3 irt the l-Tottse Oovnll¡ittee Re'port, lls ttierrel "aury cvidettce that, ttaticltal educ*tlon stattdards"' pronlÛte inr¡inovetnelits itt edtlcatio¡talachievcluellt or in the ability of tcn<:lters to þerfornr tliein jobs:" ltt orr.len 1o ¿tllsw('r this qttt'stiott it is int¡lr;rtattt
to öo¡slrìertloth the ct¡nrç.nt. cott<'litlt¡¡l oflschoolittg llt Anlerlcntt at¡d a fi¡t.ure co¡tdlLiOt¡ wlter(l therq'artl "volulttttly tt¿iti<-¡¡lal stat¡tl¿rrtls".
ffi&est ds t&s
ø 06dËè*e8èE SddcÁw8dopuP

erttrcutitttt c¿)rll(''}¿f ur yN'tt'ornmttct'' tlte pilst, this hlatiotl nxr{ its sl,ates .sfc¡¿c/r¿¡rfs era l.rzpf qstatrlisherl rcr¡uirctl tlither challelt¿{illÍl {:út}¿f(i¡¿¿ cr trave tytr¡ically turt
M>
s:.¿'pf ¿ci

t tttttdrs¡tut

/.y ¿t.t'i,sl, Ttt

slc¡r¿¿dr¿lris

or al¡solt¡tc stat¡riards of high stt¡c{cnt perfortnattce. q¡f Instead of set.t.ilrg challe ngirtg cûntexìl expectilt iotts, isisteatl t¡f tqvel a higfu rlt"Le nntinipg çvt¡¿rt leve! of perft'rl'lttatlctì r(ìï)rerietlts ÍtltlÛll$4 coÍlt¡lafistlllS Íiìast(,tY o$ co¡tt,Ctlt , we have f¿'liet{ tl¡t re'lattvsr rvell we sc&rools, rlist.ricts acltl stut.cs to give us ¿¡t¡ incìlcat,iotl ofl how ot&r wltc'ther gefleraily t¡s te[[ tests are <toirrg,, orlr $t¿in(lí¡r(llzeci or ånt t]tt" staLt" N¿ttitltl [¡r thc ¿lvert¡g,û thc L¡clow or urc abovc sli¡rle¡rts Iu-lt whctlterr Ltrelr ¡ref forirlutttlt' !s suglt't"ion nilltct'wåte¡t ttXttpttnctl to Irtt ittt.ef'ltütlslt¡al stu¡rstar(å ür tû sûnl(" rc ¡n'ioti¡thstllt¡tc s|¿t¡ttlarrl'
qt r

,J

rt t¡

t¿

u ;) 4, I !ì !);'l
*aø

f,-

I

4 ti,

g

,jsa¡j¡ùfed

):)y D\/t)liDRS

e,

We now þwue a, defanco Y&ttdrvftÅÅ,\cwr-¡"i't:wëwrt¿ qf bcstc slt¿tfs' Ïn the al¡sence Õf cofftrnon, well speaiÍied, dermandir¿g Øtù&sr¿t

st&wfurdsandhlgþexpeet.ationsforst,udefÌtsourl.Iationhas
g.ravitated

õ"rrú,r¡*-. Except

f,w¡io natiu'r"ral rr¡lr¿inturn etfüTpeLerxcy for tkre srnal¡ percentage of our ]üation's sLudent's who are hteaded for elite f'or.tr year co$eges, the Nation's coæk'¡tt stn'rtdmrds focus on basic reae3k"rg avrEl u'rithrnet'ic skills, and nelatively rnini¡ilal arnounts of factuel irtfclrmation in sciertce,
govwavd, a dø

Seosyaphy &nd lnistorY. ø Ti¿isÍocpx on W¡sdc skiëls refi.ects baf'þ¿' it¿tsnt"i'aænl poli'cg üt' $tet'e rmdiocal l¿øels øwd titp i,ædirea¿ drffiwvnce of ath,erforces including textbook ptlÌ>üshe¡-s who cater tÛ t'he lowesL coffirûÛn dencntinãtor in corntent, test developers a¡rd educational

-

adrnlnistrators who use standardized testry which reinforce [his ¡lor !bci-¡s, an¡i Leaehers who have had neithet'adeqtiate training ln experienc¿' appnopriate role models !n fheir owrt educat'lonal their focus to tend teac;hers that ÀUãitlõ*, sonre evidence ít"¡dicates tuá.f,ing *n maxirniaing sLrlden¿ perf'onnance ûn tests used fon basic aocountubili,cy purrBo*ei, which have rypically ernphasized
cornpeÈencies.

w

Fubl.ia er¡teatwtdottsfo, sî,udwtt w¡fowv¿a'¡zce 6,re also sadlg lotu'

general eryÞlic we sett'le ,{s ¡¡arents, as votersla¡'td as ¡'nern-be¡ls oflt'he developed Nat'ions' !n olirer foriar less than do our Lounteri)âr0s provide a floor' not a goal' exisf, where they fn{"ur utnt* standards, for practic*. $-ligh, or leading eclge, requirements for education períod of prã_ii__ *-u stüdent perfonaance-gì"Ìean that for some be below would schools iime, and perhaps a }óndthy penlod, mÛst
stanelard, ä siruåtion be followed by high standards are pro$osedtl"¡ey are llkely to aìso w-ary policyrnakers making i.*uou*tuo' ror ntot* *Oîoãu"t requests iJr-a feyr change to begnning is "!-his condirion cycle. iniiiuii*g the but fhe genenal fact is utatÀu rã.n as houtl'r Carolina and Ve¡rno¡rt education that, in a tigh[ ecottomy, Ùhe bat't'le in st'a.tes fon higher only are vorers the *-tuÃ'oàro* in o*ry difficuit to win. Twically,

tveid¡lv

vrewed as pclitically intolerable. when

ol

catltiotts' It¡ke*arm, anct ihts ntakes the policyÏìakers legitimately i msî' rw i¡t r ,s ?"lre E¿¿$ l? f ¡.1 t f o rw sc izools doo ofte n ml'le ct s uz¿ in affiuent ï,*påirrut¡1,,u. WitL the general exceptioil of schools tliat, laek the l¡tstiLut.ions youth a[te¡rd *rË*r, *uny ofl our hlatirir's studel¡ts a lo deliver to ÏlÛces$a'(y hunran ¿nd rrraterial nen"uro"s trn too of conte¡rt' conceplio:"t challer€lng a ctirrlculum T:ased o¡l nú¡[ aïlowed Lo üre stucåcnts Íah, sclence is lro ,na¡ly ncfroots there

takehontetexthooksorotherbooks[odotheir}ronlewon&r,and,of
r¡ew co'la{av¿d sl.w tla.tds'
¿

[o understa¡td' ntost cûftcerin, teachers'are not trailted well enough i¡l the envlsioned niat'erial ¡nuch less t* t*o.tt, iLo kitict of demanding
otr r era'¡rr'clcl tiop¿s' ttt ¿f¿ç' pl't?fl{'lif Ípt s.¿¿ty¿,N¿Ary, utfti.kt lkey wu,ef ¡ ¿Cs p t e t n, pr; tiãtï'¿{r,¿ca, t¿r¿ ¿d scd¡ool rle Êiu t: t"¡¡ sf a ¡r ci¿¡ t d w ¿tt * z¿ t' t o
r¿¡'r.' ¡¡¿ccdtioc¡cr ¿¿t

ø

&rrsf'

f,

{1

/{ rt d s i rt

¡¡

,5 f ¡e r¡ t¡l

or
'

el

s

.l'<.r

r

¿X r¡¿

q' ¡'

i

<'

tt il d tt r tt I i t¡ tt

6ed'

g

å,$

Dis t.r i bùLed

by

DYoEDRS

Sefiaøøðs ëfæÐe øæ .St€êdeæÉ,€e&deÐerûueôE8P It is difficult to åmagtne Ëlxâ[ our level sf süuden'ù achieve¡nenL lv![l

lnrprove gfeatly il\Me arntinue l0 stlppûrt änd implernent, ûur current' rninirftål sc.andærds currrictdunr. tven the pêst 2t yeers student achievement, has remaimed nelatively ffaf or very slightiy improved aL best, wlthr the exception tha[ miftority grûups, par-licularly African Åmericans, have irrrpnoved in hasie sk!Ìls a'reas, ]*ltis indicates thal blìe ernphasis i¡l the t9?'0s ðnd eerly tr98Ûs on rÅe$acîo Lrasic skills naüionai spurrecl and reinf'ovced by direct, state a.fid local policy standards aetivity had a distinct and posiuive effect, on s[udent achie'vernenl for Ëhose who could rnost benefit from it. Ûur overal) level of studenf ac hieverrrent,, hrowever, remains low-to-medjocre when conrpared with that of other developed nå[ions, and by so¡d.e indicaËors ûur relative ¡:osition is even declining. If we a.re satisfled with ¿hls continuing level ôflmediocre achievement we can conLinue ft ignore the challenge of setting higher and rnore chalten$ingf st*ttclards, for the contenL of i¡rstruition, foy studeng perforrnance, and fon school quality. Unless we rnake a consCioUs eflfort to do so, howeven, we will co¡ttinUe to be the slaves ofa de/acfo nationally accepted conception of scholastic achieve¡-nenr vuhich is distinctly inrferior to Ehat of much of Lhe rest of

*-

Lhe developed world.
sdderð¿t fseegrpeaa dø s$wderaü "éeåBdeÐes:deüu$ care€d ã"ød8a&en ffie&we.rdon {f Fftene $Weee q?ÍèosËdde¿äSde¿#, Vøðc*raüøilo"gt, NøsËdøvae8å

w&øú

ffdæeø8doæ,$ûwrcdærdeP s Valwntarg, cêtatwt¿ging, wo;tào'nal contm¿t awd petfurti?Ir¡¿ce stawlnrds coutt! sî.drr¿uf,ate hrc;arot vtnØ¿ts ¿t¿ sf¿r,e tzr¡rJ doce I ffiT¿tsr¿t aø zd'pe tfonnnnc e s taft ddt r ds a'r¿ d e r {) e c t & t iol' ts. Thi s, it r turn, couid have a positive effect <ln education practlce in local schools and classrooms. The council has heard testimony fnont the NCTM that the conten"r and teaclring siandards that they have developed have had â greât lnfiuexice o¡r the policies and practices of ståte and locatr boards óf education as these gl'oups have esta't¡lished the curricula of t.heir jurisdictions. Sinrilarly, though to a lesser extent, rve unciersta*d thut ther* is evidence thât state anc! iocal comrnLlnities have draunr from Ûhe rvork of the America¡t Association devercpmertt ofl national educat'ion stånderd$ for seience' ø Bwt, coutent a¡¿d, perJoww'tzCe sfct¿du rcJ"s r¿10?l€ ea¡¿t¿ot rånltga' sta.¿tletzt uchieL'grilÊ tzt t¿t ¿tl t eacfue r pe rforw{ú !rc' Stugïent achievement and teacher penformance vaill not be greatly inflt¡encec{ pftft by conLenü and penforrnance standands unless the stanrfarcls ere in oia coherent a*d systenric approach to improvirg i¡tstrucfion the schools. Educa[ion policy effoTts aimecÌ at eha:rging the sfnf tr.s r¡tatr are genera¡ly short-Lernr, unconnecled tt tt.her policies ancl overall goalã oflthe system, limitecì to a srnatrl set' osschoois or grades, antd iocused on parcicular problem area's ra[her thnn on the e¡ltire

for the Advancement of $clenee (AAAS) Fraiect 906'{ t'or the

Syst'em.AsaconsequencetheynarelyhøveâsustaininË!eflfect,. ñutl"nár standards, however! cot¡1d lay che foundatlott fa¡r a different
a¡rproacli.

,iç,nunru Ð4, l!!9ål

Fta ¡t

{¿-V

dL)

DjsLr:j.buted by

DyDEDlls

o

challengin8 national standards could set expectatio¡ls forall t.hãortãn¿ gt"des in key content areas' signalling the tv-ne oj
substantive ðhang"s and classrooms.

*'"

need system-wide in all of our schools

oA

national examination system based on lhe conter¿t sta¡¿dat'ds

companion report from the Assessment Task Force') oTlhecontent and,perJormø¡zce stan'dards could form the basis of for other state poiicies, such as those dealing with adoption professional and licensing teacher rnaterials'and instructional . policy ãevetopment. we would then have several interconnected ãnort, giuing coherent guidance about teaching and learning (See the aroun¿ amUitious, not basic skills, or¡þomes' Force') Task tmplemehtation compatüon report from the

couldreinforceandassessattainmentofthestandards.(Seethe

oMosthnportant,sturlen'taelúeuement'andteaeherpltlÍor¡nonce rc ilU -rta charzge in a clramatic uta\ if eústing and lutueonlent challetrtç¡ing tlrc teachnri are tfained, to be abte to leacl¿ that ¿i ¿ne ræw nnlional stanclørds. Thowh it woulcl be inlportant

La new instructional materials based on the new st¿ndards resourc'es material other the have àeveloped and that schools né"ãró"y to teach thecontent stan.rlatds,none of this will help r the unfuo tf,ät" is a dramatic effort to prepare teachers teach deep' tne have new content. Most public school teachers rlo not to teach the ,-opf,irti.uto¿ undeist¿nding of subject matter required here' propose¿ standar<ls ããî1tànt indicated uv ine mri.l of edi¡cation ways of new for call also would The ¡rew content expectations teachers t"".i.ing, for strate$es that actively eng¿ge students' Most opporturtities few have ihey wiys. such in teaðhing urá notîru¿ to pre'sewice professional and little time to re"rnãnit job. N-or d.es " to meet rhese chaüenges. lf ¡rational stanclards are

ã;;üú;;r
activities.

,pu, i.åpiou"<l teachingand learning, they will neecl reinlorcemcnt ul ãxt"ntiue and carefülly developed professional developntent

o

olcmùitious, coluttt-ttl i l¿'slr'¿tcf ir¡l¿rll 'i)z,iclat¿ce at¡ottt lhe elfect p it i tt t, b u t n o t ;."f";:*; o; b ac h i. t q*anct it udcn t .ac hi e r e m e t t I is o s Verntotlt' York' New talifornia, ií*tWt,Some st¿tãs, notåbly challengingcontent kenmctcv, fuizona and Arkansas, are aligning all of these efforts are almost However, assessment. oùj""iiuãt "nd ¡nost do not yet tie teacher professional developnrent uãï, ,å.""r1
_

und

inrt*.iional materiais policies to the curriculum/assessnrent siruarion rhan exists irr manv other ,iãiðgi"r. This is u "lrvãiri"tenr coherent policy. systenrs linkittg are developed rratio¡rs wñeie tnere
,or,i"nt tt"ndards to instructional materials' exantination currently few ãnã pt"f"ttional tievelopment' That thereare ¿esigned to upgradeinstructiotr in the Anerican "ärrJrtnirvrtems states is a mqtor reason for the Council's existence' The little <tirect eviáéncà that does exist suggests.that "PPiti?Y*
systems

other pollctes nave conïã¡ilstsndards reinforced by assessment and indicate thût datå Preliminary sctrooting. it. påtuntiut to improve local ;il; õ;iif;r"i" mathåmaircs frame-work acrively lnfluen:es Etlucatlon rßt¡rg rhe tnrernatlo¡nl öàìi"v äi.ri"rtrucuóir, Àsrudy

E

r0

ßaisirr¡¡ 'l'lnl¿rlrtrrts 'l'or Amrrit'nn þ)iluculion
l.a,.t

lt'

Study ($lfuls) found ^Asses$ment's Second l¡tteruta[iottal Malhennatícs that teachers !n ctÍìtions witlt tnone coherent, curricular ¡4uidance wene more cortsislent, mûre alike in Lhe toptcs Lhey covened, indicaLing atr infiuence of ûhe common focus. ,fulalyses of national survey data lnclicæte Llta'¿ seconc{alry scl"tools ici thin loüation which have coherent a¡rproaches, such as eonlmon ct¡rricula and shared goals, tend [o be somet¡s¿hafl rnc,re succËssf'uL thart otl¡er schools in linriting absenteeisnì an<å dropping oul, improvin$ achievement perfonnance, ând neducing perfomattce difflerences ¿ttïtlrg studengs. e fuL su'tìfi?y¿nr\, uti,l! tlw adaptdovz af i'tt:w, etpLirili'y cÍtøèleuEì'ng
stt¿rularrls affeü stztde'wt o'r:ì¿àez¡enzeraf? Ferhaps rrot dinecLly, but the c¡dds of our lclatiûfi's expect*tions atrd commitmertt changlng without, cornmitrlng oursel*¡eg to cþaliengirtg standards are Þractically aero. þ{oreover, äs otir ex¡:enienée ln t,he 19?0s ancl early 398ts with ntinintunr ccmpetencies incìicates, a cornrnon set of eKpectations and standards can affect Leacher behavior and stttdettt achlevenient' ttttcÛ¡nes' This suggest's the possitliliti/ thåt n"tore challenging ctnteltt, Írenfor'¡nance, anc{ delivery standands lvhic}t weFe iniplicitÌy or ex¡rlicitly adoptert T:y the hüatiott, itt cot'ucert witlt serious systernle refor¡n efforts, woul<T have a ¡rosiLive effec[ f,or ali
ed"u.car,:io'r¿

studenls.
Hdweesüe-tsB ffiqwüS

fu

Seds*Tffi

This section acldressees quesl,iÕ¡1 ? in the F{ouse Flepont: "\Wrether support [l.laB woukÌ provief e eclucat ionally disadvatitagecl cltilc{rett, handicapperi clrildren, a¡iri chiicìrep with lirniterl Ënglish proficietlcy the oppurtuniLy to succeed shoulcì be a parl of any effort to intplentent

ruliorìel e'¡Íueatiott st a¡tclarcls ". ? I: is tdte but lrnpûrtå1lt to s¿ty that

flor national education sta¡uXarcts ¡llust rest û1t [hL'ir ¡lnÖmisc fnr inrproving the qualitSr of'tlie ciÍucatlotral experiettces of the ¡nost neetty in ottr sot:ietY.
Wr#¿ene

a nrujor !)¿¡rt

oi'thËil¡stificatio¡t

i?øee g&e

¡Væðdova .S?seeedP

During the l$?ts aild thrüughout tÍle lg8Ûs, tlte atltittvc'lttottl glt¡l betweeil'rnajorify ancì mitiority acui rich attrl poor has t¡eett closing'
Gains rnade in the past twenly-fi\¡e years by Aflrican Antenicart'

l-llspanic Anreric¿li, and iow ipconre chiltlre¡r iri partially ciosing.the ,*h!*o**.*utL gap tvilh ¡niddle income lvhltes have bee¡¡ c{ue borh to changes in socialand ecortornic conditions attd to a national ftrcus on gaslc-skitls which soughl tc equalize the quality ofl erÍucatiott offt¡ner{ to studecrts of different, hackgrouncTs. The sce¡res of nrinorities at¡d low income studertts have riscn while the scûres of the middle ittconte and majority studertts ha'¿e stayed essentially level' Over the pasL deca<te LFre soclal, ¡-roiiticalnrtc{ cconr¡ntic clrcurr.rstances of n:lany low income and nrinonily flasuilies ttave worser¡erj. ñdoresver, the hasie skiltrs ern¡¡hasls ín schools ís treirrg le6itinlately crltíci¿ed for its faih¡re to devciop ï¡l al! st.uclents the hlgtrer levels of learnirç¡anc{ nrore complex skills necessary iti a teãhnologically advancàrt society. As a consequellee, ntatt¡' ltlcal di$tnicts ancl sthools have instit'uted reforrns that at't'ent¡rt ttr emg:husÍøe hþher orrter Nþinki¡ig and a ntcrt chællest$rtg, cunniculurtt.

,.lottwr..r¡¡

24,

Å$ü,?
Ío 0 ¡a.

