This annotated bibliography is reformatted and customized by the Center for Positive Practices. Some of the authors featured on this page include Joe Crawford, Alicia de Gonzalez, Nicholas H. Wasserman, Lindsey M. Burke, Kirkland D. Hamilton, Martha C. Hougen, Robert Rothman, Diane Stark Rentner, Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (NJ1), and Dean R. Folkers.
(2011). Aligning Your Curriculum to the Common Core State Standards, Corwin. Now that most states have adopted the new Common Core State Standards, the next major challenge is to simplify and implement them by 2014. That is why it is important to begin this work now. Joe Crawford, Milken Award-winning educator and author of "Using Power Standards to Build an Aligned Curriculum", shares his proven process for building a viable local curriculum based on the CCSS. Readers will find: (1) A system for creating local standards from the CCSS; (2) Methods for connecting the common, formative assessments to quarterly instructional objectives; (3) Ways to scaffold learning expectations; and (4) Examples taken from districts where CCSS is currently implemented. Included are helpful charts and graphs plus access to Internet-based software for mapping the CCSS to curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Schools cannot continue to do what they have always done and expect a different result. This book explains how to facilitate learning for all students while taking advantage of the new culture, technology, and norms of today's learning environment. [Foreword by Karen Young.] [More] Descriptors: State Standards, Educational Technology, Teaching Methods, Alignment (Education)
(2013). Fewer, Clearer, Higher: How the Common Core State Standards Can Change Classroom Practice, Harvard Education Press. In clear and concise language, veteran education writer Robert Rothman identifies nine instructional "shifts" encouraged by the new Common Core State Standards and provides examples of how teachers and school districts are overcoming challenges in implementation. He presents the research and rationale behind each change and provides examples of teachers making the shifts as well as sample test questions that could be used to gauge student progress in the future. Rothman also addresses major challenges that are emerging as districts and schools move to implement the standards and highlights the ways leading school districts are working to overcome them. "Fewer, Clearer, Higher"–the mantra adopted by the writers of the Common Core to emphasize the difference between existing state standards and the new ones needed to truly prepare all students for college or careers–is an indispensable guide for educators and anyone else seeking a better understanding of this major new development in education policy. An index is included. [More] Descriptors: Common Core State Standards, Teaching Methods, Classroom Techniques, Educational Policy
(2012). Fundamentals of Literacy Instruction and Assessment, Pre-K-6, Brookes Publishing Company. For future literacy teachers just beginning their professional education, nothing's more important than the first core text that builds their foundation for classroom success. That's why every preservice teacher should start with this introductory reading textbook, ideal for teaching fundamental literacy skills to students in pre-K-Grade 6. Based on cutting-edge research, best practices, and the newest professional standards, this core literacy textbook is a must for tomorrow's teachers because it: (1) Focuses on pre-K-Grade 6; (2) Covers every key element of reading; (3) Fully explains the new Common Core State Standards; (4) Highlights best assessment practices; (5) Weaves RTI guidance throughout; (6) Includes contributions from highly respected experts; (7) Advances differentiated instruction and inclusion; (8) Prepares educators for the real world of teaching; and (9) Examines current legislation. Contents include: (1) Becoming an Effective Literacy Teacher: Introduction (Martha C. Hougen); (2) The Critical Components of Effective Reading Instruction (Martha C. Hougen); (3) Oral Language and Listening Skill Development in Early Childhood (Christie L. Cavanaugh); (4) Phonological Awareness: A Critical Foundation for Beginning Reading (Stephanie Al Otaiba & Martha C. Hougen); (5) Effective Phonics Instruction (Martha C. Hougen); (6) Beginning Handwriting, Spelling, and Composition Instruction (Suzanne Carreker; (7) The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity (Elfrieda H. Hiebert); (8) Fluency Instruction (Jan Hasbrouck & Martha C. Hougen); (9) What Is Important to Know About Words of Written Language (Elfrieda H. Hiebert); (10) A Comprehensive, Interactive Approach to Vocabulary Development (Martha C. Hougen & Susan M. Ebbers); (11) Comprehension, Grades K-3 (Darcy Dycha); (12) Comprehension, Grades 4-6 (Stephen Ciullo & Colleen Klein Reutebuch); (13) Strategic, Meaningful, and Effective Writing Instruction for Elementary Students (Natalie G. Olinghouse & Joshua Wilson); (14) Disciplinary Literacy (Kristie Hotchkiss & Susan M. Smartt); (15) Current Laws, Policies, Initiatives, Common Core State Standards, and Response to Intervention (Susan M. Smartt); (16) Putting It All Together: Becoming an Effective Literacy Teacher (Martha C. Hougen & Heather Haynes); and (17) Ten Tips to Becoming an Effective Teacher (Martha C. Hougen & Susan M. Smartt). Appended are: (1) "Recipe" for a Sticky Board; (2) Say It and Move It Card; (3) Helpful Web Sites; (4) Lesson Plan Template; and (5) Glossary. [More] Descriptors: Literacy Education, Reading Instruction, Beginning Reading, Academic Standards
