K-12 Curriculum Development

 
 
Picture
March Madness usually refers to NCAA Basketball, office tournament bracket pools, the race to the Final Four and the highlight film which is called One Shining Moment.  On March 4, the U.S. Department of Education announced that 15 states and the District of Columbia will advance as finalists for phase 1 of the Race to the Top competition.

The Sweet Sixteen Includes:
Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

Unlike the NCAA Basketball Tournament, states not qualifying for the Sweet Sixteen are eligible to reapply for Race to The Top Funding.  Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education, said "I salute all of the finalists for their hard work. And I encourage non-finalists to reapply for Phase 2 in June—along with the states that did not apply in the first Phase and the finalists who ultimately do not win."

The sixteen finalists are not guaranteed funding, so it is too early to cut the nets and celebrate.  While every college basketball coach creates a game plan for the next round of the tournament, the sixteen finalists will spend the upcoming weeks preparing for a team presentation in Washington, D.C.  The finalists will be invited to DC in mid-March to present their proposals to the panel that reviewed their applications in depth during the initial stage, and to engage in Q&A discussions with the reviewers.

The purpose of the finalist stage is to allow reviewers to ensure that each state has the understanding, knowledge, capacity, and the will to truly deliver on what is proposed. The presentations will be videotaped and posted for viewing on the Department's website at the end of Phase 1.

Winners for phase 1 will be chosen from among the 16 finalists and announced in April.  Applications for phase 2 will be due on June 1 of this year, with finalists announced in August and winners in September. The only states prohibited from applying in phase 2 are those that receive awards in phase 1.

Click here to view Arne Duncan's official announcement of the Race to the Top Finalists (Sweet Sixteen).  (Length: 48 seconds)

Through Race to the Top, the U.S. Department of Education is asking States to advance reforms around four specific areas:
  • Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace and to compete in the global economy;
  • Building data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction;
  • Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most; and
  • Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.

    Race to the Top Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
    This document will provide readers with additional background information on the Race to the Top notics of final priorities requirements, definitions, and selection criteria (NFP). 

 
 

Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class
Education
Press Release
December 19, 2008

Common Core Standards Workgroup Announced
Press Release
July 1, 2009

Common Core Standards
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)


Common Core Standards
These standards will be research and evidence-based, internationally benchmarked, aligned with college and work expectations and include rigorous content and skills. The NGA Center and CCSSO are coordinating the process to develop these standards and have created an expert validation committee to provide an independent review of the common core state standards, as well as the grade-by-grade standards. The college and career ready standards are expected to be completed in July 2009. The grade-by-grade standards work is expected to be completed in December 2009.

For additional information on National Standards, visit the blog archive at:
National Standards

 
 
Picture
46 States, D.C. Plan to Draft Common Education Standards
The Washington Post
By Maria Glod, Washington Post Staff Writer
June 1, 2009

On June 1, forty-six states and the District of Columbia announced an effort to craft a single vision for what children should learn each year from kindergarten through high school graduation.  U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan was quoted in The Washington Post as saying, "This is the beginning of a new day for education in our country."

Influential Organizations:

National Governors Association

Achieve - American Diploma Project

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Center for Civic Education

Council of Chief State School Officers

International Technology Education Association

National Council for the Social Studies

National Council of Teachers of English

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

National Education Association

National Science Teachers Association

The American Federation of Teachers

The Partnership for Twenty-First Century Learning Skills

and others.......


Important Documents:

Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education

Common Core Standards Initiative
Why Is the Common Core Standards Initiatieve Important for the Country?
Council of Chief State School Officers

The Case for National Standards
The Washington Post
By Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers

A Call for National Standards
The American Federation of Teachers

The Partnership’s Statement on President Barack Obama’s Education Plan
The Partnership for Twenty-First Century Skills
March 11, 2009

The Unfinished Work of the Standards Movement
By Michael Cohen, President Achieve 

Governor Hunt Testifies Before U.S. House Committee on Education and Labor
James B. Hunt Institue for Educational Leadership and Policy
April 29, 2009

Additional information on National Standards may be found by clicking on
National Standards.  Please feel free to share your thoughts on the press release announcing the creation of Common Education Standards. 

 
 
Picture
Smedley said, "A speech without a purpose is like a journey without a destination" (as cited by Koegel, 2007, p. 34).  The same can be said about curriculum development.  A curriculum without a purpose is like a journey without a destination.  Do the teachers and administrators in your school system have agreed upon learning outcomes for students at the end of each grade level?  Do teachers and administrators have time scheduled throughout the school year to discuss which instructional strategies are working with certain grade levels or even with individual students?

The list below contains several of the skills and understandings that most teachers and parents would agree students should develop during the K-12 experience(s).  If a parent moved from another state or country and asked teachers in your school district which skills and understandings are taught in the seventh grade, would the parent receive the same answer from teachers at three different middle schools?

Using the list below, add skills and understandings that you feel are missing.  Are some of the identified skills more essential than others?  Should some of the skills be taught in each grade, K-12?  Should some of the skills be deemphasized due to the skills required by a changing workforce?  Most importantly, what is the purpose for including each of these skills or understandings in the K-12 curriculum?  Is your district's current curriculum meeting its intended purpose?  What can be done to realign the district's curiculum in order to meet the agreed upon purposes during the 2009-2010 school year?