N"t

Å

d"å

ll.i$ti:1¡uted by

Dt,ùLDR9

Ë.øeea88w Äøuü6åæsed

trqfclraeae ñ6d6nfuú Wüdø¿a aábe 6æp the As educa[isïtaå]y progressive as the loca! ref'elnns l*: irr,prove plaae rnany Plso gÏte could be, ËÏ'tey quality cf cq:r"sictllutre may *lnrtitiu* and the ptûr at a nev¡ <lisâ{{valxtage because the poor and

frorn locaÌÏy minoniLies in the society a¡'e rypically the last to lrenefit !ithe5' bónefit at' all' Dist'ricrs and schools with gen-t-t-C refonms iarge nuntbers ofl poon ancl minority sLtjdenís often have less discr.etlonrry ïnûney [o stimulate refotrm, less rvell tflained teachers, energt/ åway and more elay-to-rlay prÛblerns LhaL drain aai¡r¡inistragive Í,he increasfng fi/ith conjr-rnctton In refðn"¡rs. i.ur* o*nntr*crlve

-

,it*Uu*

of children in poverty and the deuressingly bad economic condition of nrany ci¿ies the new refsrms could wei! lead to subst¿nbial increases !n ghe achievenient gap'r' ¡'¡ew -._Thisoutco¡rtew,illalrnosLcertainlyoccufifthechangesinthe however, schools are lnitia0ed one scho*l and one districf at a time, If, the across equally roug¡hly to apply expecÛed were the changes districts schools üthi¡r a very lange clistnict o!" &ctrrss the schools and of c'pportunity greãter equality lnthin a state, there !s some hope that
r,r'ould result,
üomeruaæaau

Ü&øüdemggregl "$ûæeadæa.rde eeeed Ëddgr& Æædree8øûdoros üøwë,ñ.$ee'¡ue trqesdú&t Weðð

could he The opporLt-ltrlty for a co¡rcliLion cf equal expectatiotls enfranceciuntierasysterrt(largec$ist'ricL,stât'eonNatlon)whichhada yN:rf,onnøtzctt o"***n set of challe¡\qingcoiiterrr sfa¡¿dc¿¡¿fs and high natu¡c of. the systerin a such Wit.hin sttidents. of its all ,¿nrr,l*,0¿, fon preparitlg students to reach the inqqualiui,es in nesources neeessåry f'or woulr{ lre rnoré easily exposecl Lhan ultrler the

ãnnr*rn

diffler across schools antl óoou*nt systefiì whene Lhe expectations càpacity {itnorvledge, ex¡:enience) of clist,ric.ts. Ðit't'enences itr the anti in the quality of textbooks rnät"riål ;omnrocr i**.f,*ru to teach che cornrnott ntateria! woulEl a*ct school rrsorlrces i" nuplrott te¿chitl* the be ntore likelY ro be eviclent'
,94ñaoæd dleëdues"&1,$8¿¿sadxsrds

stancTands

¡&re #eáddea¿å Lo ettsure equal Nonetheless, if ¡tot accon:¡panietX by measures sttt't¿tlntds ø'nd"perJaruwv¿trt oppoi'tur¡iry io Tearn, liationa! cor¿åai¿Í anri advantagied Lhe gap betwee¡r y,*rpï¿detr the **lii""****t, i,ãul¿ and co¡zfør¿E narional lf sotiety' ãiuu.gouutaged in our ir'," 'lri,irnÇìrrtinru'sío?t¿dc¿¡
(d'ç

policy measutr€s desígned to clear school detrivery stattdards a¡rcl leatn' Ì'he concerns al¡out affo¡'d all stu'.jents an equal oppc''tuniry ío $t¿ndards attd assesslnents ài*inluy,*O equity coulcieasily-be nea!!aec!. &ccess for all slude¡¡ts provicle n.,*ui U* a"eon,upárrie; Ïry poliäies that irl$truct'ionâl appEopriate to high qtrælit y r*n"ur**"u, i*clu<iing attcl ¡N'rJ¿rww'tc{' t"o,8ørtÍ Hlgka teachórs" ,.'i.î*iä *r,cå well*pre'arecl with ttte sanle stude¡rLs al] chatienge to uu*i[ .r¿c ¡¿odu¿¡r¡s calt be
|,"

an<t assessn-¡ent are t'loî' accompaniecå

by

r.tritrtrt,rt.,[h. r*o$r r(,(r'¡r

Ànrcrlc;'tr.hl¡lrcrr itr ir{.*.ruu.trr tlr,'Hr¡¡r r,r,tr+r",'rìï;ìii;hi;'ilì.i : t ltt' l¡rt'rt'iuqr' tr, ,,trru¡sf t st,.r ttt't'tttlt's. Âlrtrt¡sl ¡¡tl t¡f nr¡rr lx,nrilt lcs rr(.l,i,,uu,r,*,r,t ïìii'iìïrìï öiii'i trii^ülìiirtr ììiil;ìiì,ì;i'riliriii$it's ur nrrk,¡ril r\¡rrcrrt'ur' sttr(k'trtri'

rtf lttt'rr,ast,r!¡xrr't.rt¡' iÙlll(llLq Tt-' î,'-1i.'*-sli,1'.*l! |'-.-'-I'rå|tl.*-'*¡ttetl<.os f:.r'','*riiiii['i"$r'*s si¡"içs a sttl¡st'trtlrtl

its

hi:;iì)'i'i;ii..iil;iiiì'iì,i

rertrlit¡B ¡ttttl

ill'i'til;i;ïi;ìiì,i'il;"
É,"-i,

firt i.sr rr¡¡

,5ct¡ ¡¡td¿t ÊiË

r'ris ./ìr ¡'
1

Åwctiru u

Fltl rtrr¡É

¡o¡r

dq)

tjscÌjbuted by

DyûEDRS

expectations, but high expectationswillonþ result in commonhigh performance if all schools provide high quality instruction designed to meet the elçectations,6

Fe&l,rrlHrqrame

Gøn EelP Federal programs for the needy could offer critical assist¿nce for helping needy students meet highpefforrnrmte stlrndnrds. For twenty-five years, equal opportunity in this Nation has meant something other than evenhanded treatment. Equal opportunity means extra attention, resources and assistance for tl¡ose with special problems and needs. Ttuough Chapter I (originally Title l) of the Elementary and Seoondary Education Act (ESEA); Public [¿w 94144 andTitte VII of the ESEA, the federal government has shown its commitment to provide special support for economically disadvantaged, handicapped, and limited English speaking students.
Mar¡y states have parallel programs.

Nothirg about national ståndards suggests eliminatfng or reducirg these pro8¡ams. In fact, $ven the renewed importance of opportinity to leam in the context of consensus about what we want students to learn, these programs should t¿ke on additional importance. Students with speciat problems will continue to need extra help if they are to have equal opportunity. It will be very impo¡'tant, however' to considãr thefòrm of the assist¿nce offered through the federal categorical programs. In the pasr these progrems have oft'en been designeO to-operate independently of the central curriculum and instñ¡ctional þrogram ofthe schools. In the future, undera system of challenSing c ontpr¿t and performance staninrds, the federal categorical programs must be designed and implemented in a way thatieinforðesihe opportunities for the most needy students to perform to the highest possible level on the common coæte?¿f
stanÅnrds.
Dfue¡rutCA &t

.$tqte¡ and Local Dtstrtcts

This section acldresses questions 2 and õ in the House report. "what the benefïts and liabilities are of imposing uniform national standards ... on an educational system where cuniculum is traditionally controlled at the state and local level?" anrl "whether uniform nai,ional st¿ndards are appropriate when there are wide va¡iations in the resources available to school system across states?" We have already addressed the issue of "imposiryl" national standards in our earlier discussiott of "voluntary vs' mandatory" education standards. Here we assume the standards would be voluntary but consider the desirability of developing and recommänding them at the national level rather than leaving this task solely to the states and localities. We co¡tsider first the desirability of a national consensus around specilied content goals and the¡t rve move to the issue of variation i¡r state ancl local resources'

,J.

hitth k'vcls of r,ilistil;iì.ütü:iùiiii,'r,rgiiiitiáii-r¡.i:i'ritaiu arrtt instnr('lio!rãrKl¡x'Ìfi)rnrttl k) nrnv lx'tho i,.rìii,ñ,¡iri'rirlî¡r: iîr,ii;,'f :tr;iå;i''iii.nt,,iiiu'r *'rtì tn htßh slhtnl irr¡rlhtnurlk's
ltost kno$1r,

Tlrlrra*".,,|"tßa'*-l-..tf -"¡ttt|rl.*,f -t*alh}|ts wltero

¡rtxrrnttrl ntltrrrtlt!'rilttrl¡'trt,s h¡lvo

Januurg 24, l99t

¿r0

Distribvtêd by

DyÙEDRS

9Faa3 Wotttd Be Che Qfiect

AAucoltøn S,ørtdmrds on Our Educattonal Syetcm?
coÌLsensus

of a Natlonøl Cotæc¡u,tla Atound

t Tlw Task Force beli.et¡es tltnt &?ruliotutl

araund

education standartls coulcl enhaοce the søtse oJn.atiotzal iclentit1 an¿dcommunily we need.os our Natiot¿ beeames i,nereoÃingtg d'iuerce. National sta¡tdarcls could form a core' to wnicrr st¿tãs,localities and sehools could add ståndards tailofed to Given the needs and interests of their stutlents and conrmunities. coultl accomntodate Nation a we as system, and such a consensus of ãivãrs¡ty and still have á m"a¡¡s of achieving a prime purpose sltares that citizenry puUti"t.f,ooling: creati¡tg an i¡rformed underlying values about democracy' t Of eou ¡tt, tl¿eib i s a dnrrye r utut eott t t I e ra rg u ù t' t t l' t t.tt n t el y t I t ttt iíational'standarcls ntight be lço cemt rutlieing, n igltt i ¡t .lurt m rc spo w I i t t g eo t t st ta.i'tt stales, comti u n i I i e s o¡ t d se h aolsfrc cnil.sli tuenls oJ tl¡eir noeds iit ct¡t,etg ta tho dit,t ¡.se goals an.d prevt'rrt srrclr could systenr the in ctnd studet¿ls. several safãguards a - situatio¡t from materializittg. be national Fir.i,, a.s statecl pre.viouslyJhe standanls luoultl have to voluntary, ¡tot federal or ntandatory' arul *|L"ãiù,
t

a.s a tnä ita*clards sho¡¡ld be develo¡recl and viervecl through be enhattcetl comnon eore that, whereatlopted, rvoultl while nation¿ü ' consrderable state and local ftäxibility' For example, ¡e vague, thty to as tlot so rletailed besufficiently

st¿irdãr¿s s¡oukl

,ñàri¿ be sufl¡ciently generat so as to permit schools and tcachers ã-"ãiàp **ir ow¡ dãtãilecl curricttla. One form that this flt'xibilitv

to

irignii"r"
urîn it

turoth;; fi¡nrt ivot¡ld be the additiott by statcs atxl ;;-h perfoj.ntattce expeclaliotts localities of their orvn uuit¡ue cotltent and This tttllit¡tt populatiotrs. ancl histories to reflect their orvn øthin a contntoll eore is supportcd by a varicty of

o roquencing of sttlrjt'cts or in the choice of

orrtio¡rs, ivoulct be to build in state and local choices ar¡<l

literatttre withitt

ñt;;.

if"*iUiriiv

'f

ài[.n.õ.

Llnitsl States, for exan4rlc, slt'ws tlut. o¡t teachitç antl cenffa¡ curricula are ãnty one of many i¡tfluenees interpretul an'bcing franrervorks content uoru rtotö
Research in the

tl¡at anrbitiou"

byteachersinauarietyofways.Atthesatttetinte,t'xperie¡tc'osfront buiklittg ãínãr.åui tries also piovide variot¡s pract.ical ntorlels for loceJ flexitrility into a nationi¡l framer'¡orli' Athirdfactornritigatingagainstovc'r.t.e¡ttr¿tlizatio¡tistlrattltt: significattt rvork tl'ttt' u"iionut standanls ciui¿"frui¿ ott the alrc'acly ¿rnrl¡it i<¡r¡s ahout r:onscnsus reuching üv ãìiun*ro, ol st,ates in !'errtrottt' Sottth Kettt'ttchy' York' Nãrv ðãiiio*io, st,t¡clent outcomer. or are be$ntting to ô"tàii* an<l other states havt'tlcvelopetl arlo¡tt, ntirrrtr' d"";6.t""darcls that national grou¡rs coukl adit¡X., r:ottseltst¡s, t ltt' tlerivt'<l tronr. ny buitili.g on nrore iocrlly t wot¡l(l th('y ¡$ ltttttlt pres.ribe-as "i "rr"*starr¿anli wot¡l<l n't ü¿¡tional to' re¡¡rforce what' has already beett ugrcetl
Wtde Vørlatlow Arc Nøttonat Støndarù Ap4¡r¡l4rlatc Gloen d Lacal F'tseat aàd numan ßceou¡ree? l¿ bl"lJ
clrrilk'tt¡¡ittg. "n Arlvocates argtre thut, n bettt'fit of a sel of voltuttitry, rvill pr'vitlt'itlt tht'y nclo¡rterl rvltere that ls i*ü"uliitotrüanls
ß:-t 4

/frrisi

ttg¡

Slnrlrlttltls,l'or Ånt rit'u tt

þj¡l

ur¿l ittu

[i^
DjsÈrj-buted by lr'nEDRs

underlying commonality and standard of quality for the education of our Natio¡r's youth, thus serving to protect the ¡rational public interest. Such, at least, is the overridi¡t¡g goal. A mitigating factor in achievement of thls goal is the fact thal diversity in student populations and variation in state and local resources will contribttte to observed variation in performance and delivery standards antong
and within states.
o Will challengíug n.ulional stu¡tdards ser'?rr' (ts co'mrnoil goalsJor

states ol.¿d localitie:s uùJLch hu.re u;ide'lu t'ar!!it¿g tesources? Variation in resources should ttot be used tojustify and excuse wide variation in the quality of content presented or the levels of stttdent, perfornrance, asotìow occurs. The Task Force believes that, instead, rvell def¡necl ancl challenging national sta¡tdards (cotttent, ¡rerformance, aml clelivery) ca¡r serve both to poirrt out problenls and to establish clear târg,ets for all states and localities to strive for. This is a sinrilar argunìent to that used e¿rrlier i¡¡ the cliscussion of equity issues. A prinrary condition that ntust be ntct, of course, is that states adopt lhe slandards. Ot¡r sense is that this willdepcnd on the quality of t,he st,andards. lf the st¿t¡darls are of t.he highest. quality, there will be great ntoral antl political pressure on most states to atlo¡tt thent. One lry-¡rrtltluct of adopting attd intple¡ne¡rti¡tg the conunon standards lvill be that comparisons among st¿*es itl student perfornta¡tce, rvhich alreatly exist a¡tfl rvill continue to exist, rvould have greater valitlity antl legitinracy. This fact coultl r:tlt botlt rvtys ¿rs states cottsitler wltether or tlot to adopt tltt'conìnìo¡ì
st.andards.

..Trdf(,s u:o¿tkl nr¡l

lttrotü'ittt'tlltt llt¡'ito¿t¡t

t'eso¿tt'ce l:rase

in

.slri llrr¡¡ !o¿,axl &)til tttott, lt igher stuttdr¡rrl.s. States a¡td ltx'¿lities through regiotlÍtl eonsortii¡ or otltt'r ctx¡kl tvork together lo ovPrconìQ groupirtgs llliuìy alreatly are a$ crxrperalive rlifferences ¿¡ntl {efietencies ilt resottrcls. St¡t:h cooperatictlt trlttftl easily leatl to higher qrrality <rtrrit'ttla, instrttt:tional nt¿terials. lc'¿r(,ht'r professional tlevelo¡lntettt, alttUof assessnlet¡t instrtuttt'ttts in or<ler 1o hel¡r e¡s¡r('ltight'r levelc of stt¡tle¡tt perfonn¿lllç('ptt llx' (t t k' n ! iuul ¡x' fo tl t u n re sl t t t rltt rrl's in all I he part it'ipat ittg

-

-

¡

¡

loc¿tlities.

Feosibility cnd the Stondord'setting Process
This ¡rart of the rt'¡xrrt atklrcsst's 1þ¡ qttestions o¡t ft'asibilily in th(¡

Houst'reporl.

Fcoritrility
Can tlris Natiot¡ tlt'vt'lo¡l hi¡¡h t¡trAlity ('otìl(!lll' ¡x'rforlttalttct" åtlltl

delivery statxlanls?

Teeltmony and Dtrcct Eatdence Indlcæte Thø,t IA Is Poeslbte to ltevelop lltgh.QuølttU ønd Chø'llennlng Natlonø,l Edaca,tton Standarú,

,l(,,,t,t,r¡¡

t4, MllJ

þ:-t!,

E?

Disttibvted by

DyrEDRs

The National council on Education standa¡ds and Testing has heard considerable testimony from teachers and other education professionals in the five subject matter 8reas, from states, and from ihe devetopers and the governing board ofthe National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). In addition, the counril has received information from the io¡ege Board abouttheir AP and Achievement examinations and frorn a variety of sources about the experienees of other nations. This testimony and evidence indicates that:

. High

contef¿t standnrds hntte are an existence standards NCTM Arh ô*A cãn bt d^"toped. Ttre which standards contpt¿t national for oroof for the united st¿tes grade. California The T*elfth through ãn.ã*p.* Kind'Èrgarten for our Frameworks are examples of higþ quality content standørds most poPulous and diverse state' t DemanÅinL perJormt' .e stonclat'dsJor sludents Ìnue been and canie aeuõioped,.The, rJormance star¿datd's forthe ÂP (For more examinations are an example in the United Stttes' on assessment') report' the see issue this discussion of

Entita

an d, d,emand,ins

wrt?ry!

e

The Task Force belisues thnt appropriate dpliuetv standards ciutd be de¿telo*d,Íor meeting the deÌnnwìs otclwllenging

pedornwnße stond,ards, but tNære is little rele.uant ;t'p:;ri*"" ¿n ti¿e lJni'ted States' ln the United States' delivery been standards (i.e. accreclitation standards) have t¡pically are no since there developed ìndependently ofthe curriculum speciftcation the States, United common content standaids. Forthe

ioir¿*t

and,

and use of delivery standards associâted Ïvith comrnoncor¿tent professional itan<laras (e.g., trigh quality curricular materials and would be standards) content on the prográmi baséd development is the breaking new ground except in rare-areas' One exception associated which is NçTM guidelinãs ¡orlnstru;tion pi,oposed by thq materials the are exceptions ätn tnu NCTM STøædr¿rds. Ctner

associatedwithAdvancedPlacementcoursesandt,helnterßtionai
Baccalaureate.

Although E xømples -pl*ilahg

of Chatleng-tng -Frømeworlcs ond Perþrmãnce Stantutda Exlr;t ln the Anüed -s;;;;;,thtstilínocs not Dcmonetrøte the Fcaslblüta qî Whtek Are to Challens tng E ducøtlonal tili "í,íptis Adoptõd ãs Nattonal (Althaush VolunJary ) 6" gxãicñW diverse and are not our 'tanturd' Is not the Nation too ethnically and cullurally governance and control to local ãnd ir-àlii"". t"á rooted in state

;lñ;,

;;rfrt*r*;;,
iiuí-"i.rv

and to reach the national,.consensus" overcor¿ler¿Í developntent t'heir make would stunrlardsthat *ãrthwhile? There are a nu¡nber of key issues here:

CAbuprocltl'úofrhisargurtal¿lrai'sest.lulpossib'ililgthalne!..¿,1 'irlrí¿orir, darcloped,-blJ con$ensus, will ttot be clu'tllengit'J. that in eduóation-antl in orher $ecrors reaches us

Fiü;ü*å

be set at mininrum levels, starrdards set uv govårnmãnts are lihely to over the extent debates the lowest co*n,on Juno*inator. current diversity of the eth¡ic and raclal to whictr content *uriiãnt6 the

l:'tö

Saisia¡¡ '!l¿r¿tltt

rdt;

lor Ån¡:t'itttt Edttrol

iun

OJ

Distribüaed by

DyDEDRS

Nation, and over the er(tent to which each school's focus mtlst reflect its own racial and ethnic malieup, underscore the difltculty of reaching "consensus" except at a superf¡cial level. In addition, "consensus," and therefore acceptance and ownership, is endangered by disag¡eement over controversial curriculum issues, like the teaching of evolution. llowever, a varie[y of experiences provide counter-examples to these argunents.
c TheJact

tlwt challenging and high qualitg content standards,

arcas suclt r¡s sciørce and history/social studies, haue been dercloped in a stdte tike Catif,onúa, u,hich lxæ great di-uersitA, indicates thal lhe chaltmge of'diverse opittiorts ean be oüercolne bg hard u'ork and careJul o,ttentiollt and rcspect Jor tl,ilfercnces oJ opittiott amþng the ta¡ious interesls. Califomia has been able 1'o adopt sophisticated and conrplex curriculum frameworks in mathematics, social stutlies, and science. We are nol suggesting that t'he task nìll be easy -- witness Nerv York state's recent exp: ¡ience rvith their is feasible. History framework - but we do believe that it t Thelact that the NCTM as a proJessiornl group htts reuclte'tl national "col¿set¿s¿¿s" on eo¡¿tent slandotr/,s is n posifttt' tltctuglt et¡en
not entirelg eont,it¿cit¿g argument for our abilíty to bridge lhe strþr¿g stale and local traditiot¿s t{ our Nalior¿. The lutionwide

in sensitite and parl¿culafly complet

agreement among professionals i¡r mathentatics an<l nuthematics teachirrg reached by the NCTM olì very challettgitt¡g conte¡lt expectations are echoed by the experiences of tht' several subject area standards Task Forces fonned by the Natiotnl Board for Professional Teaching standards (NBPTS). Neither of these efforts reflects any rvatering dorvn of conl t'ltt or avoidance of conl.roversial issues. As the NCTM standarcls or closely clo¡ted versiolts <¡f the stanclards are adoptecl by more and ntore state Boarcls of Edt¡catio¡t. the argument for the porver of compelling, high quality, yet voluntary, ttatio¡ral standards becomes more convincing.
o

It is rlearîrom ll¿est: e,tantples (andJrom olhers s¿¡cl¿ cs NAEP) lhttt it is jea.sibte lo deuelop tttttiottttl eductttiott sfor¿t/nrrls ¿¿'ltit'h arcJor morc challe¡qing than lhe deluclo, ¡n inimul,l¡rr.sic sliill.s stai ¿tla rcls ut I ic I t ¡s rc sen t I y d ¡' i t e n u c I t r $' A n e rican e rl ue ot i ct ¡ ¿.
¿

¡

Shndod'Srüing Procc¡¡
Even ,vith these examples of the feasibility ol cievelopittg challenging, voluntary, national staudards, horvever, rve tlo ¡tot k¡row the extenl to rvhich the standards will be ernbraced by the public and thus the extept to which they rvill ultimately affect our Nation's schools. To a¡t important. degree, the Tash Force believes that the extettt' of the influenee will depend upon the level of olutership of the nen' sta¡darcls felt bf the Nation's educa[ion professiott, fecleral, local antl state policy nraÈers, parents of all chilclren, artd the public, Ownership of the ne¡rnational education stan{ards by these various const ituents will be an essetttial cor¡rer$tone of the Natiorl's contntil.tttent to challge the content arul quality of instruction in our schools. Moreover, owrrershlp of the new national statrdards rvill generate a vision to guide theactions of state and local pollcy makers, to focus refornt and

Jon uorg

2

4, l99tì

8j

fr:-t7

Disttibuted by

DyrEÐRS

the use of resources in schools, attd to provide purpose and content to teacher professional developmettt.

e Prcccæfor Dcoctoptt1g Nøtüonøl Educatlon Standalúfp-c,"¿ø,tedtløtHltlEtululcthøtAlllnlercctcd f"ii"lw"tsr hæSttdltrg Teæhcrr, flaoc øtt Ognrtunlt" to be
IIaw Can
vision of For national standards to form the basis of a shared national tve âs a rvhat reflect accurately must they deliver can ivhat schools shared Nation warìt students to achieve. They must represe¡tt a true unãeirt*¿ing of ourgoals for student academic achievement. Yet. hon'catt rve erpeet poiicy makers, the public, and matty educa[ion sta¡rdards if they have iiiofeoiouafs rä as¡rire tõ new and challeng¡g ltt order for the prrblic them? to exposed to be üài f-r"¿ tt u "pportunity standards of "rvorltl-class" quality, it must be to embrace ctraltengind discussio¡r rvith concrett' ãi*" if..* opportuniry io elg,age in a natio¡al ieh quãnr' coñte.t and srudenr perfonna'ce. Expert by rviclespreacl "fi iìi fgÅ.ãt,r *uä nä discussed,6ebated, and refined political cit'izens' leatlers, ñ;i.ipation. Parents, business the throught¡ut str¡de¡tts eve¡t antl Ë"¿*Ë, *tiuËrsity educators, involved. Nation should be Ecø,td,?

;;;;i;,

ilüi.'