(2011). The Common Core State Standards: Comparisons of Access and Quality, Journal of Mathematics Education at Teachers College. Last year the United States unveiled the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English and Mathematics for grades K-12. In particular, the authors included two possible sequences of 8-12 mathematics courses that would fulfill the standards. Most notably, the courses titled "3a" and "3b" in these two sequences have become gatekeepers to Pre-Calculus (and consequentially Calculus). Taking "3b" would not prepare students to take Pre-Calculus, but at that juncture students would be prepared for a variety of other possibilities among mathematics courses–Statistics, Finance, Modeling, Linear Algebra, Discrete Mathematics, and Computer Science (those in "3a" would have access to all of these and Pre-Calculus). Employing Harvey & Knight's analytic framework on educational quality, this article compares who has access to taking various high school mathematics courses in three countries: the U.S., Finland, and Singapore. Using the framework as a lens to discuss various statistics and different measures of quality, the new CCSS offer a relatively wide variety of courses for high school students, aiming to make the mathematics classes required useful to the students who take them, while simultaneously keeping options open for higher level mathematics. [More] Descriptors: Common Core State Standards, Mathematics Education, Cross Cultural Studies, Cultural Differences
(2016). Teaching Skills for Complex Text: Deepening Close Reading in the Classroom. Common Core State Standards in Literacy Series, Teachers College Press. Tired of hearing about "complex text"? Bothered by the pushy messages about "challenge"? This book is for you! Unlike the many other materials on text complexity, this one focuses on specific comprehension skills that students need in order to really engage with text. This book will help elementary school teachers equip their students with practical tools and understandings of the structures and conventions that allow them to excel, including concrete tools, passages, games, lessons, and examples to teach anaphora, connectives, paragraph structure, evidence-gathering (fiction and nonfiction), and text challenge. A final chapter specifies how to stretch students in texts while attending to their stamina, executive skills, and interests. Book features include: (1) text-based lessons for grades 3-5; (2) opening vignettes that provide classroom context for each skill; (3) key objectives and Common Core Standards; (4) think-aloud language to guide strategy development; and (5) research-based strategies and games. [Foreword by Michael C. McKenna.] [More] Descriptors: Elementary School Teachers, Grade 3, Grade 4, Grade 5
(2015). The Impact of the Common Core State Standards Initiative on Math ACT Scores of West Tennessee High School Students, ProQuest LLC. The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) initiative is the latest effort by educational leaders to improve educational outcomes of American students. The standards are intended to bring uniformity in educational content of what is being taught in schools across the nation in order to promote rigor and academic portability. Proponents claimed the new standards would raise standardized test scores and better prepare students to be successful in college or a career after post-secondary education. The purpose of this study was to investigate what impact the CCSS initiative had on ACT math scores of eleventh-grade students in a West Tennessee School district. The ACT math data were collected from the West Tennessee School district. The data represent how students performed over two years and were collected from the Shelby County School district using the school district's online request form. This study used quantitative methods as the data were analyzed using a t-test and ANOVA tests. There were a total of 13,742 subjects in the study comprised of both male and female students. The results of the data analysis suggested that the increase in ACT math scores was statistically significant for the eleventh-grade student population as a group. The results of the data further indicated that the interaction of Common Core and race was effective for White and Hispanic students, but not effective for African American students. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: www.proquest.com/en-US/products/disserta… [More] Descriptors: Common Core State Standards, College Entrance Examinations, Mathematics Tests, Scores
