US Department of Education (2012). Race to the Top. North Carolina. Year 1: School Year 2010-2011. [State-Specific Summary Report]. This State-specific summary report serves as an assessment of North Carolina's Year 1 Race to the Top implementation, highlighting successes and accomplishments, identifying challenges, and providing lessons learned from implementation to date. Delaware created new structures at the State level to support both State and LEA (local education agency) Race to the Top work. North Carolina is transitioning from its current Standard Course of Study to new standards and assessments that prepare students for success in college and the workplace. The State adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in June 2010 and created the North Carolina Essential Standards for all content areas not covered by the CCSS. The State will implement the CCSS in school year (SY) 2012-2013 and is already taking steps to offer training and support structures to build readiness and understanding for the CCSS and North Carolina Essential Standards. To provide strategic support to teachers around standards and other education reforms underway, the State also established a framework known as the Professional Development Initiative (PDI). In addition, during Year 1, North Carolina began planning and coordinating within the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (DPI), among LEAs, and across stakeholder groups and potential vendors to lay the groundwork for statewide technology initiatives, including the North Carolina K-12 Education Cloud and Instructional Improvement System (IIS). A key challenge that North Carolina faced in Year 1 was building capacity within DPI. The State recognized the need to expand its staff to manage and coordinate the multiple new projects and activities. In several of the Race to the Top initiatives, the State underestimated the time necessary to move from planning to implementation, and the State's procurement and hiring processes imposed additional delays, resulting in contract delays and setbacks in hiring key personnel. Furthermore, during Year 1 of Race to the Top implementation, the State recognized that more staff was needed to address project management and oversight support needs, in addition to the positions included in its Race to the Top application. North Carolina added three positions in the Race to the Top PMO, one in the SBE, and one in the Office of the Governor to help coordinate and support implementation. A glossary is included. (Contains 15 footnotes.) [For the parent document, "Race to the Top Annual Performance Report," see ED529267. For the full report, "Race to the Top. North Carolina. State-Reported APR: Year One", see ED529321.]   [More]  Descriptors: Academic Achievement, Academic Standards, Accountability, Achievement Gains

Linquanti, Robert; Hakuta, Kenji (2012). How Next-Generation Standards and Assessments Can Foster Success for California's English Learners. Policy Brief 12-1, Policy Analysis for California Education, PACE (NJ1). California's implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), and its governing state role in one of the Race to the Top comprehensive academic assessment consortia, present a major opportunity to dig deeply into the challenges of fair and accurate assessment of the academic performance of its English Learners (ELs). Moreover, recent state legislation (AB 124) requires the state to revise its English Language Development (ELD) standards to better reflect the language demands found in new English Language Arts standards. This in turn requires moving to a next-generation ELD assessment based on those revised standards. How will California conceptualize the academic uses of language for its English Learners? How will its ELD standards correspond to the common core standards? What will this mean for EL instruction and assessment? California cannot afford to ignore or postpone questions of how its K-12 educational system will support these students' success. With over 1.4 million current English Learners, another 800,000 former, reclassified English Learners, and over 300,000 initially English-fluent linguistic minority students in the state (California Department of Education, 2012a), this combined group constitutes over 41% of the state's K-12 public education population. This brief contends that next-generation college- and career-ready standards signal a fundamental shift in the expectations for sophisticated language use required of "all" students. This shift has enormous systemic implications for how we assess ELs' academic performance; what ELD standards emphasize; how we instruct and assess ELD to better develop ELs' academic uses of language; how teachers instruct and students learn both language and content; and how the state can design more nuanced, responsive accountability policies and systems. In particular, this brief argues that: (1) the state should address the correspondence between its ELD standards and its content standards "strategically" that it identify and prioritize aspects of the new standards that maximize the potential of attending to and measuring language that is most relevant to academic content constructs; (2) next-generation academic content assessments must move toward gauging the use of academic language of "all" students and reporting on their performance; and that (3) educators need to shift how they provide both ELD and core content instruction so that EL students have greater opportunities to learn language through content, and to learn content using language. Before delving into these arguments, the authors first lay out some fundamental considerations that often go unstated in policy discussions regarding English learners.   [More]  Descriptors: English Language Learners, Elementary Secondary Education, Academic Standards, State Standards

Cease-Cook, Jennifer; Fowler, Catherine; Test, David W. (2015). Strategies for Creating Work-Based Learning Experiences in Schools for Secondary Students with Disabilities, TEACHING Exceptional Children. Nationally, the recent focus has been on adopting state-developed standards in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics that build toward college and career readiness. Of the states that have elected to adopt the Common Core State Standards (CCSS; National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2012), states either (a) updated their existing standards and worked with their university system to certify that mastery of those standards would eliminate the need for students to take remedial courses upon admission to postsecondary institutions within the system or (b) worked with other states to develop common standards that build toward college and career readiness (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). Although not all states have adopted the CCSS, most have engaged in a review and update to instructional standards for ELA and mathematics in the last few years. As the economy has changed, many traditional career technical education (CTE) programs have moved from helping students prepare for a specific job, possibly associated with limited growth opportunity, to helping them prepare for a career with the expectation of advancement (National Association of State Directors of Career Technical Education Consortium [NASDCTEc], 2012). As part of this movement, national organizations such as the National Association of State Directors of Career Technical Education Consortium, state consortia, and industry-based organizations have created sets of standards for student learning in career technical programs. The Common Career Technical Core (2014) is a set of rigorous, high-quality benchmark standards for CTE. The goal of the Common Career Technical Core is to provide students with the knowledge and skills needed to thrive in a global economy. To be college and career ready, high school graduates are required to complete a rigorous and broad curriculum that is grounded in the core academic disciplines but includes other subjects that are part of a well-rounded education (Career Readiness Partner Council, 2013). Career readiness adds to this definition by including academic and technical knowledge and skills, including employability knowledge, skills, and dispositions. For students with disabilities, the individualized education program (IEP) provides a process for ensuring access and success in courses and experiences to provide students with the skills necessary for career and college readiness. Work-based learning experiences (WBLEs) are a valuable source for such experiences not only for students across the spectrum of disability but also for students without disabilities. Identifying and engaging appropriate organizations in the community to provide WBLEs takes time, commitment, and hard work. WBLEs can be seen as part of a larger process of career development for all students. This article provides a brief overview of some specific avenues for WBLEs that students can explore. Suggestions for ways teachers can implement activities such as job shadowing, mentoring, internships and community trips are discussed.   [More]  Descriptors: State Standards, Academic Standards, High School Students, Disabilities