Ap p toache s to Standand'S e tt i ng ctlttlrl While there are a variety of rvays that a st¿t¡ttl¿¡rd-settin$ ¡rroct'ss be conductecl, there are three ttraitt approaches'

¡ Tlrc.fitsì cr¡tltr.ouch is tlu, ¡ttost eJJieient itt co.sl r¡¿d litttt': il ,tü's ktryylg ort ¡ttrtJi'ssional 6rìgírts at ili' national let'el a¡u-l Nutict¡t tl¿¿' ' This is the model that ha^s ii¡tutfront tlr:ughout pro(:trss

NAEP trä¿irionatty be used by NAEP though recetìtly the attoltìpt is matlt' direct tto ¡'odel this trr signincäntly. Sroadene¿ has ancl local edut'ators state to i¡rfluence the mirrds a¡r,i hearts of most large' public at antl policy ttrakers, parents. or the

oTlwspx¡tltln¿orldbeglttstûthelottllut¿dstttlt'Ietu'lultd gc,nirun's¿t risfil¿g tlocttt¡tt:ttls tttrcI eot¿cer¡u Ih<tt ure
.í.airulniti¿n¿ t¿t the tìàtiowú

o The thixl tttorlel sta¡ls witl¿ proft'ssiort"tt judgcnu:ttl und t, l l*' slttt t' tt n d i,,tã nrptesfiom hi ¡ ¿ãt io, al' l etiel u rtl t h * ¡ looks so u re e s'.1 n t his o! rie t 6ioI îe rl'eilo r g tt itla nceJrom u ¿r irle wt a throuÉh ¿rt move rvould srandards third n¡odet proþr;;i;;åucarion to tltt' slate nati<¡nal the from iåãri o¡o arrå pref*räúly two iteratio¡ts.
As the iterative' and local ¡evels u¡rJ úactt for continr¡ed rel¡nement. allg'roups.across lry owner'ship that is hope the procert ¡nodel "ontinues would ri,ùräiiiofly incrt'ase, This is similar to the the Nario. ll the of group Coal to ,u*on,n,.ud"d by the technical aetvisory National Btlucation Ooals Panel'

grnssroots inpttt. bírilding on existing tïork a¡rd has sonre sut¡stantial

lt

tu,l. This nlotlel has tlte atlvantage

of

Tøg¡k Fotrc ßecommendøJlon Thorrgh wt' r('('oÉlti7'(' The Task ltr¡rce reconrilrettcls the thlrd nrorlol, wt'h'lltve tlte nlonoy md time tn iftar i¿ ùóuf,f be theiiiðst, costiy

|:-t8

Itaisi ttg Slurtc/rltrl,'t .l'ot Ámerirun lltlut't¡lion

8ii

Distribv¿ed by

WtEÐRs

¡nvestrnent would be worthwhile. Our strong se¡rse is that this model offers the best chance for engaging a wide spectrum of the public and, consequently, has the g¡eatest promise for helping in lhe suecessful implementation of the new, challenging education standards throughout the ìtation.

Junu(r¡ t4, l99t

Eij

þ]ft,

Di6tributed by

DVTEDRS

Appendix

F

Reportofthe
Assessment Task Fbrce

lnhoducüon
Part of the Council's congressional m¿rndate is to report o¡t the following issues: ". . . rvhether. rvhile respectitrg state and local control of education. an appropriate sJ-stem of voluntary national tests or examinations shouttl a¡rd can be established' such as Anterican achievemenl tests, that w'ill provide prompt, ¿ccurate information to parents' educators, ancl polic.rrnakers on the prog¡ess being nrade torvard the specific edt¡catio¡r standards b!' individual students. schools. school s''stems, states, a¡rd the Nation as a rçhole (if sueh standards can be established)' The goal ofa¡ry such system shall be io foster good teaching and learnirrg, as n'ell as to ntonitor

performattce."
"A <lisrussio¡r of the validitl'. reliabilit!', faintess, attd costs of implementing a system of volunton' nût ional test s or exanrinat ions shall also be included in such report."

It is our purpose to cottsider the desirability attd feasibilitl' of a s.çstent to assess the National Education Stanclards. Our repgn *ill arlrlress
Tl¿e uü:u'st:tplr'ssrT

l irl ll¿s tt¡tpt'tttli.t tvqotl rqllil llrc u'ot'k ol thisTask Fo¡'ce and urv ,tot w'rcssañlg lhox'ollltt Couacil' ,'-l

Ja nua rU 24, I $gt

8',i

Disttibvted by

DynEDRs

the validity, reliabiliry, fairness, cost, and, particularly, potential impact on siudents with special needs. The report is organized into fivä sections: l)background, where we provide context for our deliberations and discuss important terms including assessnent purposes' uses and misuses; Z)desirability, where we co¡rsider the for and against a þreient assessment systent, a sample of arguments principles and desired of åystem to assess natiónal standards, a set fu¡tctions and national propose_ sùate räquirements for the systen¡, and that issues we identify where Sxeasibility, system; and roles in a new we where 4)inrple¡nentåt'ion, feasibility; to assure solved must be propose early steps to be taken; and 6)issues, where we discuss äoncerns tfré mer¡¡bers of the Task Force wish to bring to the attention of the Council'

Bockground
C,onlGxt For tnany Americans, the vision of a rene'wed educational sy$tem system includes assessment as a central conrponeltt. They desire a do their to educators altcl students all challenges rvhere assessment best, opens up new opportu¡rities and acconrplishments for everyotte' to improve the quality of America's schools. frot¡r the big "nlpråui¿"rincen¿ives CË¿ hopes arise from a variety of perspectives systenr to e'clucatio¡t permit its picture that our Nation cannot fronr close-up future;and the in ärode if we are to flourish that educatiort is fundat¡tt'¡tally a st.tt<lellt-tly-s1t¡(letrt prðposition where rich accomplishments, verifierl by assessntetìts' citll abilities and iense of worth in positive attd porvorful äL"ãfop

-

;õ;;".; ways. -úu

" "f,ild's

these conrpellhrggoals for assossnte¡ìl rvith nauy syste¡n "ppro".h ,*".or,äbtu rcserrrations. First,lve rccog¡ìize that any ¡tatio¡ul for respo¡rsibility state antl tlf local tratlitions the ttonor murt secontl, ech¡cation and, consequently, for flexibility antl adaptatiott. types' otlter of clata tests, uith ofot¡r extensive experience t standarcls high have rvt' tllt¡st ""uur" rvt'realiee antl accountability attcnrpts,

ióitn"
--ôùr

quality anã fairness of the assessnìe¡rts. Third, atl asscssnle¡rt so we ,V*-* åi tfr" *.opu imagi.e¿ is a ¡tew ettl,erprise for ottr Nati'tt, by createtl must ¡nake sure $,e ruoiã tl,.'saliettt har¡ns u¡ri¡rtentiott¿¡lly assessnle¡ìt systems in tlte past.

differ;

;;ñ¡.

We have onritte¿ the technical details of our clis¿greentettts unJt uuu clescribetl basic principles abor¡t whicl¡ we agree u¡n.infur that nrust l¡e foilowed if atty ;r.sst'ssnlent systcm is to rvhile offeri¡g neetle<l prote('tio¡¡. lf rt'qttirettte¡ìts w(' we betieve wl nray sueceed. We believe w('l¡¿tvt'å¡

aspirat ions àeUUeiatiorrs have been solnetintes <:o¡ttent iot¡s bt¡t ttol ttr a¡ttl to sonìe cteclible is reservâtions vary; evide¡tce

-

-

;;;;d ñ;fits

i;;ô;;ì,ñiiiet,

¡rlace for this Nation to be$n'

Purporo, Ure¡, ond ùli¡urr¡ cf

A¡r¡stl¡ttt
n þjdurul
ìott

pt¡rpÛst's' ,{ systenr t0 ä$sess thtr nation¡lst.ilndi¡rds may ht¡vtt nlut¡y anrotrg which rve tlistitr¡¡uish flve:

þ'-g

tlrudsirrg .\ltu¡rlrlrds.l'rrr rl ¿rr'rir'tt

Ë¿¡
Distributed by
DynEDRs

. monitoring

progress toward National Education Goals

o holding schools or students accountable for performance o certifying individual achievement and accomplishments

¡ improvinginstruction r evaluatinS the effectiveness of schooling or reforms
goals

Each of these five functions is assumed to be in the service of larger the improvement of our children's accomplishrnents and the quality of their educational experience. Nonetheless, these five functions are distinct and impose different requirements on an assessment system. ii The foitowing section is offered to explain frequently used terms as well as to help the Council use the common language when discussing the content ofthe report.

-

lloníto¡ítW
Sound educational policy decisions require dependable infonnation about achievement of the Natit¡nal Education Goals. Ideally this information provides an independent and relevant picture of educational progress. This information can be acquired in costeffeetive ways that do not require Ùl¡e assessmenl of every student or school every year. Examples of monitoring assessment systenìs are the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) an<l tnany existing state assessment programs.

Accountabtllty
Tests and assessments are frequently viewetl as nteans of holding schools and educ¿tt¡rs accountable for student achievement. Testbased accountability has, itt the past, focused attentio¡t o¡r the goals and content that are tested. Unless tests focus on lhe full rar€e of important outcomes, curricUlum and instruction become narrorved. Accountability does not have to depend only upon test results. For example, we could hold schools ¿lld educators accou¡ttable for promôting high levels of competence in certain subject matters and for assuring that all children have a rvide range of inrportånt, learning opportunities in untested areas, such as foreiÉn language and the arts. Syitems coulct be hekt accountable to assure that qualifie6 teaclterc are teachinglin $vcn subject areas. \l'hat n¡akes accountability problematic in evety dontain is the pressttre it creutes to fìrrd inappropriate short-ct¡ts in orcler to produee 'good results." The trigitôr the stakes, the greater the pressure. Thus it is important that lhã ¿ssessmenls, as fully as possible' reflect all inrportant $oals. Furthernrore, rve must be viSilant that the integrity of the assessntent is protected aÉiðinst c0nu¡[ion of varioUs sorts. For th('se reasons, lht' sanìe asse$st¡rents can atntost nt'ver provitle sinrtiltatteoUsly goocl ntottitorittg a¡td accoutttability inforntat iolt.

Ce¡0Ulcatlon
The use of Bssessnlt'trts to t.ert ify t,ht act'otttplishnxlnts of intlivitluul stutlents is untlerlakett for nany purpose$: to rlevelo¡r highly accomplishecl ¡¡tentl¡ers of oUr society, to tlentoltst rate ¡¡tld focus the

,lttttttttrl 94. llr9l

l\t

, Es
Djstributed by
DyoEDRS

to impact ofeducational services, and to encours$e student efiort that purposes, essential it is of these all For ends. progrcss "iñË""-"frã¿ rtrna$¿r or achievement, the steps tþ.ír, will help students be iówar¿ itrerequire¿ standards, and thebenefits of certification

ãã***i""teå

openly to students, teachers, parents, g{lnq.n9u.Uc' g"""use of the consequences of certification for an individual's future, with it the the certification purpose of assessment also ca¡ries and the Standards fairness. and validity rtti"turt t""t oi"åt criæria for to be need certifïcation individual's one for them iãsæ that measr¡re individual. any other for used tests and st¿ndards the uluiuaunt to to Fñn"r*or., cqgification assessments that tie consequences dipromas schoo] high of for instance, denial i"¿ioi¿uA p*rtoímance

-

specifi" or are required for particular employment, have ¡ for instructional standards important pru."¿"næ it ¡t set useful an<t actual on-theãnvironments or the relationship òf the assessment to

-

l"g4

job skills.
Indeed, the Assessment can be an integral part ofeffective teaching' involvement active same üãrir"r*rr*ents and instri¡ctiôn expect the and of.skills developmenr the ãiriu¿.nt, in problem solving and to improve-instruction' used are unoerst¿r,¿ind. Assessmentsihat ilety to differ from those used for the other purposes f,o*ãu"t, for a ¡iumber of important ways. The key audiences

hrct rrctlonal f mptoo e mcnl

|]¡"d ;ú;in Àt"ss*"ntt intended to improve day'to-day

*"

insuuction within

parents' Intensive individual elassrooms are students, teachers, and and use of scori¡u¡' i"""¡*ment in the development' instructional to-this critical be may tttutt*"nt information purpose must it-p-i""à*ã"t function. Assãssments used for ühis both teachersand to srudenr performance ññ;iúviàu¿u"à¡, "n with students and üu¿"ntq anA tney musì provide both teachers

;;h;t

"iä*ãåá1, ;lidilñJh;

purpose than for the. others, usefulness or externi-t-eiir rnðru for this frequent decisions about because teact¡ers musimake myriad and instructional content and stYle'

are desired. In of tne hãming and performances rhat to constrain the likely is a"se*me¡ìt óf n"u¿"¿ i*quãncy

E oahllorJton ol SchoolltW or Pwg ramc than only dependable The evaluation of schooling requires more it may also require information about,tuãunìã"aáemic achievement; levels of attitudes' like assessment, of non-cognüþe outcornes' on parental information ctear as iniuï*is as well Assessmentc factors' education, poverty and other non-school often be used in evaluation ;;;ig"*;i* *oniotins purposes can that alweys.expected almost is tü&t, uüt, in adoitioñ,h of assessed causes tikely the about evaluation will allow-iniårences or influences may be the impact of .pililrd; "uutus in combinarion with stutlent intãrvenrlons, ,;t""."t" it nray bc neces$ary Uact<grounO factors'To draw strong conclusiotts' to assess students same the on itããi""i i""gttudinat lnforma+'lon uses of such outcomes. desired orher á*¿ în u"r¡rä"*åiï program or partlcular ;;;i;;;ú;"av be formative, to lntprove the

;a;ilüñ,.n¿

the

I

;;;;;;"":rt ;ilü;;;h
þ4

f?ttistlHg 'Sfat¿da rcls {ctr

Atnrricttu t'duauli<tn

"
Disttibùted by
DynEDRs

{JrJ

schooling effort, or summative, to make a go'tlo-go decision about a particular program or stratesr.

Hþh-StalceaAse
Much conve¡lsation in assessment. focuses on high-stakes uses of assessrnents. But what constitutes high stakes? The phrase nieans different things to different people' ln the present context, horvever, the key is whetherperformance on the assessment has subsøntial consequences for participants in the educational system. The consequences of an assessment, might be desired by or imposed on students, teachers, or administralors. Á clear form of high'st¿kes use for is individual certification, in which some important event instance, graduation from high school, admission to college, or is made contin¡lent on performatìce oll an selection for employment examination. Other relatively high-st¿kes uses include proposals to make teachers' conìpensatio¡t or state fltnaneial aid to schools or districts cont¡ngent on scores. Higþ stakes occur when lest results are used to compare schools i¡¡ choice programs. ful essential and complicatirg lesson of the test-based reforms of the 1980s, ho\-ever, is that tests can beconte high stakes even in the absence of severe, externally a,rutounced sanctions of this sort. In some instances, publicity alone was sufhcient to spark a chai¡r of events sufficient to make tests high stakes, for example, by intlucing district or building adrninistrator! to use test scores a5 an important criterion for staff evaluation. lilhenever consequences of test scores sre substantial for individuals, issues of validity, reliability, and fair¡ress become ntore difficult. where high stakes are more a matter of perception thatt actual consequu¡ces, !$sues such as faintess nuy be less salieltt, bt¡t the risk of uni¡¡te¡rded cleleterious effects oll i¡lstructio¡t ¿¡¡td less trustworthy results are subst¿ntial nonetheless.

-

-

Tect llltstlp,c
Coneems for misr¡Se of tests ancl other ¡msessntents are at tht'core of nìatìy reservatio¡¡s about thc implenrentation of nu¡tdated ässessntents as instrunre¡rts of national policy. \l¡lty is l,his isstle so irnportant? lleferences such as t he Sl¿¿ r¿dc I rls fo r Ecl u ca t i ¿s n a I r¿ n d Ps,ychotog¡ical ?esfs a¡rt t.he report of the National Academy of Edlcatioir rm¡>hasize, among other issues, that the valitlity of an instrU¡ne¡tt or assesstnel¡t tloes ttot solely resitlt' itt tht'tt'st itself, but rleperrds as well upon the ways test results are used. At the most global level. :nisuse occur$ rvhen results are used for unintettdetl rvriters in thc õur¡ror**. Àrd it. is intportant to ¡ote that significant and ntisuse artr use appropriate between iielå Ueüeve that diffeiences inap¡rropriate an i¡tvolves misuse of hi¡rd one clear. always crystal not interpreiatiolì of the purpose t¡f the test, For exanrple, a nlisu$t' uccr¡ir whe¡r tests that are intended to provicle i¡tforntatiott t¡¡t streirgths antlrveaknesses to improve instruction are used to lal¡t'l sturlints. Arrother ntisr¡se nright, result from using a nleasllre rvith ¿t rveak base of evitlettce, for instattce, itr tnakitrgcerlaitt ct'rtilit'¿ttit¡tt docisio¡ts husttl on a sitgle, wet*ly valitlated nlot¡sure, A ll¡irtl nlisust' ittvolves the conseC¡uences of Usitlfl ¡fiven nlc¿¡stlrtls tt¡ ntakc tlt't'isiglls about studelìts resu¡t¡ng itt unfalr decisions, Misuse is a parntttgttttt

Jtnuary t4, l9trg

*'-!,

$L
Distribvted by
DyøADRS

concern because if misused, tests can undermine efforts to improve education and can harm children. Misuse is important because it may lead to erroneous judgnrents about educational performance. Tests are not valid in anã of themselves; rather, they a¡e valid only to the extent that they provide a frrm basis for reaehing specific conclusions. A test that is wã[ suited to supporting one t¡rye of eonclusion may be of or misuse entkely inadequate for supporting another. One use a using example, a test may undermine its validity for another use. For the to teaching and thereby encouraging test for aðcountabitity . will generally-undermine the validity of that test for monitorin8 test progress. \ñrile there are many other instances that can be cited of iu"i*isur", it is irrtportant th¿t reasonable steps are taken in any

-

-

-

-

proposed system to avoid the harms caused by test misuse'

m*jjy
Prtçú Sffi

of Syslem lo Assess the l'lolionol

lltt Unilld Sffio¡ A¡¡osnonr Sy¡þÍl

Education in the United States ir. r-est-happy.lile expend significant resor¡rces on studenü testin8, data coü¡ction of "hard" information, all undert¿ken Ñ8t*, evaluations, and tuport prepar¡¡tion that üorñinaUy to meet the majoipurposes of assessment. Few believe often and is inconsistent the present system is sucãesif'd. lnforrnation is incoherent. The information plc.iderl is seldom tinrely and there and middle' elementary, for little articulation amorrg tests $ven ,u.ãnã"ry,.hool students. Despite the preoccupation with testitrg, we have ño real assessmen[ system' How can we explain our

*

predicament?

.

core reality of Many external test,s and assessme¡rts float free of the are practices' Teachers teaching clasJrooms, curriculum, and day-to-day their to improve results ã*p""i"¿ ió "use" test intiru"tion, Uut rarely are Àssessments, curricula' texts' and ,.*lli"g;*ctices adgred. Tests and textbooks ofteI¡ entphasize oináià,ri ä*h and contenr. Moreover, teaehers are t"aught in but ¡tot teacher education programs"book-learning" about tests, practical saclly, use. of be can much about how suchìnformation for been,.power" not has results rest by ü**ìã¿g" piovided teachers.

rTest-basedaccountåbility,whileaconrpellingidea,hasseldom

worked in its present form, Standards of performance may be is lowered so that sehools will not look too bad. Test content from test inferences incorrect public make simplifiect. The press and and wlh cuniculunì be aliSned nor may ;;;;;:ñ*ruse ¡he tesrs guidelines for how clear no practices, thcreare insm"rionar t"".h"r*."n üse the test information to improve lnstructlon. "resl,teachers, quite rationslly,.lnay teach children timc ;Ïiú;ktti}"r';her than iubject matter. Valuable instructional a the test on as t'asks or ls spJnt practicing similar items i""rõn"¡¡u but uñl¡nately counteqrroductive alternatlve because

ö;;;õ;ily,

-

F4

lini.ri

ttg

liltttttlards for ¿\n(tietn lldueulir¡tt

s¿
Djst¡i.bu¿ed by
DyûEDRs

r

tests always are limited in coverage. Effects are worse when test items are ihallow or trivial. The curriculum that ehildren a¡e taught constricts to what is on these tests. Some but not all anaþts believe, therefore, that ou¡ tests can be blamed for much of the poor teaching and low quality materials found in some of our schools. Many tests provide a model of "quick, right answer," piece-meal learning, and artificial divisions of subject matten into microskills. These tests are thou$ht to exempli$ a a view that basic skills must be discredited view of learning leamed before complex thinking. while it is arguable that tests alone are responsible for the type of instruc[ion found in all too many schooli. it is clear that we have not sufftciently explored ways to assess students'deLper knowledge of sutrject matter, complex probtern solvingl, and clear communication' ,{nd what about good õitizenship, commitment to hard work, and Ûeam building? lVhat about subjects other than the core subjects?

-

e Even hi8h quality tests may be misused. They provide an illusion of precisioir. Federal testing requirements for program services and_

ãccountability result in classising students in ways that frequently retard student prog¡ess rather than support it. Assessments have included material [hat is biased against, children of different races and gender. Mandated tests have a particular¡y bad track record n ith-Limited English hoticient (LEP) students, disadvantaged students, and otñer special populations. Some test misuse in schools occurs without sanction, despite the disme'' of test experts and commercial testing comPanies. o The costs ofour present system are high, not so much because the tests and inforrnãtion are expensive but because they are so rarely used to make things better. Bureaucracies demand accountåbility reports for Federal and ståte funds. These reports seldom inform poliey but provide the appearance of "bottom-line" management' o A bright spot is the NAEP, which in its present model witlt current const-rainis provides reasonable information on the quality of the Nation's achievement. tt functions well as an independent mechanism to monitor national and ståte pro8ress toward the National Education Goals, particularly Goal3. NAEP can do this were because it is not burdened with more than one purpose, lf rve progrcss, national monitoring purpose of tr,i¡dd accountability to its its co¡rtinued utility for monitoring would be questionable'
o

The presen'r, system also has many resources in the fonn of expertise of commerciai developers, and irurovative new assessnìelltl. con¡ing from them and from the schools, universities, a'd rledicaterl individuats eommitted to improving the way we assess students nntl
use results.

In sum, our present system of assessnte¡tt has substantial weakncsses serve as well as some strenS,ths, attd many of us believe that it cattltot the before Tht' lssue change. * *ui"r impetus foi fundamental a ", Counciiis whether, and to what degree ancl uncler what conclltions' eurrent in the assist to able better be woultl sysl,em new assessment

reform agenda.

Jan,uarg l¿4, l9gl!

t'-7

g3

Distribùted by

DynEÐRs

We have at least two reasonable altematives: l)not to use assessment as an instrument of educational policy or 2)to redesign a

ne$'strategS¡ from the ground up to assess national education standards.