(2012). Year Two of Implementing the Common Core State Standards: States' Progress and Challenges, Center on Education Policy. As of January 2012, 45 states and the District of Columbia have adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English language arts and mathematics developed through the leadership of the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. Released in June 2010, these voluntary standards outline the knowledge and skills in English language arts and math that students in grades kindergarten through 12 are expected to learn to be prepared for college and careers. For the past two years, the Center on Education Policy (CEP) has tracked states' progress in implementing the Common Core State Standards by conducting surveys of deputy state superintendents of education or their designees. The authors' first survey on this topic took place in fall 2010, just months after the standards were released. As described in the 2011 CEP report on that survey, "States' Progress and Challenges in Implementing Common Core State Standards," the adopting states had taken initial steps to implement the CSSS but many did not expect to fully implement some of the more complex standards-related changes until 2013 or later. In October through December of 2011, the authors conducted a second survey of deputy superintendents or their designees to gather more recent information about states' strategies, policies, and challenges during the second year of implementing the CCSS. This report describes findings about the CCSS from their 2011 survey. The survey also addressed other topics–including states' fiscal condition and capacity, progress in implementing the assurances required by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and waivers of Elementary and Secondary Education Act requirements–that have been or will be covered in other CEP reports. Thirty-seven states and the District of Columbia, which is counted as a state in the tallies in this report, responded to the 2011 survey. Thirty-five of these 38 respondents (including D.C.) had adopted the CCSS in both English language arts and math at the time of the survey, while one respondent had adopted the standards in English language arts but not math, and two had not adopted the standards in either subject. These latter three states are not counted in the totals of adopting states in this report. Thus, the authors' survey findings represent the views of a majority of the 46 states (including D.C.) that have adopted the standards in both subjects. The names of participating states have been kept confidential to encourage frank answers. Findings reveal that states view the Common Core State Standards as more rigorous than their previous standards, according to their survey, and are making progress in transitioning to the new standards. But states face challenges in fully implementing the standards, particularly in finding adequate funding. The majority of the CCSS-adopting states in the authors' survey do not expect to fully implement the new standards until school year 2014-15 or later. (Contains 3 figures and 3 tables. [More] Descriptors: Academic Standards, State Standards, English, Language Arts
(2011). Setting a New Standard with a Common Career Technical Core, Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers (J1). The pursuit of common educational expectations, or standards, among the states has long been a conversation met with strong opinions–for and against. However, it seems clear that high standards and consistency are both critical characteristics to have in educational programs. The task to achieve such is certainly not expected to be easy. Using the influence and input of business and industry, the resources of the National Association of State Directors of Career Technical Education Consortium's (NASDCTEc) Career Cluster Knowledge and Skill Statements, and a critical engagement of participating states, the creation of Common Career Technical Core (CCTC) standards is on the way to reality. CCTC intends to support a consistent alignment of high expectations among career technical education (CTE) programs. Proof that such a large task can be achieved is the Common Core State Standards Initiative. The creation of a common set of standards is no simple task, but through work from 48 states, two territories and the District of Columbia, the creation of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in mathematics and English-language arts (ELA) has demonstrated that a process can be implemented and outcomes achieved. [More] Descriptors: State Standards, Academic Achievement, Academic Standards, Vocational Education
(2012). California Diploma Project Technical Report I: Crosswalk Study–Crosswalk of the Intersegmental Committee for the Academic Senate Statements of Competencies to the Common Core State Standards, Educational Policy Improvement Center (NJ1). The Educational Policy Improvement Center (EPIC) conducted an investigation of the Intersegmental Committee for the Academic Senates (ICAS) Statements of Competencies for Mathematics and Academic Literacy. The purpose of this work is to understand how the ICAS competencies relate to college and career readiness, as represented by the augmented Common Core State Standards (CCSS) adopted by the California State Board of Education (SBE) on August 2, 2010. This study investigated a crosswalk analysis between (a) the Academic Literacy (ELA) ICAS competencies and the CCSS ELA Anchor Standards and (b) the mathematics ICAS competencies and the CCSS Standards for Mathematical Practice and the High School Mathematics Standards at the cluster level. Overall, the study finds that the ICAS competencies do relate to the augmented Common Core State Standards. This study also reveals the absence of certain "habits of mind" and English as a Second Language (ESL) standards in the CCSS ELA standards, and the absence