1.   Citizenship     
2.   Geographic Awareness     
3.   Decoding Skills
4.   21st Century Learning Skills     
5.   Presentation Skills
6.   Writing Skills     
7.   Problem Solving Skills
8.   World Languages
9.   Literacy Skills
10. Self-Awareness
11. Character Education
12. Healthful Living
13. Personal Financial Literacy
14. Apply Mathematics in a variety of settings
15. Communication Skills
16. The Arts
17. Career Development
18. Interview Skills
19. Critical Thinking Skills
20. How to Apply Skills and Understandings     

"All learners benefit from and should receive instruction that reflects clarity about purposes and priorities of content."
                                                        -  Carol Ann Tomlinson and Jay McTighe

References:

Koegel, T.J. (2007). The exceptional presenter. Austin, TX: Greenleaf Book Group
         Press.

Tomlinson, C.A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and
        understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
        Curriculum Development.

 
 

Testing Our Schools explores the closely intertwined issues of Standards and Accountability. Standards are necessary, of course, and so is accountability, but are schools being backed into a corner? If they continue to live by test results, will they die that way? 'High stakes tests,' 'multiple test measures,' multiple opportunities to take tests– How these issues are resolved will shape the future of American public education.  This site shares multiple perspectives and views education policy from the presidential administrations of George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. 

References:
www.pbs.org/merrow/
 

 
 

On March 10, President Barack Obama spoke at the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Conference in Washington, D.C.  To view a full transcript of his remarks, provided by the White House, visit Education Reform.  Since this site is designed for educators in the United States and abroad to discuss K-12 Curriculum Development, please share your thoughts on state standards versus national standards and on the President's recent remarks regarding education reform.

Excerpt from speech to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce:

"So let's challenge our states -- let's challenge our states to adopt world-class
 standards that will bring our curriculums to the 21st century. Today's system of
 50 different sets of benchmarks for academic success means 4th grade readers
 in Mississippi are scoring nearly 70 points lower than students in Wyoming --
 and they're getting the same grade. Eight of our states are setting their
 standards so low that their students may end up on par with roughly the
 bottom 40 percent of the world.

 That's inexcusable. That's why I'm calling on states that are setting their
 standards far below where they ought to be to stop low-balling expectations
 for our kids. The solution to low test scores is not lowering standards -- it's
 tougher, clearer standards. (Applause.) Standards like those in Massachusetts,
 where 8th graders are -- (applause) -- we have a Massachusetts contingent
 here. (Laughter.) In Massachusetts, 8th graders are now tying for first -- first in
 the whole world in science. Other forward-thinking states are moving in the
 same direction by coming together as part of a consortium. And more states
 need to do the same. And I'm calling on our nation's governors and state
 education chiefs to develop standards and assessments that don't simply
 measure whether students can fill in a bubble on a test, but whether they
 possess 21st century skills like problem-solving and critical thinking and
 entrepreneurship and creativity.

 
 

 Are schools in the United States preparing students for life and work in the 21st century?  If schools within a state have a difficult time aligning their local curriculum to the state standards, then how aligned are the fifty states?  Are some students receiving a more rigorous second grade curriculum than their peers in other states?  Does an A+ in Algebra I mean the same in Massachussetts as it does in Mississippi?  Should the United States adopt national standards, or should states continue to develop the standards and objectives for public schools?

According to the Center for American Progress, "With more than
50 different sets of standards, there is no national measure/yardstick/ standard/benchmark for academic achievement at each of the grade levels. NCLB requires that states hold districts and schools accountable for getting all their students to 'proficient' achievement levels, but allows them to adopt their own definitions of 'proficiency.'"

"With the pressure to increase student performance, there has been counter pressure for states to game the system by lowering both standards and proficiency definitions...

...Only national curriculum standards and national definitions and measures of student performance at proficiency levels can prevent this behavior."

Do you agree with this statement? 

References:

The Case for National Standards, Accountability and Fiscal Equality
Center for American Progress (November 2005)

Additional Resources:

Achieve


NAEP: A Common Yardstick


 
 

President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have recently shared their thoughts on national standards for K-12 education in the United States.  On February 16, Randi Weingarten wrote an Op-Ed article in The Washington Post.  Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, wrote "The countries that consistently outperform the United States on international assessments all have national standards, with core curriculum, assessments and time for professional development for teachers based on those standards."

"The United States Constitution created a national system of banking, transportation, commerce, justice, and the military with attendant national agencies and institutions to plan, direct, and implement them; education was left under the old Articles of Confederation, where it remains to this day" (English & Steffy, 2001, p. 31).

Questions for Professional Dialogue:

What are the benefits of national standards?

What are the weaknesses of national standards?

Do you teach in a country with national standards?

What is your opinion on national standards versus state standards?

Additional Sources:


The Accountability Illusion
Released by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation (Feb. 19, 2009)

Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World Class Education
National Governors Association (Dec. 19, 2008)


Education Standards are not the Answer
CATO Institute (article appeared in The Washington Post - April 5, 2007)

The Case for National Standards in American Education
Education Week - Commentary (March 5, 2007)

National Standards: 50 Standards for 50 States Is a Formula for Incoherence and Obfuscation
Education Week - Commentary (January 5, 2006)

The Case for National Standards, Accountability and Fiscal Equity
The Center for American Progress (2005)


English, F.W., & Steffy, B.E. (2001). Deep curriculum alignment: Creating a level
          playing field for all children on high-stakes tests of educational
          accountability
. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, Inc.