Argunrrrilr

o Ì'lew Assc¡sme¡rt Syttcm A sense of urgency coupled with persistent America¡r optimism has resulted in a laft ãf arguments for a new assessment system. Some arguments are put, foñh with a particularvision and belief that it is

b

mõst critical to change the lorm of the tests from multiple choice tests to performance-baseã nsks. Others hold that attaching real .o*ruquun"us tq performance is essenlial' Below is a suntmary of the *-gãåi*pirat¡iins fora new assessment system (but not neeessarily and tensions a siñge national test). Notice that there are conflicts foct¡s otr of arguments set first *or"rg ro*u of these argu¡nents. The general' assessments in
o Assessments are the critical instrunte¡tt of eclucational policy. They giver¡-s are a cost-effective lever for charrging the systent. They

somethingtoshoo[for.Theyletusk¡rowhowwearedoittg.They witl motivate studettts, theii parents, and the systenì to work hartler'
¡ To mr¡tivate stUdents and teachers to work harder, ¡ìelr assessllleÌtts
n'ell as must have consequences for the rvorld ot¡tside of sehool as job or for ¡¡urkel, the in li,"i it,ri¿u of school. If assessntents cottnt, harder' will try college applieation, students ¡ Both speciai edt¡catio¡t and LEP stude¡rts h¿tve bet'tt t'xt:lt¡tletl front

assessments.Thenrqiorproblemtviththisapproachhasb.cenlhat

I

A ¡ttore these studeÌtts are thän placed "ot¡tsitle of itccott¡ttability." co¡ìcerns if equity is neerlerl üi.furir" approach tow'aids assessnìent are to be resPectecl, tteetls it America neecls a rvake-up caìI. ltr firct, t'ach lot:¡rl r:tlntnttlttity t'ontn¡u¡ritit's ltlcal *a¡e-up catl. Only clear iest rcsults n'ilt t:o¡vince scltool and their own chiltlre¡l trtay havt' u,ii purur,t* that i¡eir serious prohlents.

'tr:t

I ComntO¡t assessnìt,¡tts

Í¡rtr ¿llt ttsst'tttiAl (x)nux)tx'ltt tO OpCll ttp ChOiet'

of public schools or edt¡catio¡r prof{rattl lo l)aronls' . An assessnlcrìt systenì will ¡¡ivt'reltt'rvtrl nteruting t0 high scho<ll iItstitt¡tio¡ts' ,liplo,nu., un,l reitore publirl cotrhtleltt'e itt etlucational nittirlttal of o Rt ce¡rt polls shorv l hat tltt' public lvat¡ts some fontr sclto'ls, testi'g. They want to be abie ttl kntlrv horv kitls itr ¿iffere¡tt sta¡xl¡rrils, tlistriðts, ur,ä *tut*, c(r¡tìparo ag,irirrst conu¡ton ¡ Test,s can help to ov(ir(,onle ineqttity, sl,t¡tlettts shor¡ld b(¡ jrrrlgorl ott o¡t otht'r citar¿¡cteristics' tlnless all úu* t¡ny ¡rt'riorn, alrd 'ot hi¡¡h st¿¡nrlarrls, w* rvill per¡n'lttato, if ac:¡it'vc ,ü,,t,.i,tå or.. hetpt,rito ,,x,,"urtrate, i¡e cl¡ss atttl rarial clivisio¡ts i¡t this Nt¡tiott.
o lf ths t tlucatio¡r ¡¡oats iuxl slalttl¿trtls aru goitr¡1to bt' l¡tort' lltil¡ rhetoric, we ntttst ¡llist'sli our progres$ towartl tltt'ir ¿rcltit'çentt'ltl ' o lltlut:atiott lus ¡tot ht4trovt'd lx'c¿tl¡st'tesls hi¡vt'ft'w rt'al

n,it

i"r*ni*r,.**

fot ttiiitnnf
l{rt

s. Stt¡tlt'ttt.s ltttlst l¡t' hekl t.,

hig¡ statttlanls

¡'+l

isirr¡¡

.sfrt

rt/rt rrls

.fìr

r

¿lwt rìt¡t u Êtl urnl iou

t).¡
Ðistribvted by
DynEDRs

and not passed through the system because oftime spent in classrooms.

¡

Test-based accountability is the "bottom line" of eclucation. tlntil teachers and administrators are made to feel responsible for their stuilents' performance, they have few incentives to change what they do.

o Our evaluation systems ìrave too many mind-nunrbingprocedt¡ral requirenrents. IVe need to allow more creativity in the system by holding schools responsible for out,cornes and let schools tlevelop rvays toachieve them.

t¡lme arguments for a ¡tational systenr of assessntent dcpend t¡pon a sp:cific vision of assesshtent aud tests a$ part of a larger eclucatiottal refr':m effort. Critical to this view is the intportattce of alignittg testing tocurr¡culum anrl instrt¡ction. Argurnents in su¡tport of this vitll
include the following:
o Our i¡rtenrational partners in Ettrope a¡lrl Asia have t'dt¡catiott

systems that produce a high lel'el of liter¡<y and contpetettce. Testing linked to curriculunt is a comt)onent of these systenrs. A natio:ul examination systenl, based on clear eurrict¡la arul on examinations that can be prepared for, could also be usetl i¡t this

country.
o Aligning stanrlards, curricula, anrl tests rvill pt'nnit clt'ar

con¡nru¡rication to all cotrstitue¡x'ies in the etlucatiolìal contlttt¡ltity. lnformatiotr from measures will make sense a¡trl eclucational resources can be eoheretrtly fot:used to rapidly improve our status. Evidence in sup¡nri of this vicw <:alt l¡e seett, forune segnent o[tho st.udent po¡rttlatiolt, in f he rece¡tt report of Atlva¡tcetl placentettl Tests.

Other arguutettts hittgt'on the t¡st. of a pi¡rl i('ular forn¡ <llasst'ss¡¡tt'¡tt as a way to inte'gral.e curriculunt. leat'ltittg, lt'arning, alttl ¿sst'ssl¡tr'¡tt:
¡>erfOfnrattce åS$essme¡t, Perftrrn¡attCe ¿sSeSsnte¡rt feqUires Sttrlt'ttts

to cont¡rlete challenging tasks that call for deep ttnclerstattrlittg of sUbject nt6tter, problenr s6lvittg, ¿¡n{ co¡tutu¡ticatiott. Thest'tasks ntay be co¡tceive{ as extentletl projec[s, l¡anfls-o¡t tlentot¡stratio¡ts sUcl¡ as concluct,ing experimettts, or portfolios, where st t¡cle¡tts inclutle eviclcnce of a range of accont¡rlishnrents or their rleveloperl t'x¡rrtise. Currently trünerous k¡cal a¡ttl stalçl o{ucation agen¡it'sare clevelqrittg such assessnrents. Anto¡tg the achatttages cited are:

¡

Assess¡ttetrts calt be ntore ongûgillg ft¡r stutlt'ttts ¿¡¡rl ¡ltort'

tttxlerstandablc to parettts alttl tltt' t'ontntttttity. ¡ Worhing ott tlte tlevt lo¡l¡tteltl ¿t¡ttl tltt'ev¡lt¡irtitltt ttf ¡tcrfonttaltttt tasks ¡lrovitles an ittvalt¡nhlc eX¡rerit'ttt'tl [trr tt'¡tt'ltt'rs. lterftlrt¡ti¡ttt't' ôs$ossment þripgs I.ogt'ther assessill('tll tttttl tetchittg itt n ¡xttvt'rfttl.
eoncrete way,

I Scoritt|{ ¡rt'rfonrta!lce ussessttte¡tts
e

ctt¡tllk's lt'¿tt'ht'fs ltt tlcVt'lo¡r A of s¡t't't'sslt¡l rvorh. i,t'.. rvl¡rl il me:lns Utcl hoW t() recgÉlllzg lt. $itt¡tlt,ttts C¡ltt ¡¡st'llu'st'çritt6 syslt'ttt

ltr¡r r¡ixlerslutrclirrg of tl¡1' qttulit

it':5

,Iûnuttrn t4, l!r!|t

lr!,

s¡i

Dittribvted by

ÐynEDRs

to assess their own work and internalize high standards'

cPerformancetasksprovidemodelsforteachersofthebest instn¡ctionat practice. Even if a teacter does not help design a puïiot**"*-'Uased assessment, she r¡r he will be $ven a dramatic ne*way to conceive of arrd to improve instruction'
o Performance assessments that are cumulative encourage students

lo

iurponsibility for their own learning by reftecting on their ownwork.

ãi"

o Because

and of the integrat reiatlonship of performance assessment mandated with associated previously harms iearning, the
assessments will Þe mitigated'

o

these Nurnerous local añd s¡"te education agencies are developing by enthusiasm ofgreat reports assessments already, with háve an eager clientele for educational

ñi"þ;ringi"a"trurr.l,Ve
asses$nent of tNs form.

passion for the There is considerable sentiment, momentum, and systems' development of ne.w assessment

Argurncntr Aggin$ s l'lsw A¡se¡¡nrat Sy¡rem

systent of Yet there is no shortaSe of arguments against a national proponents' assessment by assessment. Parallel tã the arguments

"ñ;;ilttrá pf"nned systeni. Again, let's begin with the most general
envisioned.

it*le

their objections in the light of certain assumptions

"Ëoui .ãn"u*r._ pertinent toatmõst any system of assessn¡ent that maybe

¡ Externally nrandated tests have not worked in this cot¡ntry. There is
no rea*nn to believe they will work this ti¡ne' too ma¡W purposes simultaneãusly

rAmajordangerofanationalsystemisthatitrvillbe¿skedtofulfill
narionaigäals, instructional responsibilities.

- monitoring inrpróvement' accoul¡tability'

progress toward and

certificaiíon' No single measure can ¡neef these nrultiple

¡ \Te already k¡¡ow our systenl is in lroutrlt'' Let's fix it bafore we test
it. We do lrot have ancl chalk.

,*oït""t

to spend on teaclri¡tg' books'

"ttough

¡ Thc'etrvironme¡tts from rvhich some chiltlrelì conle
rnake

fa¡rtily l!Þnor-t conclitions of poverty, poor health, and itra<lequate with tests successful our etlrrcationäiåystem less likely to b(' or rvithout them.

-

with

_

rAnarionalassessntentsyslemwillexat:erl¡¿lt'rathertha¡rsolvethe having tests will o,l,,iW pioUfon . Sporttïrataphorc notwithstantlirrg' chiklren, LEP st,udents, ,,üf i.uäl tn" phyiirg field, Diiatlv¿¡rragecl

ä*oianá"r¿s. They may fail and l¡e left behirrcl r Natior¡al tcsts nrearr national currieula. They will hrevitably r.esttlt itt if,îuriiip"tion of cilucational autlnrity from states nntl localities and resuif itt $realer centrallzation ofcotttrol
fr'.t0

on.t

.t

it,trur.,

øit uäriour special ¡reeds have to go farther to tneet

flrr

isi rtg,5ltlrrrla lds,for

¿l

llr'r'icttrl

Etl tt c¡tl

ion

$ti
DisttibÈted by
ÐynEDRS

o

Extrapolation from European systems is inappropriate. Tt¡e United States has g¡eater challenges in the diversiff of its student body, no formal policy of early tracking into academic and vocational progftrms, no nationally centralized curicula, and no rseent tradition of a highþ regarded teaching profession. European countries have a range of soeial, health, and family suppori systems lackinginthis country. r A national assessment system by itself will not resrit in education¿l reform on the cheap" Iffithout resources to build the infrastructure we need to improve curriculum, teaching practice, and the quality of teachers goi¡rg into the schools, we are doomed. And even if we had the national will to make these changes, we don't have the resources
to do

so.

ie

r Standards are a big step forward, but

so far our examples are very generally phrased and may be subject to wide interpret¿tion. We need carefuþ constructed curricula before we can develop adequate assessment instruments. SpecifÏc tests, if created before specific curricula, may drive educational refonn in a direction undesired by educational policy makers and rcpeat previous failrues. So we can not do this tomorrow. ¡ Holding students accountable or requiring certification that has real consequences (for graduation, employment, or opportunity for further education) may be subject to judicial challenge unless school systems can demonstrate that adequate notice of expectations and reasonable opporturúty to leam have been provided,

Some negative arguments focus on a system of assessment that would

permit individual states or grcups of states to develop their own performance assessments of the national standards. Illustrative concemsinclude:
o Validity studies of perfoffnance assessment are just be$nning and as

yet we do not have strong evidence in support of performance assessment. At this point, they are risþ for use for student certification or other high-stakes consequences. r Fairness of performance assessment results may present problems for two related reasons. First, the evidence to date srtgÉests that it is that is, hard to demoru¡trate even limited generalizability successful performatrce on one t¿sk is related to performance on a similarbut sü8htly different t¿sk or topic. If different students complete different tasks, assuring the comparability of Ëheir results is difficult, Secondly, the effect of comparability of administrative conditions will need to be determined, so as to assure that all children are assessed under standard conditions.

-

¡ Performance assessments may prove especially difltcult for
disadvantagedlearners who have not had instructlonal experiences in extended complex task performance. Evidence (from NAEP) srrggests that minority stu.dents eomplete open-ended tasks at a much lower rate. Changing the kind of assessment is r.o irnmediate cure-all.

,!an,uury 24, 1992
'a
,

F.I

I

9?

Oisttibùted by

DynEDRs

r Performance

t¿sks presently depend substantially on witten and oral communication, even in subjects such as science and n-thematics. LEP students could be unfairty affected by these casks. In addition, there may be more opportunities for biases based upon superficial qualities of language (such as a foreign accent or Blact< English features) to influence judgments. ¡ The logistics of perforrnance assessment raise questions of practicality. tt is not an efficient format; provisions for students not Leing tested require ex6a resourees if leaming is to 8o on while the testing is in progress. . The cõsts oftrui system in terms cf teacher development, task dovelopment, *dministration, scoring, and validation are so high as

to be insupportable.
Because the council has already expressed sentiment against, using a sin$e national test, no arguments, althottgh they are numerous'

and strong, wilt ¡e put forth against that alternative, such "or.:oin.ing, as usingan individuat form of NAEP.

Summory dfugumenl¡ AIthoWh it mi.ght be desirable, we have nol presented counter"nd'rejoinders "rgu*ãn¡5 assessment system. How can we sumrnarize the against a new

to each specific point raised on behalf of or

principles aiguments? Some arguments for a national system focus on of these A set ofþod management, incentives, and communication. in the ancl testing assessment with ãrö*unt, itripti"r that our failures assessments of assessments, forms new pùt arn be overcome with more closely linked to teaching and focused on valued ãccomptishments of stu6ents. These arguments are essentially optimiitic and have relatively little evidence in their support' past Arguments against a national system are based on our intencled by changes that on doubts u*påäun."r wilh assessment and

n"-*"ttutt*"nts will actually occur.

New, performance based

recor<l on assessments have not as yet âccumulated a sufficient track permit their to effîciency and practicality, faimess, t"fi.bility, purposes' "rir*W, wholesale adoption as a national policy for all assessment, has anã torrugÌ,-.t"kur purposes in particular. No single examination system purposes of monitoring been ableiimultaneously to serye the ptogt"tt, student certification, accountability, instruction'a of and schoolevaluation as well as maintain the validity consider we mu$t minimum, purposes. AË thô *uttut for all its assessments for different purposes' different -onepartialrryayoutofthisnegativismistolooktowardthe

ñññ1-;t,

provisiån of indicators of school arrd system capacity as meals to hoth evidence ãssesr tftu quality of the system and to provide collateral performance student iu¡"ount to itre vãt¡¿ity and fairness of the
assessments.

nrtt orgh most interest and discussion have been clevoted to the ¿"ääp"i""iof stutlent assessments of the national standards, theof tJ"pliån ãr.apacity indicators requires a significant commitment ñrgy;;.tt. to ttris point, there have been numerous effor[s to

"r"ãõ

*pu.ity, in tet ¡ñs of resources

and educational pro.','sses. 'l'ert

þ'-12

tltlisi

n¡¡

litandurds

Ånoriean Eúucttllon

ûs

Distribvted by

DynEDRs

Some have been created to report to the public on the status of schools, for instance, School Report Cards that include information both on capacity at the school and on school performance. Some have been used as accountability mechanisms with varying success. Some of these have been cast in the form of educational indicators of inputs, processes, and outputs as means to monitor and explain changes in

our educational system. The recent report, Edtrcation Counts, prepared by the Congressionally mandated study panel on indicators provides a detailed vision of the benefits of an indieator system. Capacity indicators may provide sources of evidence that will increase our confidence in results on outcomes, But indicators of capacity are not without problems. One limit and consequentþ a source of tension is hgw to achieve some comparable level of reporting- from school to school, for instance- without overlooking special and important eharac¿eristics or efforts of the sehool. rtre also need to keep the level of documentation from being burdensome. Finalþ, we wish to reduce the likelihood that reporting on capacity will result in explicit regulation and prescription. How can we proceed? First, we must cut our interest in capacity to the bare but essential minimum. Three attributes of system and school capacity are essential to the interpretation ofstudent assessment. (Dependíng upon tl'ie fînal character of the system and school capacity indicators, other elements may be added.) The minimal elements are:
o

equal opportunity to learn curricula implied by lhe stanclarcls learning resourcesr instruction, cumiculum, teacher and student assignment;

-

r specific issues about environments for populations with special
needs; r procedures to avoicl test misuse.

Information on these points is essential to determine the validity and
faimess for any high-stakes use of assess¡ne¡tts. To sumnrarize our views: ¡ We all believe n'e can devise methods to intprove the way we rnonitor our progress toward national goals.

r Most of us believe that we ca¡ìnot use traclitio¡tal tests

as

aecountability tools to improve performance. r We only have parùial evidence on the likelihoorl perforntattce assessments will be successful. We are coucenred that changittg the form of the åssessnrent will not' solve basic problems of inappropriate use attd we will need to bt¡ild a carefully doct¡ntentetl set of experiences about practicaliüy, validity, reliability, and costs of

their use for differenl. assessntent purposes.

Jnn uu ru

:!4, l9!l*!

l\ rì UJ
t

þ"'t:t

Distribúted by

DyTEDRS

Our Vision: Toword o System to Asses¡ Notioncl Stundqrds

ûe

We conclude that there is no ready-made examination system available for insta¡rt use in the assessment of national standards. None brings together the hopes for assessment and the prctection against preüousiailures. But we recognize that assggsment is a critical part of ihe educational reform proeess and a desirable and appropriate requirement for public ènterprises. We reatize that we cannot Ìvait

uniit

*"

We have reslarched, deLugged, and resolved every unknown.

must cautiouslY begin tomove now. \Ve recom¡nend n fundamental redesign of our assessment redesún that can start imrnediately but will take time and ryrt**

" to câre to come

,":ql o lve support an &ssessment system that protects children from the harmióf test misuse, from ,¡tfairness, and from poor quality æsts
andassessments.

-

fruition.

r we support an assessment system that holds schools accountable producir4¡ for pråù¿ing high quality educational progmms and for of their all of expect Americans theinteltectualáccomplishments children. ¡ We support I systen that fosters rather than inhibits creative and
demanding teaching.
o We

progress need an assessment system to help us assess our

towardtheNationalEtlucationGoals,andonethatprovides *¿urrt"n¿"ule information that will help mobilize families' Ju¿ents, educators, and the whole community to rededicate themselves to the cause of leaming'
Our strategy is based upon a fewbasic assumptions:

rNoonetestorassessmentshouldbeaskedtoserveallthe made up of assessment purposes. We need, at this point' a system to adherence their by articulated óomþonents, $ued together purposes assessmen¿. for explicit ãoniunt standards, and servir¡g r ,lhere is glood in the assessment system that should be retained and
put to use in "_på"c"ã. ro.uiitiu, ana by commerãial test publishers should be thisnewassessmentsystem.Mos[oftheseeffortsfocusonthe

nxcellent progtress in assessment design by states and

instn¡cttonal improvement uses of assessments'

o Suflicient safeguards must be

populations, ãñäåi"n, p"rticurarlv disadvantaged, LEp, and special refined' is being it while system from negativ" .onr*iuàn"es of tñe ofparticular areas to extended be Further, assessmentihould a concernto these groups. For example, it is important to ensure LEP for comprehensive asseisment of English language skills students,

built into t'he system

to.

protect

.

F',-14

ßa isdrrg Slaltcltrrrls J'or

Americun Educal iott

I00
Distti]tu¿ed by
DydEDRS

We propose, therefore, the development of a system to assess the national stsndards which cleaves to the following principles:
o

It is always conceived as a part of a larger educationat reform effort. .{ssessment is not adopted as a quick ñx.
as a system as a cacophonous set of information - notPerformance information will be that provides little guidance.

r It fir¡rctions

articulated. There will be coherence among assessed grade levels. There will be relationships between information secured to assess system capacity and system performance. lnappropriate uses ofthe
assessments should be avoided.
o

lt is developmentpl. We t¡nderstand it will evolve and change. rüe will avoid practices that premature[v freeze new assessments. ¡ It is empirical. We will invest increasing reliance on its results as we
develop experience and evidence o.rits validity, reliability, and faimess for ear:h use and the consequences flowirrg from each use.

. Itwill

begin with assessing content knowledge because that is what is technically the most feasible. However, there must be the understanding that students do not leam ifthey are not inlerested in the subject matter. Thus, direct assessments of student motirration to learn need to be developed to supplement, assessment of knowledge, r Because of this experimental nature, we want to monitor the impact of the assessments on the educational system. If we are in error, we are committed to changing our policies.

¡'Ihe

assessment system will be practical and economical.

ll will

collect as much information as is needed

with minimal disruption of

instruetional tin,e for valid decisions but no more.

Overoll Requiremenis for on Assessmenl Syslem to Assess the Ñqüonql Shndsrds
'i-he new assessment system must be designed to ensure that ståtes and local districts have the primary responsibilities for creatingland implementing assessments for the purposes of accountabili$, school

evaluation, student certification, reporting to parents, and iirstructional improvement. Such responsibilities should be state and local because decisions about schooliruiare made primarily at the state and local levels. Furthermore, there is no single best method of assessment, \ile need to provide for the creative development of mtrltiple alternatives to assess the national standards. Ttre responsibility for assuring the quality of these assessments would reside atthe nationallevel. The national level would also be responsible for monitoring progress toward the National Goals (this responsibillty would be fulfilled by usittg NAEP, as it is modiftecl to reflect emerging national content standards), additional national responsibilities are independently evaluatin¡¡the impact of the assessment system on the Nation's educational quality and equity,

Jttt¿ttttr!t 94, l99E

F-t6

:t

ür

Di'tribüted by

DydEDRS

and providing resources for technical assistånce, research, and development on assessment so that the system may be improved'

Stute End Locol Responsibilifie¡
States or groups of st¿tes have the responsibility to devise differentiãted assessments of the national standards. Th:y may use these different assessments ultimately forpurposes of monitoring progress, accountability, student certification, instructional impî*"**t, orschool evaluation. Forast¿te to parüicipate inthe system to assesqnational standards, its assessments must meet certain assessment quality st¿ndards. St¿tes are to be encouraged to explore wide options in how they approach the design ofassessments ofthe content standards. They un.outugud þdevetop innovative schedules of administration and "iô improved procedures to report to their publics. There will be marw tefitimate strategies adopted by ståtes to reach the content ,tãnd*rdr. Consãquently, it is expected that there will be diverse interpretations of these st¿ndards in curriculum and teaching p*"m"u. fi¡is diversiw is to be encouraged and is a welcome part of par: of äur Nation's educational heritage. But all assessments used as levels to reasonable be developed process must itã n"i¡otrA standards of validþand fairness.