of discrete mathematics and calculus in the augmented CCSS mathematics standards. The ICAS framework is broader than the CCSS ELA standards in addressing additional components related to supporting ESL students and includes key cognitive strategies all students need to be successful in postsecondary settings. The results of this study also raise the issue of the level of desired preparation in mathematics for high school graduates in California. The CCSS mathematics standards strongly relate to the ICAS competencies identified as "essential" for all students, but have gaps with the ICAS competencies deemed "desirable" for all students. Appended are: (1) Standards and Competencies; and (2) Competencies and Frequencies of Ratings. (Contains 5 figures, 17 tables, and 5 footnotes.) [This paper was prepared for Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE).] [More] Descriptors: Academic Standards, State Standards, Alignment (Education), Competence
(2012). The Common Core State Standards: The Emperor Is Still Looking for His Clothes, Kappa Delta Pi Record. As of September 2012, only Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, Texas, and Virginia had not adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Yet empirical evidence that demonstrates the efficacy of the initiative remains elusive. The Emperor has no clothes (Tienken 2011a). This latest installment of standardization and centralization of curriculum and assessment could be one of the largest social experiments undertaken on children, who are compelled to participate. Some have gone as far to describe the de facto nationalization of public schooling as the Stalinization of education (Baines 2011). Recently, two reports purported to demonstrate the efficacy of the CCSS surfaced. Could these reports be the pants and shirt the Emperor needs? Unfortunately, the reports suffer from methodological flaws that call into question the claims made by the authors. In this article, the author briefly critiques the latest reports on the CCSS and provides evidence on why the Emperor is still running around naked. [More] Descriptors: State Standards, Evidence, Intervention, Program Effectiveness
(2011). A National Education Standards Exit Strategy for States. WebMemo. No. 3437, Heritage Foundation. The push for centralized control over what every child should learn has never had more momentum. The Obama Administration has pressured states to adopt the Common Core State Standards Initiative, conditioning more than $4 billion in Race to the Top grants on its adoption. The Administration's blueprint for the rewrite of No Child Left Behind also called for Title I dollars to be contingent on states' adoption of the nationalized standards. Some state leaders have jumped on the bandwagon to nationalize the standards and content taught in local schools. With little public notice, any states have agreed to adopt the Common Core national standards. This movement is a challenge to educational freedom in America and is costly in terms of liberty, not to mention dollars. State leaders who believe in limited government and liberty should resist this imposition of centralized standards. Adopting national standards and tests through the Common Core State Standards Initiative surrenders control of standard-setting to distant national organizations and Washington bureaucrats. Education reform should give control over education to those closest to students. Conservatives have the opportunity to reverse course and reject this latest centralizing overreach. It is time for states to reject the nationalization of standards, tests, and ultimately, curricula, and instead work to strengthen and improve excellence in their local schools through state and local policy. [More] Descriptors: Federal Legislation, State Standards, National Standards, Educational Change
(2010). SEC Content Analysis of Standards: How to Use SEC Charts to Compare Common Core State Standards with Prior State Standards. In 2010, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) Surveys of Enacted Curriculum (SEC) State Collaborative conducted a content analysis of the new Common Core State Standards in English language arts and mathematics. Now, many state, local, and school education leaders are using an online data reporting system to compare their prior state content standards or assessments with the Common Core Standards. The following short guide outlines recommended steps for beginning in-depth analyses to focus the work of state education agencies, districts, or school leaders in leading change in curriculum and instruction to meet the new Common Core Standards. [More] Descriptors: State Standards, Content Analysis, State Departments of Education, Academic Standards
(2011). PARCC Model Content Frameworks: English Language Arts/Literacy–Grades 3-11. As part of its proposal to the U.S. Department of Education, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) committed to developing model content frameworks for English language arts/literacy (ELA/Literacy) to serve as a bridge between the Common Core State Standards and the PARCC assessments. The PARCC Model Content Frameworks were developed through a state-led process that included ELA content experts in PARCC member states and members of the Common Core State Standards writing team. The Model Content Frameworks are voluntary resources offered by PARCC to help curriculum developers and teachers as they work to implement the standards in their states and districts. The Model Content Frameworks offered in this document present the standards in an integrated fashion that will be useful for curriculum developers and teachers alike, while providing insight and guidance for the development of the future PARCC Assessment System. By systematically weaving together the standards into modules that progressively develop student understanding from grade 3 through grade 11, the Model Content Frameworks offer one way of envisioning how to emphasize the critical advances in the standards by focusing on essential knowledge and skills that students must develop for college and career readiness. Research supporting key elements of the standards is appended. [More] Descriptors: Writing Skills, Instructional Program Divisions, Expertise, Language Arts
(2011). Something in Common: The Common Core Standards and the Next Chapter in American Education, Harvard Education Press. "Something in Common" is the first book to provide a detailed look at the groundbreaking Common Core State Standards and their potential to transform American education. This book tells the story of the unfolding political drama around the making of the Common Core State Standards for math and English language arts, which were adopted by 43 states and the District of Columbia over a six-month period in 2010, after decades of similar proposals had gone down in flames. As a senior fellow at the major organization promoting the Common Core standards, education writer Bob Rothman gives the reader a bird's eye view of this unfolding drama and brings the major players to life with lively anecdotes and behind-the-scenes details. He describes the developments leading up to the historic agreement and compares them to earlier efforts. He also explains the content of the standards in depth, describes steps being taken to implement them, and examines how the assessment consortia plan to measure student performance against the new standards. The book is a must-have reference work for researchers, practitioners, school leaders, policy makers, and others interested in contemporary education policy and reform. [Foreword by Governor James B. Hunt, Jr..] [More] Descriptors: State Standards, Educational Change, Academic Standards, Educational Policy
(2012). Race to the Top. Ohio. State-Reported APR: Year One. This paper describes Ohio's progress in implementing a comprehensive and coherent approach to education reform from the time of application through June 30, 2011. The sections presented in this report highlight key accomplishments made by Ohio to implement a comprehensive and coherent approach to education reform over the reporting period in the four reform areas: standards and assessments, data systems to support instruction, great teachers and leaders, and turning around lowest-achieving schools. Some of the achievements made by Ohio are: (1) Ohio's State Board of Education adopted the common core standards in June 2011; (2) Standards crosswalks comparing the K-12 common core state standards and Ohio' 2001 K-12 academic content standards in English language arts and mathematics were developed and published on the ODE website; (3) Standards crosswalks comparing the 2010 state revised standards in science and social studies to the 2002 academic content standards; (4) Model curricula aligned to the common core state standards and the state revised standards were State Board adopted in March 2011; (5) 774 model curricula in ELA, Mathematics, science, social studies were developed and published on the ODE website; (6) Approximately 13, 000 educators participated in state-sponsored awareness and professional development sessions on the standards; (7) Fall and spring standards and model curricula sessions provide awareness and understanding to 10,744 educators statewide; (8) Revising Ohio Board of Regents (OBR) college readiness expectations aligned to the common core state standards; (9) Ohio and the Center for Educational Leadership and Technology (CELT) defined the Instructional Improvement System (IIS) requirements and it continues to work with Local Education Agency (LEA) stakeholders to refine Ohio's requirements; (10) Ohio and Board of Regents collaborate to work on data exchange to link K-12, Higher Education, and Workforce data; (11) Ohio will expand upon and leverage its existing statewide longitudinal data system and associated data tools to develop a comprehensive integrated system that allows user-friendly access to various data analysis and reporting capabilities; (12) Ohio redesigned Educator Performance Management Systems/Support Educators through evaluation results; (13) Ohio expanded effective educator preparation programs; (14) Ohio supported educators to increase student growth; and (15) A strategic goal of Ohio's Race to the Top plan is to improve achievement for 33,000 students enrolled in 68 persistently low-achieving schools (PLAs) (42 district schools and 26 community schools). [For the parent document, "Race to the Top Annual Performance Report," see ED529267. For the state summary report, "Race to the Top. Ohio Report. Year 1: School Year 2010-2011. [State-Specific Summary Report]," see ED529325.] [More] Descriptors: Academic Achievement, Academic Standards, Accountability, Achievement Gains