Nqlionol Responsibilitie¡
There are four rcsponsibilitiesat the national level:

l)
2) 4)

Assuring quality of assessments Monitorir¡8 progress toward Goal 3 of the National Education
Goals

3)tndependentstudiesoftheimpactoftheassessmentsystem
Technical assistance, development, and research

A¡¡rrring OtlolilY of A¡stû¡metlr
national Assessments must be judged to be consistent wit'h the
standards and to meet crileria of validþ, reliability, and fairness. Wä¡àut *,ir quality assurance at a national level, we have no way of the ¿evefoping a truty national system' Au{!y st¿ndards for adopted and be developed will ã-"ãiói*ãrt and us" of assessments entiW. by a nationally authorized -aüilñ;.,dards for the developmelt and use of assessmentwill qualitv , u"ããlãiäpud and adopted bv a natlonal entiw' These Støttdøtdsfor tlrc from ,t"ñã"rAË*i[ -nl*A¡,rr*t be adapted ajappropriate

National ñesearch Assoclationl Rmerlcan Psychologlcal Assoclation, inclupe will also and 1986) Education, ¡n the Councll on Measuremãnt gt'udsn^t ártnrut"¿ tn the CríterÍa for Euotuatíøn' of Aísessmøú Sgsterns (Nattonal Forum on Assessment, 1991). Such

and, p i,elwtog¿càt TestìW (American Educatlonal

;Ëilä;;i;

Eaisíng Stan,clards for American Ed'ucotàon

j02

Di6ttibùted by

DttrEDRs

qualiW ståndards, incorporated in promulgated g;uidelines, should be helpful to states and local districts in the development of assessments. 'll'vro principal concems are to be addressed by this entity: standards of assessment validity and standards of assessment equity.

$iørlølañs qf Acecæmrlnt ValtdttA
Forassessments to be valid, they minima\y mustassess the deveþed content standards. The entitywill assure that the assessmentsproposedby states orgroups of statesare aligned with the national content standards. If triSh-stakes uses of assessment are desired, volunteering states will provide empirica{pvidence of the validity of theb assessments. Ttre entity will review the validity studies to determine if they provide reasonable evidence to support the adoption of such ttigh-sakes uses of assessment. firis ¡eview and recommendation is necessarybut not sr¡fllcient for hþh-stakes use of the ¡esults of the assessments. 1?re entþ wlll create guidelines and conduct studies to determine the comparability of assessments f¡om different states orgroups of states. At the outset, gu¡delines r¿'ill be promulgated and reviews will relate to tt¡e comparability of assessment design, forexample, in content quality, ehallenge to students, and content coverage. As available, empirical studies will be conducted to audit the operational comparability of assessments, standardÞation of administration, and to report publicþ on comparability for $ven standards.

Stat¿fuiù ql Aæ easme nt E qult Y
States will come fonr¡ard with their plans for assuring equity in assessment design, administration, and use for gender, for special

popùlations, disadvantaged students, and LEP students for reviewby

thisentity.
There are thret' principal concerns regardfuig equity in assessment of LEP and other student populations:
o

If students are not assessed because of the lack of instruments, they will failto beneflt from the presumed desirable effects of assessment (improved instruction, accountability, and argeting of ¡esouces).

o

IfLEP students are assessed in English on subjecü matters such as mathematics, their perfonnance will be handicapped to varying degees by their English skills. The problem is not easily resolved even by assessment through the native language because of the heterogeneity of students and instructional pro$ams for LEP studerrts. Special procedures will need to be developed !o take langu¡ge and culture into consideration forappropriate assessment. r All students must be provided opportunity to learn.

The entity will design in consultation with state and local educato¡s guidelineb for the collectlon of evidence on system and school õ"saclty lndicators, ntith speeiftc attention to equlty plotection. Declslons wlll be made related to the differentlal need for capaclty indlcators for dlfferent assessment purposes. States will provide such evidence as lt becomes avallable. When evidence of both capaclty tndlcators and validity st¿ndards la adequate' the enttty will support

Janua,tg 24, Ig92

,

,,Í 03

Distribúted by

ÐynEDRs

the use ofhigh-stakes assessment with secondary school students. is anticipated that the entity will conduct audit studies, visiting samples of schools, to verify the capacity and equity evidence provided by states.

It

Our assessment system must accbmmodate to the ngalities of state end local responsibility for education. The entity provides a technically responsible mechanism for assuring that the assessments are national, and are reasonable interpretåtions ofthe standards. Creativity and flexibility of assessments shoul{ be encouraged. Validity evidence for promising new assessments is not fully available and all agreethat such evidence must await the designand preliminary use of assessments of the national sandards. It is impossible to examine the validity, reliability, and fairness of assessments not as yet produced, but we must responsibly give notice that high standards of assessment will be expected. The national function of assuri¡rg the quality of assessments provides this notice. The entity will assist ståte or other entities and assist in the preparation of evidence on validity, rr{iability, faimess, and attention io the needs ofspeclal populations ofproposed assessments. Validity evidence will be provided forthe specific use to be made of the assessment in view of the populations assessed. Evidence on the quality of sysæm and school eapacity indicators will be needed for a nr¡mber of reasons: l)to assure quality and comparability of informatÍon; Z)to permit reasonable inferences about the óperation of the education system nationally; 3)to be used to avoid un¡ntended narrowirg of curricula; 4)to provide critieal information on opportunity to learn, treatment of special populaiions' and the avoidance of misuse of assessment before trigh'stakes assessment is recommended, Audit or verification through selected sehool visits is required so that: l)undue process information is not required of local districts and states;2)the guidelines for evidence do not inappropriately prescribe instrultíonalõr other school or system processes; 3)information is generatedto make the capacity assessment.more effective and õfficient; 4)special policy-relevant information can be obt¿ined for use by the enUiy, ttre Ståndaros Council, or Corgress' School visits will be made by teams of skrlled school practltioners' Tte lnembership of the entity wtll be primarily technical to ftt with theireharge. Experts in measurement, assessment, subject matter, learning, ðlassro-om processes, and speeial populations will comprise the entity.

ßattotrøle þr Aæccemcnt Qtlø,lttr Aseurwr.ce Fwrctfø,n

ffif#ft

Pmsltlr Towurd Gosl 3 of ilË

l'ldim¡

A critical natlonal responsibility ls monltoring proglress towarc the

National Education c-oats. Tt¡e most effective and efficient method of monltoring¡progress to$tard Goal S is the Natlonal Assessment of ndueattoriai Prõgress (NAEP). NAEP, wlth the oversi¡¡ht of the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), should continue in lts present role. Although development and reflnement ls necessary for

F-18

Raislttg Slandnrrls

tor Ameticau Ëdueallott'

Í 0'.i
Distri¡u¿ed by
ÐyiEDRS

NAEP to assess the content standards, NAEP is well designed for meeting this monitori4g function for the Nation and the states. A broadåased NAEP that provides comprehensive assessments of important subject matter areas is needed to provide independent information about our educational progress. NAEP has a critical role to play in meeting the national responsibility of monitoring p¡ogress. Rationale for an independent NAEP. The monitoring function of NAEP rnust be preserved and kept separate from the newly redesighed assessment process so as to remain a source of independent evidence on the progfess our Nation is making toward attainirg its Goals. Import¿ntly, as NAGB has recently noted, NAEP serves as ageneral check on the trends ofeducationa,ì progless, trends that may not bê available from any other source. NAGB must continue to $ve its full attentiotr to the development and improvement of N.AEP to meet sim! rneously the need for progress information and the need to adapt ar .. ,propriate to the national standards.

tndcpardont hroluolion of tln tnrpoct of ttn A¡¡ctarnat SysHn
The Asseærnent Task Force considers it essential that independent er¡aluations ofthe effects ofany national assessment system be conducted on a continuing basis. These evaluations should be the responslbility of one or more organizations that are independent of thole that ei6b[sh the national standards or develop or approve the assessments used in the national assessment system. As a check on the system, the evaluations should examine several different aspects of thå assessments. They may investigate independently the reliability and validity of the examinations for speelftc uses. They should evaluate the fairness of the examinations forvariousgtroups of students. ln addition, the evaluations should explore the impact of the assessnents on learningand the overall quality of the educational s'Ttem. These studies should have a national focus and have as p-rÍmary auctiences the public, congress, the secret¿ry of Education, i¡¿ nõ N*ional Educátion Goals Panel. Evaluations might determine if assessments have had positive impact on the opportunity of students, the quality of instruction, or the conf¡dence of the public in the quality of students'accomplishments. Studies may address neg;tive impact of assessment, on equity concerns' curriculum and te."t trU proctices, and on student opportunity to learn'

Tochniol A¡¡islûnco, Dadopnrcnt, qnd Rcsconh
Toassess the National Education Goals, we need "break-the-mold" assessments. If we don't have ühem, a nagging concern is that innonaUon will recede to the level of less creative assessme¡¡ts usecl. Wà wiU ne"O a bold and signiflcant program to develop new types of assessments and wish to involve talent from a variety of sources. SJUrtrntiut Federal financial support should be made available to st¿tes ancl local dlstricts, working in partnership with commercial Ùest prblirhorr, unlverslties and other educatlonal lnst,itutlons, to devclop new assersments that can futflll the vision of a positive assessment

role ln educatlonal reform. Anadditlonal natlonal function is to provide technical assistance to

Janu.arg l¿4, l$92

l,'-ß)

i.05 , ¡t
Disttibuted by
DydEDRS

states, local school districts, and their teachers to help them profit from the planned value of the assessment syst'em. Specifically, technicalassistance must be supported for the design' implementation, staff development, and reporting requirements for newassessmentS. Finally, a research program shouid be supported to help solve problemsin design, analysis, and interpretation of new âssessments. Areas requir¡¡rg rcsearch will include, among others, new approaches to compa¡ability, generalizability and fairness of assessments, adaptaiion ofassessments to special needs ofstudents, and issues of aggregation and reporthg. -ÁUãf tnese func{ions could be carried out by the United States

Department of Education.

Summcryon DosircbilitY
Validity, retiabiliw, and equity standards mustbe built in to any adopteci national system. Because we do not have the standards and process to assessments in front of us to review, we have to create a is desirable of assessment safeguård their quality. A volunAry system assures and of education control ifthõ system respects state and local assessments' of the fairness the va¡idity, reliabiüt'y, and

ßr,commendøtlotu,: ¡ Ttre N,{EP should be the mechanism on a matrix-sampled basis to

monitor our national proS¡ess toward the national standa¡ds. o A national examination system, or system of assessments, based substantially on assessments of the standards by individual st¿tes or gtoupJ óf råtes, is desirable u¡rder certain conditioris. Speciflcally' õuch'assessmenis should be used for instructional improvement purpóse* uotit evidence of their validity for high'st¿kes purposes is obtained.

I An independent quality assurance "entity" should be created to

.

review the validiw, reliability, and fairness of assessments ln the nã* tyrt.*. For hi¡h-stakei uses, volunteering states will ptovide evidence of theirown choice of the validity and fairness of the assessment fior the purpose intended. impact A long-term, independent study should be conducted of the quality edggltioJr, of the on assessment ãr-anínationat system of and educational eqdty in the United ,iu¿Ëttt

Sates. "..ompiishments,

Feosibility
Feasibillty of the assessment system hing¡es on enabllng condltions, incentlves, and costs'
a

variety of factors:

Enobllry Cond¡tiott3

Three enabli¡$ condltlons are reguired: the development of

Jtiî¿*åã, düJt*hnlual

of the tnfrsstructurc to support sueh assessments, lncludlng concerns

know.ho'w to develop such assessmcntsand

F-go

Rolslng Stonrlards tor Amerlcan Educollon

10d
Distribúted by
DynEDRs

practicality and lo$stics. The development of standards is essential so that early development of appropriate assessments can hgtn. The development ofcurricr¡lum is necessary so that assessments can be appropriateþ integ¡ated into the instructional sequence and so that "opportunity to learn indicators" can be developed and implemented. lVhether curricula or assessments need be developed Írst is a matter of contention and best lefr up to individual and groups of states to
decide. What is our technical knowledge base to develop valid new assessments? On the one hand, we carutot answer the question Iiterally until we séÞ the standards emerging from consensual subject matter processes. On the other hand, we have a robust and busy community developing and explori¡rg the properties of new assessments. Marry are using similar measures to focus leaming, to reform the curriculum, and to irnprove teaching right now. Because we have proposed a developmental process that will reduee the liketihood of premature use of such measures forhigh-stakes purposes, the feasibility ofthe system on teehnical grounds is reasonable, particularþ if recommendations are adopted to improve the development, research, and technical assistance bases. Lo$stical concems are many and inelude a wide range of topics, from making sure teachers understand how administration and scori¡rg techniques relate to instruction to classroom management techniques to allow valid assessment to occur. The practicality of early efforts will need to be examined objectively to avoid negative side effects of a newassesslnent system.

lncailivr¡
What incentives for participation in assessment development and implementation must be created? An obvious choice is to provide relief from cert¿in Federal and state testin!¡ requirements' Lo$cally, we can not imalline simply layering on more assessment to that which is already in place. For example, relief from existing testing requirements could come in the form of encoura$ng the substitution of ¡rew assessments of the standards, perhaps performance assessments or indicators of capacity, for current reqÚrements. These options would serve to free up staff and other resources for eruagement in the design of new assessments. "Break'the'mold" assessment development funds could provide a desirable jump'start to the process. Other options would allow commercial publishers of assessment to deduct their research and development costs to permit their investment in new assessment strate8[es. lüe sug¡lest that decisions about incentives should be an early agenda item for delibention by any successor group to the Council.

Coûb
The proposed system will require fiscal resources as wellas reallôcaiion of the time of teachers and others' By any rough estlmate the system will be expensive. Costs will depend upon frequency of asseisment tasks, whether scoring ls intemal or external to the school. Exami¡ratlons can cost $66 a student for externally

Jan.uarg 21, t992

i.0 ?
Ðistribvted by
DynEDRS

administered, mt¡ltiply scored efforts down to orrly a few dollars a student. we are estimatinggrossþ we have about 10 million children to be tested annually, if each student were individually measured. our cost estimates vary directly with the complexity of the effoft. sampling students could vastly reduce costs. Furthelmoret the cost of the operation of an entity with an audit or school funetion is considerable. Roggh estirnates, based on the Inspectorate system in Great, Brit¿in, suggest that costs per school visit range around

$25,000. Even if ðont¿ined by economies of sampling and scheduling, these costs a¡e massive. Furthermore, studies of national impact, technical assistance, and researeh and development require considerable resciurces. We would hope the "break-the-mold" assessments wor¡ld be funded at a level comparable to other rnajor elements of the education reform efrort. we are very mr¡ch in need of credible estimates to be even in the ball park and request that the cormcil to seek assistance frotn an entity such as the cong¡essional Budget ofhce or findings, lf available, from the office of Technologr AsseJsment study on testir¡g to assist in the accurate estimate of costs for the development and operation of the national and state components. But we can assure the Council it will take considerable resources to fulfrll the vision.

WhoPcysfrrlt?
State and local governments are not able to support new assessment costs at the same time state economies are in trouble. It is hard to justify cosæ of assessment as instructional resources constrict. Even if -partiãipanæ in this assessment system were $ven relief by the iteOerat and ståte governtnents from certain student testing requirements, the funds generated would be relatively small aæi¡t-st the need. But, we need to-find resources îor the support of desirable new assessments meeting the standards. suppon is essential,by the Federal Government for ihe development of "break-the-mold" assessments by states or Sroups of states to meet the national may be helpful, particularþ foundations standards. Thã private "uãþr in improving schools. But their with interests ancl businesses discretionary resources are increasíngly limited' We may aíso be naive at this time to believe that a complex development process such as we are proposing has to stårt on all child immediately. We may not be able to pay the full irãnt" ior "uery ¡itt tight now, änd we may want to pay as îe go' States may very well pick ftaue io size tireir efforts io the pocketbook available and they similarly, particular subject matters on which to concentrate. permit the to or districts ilghi io"ur aíte¡tion on parüicular localities environment' economic prõcess to 8o fon¡'ard in the cunent Similarly]it wou¡l be essential to obt¿in in written testimony opinions of .tat.t on the financialtrade-offs and their estimated costs tò meet quali$ assurance standards.

'

ßeeommendø,tton:
The Assessment Task Force believes it is feasible to develop a systenr to ur*ss nutional standards on tech¡úcalgrounds if we adherc to the ¿""ãi"p*"ntrl prlnciples under$tg the proposed clesign partlcularly

Rr¿isi tt0 lllnndnrds J'ot Amerieøt¿ Educ¡alion

i0tt
Distributed by
DynEDRs

the use of differentiated assessrnents for different purposes. The feasibility of system costs will depend upon what resources are made available by the Federal Government to initiate aryl sustain the process. The Councíl may wish to consider cost sensitive and resource leveraging schedules to encourage some activity to be$n immediately.

lmplementotion
We propose t¿ki¡rg our lead ftom the business community and to adopt an implementation strategy that rests on the idea of iapid

prototlping

getting something, even something modes[, into tri¿ls to improve cur early, and adopting a test-and-fix approach assessments as we go. Critical to this overall stl ategy are three points: coordinating development in a few priority areas, for example mathematics, reading, and uniting, for fourth grade; enccuraging different strate$es and approaches; and reporting descriptive information as early as possible to the public, parents, policymakers, educators, and students.

-

-

Fíret Stepe ßecommen&d to the Coutætl: . Encourage the developmentand trial of assessments

of the NCTM standards. r Make governance decisions, and seek authorization and funding for the National QualiW Assurance function. o Encourage the f'tnding ofresearch projects and new "break-the-

mold" assessments.

¡ Move toward encouraging the relief of certain existi¡rg Federal and
state testin€lrequirements for participants in the national standards process.

lssues
There arose in the Task Force discussions a number of issues that we wish to abknowledge briefly and bring to the Council's attention. They are not integrated into the body of the desirability and feasibility discussion because they may be regarded as beyond our charge. But we believe their considerationwill ultimately impact the quality of any implemented assessment system. One major concem is the narrow focus on the five subject matters identilied in the legislation' We are aware that the Goal 3 language is broader, and that the report in Education, counts of the special indicators panel also recommettds a broad based consideration of outcomes. Particularly of interest are outcomes that integrate across learning disciplines and that focus on skills that underlie many different kincls of performances. Attitudes, dispositions, and engagement are also important. One obvious area

that ls missing from our explicit consideration, although ntenlloned repeatedly h our rliscussion, is how to deal with the recommendations of the Department of Labor's comnission on workforce skills (Secretary's Commission on Actrleving Necessaty Skills (SCANS)).

Janunrg :¿4, 1992
'..,

þ'.!r9

i09
tti
,

Distributed Ity

ÐttÐEDRS

Expanding the foci for assesstnent ¡s valuable because it provides choieãs to students of the areas in which they wish to focus' For instance, in many European eountries students may choose among a vaúety oi areas, including the arts, foreign languages' and somewhat more þractical freldu. Notwtnst¿nding the cost constraints described auove, we believe that a system that provides opportunity for students to emphasize at least in part their special talents and goals is the sort of sysiem we should strive for. Clearly, this is o pnbr matter for the consideration of the group charged with content standards' Discussions among ¡¡retask Force members also dealt with governance ¡5suss;,tvho funds, manages' and jnsulates the quality ãssur¿nce functions described. Different positions were strong¡y held, and we believe there are a range of arguments to be made on their

behalf. Apersistent concern \Pas' of course, that even ourminimalist systém would be too costly or complex, and that the outcome and trigh-sakes features of the systemwould dominate the process. we beì-tieve that sÞìndards of validity, reliability and fairness,'as well as concerns for special populations will not be served without the minimum cornponents that we have proposed'

Summory
we recommend to
ühe council thaL they support the desirability of a national standards as proposed' This system the systÊm to assess putpores of assessment, supports responsibility for design, uäpar"t""

development, implementation ¿nd Pub,lic reporting of assessments at tne st¿'te anOiocát level, and provides for a set of essential national functions. State roles in[his assessment system assure thaü will be appropriate traditions for the local responsibllity for education observed.

Amajornationalfunctionisqualityassuranceoftheassessments. q""titv"ir assured in terms of adherenee to the national stanclards,

tn¿ u"li¿ity of assessments used for various purposes and student group.. Þarticr¡larty importånt are the indicators of opportunjty to -

Ë"rö

provisioni for special populations, æ¡d the avoidance of the misuse ôfassessrnents. School visits to veriff capaciüy evidence

iq"ii'

will be conducted on a sampling basis in t,he sewice of improving the pro.err. The quality assurance-function would also be responsible for by the äeveloping reports on the comparability of measures developed groups ståbes' of or individual various Another critical nationá funetion is the continuation of the ináãpenáent role of NAEP as a mechanism to monitor national eonsensus exists to preserue the ñflñ, þward goals. strong provision of trend information as it moves the and ãrãõ¡ifitv oiNlÈp st¿ndards' the national of assessment toward effects of Similsrly it is an essential national function to evaluate the we provide immediately that ttris propo;ed system, our requirements
and impfemånt tolg-term studies äf impact on the edueation system system' assessment designed newly of any students onbur ls proposed to provide of "Ur."t-tt A "-mold',ãssessments

ilg**

F-24

Eaisittg lit and.artls for Att'e ri

ea

¡t lldttcøt i¡ttt

i,rJ

additional momentum to the system plan in order to improve its chances ofsuccess. Finally, prograrË to provide needed technical assistance and continued research ¿o address emergingltechnical problems should be supported. ÎteTask Force considered feasibility and believes that thesystem is feasible technically if developmental and validity principles are upheld inthe qualiry assurance process. The Council needs reliable cost figures for the development and operation of the assessment system. Particularly, early steps u¡ere suggested to 8et this system launched immediatelY.
n

January 24, I99f)

i-l ¡

F-25

Aooendix G

Reportofthe
Irrqúemerüation TlaskFbrce

tTt Ih"

N"rionul Council on Education Standards urd TestinS was established to provide advice regarding the desirability and feasibility
of national stanclards, a national examination system' and related issues. Underlyingthe interest in ståndards and assessment is deep

coneem arising from persistent evidence that the acadenìic prowess of American students is seriously defrcient. This deficiency touches all student groups regardless of income, race, lal4¡uage, gender, or disabitþ. Thus, Congress is interested in high standards and rich assessment strategies for all students. At the same time, a number of questions posed by the Congress to the Council conceming "wide variations in resources åvailable to school systems," the special challenge of success posed by "eeonomically disadvantaged chilclren, handicapped children, and children with limitecl English proftciency"' the use of national examinalions "for unintendecl purposes (such as sorting and tracking of students)," and "whether'.. it is feasible'.' to challenge all children to do their best without penalizing those of Iesser eãucational opportunity" make it ctear that equiùy is a central issue to the Congress, The Task Force shares that equity concem' Neither the Congress nor the Council is interested in simply creating hi¡¡her standards and new tests so that the Nation can know one more tirp,e that our studenls perform poorly. Sþnilicant lmprovement in performance by all students, including those çilh whom we historiõaly fail, is the obJectlve. The Council is clear that
Tl¿e vir'¿t,,s <'¡,;preissetl

this

Ta.sk

itt tltis appendi.t rcport retleet the uvrk Foice and are not necessarily lhose oJlhe Coane'il.

oJ'

Jun tturtt :t4,

t992
er i', ¿I¡.,

G'l

simply creati¡rghigþerstandards and newtests will not result in signiñcantimprovement. Ttre Implementation Task Force was created Uy the Council to offer advice to the Council as to what must be done tó ensure that most students are able to demonstrate on the rich new :'ssessment strategiesthey know and can dowhatthe newhigher standards will caü for. Absent leadership in helpinS students achie?e, the st¿ndards and assessments, as the standardsTask Force has said,

wil

Our report?, therefore, is based on the following assumptions: (l)all students-ca¡r leam at significantþ higher levels; (2)academic achievement must increase dramatically Ín Er¡glish, mathematics, science, history, and geogrnphy if the Nation is to maintain its economic strengt'h and democratic institutions; (3)increases in achievement must be demonstrated byyoungsters with whom we as well the poor, disabled, and language minority historically fail as with students with tvhom we have been relatively more successful; (4)marginal changes in schools ofthe reform eharacter practiced for thá paslAeca¿e will continue to yield medioere results with virtually ail sludents; (5)there are many reports of potentially promising practices, Uui tiiere is little knowledge about how to be successful with stuC ¡nts on a large scale; (6)we should rethink how present firnds are bei¡rg invested in education and not hesitate to incorporate more cost effeõtive practices when appropriate; and (?)subståntial additional resources will be necessary, but "more of the same" is not enough. Any increased spending must purchase measurably productive chenge. These assumpiions lead us to the conclusion that only deep and systemic charrgê wil have the power to alter school, district, state, an¿ community behavior sufhciently for virtually all students to meet the new standards the Nation requires. The depth and breadth of necessary change will involve a number of integpted parts' The integrated and ðomprehensive character ofwhatwe propose cannot Ue oieremptrasized. The piecemeal, project'oriented, narrowly focused mèntåþty that has affeeted much of the largely failed reform measures to date must $ve way to broader strategies that are tonnecteA vertically (sõhool, district, state, Nation) and horizontally o¡ the iøtt in a s"t ool, diétrict, state, Nation). The Congress called and standards national of desirability the òouncil to determine assessments. National standards and assessments are not desirable wÍthout conrprehensive initiatives such as those suggested below. High st¿ndards and assessment stfategies rich eno4h to measure points' the e-xtent to which students have met them are our reference gv high standards, we have in mind the knowledge, understanding' an¿ a-pptication of complex facts andproeesses; the ability to infer, and deduce ideas and reach conclusions; the capacity

be acruelhoax.

-

-

"on.éii,",

'" lir;rit í^;o,;-twtt lrom the N'on that ldentifled lmplement

e"'h*ïffi åïd,i[: t'.]tf,ffå{f ,ll""*

r;at"gg:H'#in$*Hi1eg,'¿$u,x::$*[rüH"'tr;ifåü"ll's'"nnn", ãffõrt" uri{eþy ac-ross the country a¡d thoushts
öör;îrîdËffiñä"ñd;i;i8ümi¿
Roundtsble,
qf a ;b"üí iù;ii;irì¡;tõr" ttrat r,ñä'ü äãüü*Ëll snd ( 8) Tnö Essenxdt conporcnts î,;ä;;iñrt-Èrä/j;ü";;5úüøoi, w¡icä ts the Éubllopôllcv asende of rhe Buslness

C-g

Raísing Slonúatds f,or An'erícdn Educalàon

113
Djstri¡uted by
DyDEDRS

to commr¡nicate effectively; and the skill to work productively with others. We believe such knowledge and capacity to perform willbe reflected in the full ra¡rge of disciplines embodied in the humanities, mathematics, and sciences. Rich assessment strategies are those that can measure the type of standards refleeted in those examples. Tlrcy will likely include portfolios, projects, and performance-based strate$es. Some will involve individuals demonstrati¡tg competence at a particular point in time. Others mayinvolve activities performed by groups of students over a period of time. We have paused to describe t the character of standards and assessment that governed our thinldng to make the point thåt $'e believe it is those kinds of standards and assessment that are desirable if sehools, districts, states and the Nation provide the support that will enable students to meet the standards. Ttre equitable implementation of high standards and rich assessment strate$es depends on well-prepared teachers and administrators, equipped with propertools. The tools include curriculum resources, instructional approaches, and technologies that will enable children of diverse bacþrounds and interests to achieve the national standards. Teachers and administrators need the support of govemance systems thatare eflicientând helpful, not top-hearry anrt inhibiting. Ttrey must be provided strong support from the non' school comrnunity. They must function within a slatem that places a premium on student outcomes and professional practice. Since students spend far more of their lives out of school than inside, aehievement of standards will depend on buildingof commu¡úties of and for children and parents that support the health and well-being of you¡rgsters thatare a preeondition of leamin¡¡. lVe wilt, therefore, discuss implementation withitt eight broad categories:

r Curriculum resources and instruetional strategiies r lncentives r Governance system
o o o

StaffcapaciW
Support.systems for students and their families

Technology

o Public understandir¡8 and support

¡ Equity

Cuniculum Resources ond lnslruclioncl Sholegies
Curriculum resources and instn¡etional strate$es need not (indeed' should not) be separate from assessment as routinely as is presently the case. The lines bet$,een instruction and ar¡sessment must be bluned both from the curriculum and the assessment perspective. We advocate assessment strate$es that will make "teactring to the test" desirable. It should also be noted that for curriculum and lnstructional strate$es to rnake sense to teachers, the teachers must be engaged in both de.veloping currlculum frameworks and ln identlfyittg the characteristlcs thåt dlstlnguish resources and strategies llkely to help

Januatv 24, t992

{¡ il.I
I i ,-

Disttibùted by

DynEDRs

students achieve the national standards from those that will not. While we address the development of stsffcapacity below, $/e note here ihat opportunity for teachers to work r,r'ith and develop cuniculuraon site will play a very important role in a staff having the abiliry to teaeh effectivelY. T;1¡L defutition of national st¿ndards must include the crafting of state curriculum f¡arneworks. Such frameworks u'ill make clear that we mustabandonthe minimum ski': orientation, the emphasis on coversge not depth of understand;.ng, and the premiurn that is often phcedãn students knowing isolated facts. Instead, the cu¡riculum i'rameworks will be discipline-based, oriented towa¡d thinking' understanding, problen¡-solving, and knowledge integration with connections to the real world. such frameworks should provide pararneters, not prescriptions, for practice. It is necessary to provide l,he school sþff with acCess to the tools of teaching and learning, i'he good curriculum resources, and the capacity to identis or develop instruetion strategies, includir¡g interactive technologies' For curriculum materials and strate$es to be outstanding, they must be linked to the ståndards and assessment strategies on which if," Co*.il is focused. A process must be put in motion to develop characteristics of curriculum resoutrces and instructional strategies lili"fv i" t àp aU students achieve the national standards, without it . *rritit g it ã one-size-fits-alt mentaliry. Examples might include: (a)ttrà ¿epitr of üre material; (b)the richness of recommended class (c)how muclremphasis is placed on student dialogue' rüe believe this process should also "iã*ii"r;and cooperative leannin8, and $,riting. appropriate authority actually an having inclrude the next step of instructional resources against other and material review curriculum cor¡ld be the qtåt9 or' authority appropriate The iñ" ãf,"*.t"ristics. cities, workingwith professional ;;;ñ;;;;nsortium of ðtaþs and i"J[itrãipUn"-based associations from which the standards and stratûgies may emerge. It is important that this review "rr"rr*unt ptã"ã5-¡" tig*"u-s. Absent special attention to rigor, it would likely in an iesutt in the lãwest common ãenominator of curriculum material process for A sales. increase and controversy effort to minimize ã.i"*ãitgã *.*inglful "Gooã Housekeeping Seal" to assist in.the. and adoption of good practiee wodd then be "ãi*t"tliOentiticatlion páttiUiã. f" avoid the image that good practices are readily u"ry ãiff"rent context$, the "seal" process^could iransportable ""ro* by careiully documented reports of practices that t" "õão*p"ni"d were apparently successfut (or problematic) in speciÍrc settings.

lncenlives
strate8y is A key component of any outcome-driven-systemic change staff in the performance of the to attached b. that consequen"u, muõt students' performance of the district level and to the räñãálr motivating in role "t "",i important play extremely an r".tors lnirinri* ,," dône'i or the satlsfaetlon of helping a ;;õt": Th¿ ;n*" of ¡ob we[goals or another student to turn hls life student achieve ex¡aoidlnary most educators to teach in lead that offactois types the

"ióuná "r"

G4RaisingStat¿dørrlsJorAn¿erícan'Educaliotl

1,15
Distribvted by
DyaEDRs

the first place. Moreover, good working conditions, district and community support, and acknowledgment of good effort are aiso significant. But it is clear that extrinsic factors also play a role in staff and students alike. shaping how and how hard people work While incentives, positive and negative, are not sufficient to move the system high standards, rich assessment, changes in governance, professional development, health and social seryice support, technologr, and more time for teachers and at least some students are also necessary incentives are an essential component.

-

-

-

Stotr

d

School¡ ond D¡¡tricts

In designing a strohg incentive system for schools or school .listricts, there are a number of principles we believe deserve consideralion. Ineentives need to be tied directly to ach¡evement of high standards related to bo[ir student outcomes and professional practice. We contrast this with the lvidespread present practice ofencouraging focus almost exclusively on inputs (filling out forms) and low-level

skills (minimum competency tests). Incentives for school and district staff need to be powerful enough to rivet staff attention on the aehievement of the high standards. Incentives should place a premium on doing better with students with whom we presently do the poorest job as well as those with whom we do the best. It is very important that we have learnin$ environments in which all students dramatically move up the achievement continuum from where they presently are. We contrast this with present incentive systems, for example, that encourage experienced teaehers to work with the least challer\ging students or lead to "pushing out" the most challenging students or to encourage the absence ofthe poorest students on days assessment is to occur or to retain in grade the most difficult youngsters. Incentives should be designed to reward value added by a school over a defined period of time. We contrast this with focusing on interschool comparisons, which tend to measure demographic characteristics more than the difference a school is making irt the achievement of students. Incentive systems should be designed so that students are not harmed. For example, if penalties are a part of the incentive system, financial penalties or even dismissal for persistently failitg staff, at the district and school level may be appropriate but not the withdrawal of funds for the school program itself. Indeed, it may be appropriate for such sehools to have more progßm funds, not less. There should be a spec[rum of incentives. The posiLive end shoulcl include such things as financial rewards for staff at both the district and school levels, opportunities to participate in special professional development, and recognition programs. Schools experiencing difficuþ should be assisted through technical assistance' extra professional development and special fundinS. Staff i¡r schools and school dlstricts persistently failing could face penalties including public diselosure, loss of stuclents, staff financial loss, dismissal of staff and school reorganization. There is no one best way to design an incentive system. Moreover, a single approach wtll llkely not work forever. Incentives are sltuatlonal

Jnuuaru 94, lll92

¡.-L.u

J1¿s.

Distribvted by

DyøEDRS

and can be tricky to implement without causingunintended results.

These words of eaution are intended to encourage thoughtfulness and sophistication in the design of the system, recognizing that anoversimplistic or crude system rooted in a pünishment locus would be

counterproductive.

Student¡
There are a n¡¡mber of considerations related to providing incentives forstudents to work harder. They inelude:
o

At the present time' except for those apply'urg to the mour compeiitio" four-yçar colleges in the United States, most highschobl graduates are adrnitted to the college of their choice. Thus, most stutlents knowthere is not much "pay off'related to higher education for outstanding performance. systems of collaboration with post secondary education instltutions of all kinds should be Oesigned to make clear to students that elementary/secondary perfõrmance infÌuences post-secondary education opportunities.

o Quality altemaüives to college for the "forgotten half," such as

strong entrysÏills' æprenticesrup prograrns, which also rgguile business and labor with the partnership tùä¿ to Ue ¿"u"topãd in communities. o systems of collaboration with employers should be designed to performance make clear to students that elementary/secondary

innu"n

hiringl decisions' In desiÉning the systerns' special care tó prevent such standards from being used in a must fashion that wordã result in undesirable behavior such as racial taken be "t

discrimination.
o A variety

trainingieducation opportunities that encourage ha,id work by ,ru¿unîr should be considered. They could, of couJse, include be traditional factors such as grades. !n addition, students could choiee of proiects' opportunities, learning gt*t.r of choice Si;ã^ working in groups, etc. . High stakes for students should follow high stskes for schools. If we Ëil. high ;t ndanis, rigorously maintained, we must g,ive schools time to learn to succ'eeã øth increasing proportions of students school,wide before we penalize individual students. othenrise' ,iuã"ntr *iff again bear the full bnrnt of the system's failure.

ofincentives short ofjobs and post-secondary

crovernonce syslem
all We believe the systemic change that is necessary to have

ñúj;" "t"l"il":n"t

new roles and govern these new ips for the participants. Principleslhat following' the toiãt uo¿ relattonships should include

;.hdve

the new tùgh

sþ1{r{s wi¡ involve

r ln the exercise of power, authority and responsibility should

be held performance ls moved in paraffel If rnore responsibillty ior student down the bureaucfad¿ pipeline, ¡nore authotity and the resources

Rolslng Slænddtds lot Åme rùcot¿ blducallott'

117
Djst¡jàuted by
DyîEDRS

associated with that authority should follow or vice versa. Power and authority should be exercised as close to the individual student as is

consistent with effective accountability. r Each level of government, should examine its standards and regulations in order to remove any that are or âre perceived to be an impediment to appropriate decisions at lower levels. o Legislative bodies (ineluding Congress, state legislatures, state boards of education, municipal legislative bodies and school boards) and non-educator executives (including the President, governors, and mayors) should be decisively involved in goal and eurriculum standards determination (outcome definition), policy decisions related to the natu¡Þ of assessments, a determination of consequences to be att¿ched to student outcome performance, and the provision ofadequate and equitably distributed resources. Education management and school-based personnel should then be $ven the freedom to get the job done within a period of time that
has been agreed upon.
o

Each level of government should address the adequacy and equitable distribution of resources in levels below it to ensure at least equity of opportunity of all students to reach the hþh st¿ndards we envision. For the federal government, for example, that nresns aitention to initiatives such a ESEA Chapter I, Head Start, and Education forthe Handicapped Act. For ståtes and districts, this principle includes elimination of the present widespread fiscal inadequacy and inequity between districts and, within districts, between schools.

o

The governance structur€ should be a funetion of what works. Radically different modets of governanee are possible in the public sector. For example, charter schoots; charter districts operated within a public utility concepL school-based shared decisionmakin$ boa¡ds of children and families that collapse distinctions among education, health, and social service agencies; and ehildren's welfare boards are among govemance proposals that have been made in the hope of contributing to hi8her achievement of studenæ'

Sftrff CopociÌy
Ttis area is extmordinarily irmportant. We are asking schools to accomplish levels of achievement that have never been accomplished. We are asking that the diversity of students achieving at those high levels be broader than ever before. The nature of the expected thinking, problem solving' learning for ühe mqiority of students is different. The nature integratlon of knowledge, worklng in teams of assessmetrtwill be dlfferent, The locus of decision'maki¡tgwill be different. PedagoÉV, with Ereater reliance on strategies such as dialogue, wr{ting, and community based experiences' will be different. The tools of teactring, and leat .rrg technoloty will be dlfferent. ln short, a radlcally dtfferent klnd of teaclrin¡¡ wlll be requlred of most teachers.lo do what must be done wlll require tlrne for st¿ff and exceptionalþ hard lntellectual work. Wlth char¡les so wide and deep,

-

-

Jonuor! 24,

1992

Il{j

Distribvted by

DynEDRs

the professional development of staffis central. The radically different behavior on many fronts will not occur by passing a law or issuing direetives. Mdoich¿nges will be required both before and after the eo¡rtmeneement of service as teachers and administrators' PrræSerríce Prcfu ¡i<¡ml 0aæloPnnt Pre-sen¡ice education should be linked to the national st¿ndards and prepare teachers with the knowledge and skills to help diverse rtuå*tr to achieve the starrdards. But this is difficult. Pre'seruice teacher edueation has undergone little change over the years. Present traininn in neither content nor in pedagogl is adequate. As teachers come iñto the profes$lon, they require abroad and deep knowledge of their subject matter. This poses a particularly strong challenge to and seiencès since it is there and not in colleges of .o1"ær äf "rtr eduõtion where côntent is most often addressed. This, for example, may require, for elementary teachers especially, ¿ concentnation in mait/rcience or humanities instead of the once-over-light¡!, approach io"u"t¡rtt ing. \¡/hile r¡ltimate teaching competence will be honed in po"tiãä, rCrõog pedagogcal pre-sen'ice education is also importånt. lf ive are tó ct¡anSe from a-model of teacher as the worker and deliverer tn" $udents as passive receptacle to a model of òf knowfeOse teacher as ãoach and facilitator and student as worker, iL will require very different pre-serice preparation' Iiwe are to it"u" sígnihcantly bott'er teachers entering the profession, it will ükely involve strateglies such as a rigorous attd äarefulty devetoped párformance-based asse$cment for entry level standards teachers based on standards directly linked to the national a through teaching enter they whether ioi,tu¿unæ. All teachers, high meet to be expected should route, or altemate traditional change standards orsubject m8[ter knowledgeand peda8ogical skill. bodies accreditiru unless be impeded in pre_service prãparation will National as the such institutions progrulll siandarcl-setting council-forthe Aecreditation of Teaeher Education and the National Ã*"o.i"tion of Ståte Directors olTeacher Education change lheir standards lo coordin¿te with the new national stucënt standards' màfi r:tr"¿rrds need to be made consistent with the teachittg developed by trre National Board for Professioltal

ttn

;r"ããb.ing
ln'Srnfrr

Teachiru Stardards (NBPTS).

Humon RocorÍtc¡ DüËhpñtcnt

to funclion Most of the teachers presently teaching were not trainetl in schools taugl¡t not have They with the new n.,*ur*ry "upuõities. wheresuchbehaviorisextriuite¿.Theyhavenothadrolemodelscf to-have such teaching to emulate' There is no reason to expect most standards. the new meet students all it ã."puciti"ã required to have a lon8 Most of the present teachers will be in the teachinS force for tlevelopment resources humg¡ in-service li*". rr,ur,ä far-reaching iñüi"ti". iiviUt if we wañt students to achieve the new stantlarcls' We underscore the following prlnciples:

I

specifically in Effective professional development mt¡sÙ be defîned or be ¡rblc to tto to know need students what to *iæion"rr:ip

Gafi¿isdlr0$tolrdardslotzl¿¿r,r.ictrnl)duc<ttitlil

1i¡l

(national standards). lt needs to be sustained, intense, and targeted on both discipline-based and pedagogical content an<i on instructional tools such as technologl related to the teacher's job. ln the private sector, when new corporate goals, products, or technologiesare introduced, companies organÞe the time of workers so needed re-education and training can be pursued as part, of the rvorker's regular work responsibilities, whether the additional training occurs on-site or off-site. Similarly, when changes in teachers' responsibilities occur beeause ofnew educational goals, new forrns of evaluation, new kinds of students, new curricula, or newtechnolo$es, professional development must be offered in the context of the teachgr's job, not as an "add-on" on weekends or after school.

r The best professional development will be done in school as, for
example, teachers work on curriculum development, create assessment tasks, and learn from their peers. Such activities should be undert¿ken purposefully as a structured effort to enhance professional capacity. As a corollary to such site-based work, new models of human resources development such as teaching academies or other professional development school models should be encorrraged.

Determiningwhat standards define what experienced teachers shot¡ld know and be able to do and developing the ¿ssess¡nent strate$es that
permit us to knoiv leachers have met the standards are im¡rortant corollaries to setting student standards and assessment. The NBPTS has embarked on that critical and ambitious effofl' related to experienced teachers and deserves strong support at all levels of government.'lheir work, of course, can also inform starulard-settitrg
of new teachers recommended above and stB¡ldard-setting f<¡r

students. The traininS and nurture of superintettdents, principals, atrl others in leadership positions is important since they play such att intportant role in creatingthe elimate within which leaming takes place (or doesn't), Thus, rve need to focus o¡t high'performance nìanagement qualities such as sharing power, focusing on the rvell-being of the stuclent, being aware of community/coltsumer needs, opening litres of communieation with staff and parents, and develop¡n$ stron8 ties to other public and private non-profit support groups. Two f¡nal comments related to staff capacity ntusl, be n¡arle. First ' it is clear that we must have higher cntrance standar<ls ittto teaching. Standards for staying in rnust also be more rigorous. ln short, it will bt' tougher to become and remailt a teacher in a systenl com¡nitted to high student achievement. Doin¡g the job will also be mt¡ch diffc'rettl. ancl ntaybe even harder. work, As a collsequetlce, fitndamental ehanges in compeltsation systcn$, work orgitttiintiotts, antl i¡t *'orl:itt¡¡ conditions are required if we hope to attrãct attd hold sttffît'ienl quantities of the quality of people we ìvatlt teachi¡U anrl aclministeriryl, Secottcl, the issues of aclequacy and eqrritable clistribt¡tiott of
resot¡r(,(,s are ¡urtit.ularly itttport.ant i¡t rt-lationshi¡r to stttff ctr¡rttt'ity,

Adrlitional tinre nrust bt providecl if professiotral clcveloptttt'ttl is to lx'

J(nuttrf 14, l!r!)t

I ;ì i) ¡

G-9

Distribvted by

DydEDRS

part of, not an âdd-on to' the teacher's job' Thaú costs money' ln the äismcæ in which low income, limited-English speaking, and disabled students are disproportionately concentrated, the resourees issue as

itrelatestohighst¿ndardsforteachersandadministrators,

compensåtion, work org¿nization, and working conditions is particrf arly critical.

Support Systems for Srudents qnd lheir Fqmilies
grade, but Education does ¡ibt start in kindergarten or at the nr$ teachers. or only f¡rst student's a not much earlier. Educators ale p"runtt and others in ¡he community fîll those roles' Hungry' ;rrt uj¡hy, *d homeless children are not going to learn to think . ;;ú; problerns, or othe¡'ruise meet the high standards the Coi¡r;ilïÀ in min¿. It has been estimated that more than 90% of a that student's life occurs ouæide the school. such facts make it clear rcsources adequate and initiatives, courageous strong leadership, áüã.1"¿ tot""rdìhe weÈbeing of students outside the schoolhouse inside doorare neeesssry to achieve the ståndards to which we aspire which action general in areas three at least the schoolhouse. Ttrcre 8re

;ñ"li;',

is importånt.

Porrnl¡ crd Oû.r Studüt Adrrcco¡¡
is the Every child requires an advocate' The advocate ofchoice and school: home between connections key several áre p"runt. There o Parents should support the high expectations reflected in

the

,iglrou,,t"ndardi ",,e anticipãte for theirchildren and create the premium placed on. ãolvironment at home that démonstrates the games' television' video education (e'g', control distractions such as

;d;ãñ;

ìeaäio ûre child;do personat reading; and insist on school

attendance).
o Schools should appropriately integrate parents and other resources the eãucarion prog¡anl itse¡f, not simply use

in rh" "o**unitiintó the edges in busY work' them around

.Parenteducationisimportant.Thisincludeshelpingyounsparents

sÙrengtheningthe know how to parent. tfalso can mean the school toward helping is directed of this ä"u¿"*i. skiils of the parenr. All the parent helP the children'

oSchoolsshouldcommunicatewithparents'beresponsivetothem' ãn;ìnloiu* und work with them to ensure rhe child's suceess.

r ManV, and increasing numbers

of, chìldren clo not have a funetionin$ An alternative must be found in support' símilar of tource can help strergthen the those circumstances. on the äne hand' we Still. when there iam¡ly an¿ the parent's role in the child's education'

p*"ïïìt

isnotaneffectivep","nt,thatmustnotbecomethesehool'sexcuse

categories' One for failure. mere are ai téa$ two getteric-alternative one verslon context, this guidance. ln home-based call ir of extra meãsure ii ro, ar of the staff ir, a school to undertake some approach other The an¿ .onrutn fo, indlvidual children'

"t.t.o*"

over*i8ht

GIO

Ruìs

g .fil a rt tl n r<l s la t l.^ì4
ì
rt

À ¡n p r

ìc

tt ¡t E tl tt c tt t i o tt

Lti I

(not mutually exclusive) is to assure the support of a trained community-based role model (a mentor, big brother, big sister, etc.) for everyyoungster needing one.

Eorly Ch¡ldhood Educot¡on
The evidence is very strorg that,a quality, developmentally appropriate pre-kindergarten program for disadvan[aged students reduees signifìcantly many of the problems associated rvith poverty. It contributes, therefore, to the degree to which low-incomeyoungsters ultimately may achieve at high levels. lVe give emphasis to the importance of the pfogram's quality and developmental ap¡rropriateness. Since such programs âre less expensive and more effective for children than waiting to provide remediation to them when they are older, at least every disadvanLaged student should have the opportun¡ty of participation. In order to assure the opportunity for all, it may be $/ise to consider providing for all and rnaking it free for low ineome students. Such an approach would avoid the effort being perceived as a poverty program. It could also contribute to racial and economic integration. It is also clear that such earþ childhood programs are most effective when continuing support for the students is provided through elementary school to prevent backsliding,

lhohh ond

Soc¡ol

S.n ice¡

Students whose most element"l rþslfer, food, and nurturing needs are not met are not going to perform at the minimum cÐmpetency level consistently, much less demonstrate they meet world-class academic st¿ndards. The health and social service systems must be restructured to better meet the needs ofthe poor and the working poor. The coverage of demonstrably effective prog¡a¡ns such as prenatal care; Women, Infants, an<i Children; Early Periodic Screening and Diagnostic Treatment; and the school breakfast anrl lunch programs must be expanded to cover all children ln need. We recognize that most of the effort necessary to provide health and social service support t"o children and their families will not be provided by the edueation system. l{owever, we inelude it as part of the necessary systems change in our report since it is clear thal we will not achieve hith national ståndards with a large proportion of American children, absent change in the other systems. Indeed it may be necessary at all levels ofgovenrment' to restructure the health and social service systems by crrployin$ the same principles we are suggesting for education; for example, identiff appropriate outcomes (standards) for whlch the system will be accountable, develop any necessary assessmenù strate$es, associate consequences for staff with the achievelrtent of outcomes, provide the type of necessary training including cross-system traini¡rg, alter govemanee and linancing formulae to at least encourage if not force service integration, and provide resources such as aCequate health insurance so that all chlldren and families are covered.

Januot¡1

2 4,

t99e

I n¡r ItJÉ,

GlI

Technology
Amuçhgteateruseoftechnologywlllbevitattoourgoalofhavingall students-achieve the new high st¿ndards iil at least three ways.
o

Technology can enhance instruction when teachers use it as a tool. promote It permitsãtudents to stnrcture complicated efforæ. It can Since teams. workinÍlin and of learning Uoïn me in¿ividualization arises û'om "doing it when best occurs leamiqg *o.n high.r level tàtñù" and since viãeo and cornputer technologies can depict *oloi t¡*úate rpal life, there is muc\greater opportunity fo¡ authentic learnin8. Mr¡ltiple technolo$es pennit access to many

ü

moredimeruionsofexperiencearisingfromhistoryorscienceor

" is importånt. In addition' instruction-related n"Uon"i tt"ndards asrà;ment strateges rnay be powerfulty enhanced by technologl. o Technology enhances access in severat ways' One is through (student to ¿iraîãu rä"*ing. students can connect to one another and to sources connect Students-c¿r¡ country). student, country to (data interactive bases' unarrailable ott¡erwiie oî f."o"'tedge iãuãr can iounes leO Uy scñobrs, educatlonal television, etc') Technology a privileged only to nowavailable ú"gã J"tyteacher,*"ortut video and audio technolo$es, for example' allow
in:waystiràt

existence halfway around the globe. A resource-rich environment cante provided in any schoot an¡nilhere through technology. In this .ãnæ*i tt ¿"u"topment of software powerfully aligned to the.

fe*.-fwo-*ay r,ighoeaucationfacr¡ltyandelementary/secondaryfacrrltytoconf.er to can facilitaie trâining, use of resources' and access
and in wavs research. The more teachers learn from one another more powerful the classroorn' and school ãl".if'."*.eted ¡o-;ñt Teclurology can help make that happen' - f.îttting "xperience. access relates to disabled youngslers. on ¡r,oit"" õers'pective (providing some technologies make rela[ively esoteric contributlons helpful other synthesizer); voice a ã rpL"tttf"$.ñta uuoi." with ühe learning processing for work (off-the-shelf is routine

n

iu"ïu,oiogv

disabled child).
o

It can schedule our TechnoloEy is also important in managing fata' help teachers help to dat¿ student organize buses. lt can collect ai¿ perrnitgreater and overload administrative reduce luoã"i*. Iü ean classroom level. and eoncentration orsc*r"" i.sources at the school

suggested above' If we are to use technology in the rich ways an intense' substantive' Absent ptäf"*i"".f ããuetopme¡tis crucial'

rætoA ptli.ssional developrnent effort that is t¿skbased' nor ¡" used or it ïvill simply be used to reinforce ãiít., i.ãt practice, "iri "àr"g, píactices such as when it is devoted to drill and piesent every erable ' we must to realizeihe power of technologl'

Ññã;t
ii*"

åtu

schoolandstu¿enttousethemostsophisticatedtechnolo¡yavailable

*u¡åt

mqior equity issue as *l*¡."ãl and student. This is, of coulse, a schools with a
g "A*erica on Line" for all, including of disarlvanta$ed, disabled, and language minority

;*;ñ"i¡;n
students.

G-12

llø'lsírtg Standc¡'tls

ior

Am'ericatt' Ilducatiott'

I fr¿h

Lt3it*

Public Underslunding ond Support
Iæss than 25% of the electorate has children in scho'rl. There are

increasingly more older Americans than young. Most citizens believe the schools in general are in bad shape but that their local school is in good shape, Colleges and employers think the school's product is poor, while the students and their parents think the students are doing pretty well. Most people, including many educators, do not reallybelieve all students can leam. Many parents believe that somebody's child needs to knorv math and science, but not theirs since the parents functioned just line without the knorvledge, Many cio not, rurderstand that faili¡U children create "tougþ luck" for all of us, not just forthe failiqg children. Many believe that the traditional methods of schooling, curriculum, modes of testing, etc., are "correct" since those traditional methods conform to their own experience. Such facts pose a huge communications challenge. They rnust change if the necessary supportive ettvironment is to be created within which all stuclents will meet the new standards. Wemust be clear wl:'r has a stake in American children meeting high standards and ptccisely what the stake is. Parents, eclueators, the business community, the media, a¡td elected officials must, "buy itt" to the new st¿ndards, new assessntents, ancl initiatives of the ki¡ttl addressed in this report if the elimate is to exist to get the job clotte' lt willbe necessary to organize the message block by block, comntuttity by community; the print and electronic media must be usetl effectively; business, reli$ous organiz.ations, utliolÌs, and ot her institutions with regt¡lar access to large numbers of people must be engaged in the effort' employees and ¡nembers of high stantlards, as deterntilted by ric'h In short, the attainment assessments, is not the job of schools alone and r¡'ill not be achieved by schools alone. A critical mass of the citizellry must unclersta¡td tht challenge and, itt effect, insist that it be achieved.

-

-

Equity
is rvorthrvhile unless it is bt¡ilt i¡l a ¡ni¡¡tltcr thitl nroves toward equitable results. Give¡t our demography, tht'

Nothi¡g we have said

increasing proportions of students witlt rvhonl we historicall.v fail (about one third of all American students are poor, disabled, ordo ¡tot speak English as a first language), and the economic ancl civic needs of the Nation, it has become improved results, not simply the avaitability of oppcrtunity defined by input regttlations, arou¡xl which the Nation's future revolves. Provicling genuine opportunily to all remains a ntoral imperative. Actually moving significantly toward achieving much higher results by each student than he/she presently exhibits is the Nation's cco¡tomic imperative. The moral imperative has always confronted us, For the fÏrst time hr Anteriean hist<1ry, wc face the economic intperat¡ve of Sreater equity i¡t outeontes. Equity will require courage and u¡lcomnrott actio¡t. Exant¡:les l¡rclutle fiscal eqrrity (rrot jt¡st equality) within (antl, perhaps ultimately, among) states. furotherSood example of effective atfir¡¡l

Jun uura )!4, I $9!

ç-l:,

1i{'
Disttibuted by
Dy0EDRS

could include major changes in Chapter I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act when it is reauthorized in 1993 so it embraceJthe spirit of issues raised in this report (includi¡tg the use of the n¿tional s'.år¡dards and assessments and full funding). lVe take the opportunity in this section to emphasize recommendationi in previous sections related to equity. Equity is not somethirulthat is, different from or stands outside other issues. It must be inteS¡al to every component of a successful education system.

tlt

Conclusion
It
considäred seriatim. They are nota menu from which one picks and chooses. Systemic change is by defrnition comprehensive and. integrated. There is a critical mass r,.f change that must occur in the righãorder with adequate, equitably distributed resources to produce eñough synergistic pôwer to move the education system as far as it *usimoue to-prodùce the res¡rlts on which the Nation's future will be
is important to note that the issues we raise are not issues simply

built.

GI4

Httìsi

nt

Slundarcts

lo¡' An¿etican Educatiott'

t 8i,
I,jst¡jbuted by
DynEDRs

Appendix

H

Reportofthe
English Task Fìorce

Bockground
Tt¡e English Task Force was created by the National Council on Education Standards and Testing to advise it on the desirability and

feasibility of national standards for students in English and language arts. oÈher task forces were similarly created to advise the council on standard-setting and assessment in five core subjecæ: English' mathematics, science, history, and geography.'lhe Er¡glish Task Force decided to rename itself the EnglisM,anguage Arts Task Force in order to better reflect the broad range of skills commonly expected to be inctuded in this subject (i.e., reading, lvritûtg' speaking' and
listenin¡g).

Sau¡ of Efforb þ Düt lop l-¡oliond S|ondord¡ in [ngf¡¡h
There do not already exist nationally accepted st¿ndards in EnglisM¿ngluage Arts for what should be tawht, how it ¡hoqld be Aught, or wñat itudents shoulrl know and be able i c do. The National Asséssment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has developed reading and writirUl curriculum frameworks thror4¡h a naiional consensus process which are to be used in desig¡ing those parts of the lSpa ÑAEP assessment. The National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) is currently seeking fi¡nds to develop teaching standards, but

lhts Task Force

a.r¿d

,dix rePort. rellect the v;ork oJ are not tncessarily those of tlæ Cout¿cil'
H-t

January 94, l99t
I lì 'r i.Ét

DisLribùted by

DyoEDRS

the effort is stiü in the planning stage. Several states, including Califomia, Pennsylnania and otherS, have developed curriculum frameworis for E'nglistú¿r¡guage Aræ and are attempting to alig¡ their assessments accotdifrgly. It is important that any national st¿ndard-setting process tåke into accot¡nt these various important

efforts.

Are l{olionol

Sundod¡ De¡irsbh,

Ghten tho

$r&

Ronge

of

StrdontPsrbrmmce?
National standards can do rnttch to address those wide variations in for all children' student performance. They can help ensure access in quality education high to a regardleis of raceibr background
English/Language A¡ts.

-

-

õf .ou¡'uinãre is a potential for misuse of the standards as well as assessment iesults. Thã focus must be on improving education, not tracking students. Student performance should be viewed ;tting on a cõnünuun teading to firll subject mastery, with studgq prog¡essi¡¡g at the pacõ that best suits them. Tho*gh theTask Force äi¿-not."tætnpt toãeal with the question of how second language it learners will fit in øtr, respect to EnslisM.anguage Arts standards, ai¿æree ûhat this issue is an important one that will eventually

*d

-

require careful attention tJlrllot Shot ld

ond

lbrr

long Will ltkl¡e?

Bcfio

ProccÚt

fu

Dütehp¡r¡g Ì'lery $qndEtd¡,

The National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) and the international Reading Association (lRA) are the mqior teacher groups i-n this area, and it is important that they be a part' ãiiñu n..""si. Oevetopment of ståndards in Englistr/l,anguage Arts, ñã*uuä., should also involve educators in other subjects or fields as *att ,, interested lay persons, including business represetttåtives, oflicials, and other policymakers' electecl Content st¿ndards, performañce standards, and teaching stan¿ar¿s be decided on first, aU ne"¿ to Ue created.bontent standards should be able to do at and know to want students we Uã¡li"t itg *ith what the early grarles through down working then g;¿" ie-.(t}r" "product"), goal. The content io àrt"¡fiir, reasonable benchmarks toward that glrades 12' but t'he 8, and 4' rt""O"rAs should be roughly the same at levels' upper the at sophistication expectedlhould increase peîformance st¿ndards and assessment should be developed itr the content standards. Examinations are likeþ to be

;;;Ë;ñ"t

;;;;: úed on

grades first' reaãy in order of simpücity, withthe earlier should actually draft. three about of'*itits À ämaU number grouq numbering. representative abroadly and tnå sunãaras,

-

-

õ;Ñ;¡utiiwo
iiænriuã-p*cess

ctozen súout¿ reviewtheirwork. The broader intervals, providittg ittput ãioup should meet at roughly one nrontfr resources . . an¿ a¿oice on successive drafts. Assuming adequate géôO,OOO an¿ $1,000,000) and committed personnel' this CU"tr"""" should last about six months. 'r he resulting

tt -

*itl require continued fine'tuning over time' "á*At iiiãr"tutu ls thä content specific to the Englis¡/language Arts

"uttr.uiu*

and enriches the life experience of all of us. All studenÙs-

H-2

Raisitt¡¡.Ttcndards tot' t\rnetÍcnn Edueolíon

72'î
Disttibuted Ly
DyhEDRs

regardless of race, gender, or bacþround should be able to recognize a wide variety of great works of literature (appropriate to theirgrade) and respond thor¡ghtfulty and knowledgeably $ven some ehoice of topic. The diffrculty many students encounter iaday when they are first introduced to literature in the upper grades is a result of their often minimal exposure at the early and even middle tlrades; disadvantaged studenæ are typically the ones most deprived of a rich

-

curriculum.
Teaching standards should also be de'¡eloped to provide suggestions and examples to teachers on helpir¡g their students reaeh the new standards. Teachers should be free, however, to use their professional experierrce and discretion. Standards for the broader community, perhaps even including the media, may be something worth considering as well.

Asrasiq *o

Ì-¡ew

Stqndod¡

It is important that students be able to demonsFate higher order competence in ErUlistr/Language Arts skills on avariety of topics. lt is vital, therefore, that the standards developed for these skills in Englistr/l,anguage Arts inform those relevantåspeels of assessment in other subjects. For exarnple, grading of an essay on a topic in history should apply the appropriate criteria for writing skill as an essay anal¡zingapoem.
The examination system should have a local component, such as portûolios or teacher evaluations, in addition to the national component. Experimentation shculd be encouraged in the local (or re$onal) section. The resulting examination system should not be yet an another "test" to which students are subjected; it should, instead, replace the outmoded standardized tests many students cur¡ently take. Ancl it should be tiShtly ¡ligned with exemplary classroom practices so that it validates superior teaching and learning.

fifætftrg

fic l{Gn Slsndords

Schools and teachers are not currently prepared for a challen$ng curriculum in English. Substantial atlention to re-training of toclay's teaehers will be required, as well as a reexami¡ration of pre-service preparation for future teachers. Other systemic changes, as rvell as communities serious about the importance of schooling, rvill be necessary as well.

Janttctry 24,

Igtlg

i23

IËÌ

Disttibuted by

DyaEDRs

Reportofthe
Mathematics Task Force

Bockground
The Task Force on Mathematics is one of eight task forces created by the National council on Education ståndards and Testing to advise it on mathematics standard-setting and assessment. The Council's charge is to report to the Congress, the President, and t'he American people on the desirability and feasibility of creatin8 national standards in fwe core subjects (English, mathematics, science, history' and 8eo8¡aphy), as well as the desirability and feasibility of an ãxaminations system to measure student progress toward the standards.

Stslur of Elforit p Oardop hlol¡oml Smndordr in l¡isdramlb 'llte Curt'i,culum and' Ea atzntì,on Standn'rds for S cltool Matlwmati.cs, by the National council for Teachers of Mathematies (NCTM), shouldbe accepted as appropriate "content standards" in

mathematics. Though several states are in the process of developing performance standards and assessments in accordanbe with the ÑCm¡Søn¿ards (such as California, Indiana, Texas, and Kentucþ), these efforts have not so far resulted in a set of perfornunce standards that are widely accepted as authoritative. (The Mathematics Task Force did not f¡nd the sr¡g8ested distinctlon i,s reqort te$ect tlw wotk thpse oÍ tltc Cotttæil' nßcessari'lU nø, ø¡e lhís Task Fo¡re and

ol
LI

January 24, lg92

i ?I}

Disttibvted by ryEÐRs

between "âchievement" and "performance" st¿ndards a useful one, and this report only uses the term'performance standards".)

fuc l{olionol Sþndrn'd¡ De¡imblc,

Ghrcn

ttnìryldc Rorgo of

StudcnrPorbnnonæ? Tte creation of a single set of high-quality math st¿¡rdards for all

is students and a naiiona! examination system to assess results understånding, of mathematical vitål in raising the overall poor level and is espeei¡ty important precisely because of the wide variations in student performanõe. Every student, regardless of race, gender or backgror¡rd, should be assured quality mathematics instruction in an atmosphere of high expectations for all. The st¿ndardsitroul¿ ¡e created in tiSht of the hþþest world standards, as well as our own judgement of what is importånt for students to know and be able to do. No eomprornises shor¡ld be made to today's low levels of performance. Thoruh there should be one set of st¿ndards for all, we may wish to allow students to specialize in applying the standards to a particular area of interest. This op¿ion must be explored with care, to ensure that no student Ís timited by a "watered down" curriculum' To ensure equity, examination results should be reported in conjunction wiih socio-economic information on those assessed (similar to the current reporting of NAEP scores). Assessment tasks øll h"u" to be carefully desigred in order to be comprehensible to students from diverse iultural backgrounds. Arrangements should also be made to provide handicapped students a fair opportunity to succeed on the examinations.

-

-

ìt

ond lbrr longtlti lthltr?

l¡ûr shotid

!t fu hocr$3 for DüËhping |l¡c hlGli' sþndotdt,

NCTM should play the key role in coordinating development of the standards. NCTM's content ståndards will have to be elaborated for gþdes 4, 8, and 12. The development of meaningful performance ãtandards and assessments requires a multi-phase approach. Anä"oti* pt"cess should b,, emþloyed, involving successive-standards professional drafts and input at each stage from othermathematics of sample pJPtit'The creation groups, chsjroom teachersland the performance of setting part the of tasks is an integral *n¿ n.ust be donã in parallel. A variety of sample ksks will "t "¿"r¿r to be developed coveringevery aspect ofthe standards' ñave tf,u fuU procesi of developing performance standards and sample o.".r*uni t rks will take approximately one and one-half years, product assuming adequate resourcei and personnel. The resultirrg to a be$nning' viewed as strould still only be though rãady ior use

är"**"nt

be improved uPon overtime,

-

-

A¡¡ü¡he rh ì{lwS¡ndad¡
o

of The standards should provide information on varying degrces performance at gradei 4,8, and 12, each examination level' ¡ Assessment must be aligned with the new st¿ndards and sound inriru.iion"f practices.Þor exampie, lf we believe thatwe should be

I-2Røisittgsl,nutlt¿¡tlstorAllactlcttttþldttt:ulion

1J0
Distribùted by
DynEÐRs

encouraging the development of extended mathematical reasoning and problem-solving, ¿rssessment must include complex tasks and ample time for thor¡8ht. The importance of hi¡þ quality assessments is further enhanced by the likelihood that high stakes incentives will be attåched to performance on these measures.
o Assessment should focus on mathematical t¿sks for which students

can train and do well, not "brain tease¡€" that require innate ability

to perfornr successfirlþ.

¡ We may wish to consider separable score results in a variety of mathematical "domains" to more fully capture the range of student math ability; thi$ requires careful consideraiion to determine what new'domains" would be useful, if any. . Assessment tasks should be written in a way that is underståndable
to a broad audience and past exantinaLions shor¡ld be made available

for public review.

Jurt.uary :!4, 199¿

lñ¿ rtli

I3

Distribùted by

DynEDRs

Appendix

J

Reportofthe
Science Thsk Fbnce

Bockground
The National Council on Education Standards and Testing was formed by the Con8¡ess and the President' The Council created f¡ve Task Forces in the core disciplines of English, mathematics, science, history, and geoÉraphy plus three Task Forces to advise in tlte areas of standards, asseslment, and implementation. The Science Task Force met at the Hotel Washington on October l'5, 1991 from l0 a.m. to 5 p.m. The purpose of the Science Task Force is to advise the Council on the deiirability and feasibility of national standards in science, and $ve the Council direction, if national standards are found to be desirable and feasible, To focus the task, copies of the following were CalNþmin provided -puAU" to the Task Force: Scíørce Framsworkþr Scltæts(Califomia St¿te Board of Education); Scie¡æe Íor All Americøns, (American Association for lhe Advancement of science); Earth Scisr¿ce, Conltnt Guidelines, Grad¿ K' 12, and Earth Science EdunationJor tlæ ?Ist Cmtury, a PlannûW Gui'de, (Arnerican Geolo$cal Institute); and 1994 NAEP Sciewe Consen's?ts Assessmenl Ftzvnework Prciect, (National Assessment Goveming

Board).

ùr rcPon reJlect the wortc oJ this Task Foice and arc not'necessørilU tl'ø¡se oÍ tlæ Council.

Jattuøry 24, t ggll

'i'l

732

Sffir

of

The Science Task Force agrees that there is currently no set of

ftrtt þ DüdoP l{oliorrl Stmdord¡ ¡n &¡rE

content a;rd performanceétandards that can be used as national standards. Hôwever, the National Academy of Sciences is spearheading a unified effort of numerous science organizations to d-evBlop natiõnal st¿ndards. In August, the National Academy suthn¡ñed .tt unsolicited proposal to Secretary of Education lamar Alekander a¡rd received ifutial fun¿ing to be$in work on these stañdards. The National Academy has begun an analysis of curre¡rt ¿Ju*"ntr from the United States and other nations and is looking for co¡iunon themes, content, and skills. BV th9 end of l99l the National eÅaemy will have sel up coÍunittees of science educators, teachers, adminisirators, state agencies' and the general public' Work on curriculum and learning outcomes will be8in ñrst. Development of t"".rt"u *¿ instruction st¿ndards, (which includes discussion of instruciional rnaterials, opportunity to lear¡, and professional áeveloprnent) and assessrnent and performance stândards lvill thetl
occur simultaneouslY.

Arr lrlal¡ond Sþndord¡ Oc¡¡rotic, GiYü ilF TV¡d' S¡d¡* Pcrfonmno?

kttæ of

process. standards lend purpose to and reinforce the educational serue as and education science improve and influäncu Stanàar¿r ""n movement" education-reform the together holds the "$ue"that Scienie teachers need io know what to teach. Nearly all elementary they schoot teachers are responsible for science instructio¡t, artl because would$ve standards that particutarlv need the framework oñãn f,."e liftle or no background i¡r science. NaÙional statttlarcls ít "V wor¡ld improve instructional maærials by the emphasis and dircction tf,.V *oui¿ $ve to publishers and ins6uctional material designers.

piml¡¡ng Arr $qcdsnl¡ ûot(hotügc lilçbiþttn W*por Ilü. of lrl¡.r Oeeorrn¡lt tæril¡l¡?
Thedisparitiesinopportunityareinfactamostcompellingargument can f* tfi* inprrtance ãista.daids. Good standards used effectively goocl be the dispariries in opportuniry. There musr i "rp,àãuä" modeis. So¡ne districts need additional funtling or a inri*"tior,"t artd rã¿i.piUution of funds so that every child can be challe'ged

i;ip"l;rã"
ia*

her or his best and meet the standarcls. lssues such as or pronciency in Erulish need to be atldressed separately.

tlltþ shqrld Dünlop fu s¡ndorú ond llolt-should rrtry bt Ordoard? iirtnt l.ld¡oilt Sm, ond lffil CtÐt¡srrlun

mtdåLAætclstAvdhbh?

groups representing the The Task Force believes ùhat the major urylgr the sante scie¡rce educational community are "getting togethel This proct'ss standards' i"nt'*ith the National Academy to develop school boanls, school includin8 will also need to involve others, policy groups' and education state parent Sroups, adminlstrators, ¡o"r¿r, lay per.ons, and business leaders. science experts nra.v "t"tã tfro tead to ¿ãvetop proposals that are presented to lay revit'w i"iu

J-:Jflcisilrgs'tr¡l¡rttlrclst<lr¿llllr'ricttnþ}tlucttlion

1 D.) ¡ rri,

Distributed by

DynEDRs

g¡oups. This dialogue should Ínform the public about the tough issues and, ultimately, about the decisions reached. Looking at the best international, national, state, and local currieulum materials is an important part of the National Acaclemy's work to develop standards. There is much available. The America¡t Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) inSciencefor AllAmerica?s reports on literacygoals in science, mathematics, ancl technologl. Several professional societies have completed projects that provide good source material, such as the America¡r Chen¡ical Society which hasguidelines on chemistry for K-12, and the publication of the American Geological Institute ùit¡ed ãr¿rlå .9rrertre, Co¡ttsr¿l Guidelines, G¡atles Ii 12.
i!

lhr lgnW¡I ilÉ&.þ DrËlooilrclb¡riob?';tholGqr '
Don

þÈ¡ç.dþrhrÈ,os¡?

B.

By the fall of 1992, the NationalAcadeny of Sciences expe(ls to havc a draft of curriculum stanclards atailable for pttblic serutiny ilìd clebate. Consensus building will be the next step. Teachers nìt¡st kllow and understand the process and recommenclations. By 1994, the aim is to have content stanclarcls and soon thereafter assessment standards and a prototype ofassessnrent tasks. The f¡rst assesstuents nray be possible by 1995. The National Assessment of Eclucational Progress (NAtiP) tritl assess science in 1994 at grades 4,8, a¡tcl l? usi¡E a nelv assessnìetlt. norv being developecl. The Natio¡ral Asst'ssnteltt Governi:rg Boartl (NAGB) already has atlopte'd a eontelìt frantework for the science asses$ment basecl on a national consensus process. The f¡amework specifies the main topics to be tested. the relative weight ftrr e.ach' antl the ty¡xs of questiotrs to bt'used. Latt'r, after the ¿ssessnlent is constructed NAGB rvill set achieven¡ent levels fcr stuclent performance. The NAEP scie¡tce tssessnìent will be conrpleted largely in 1992 ancl early 1993 a¡rd will be available to the Natio¡ral At'aclettty comnrittees worhing on assessneltt standards. The ntain way to expedite the standards cleveloptrtent process is to ex¡redite the fundirrg. The initial funding for the clevelopntent of scienee standarcls is available. Funcling for the 1994 NAEP science assessment is appropriated, bt¡t fundirç for the National Acadenty standards developntent does tlot itìclude assessntent rievelopntent. Efforts also neecl to be u¡xlenvay to develop teacher sup¡lort, pttblic sr¡pport, and sehool board/district support. The Task F'orce clitl not discuss the fimcling inrplicatiotts for implententing science stantlartls across the natio¡l, Bt¡l a nrentbt'r notecl thät there are ntajor costs involved in int¡rroving scieltt'e education as this requires i¡rvestnnnt to develo¡l "hattds-ott" ntateriats, new fontts of assessme¡tt, n¡assive in-servit'e teaclte r educatiott, antl ¡tew ¡rre-service science currict¡la. ..length of tinte t0 tlevelo¡l st¿¡ndards" does not atlclress dirt'ct ll, The the issue ofthc time requiretl to intplemenl ct¡rrieulunt st¡tntlartls. Tht're is debate over how sooll new assessnlellts <lf stutlt'nt that is ltow soo¡t årssessmel¡ts í'alt hc pcrformances can be Usecl i¡serl that are linked to n(.w ct¡rricultun contellt standûrcls th¡t are being implente'ntecl, Several Task lbrce ntantbors su¡¡geslt'rl lhal

-

,lunuury

t4, I$!rt

,L'

il¡t ¡t.Ir
Djstrjbuted by
DynEDRs

assessments should follow the successñrl implementation

of

curriculum standards.

Ofiü b¡u.r

-qaÉh Sciences. This field is also Clarification is needed in the area c in the geography curriculum in the tjnited st¿'.tes and other countries. possiUty ttre ãeogr¿phy community shor¡ld be included as the science community discusses this area. TechnoÍogy is ofren tirùed with science, and there is continuing debate abouîttre plrrce of technologl as a subject area inthe scienc¡ curriculum. Some contend that technology is a tool, albeit a porrerful tool, for science, and others argue that the roles of science and tecturologl are sometimes reversed. The science Task Force cerøinly did not rõolve this debate. ln their brief discussion of technologr, several Task Force members spoke of technology being built into the standa¡ds for teaching science rather than into the st¿ndards for
science. The primary purpose of assessment must be to improve learning' Imbedded asseisment, where the teacher assesses du¡i¡rg the learning pf""", it o,¿¿ be part of the process.-Assessment must convey what ihe sludent can do and what the student has trouble doing' ñ"l"pingst¿ndards and assessments is a nrst step in determining what it tå'keJto '.get the ståndards to the student." We must $ve the and teachers the support they need such as appropriate materials to takes what it know to boards need stanCevetop*ént. S"t irnplement and meet sandards' Siuá"n6 need to leam both factual knowled¡¡e about the world th"* and the reasoningand skills involved in "doiru¡" science. "ro*d not be viewed as an either/or question. As much as should This pàrriUiã,rtu¿enrs should gain the appropriaæ factual grounding- ina mann", ih"t also teaches i-hem to reason and investi¡late scientifically'

*l

-

J4

ldatstrtg Slarrtirt rds fttr ¿lrnt'r'trtt n l)ducillto't

l.du
Disttibùted by
DynEÐRs

I raF

Appeffiix

K

Reportofthe HistorvThskFbrce

Boclcground
The NatÍonal Council on Education Standards and Testi ng was formed by Congress and the President. The Council created fire Task Forces inthe core disciplines of English, mathematics, science, history, and geogfaphy, plus three Task Forces to advise in the areas ofstandards, assessment, and implement¿tion. Ttre History Task Foree met at the

HyattRegencyonOctober2S, 1991, from l0a.m. to6p.m. The purpose of the History Task Force is to advise the Council in brelaring iæ report. The Task Force was asked to respond to f¡ve

ipeãinc questions relatindlto the desirability and feasibilþ of national standards in hlstory, at¡d to give the Council direcüion on the development of those standards, if national standardt: a¡e found to be
desirable and feasible.

Snru¡ of Eftrrþ D.ìrdop t'¡ol¡onol Sftrndordc in Hirtory The effort to develop national st¿ndards in history does not have to
start, from scratch but can build on previous work. There are a number

of exceltent documents already available: Hütoty'Sociøt Sci'erce Fro"mcwork (Californi¡ State Board of Education); Build,iûA a

History

Ç

vrriculum : Guidc litæ s for

Scl¿ooh ( Bradley Commission) ; Cftø

rliw

¿n t:r?P Te onhhtg H a. Couræ: Soci¿;tr Studies

istol

,ulLt; rc¡n rl reflact t'rw work a| this Task Force and are mat wcessarily thøse of thn Cau¡tciL

Junuarv 24,

1909

I l\rr iút
lt

Disttibuted by

whEDRs

tlw 21st Century (National commission on social studies in the Jor -schools);

n6ø*ät

pørspe-ctiaes Stdpt¿ß Slnuld, Acquere (National Center for History in the Schools). Also, ttte National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) consensus project in history will have content frameworks and test standards fór tãsting on United St¿tes history in 1994 and world

Iæs

sønsJrøn Histnry: Essentinl Urd¿rstanÅ'iWs anÅ

historyin 1996.
Ar€ Nqliond Sþndords Deshoble, G¡v€rl ll¡êW¡dc Rongoof

StrdentFerhrmonce?
and textbook developers, and could help raise expectations in our schools if they are done the rigþt way' National standa¡ds should be volunt¿ry. They should not be overly specitic, but should present a core of ag¡eement on what is essential.

National standards wpuld $ve guidance to teachers and to curriculum

They should be flexible, leaving room for locpl history, divergent cuniculum frameworks, a variety of textbooks, and various ways of teaching. National standards should have a$obal dimension and include world as well as United States history'

Aro SÞndod¡ rhot choll€fræ All childrcn lffifio{rt Penolizing Ittoúc of lesser OPPortun¡t Fco5¡bh? National standards can and must be fair, othenrise they will not

survive the consensual development process norbe adopted by st¿tes and school districts. A test based on national studards will be fair what they because both educators and young people will know exactÌy national Moreover, test. the on need to learn to be successful ranã"t¿r will help the cause of equity by focusing attention on the need for equal reiources to meet equal st¿ndards' studies show that children do not do well when lheir teachers have to the low eipecations for them. All children have the right to aspire National expect¿tions. high equally to rãt of goals, to be held all of us to stan¿ar¿s dn thus be an instrument of equity by requiring youngsters' all educate to it takes do what

o*"

whoshould Dgl,Elop rtþ sþndond¡ snd llow sho¡ld Ítsy Dwdopod?

Bo

process National standards should be rleveloped through a consensual standard'setting The gxoups involved' be to that allows various be several $tatles, so fro""r, must be opén and public. There must in process' itrat the standardican be rèvised and refined an iterative organizations' professional should invoive teachers, Tñ; expertisg, a1d the public. There also needs to be relevant øtrl irãùp, íå*åãnti¡v ottothanihe federalgovernment or any single präfãgr"äf association that bringJa¡ these groups together and

ññ

the st¿ndard'setting process' coordinates --iligh qr-lity national standards will result in assessments that just multiple'choice fnciriåå åsrayã and open-ended questions, not items.

K-2

Rolsing Sl,ondards Jor Åmerican Education

I

Lrl (

¿a r^t

Distributed by

DynEÐRs

National sta¡dards should allow students

t<¡

demons$ate different

levels of proficiency or achievement. The standards should also encourage interpretation and analysis as part of the stucly of history,

notjust the leamingof basic facts.
History is an integrative field, since everything that has happened is part of history. National standards should be inclusive with regard to the content that can be tâught in a historical framework, including civic education, economic history, art history, l¡terature, geography, etc.

tlow l.ono W¡ll ¡t kl¡c þ DüËho fic f¡lorrk¡l¡? Whot Con Dficþ Ë¡¡p¡¿¡tr*e Prccc¡¡?'

lc

lVirh appropriate reqpurces, national st¿ndards coulcl be cleveloped within two years, perhaps sooner. It is vital to be$n right att'ay. Reading, writing, and mathematics ässessment in NAFIP are scheduled for 1993-94, ancl with geography a¡td science movittg fotward as well, it is urgent to be$n work intntediately ott history
ståndards.

At some point there may tteed to be an e¡ttity, perhaps a quasi' govenìmentâl agency, to give standar<ls efforts legitinrac¡¡ a¡rcl to provide an imprimatur for the standarcls developed by tlifferent disciplines. Schools and teachers need to know that there witl t¡e a long-term national commit.ment to the ¡rerv stantlards.

Jnnuury t4,

I{l!19

133

li:t

Djst¡jbuÊed by

DynEDRs

Appendix

L

R€portofthe
ThskForce

Bockground
The National Council on Education Standards and Testing was formed by the Cong,ress and the President' The Council has created ei8ht râsk Forcei to advise it on the best and most expeditious process to devetop and implement standards in eaeh subject area. Task Forces were cieated inthe core areas of English, mathematics' science, history, and Seography plus three others to advise in the areas of standãids, assessmànt, and implementåtion' The GeoS¡aphy Task Force met on october 10, 1991, at the Hyatt ReSency on Capitol Hill from l0 a.m. to 5 p.m. The purpose of the Geog¡aphy Task Force is t9 advise the Councú in preparing its report.'fhe Task Force was asked to respond to Íive sp"iinð questions relating to the desirabiliW and feasibiliry of nationâl standàrds in geography and $ve the Council . direction, if nationalstandards are found to be desirable and feasible.

Slslr¡¡

oldbrr¡pDüdoP l{olistol gondore h CægruPht

The 0eography Task Force ag¡eecl

thqttlg work done by the Natlonal (NCGE) and Association of Education Council lorôeog¡aphic American Ceograpirers (AAC) calleù Guid.elincs lor Geogrøphic Ed,ucøtio¡t, wñich identtfied f¡ve fundamental thenìes in Geography and set up a seguence forgeographic education, wåsan excellent
tdi^t'rePort tuJlect the work o! t¿ol neeessarily those of tlw Couneil'

låis lask Foiee ond ow

Jtn uurU t4, l99t

bt

13tJ

Disttíbùted by
'j,.ûEDRS

start toward the development of Content Standards in the field of
Geography.

Outgrowths af. Guideli¡tes for Geqraphic E ducation are two documents published by the Geo$raphic Education National lmplementation Project (GENIP). These documents, .l(-6 Geogmphy and?-12 Geqraphy provide themes, key ideas and learning opportunities, which are grade level specific. There was consensus that this body of work is the best currently in the field in the development of performance ståndards. However, much more work
needs to be done.

The Task Force agreed that the work being done by National Assessment of Educational Progless (NAEP) is the next major effort which will add to die development of content and performance standards in the field of Geography. NAEP wil have initial work in Geography ready for publication in March or April of 1992. NAEP is using Guidctines J'ttr Geagraphic Educalion as one of its resources. NAEÞ and its governing board, NAGB, are working closely with the National Geographic Society as well as the mqiorstake holders in the field of Geography. The Task-Force agreed that other important work is being or has l¡een done by NAGB, the National Geographic Society' the DepartmenLof labor's secretary's committee CIn Acquiring Necessary Skills (SCANS) Report, Careers in Geography, ancl the Geographic Alliance Network with AAG on their Sirant from the National Science Foundation. These efiorts can be used in tlte development of geography standards. The Task Force agreed lhat an importânt contr¡bution is being made by Geographiã Al[ance Network, which was started by National Geograbnic Society and provides direct assistance for geographic eduãation on a state-by-state basis' The Geog¡aphic Alliance was formed in response to a growing sense of alarm that our geographic illiteracy was hampering our competiliveness in international trade' The t"sÍ<of the Aúance is to revitalize geography with appropriate giroups and re-establish its presence and importance in t'he ãuniiutum. The infrastructure of the Geographic Alliance Network will be useful in disseminating information to members of the geognphic community and to the public'

-

An NafionolSþndord¡ Dc¡int¡lc, Givrn il¡cW¡& nqlgc of

ttutntPrrfommcr?

The Task Force agreed that national standards are indeed desirable. The process of developing the National slandards will cause us as a t¡atiån to identify what wã believe to ba important and permit the public and otheistake holders to conment, scrutinþ.e their efficacy, .n¿ f,"fp us as a Nation to iderrtify and agree on national standards itt geograPhY'

An Srndorrdr ñor Cln[ütgc dl Çhildtrtt Wilhorn Prmlidtrg

Iltolrof lãrlr

Op?ortunñtY F¡¡üh? The Task Force agreed that l,he standards nlust b€ set without regarrl to sociological or ãemogaphic factors. It ls a gotesque disservice to the counüfo and to the õhitd to assume a child by virtue of his or her

l-2

llaisiHg,slaildc¿rds Jot Anetìran þ)cluctttil¡t

L.iu
,jsttjÞuted by
WaEDRS

ethnic or socioeconomic background cannot achieve high standards.
We assume every child can learn and accomplish high standards, rvith sufÍtcient time to learn, toots, and resources. The st¿ndards thernselves do not impose any penalties.

llrho Shorrld L ln ohd in l}crlrlooim StsndqnL? Ifircrnh Ithot hocc¡¡ Shor¡ld Írcy ¡o_OalålÈda urh¡tl{otonol;StqÞ, ond l.ad Crfüsuhrm mofo¡qb nn #o ¡r¡t try'o¡loblc?
The Task Force agreed that the widest possible variety of stake holders shor¡Id be involved in the process of developing st¿ndards including teachers, specialists, content area experts, pre-service teacher trainem, mass media, parents, business, legislators, textbook publishers, and possibly students. The question is the order in which they are to be involved. While there was some feeling that the 'experts" (e.g. professionals in geography) should present the initial effort to be critiqued by the other groups, there was also sent¡ment that all st¿ke holders should be involved in the up-front process from the beginning. Clearly, however, the profer ;ional de'¿elopment of teachers regarding the new standards and learning strategies to support those standards is a critical feature that must be included in the overall plan.

llow Lqr Wi[ it Ël¡c þ D!ìËloo fiG Whot Con Bc Doæ þ Ë¡¡ec¿¡t¡ fu Proo¡3? ' ^lsl¡rbb?
The amount of time necessary to develop stantlarcls is at least one year (December 31, 1992). This time line was $ven under the assumption that appropriate funding and persorutel could be assþted to the task. We feel that this is a very optimistic time litre. Once the sta¡rdards are released to the public and publishers, it probably takes 6 years to get a textbook series on the market. When the standards are in place there must be a concerted effort to get the information to the educational community and public. Appropriate learning strate$es need to be identified and disseminated quickly, The task force did not identify the "best" materials; inste.ad, the task force acknowleclged that the development of ¡rew materials wh¡ch reflect the süandards ane ånother critical feature of the plan.

$ondrrd-sdling Excrtirr
Afteran exercise in which the Task Force actually wrote some sample standards for the different grade levels, there was a general consensus that the use of the definitions of eontent, performance/ achievement
standards was not completel¡'clear. There needs to be more work antl refinement on the definitions so that they are easily understandable. In fact, the use of "standards" following content, aehievement, and performance (e,9. ståndards, st¿ndards, and standards) actually serve to confuse people who are reasonably expected to know something about their fietd. Many argued that the use ofgoals, objectives, and performance standards was clearer.

J<trtuory 94, l99g

14:

l^9

Disttibtted by

DVdEDRS

F

þ $t &h gmdc ¡urdsd¡, chæ tlro.n ¡nd¡cdi;o ñotdrdlnt¡ ¡hd¡ld þ.eçGbd þ ls¡gw'tltoË lhon h¡ rhün thc l2t[r grudc' ¡ËTüÏCiñ; rñ-sr"dc ""d ()tNiüAütof Con¡mru¡

¡dtff

lt wu¡ difficr¡lt

Debaüe occurred on whether geography was a sepa¡ate or intelFated disciptine. The.re was consenJus ftrat t¡e st¡ndards for the study of

separated from theottrer disciplines.Ttre result of ú,Ue¿,i¡ná it in other iubiects is that only the understandings il;rgw:forthe otherdiscipline are bugh! It was believed thatthis Ë;ãruti"d in alack of geographical understandingwhich has d ür; ability of õurÑaiion to compet€ on the internatior¡al

g*oötpL'**tbe

h*,ùt

market.
ln ¡o¡nc
o

il

nrc¡cnrsrtw from lhc Bt ¡inc¡¡ ¡rntrosnn¿ difhnni Pointr.

olul,

ü¡c

Ror¡nd

bbb

The príority of business is not whetfter geography is taught as a but th't students r¡nderstand practical concepts of .åp"ãæ "ñtfty, useft¡I knowledge to business' geograptfv are that

o

Business shoutd be involved in the process of developin¡¡the ã"ni¿"¡u* from the beginni'g. Busíness plefers not to have a after it has been developed. utueprint giuen to it to froofrãad *steering com¡nittees' in the past; now lt tire on been Busùess ñas people *"næ io Uã on the "working committees" with the content (not to to react an¿ iñã t""ctrers. Business-wants the opportunity considered. being are r,ãtds afthe time rhe standards o Thebusinesscommunity realizes the problem of developing but it would like to see the process time cut in the effort 't,o¿a'¿', it itial product out quickly for public sen¡tiny' to

;ì) ;t

i"itn

TheTaskForcea8Feedthatthereismuchthatwecanlearnfromthe businesscommunity,andeveryeffortmustbemadetoincorporate
them into the Process.

l'4

ßcr

is

t' n

g

.5t

c¿

n rJtr r d

s Jrt

t

A ¡ne r ic a tt Iì tl u e dt

Io

n

142
Di,tributèd by
DynSÐRs