Parker-Burgard, Don (2009). Almost There? The Road to Common Standards Reaches a Milestone, District Administration. The Common Core State Standards Initiative is a collaborative effort between the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association (NGA) that is developing core K12 standards in English-language arts and math. The current patchwork of state standards makes it difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate student performance across states and countries. Dissatisfaction with this situation is a major factor driving the effort to develop common, internationally benchmarked standards. The CCSSO and NGA released draft standards for college and career readiness in September, and the groups plan to have final standards for each grade level ready in January 2010. At that point, the states and territories that are participating in the initiative–all but Texas, South Carolina and Alaska at this time–will submit their timelines and processes for adopting the standards. Any state may choose to include additional standards beyond the common core as long as the common core represents at least 85 percent of that state's standards. The implications of this process for states and districts will be profound and far-reaching. The author decided to speak about it at length with Gene Wilhoit, executive director of the CCSSO, and Dane Linn, director of the Education Division of the NGA Center for Best Practices. This article presents his interview with Wilhoit and Linn.   [More]  Descriptors: State Standards, Academic Standards, Elementary Secondary Education, English

Freedberg, Louis (2012). Math in a Child's World: Policy and Practical Challenges for Preschool Mathematics, EdSource. In recent years, compelling research has found that mastery of early math concepts at a preschool level is a better predictor of later academic outcomes than literacy. Partly driven by these findings, increasing attention is being focused on improving math pedagogy at the preschool level. The issue has assumed added urgency as a result of California's adoption of the Common Core State Standards, as well as the roll out of transitional kindergarten, the first new "grade" in state schools in more than a century. Several convenings, underwritten by the Heising-Simons Foundation, have been held during the past year in California focusing on early math at a national, state and local level. This working paper emerged from two convenings held at California State University, East Bay and the University of California Irvine, sponsored by the California STEM Learning Network (CSLNet), which focused on the policy and practical challenges for introducing a more comprehensive math curriculum at a local level, especially in preschools. This paper supplements two previous papers written by Deborah Stipek and Alan Schoenfeld based on convenings held at Stanford University and the University of California Berkeley in November 2011 and January 2012, respectively. This paper identifies several key challenges based on discussions at the Cal State East Bay and UC Irvine meetings, as well as follow-up interviews with program administrators, educators involved with teacher training and other experts in preschool education in California. These challenges include: (1) the paucity of math content in preschool teacher preparation and permit requirements; (2) the lack of preschool professional development and in-service training; (3) the barriers imposed by "math anxiety" among preschool teaching staff; (4) linking the preschool experience with what awaits children in K-3 grades; and (5) the impact of the state's budget crisis on the capacity of state agencies, education institutions and preschool programs to respond to these challenges. On a broader level, California also faces the challenge of how to reach the hundreds of thousands of children who are not enrolled in state-supported preschool programs, and who may not have adequate exposure to math concepts before they reach transitional kindergarten or kindergarten proper. (Contains 2 tables, 1 figure, 1 online resource, and 26 endnotes.) [This report was written with support from the California STEM Learning Network (CSLNet).]   [More]  Descriptors: State Standards, Kindergarten, Preschool Education, Preschool Teachers

An, Heejung, Ed.; Alon, Sandra, Ed.; Fuentes, David, Ed. (2015). Tablets in K-12 Education: Integrated Experiences and Implications, IGI Global. The inclusion of new and emerging technologies in the education sector has been a topic of interest to researchers, educators, and software developers alike in recent years. Utilizing the proper tools in a classroom setting is a critical factor in student success. "Tablets in K-12 Education: Integrated Experiences and Implications" explores the use of hand-held mobile devices in primary and secondary classrooms to assist in learning, sharing, and communication among students and teachers. With cutting-edge research on pedagogy, practice, and new initiatives for mobile learning devices and applications, this advanced reference source provides educators, technology coordinators, administrators, and other faculty with the resources needed to effectively implement mobile applications in their classrooms. Following a foreword (Orrin T. Murray), preface (Heejung An, Sandra Alon, and David Fuentes), and an acknowledgment section (Heejung An, Sandra Alon, and David Fuentes), this book is organized into the following sections and chapters: Section 1: Theoretical and Conceptual Orientations: (1) From App Attack to Goal-Oriented Tablet Use (Dominic Mentor); (2) iPad Implementation Approaches in K-12 School Environments (Heejung An, Sandra Alon, and David Fuentes); (3) Using Mobile Devices Selectively: Developing Constructivist Pedagogy to Support Mobile Learning (David Fuentes, Heejung An, and Sandra Alon); (4) Emerging Use of Tablets in K-12 Environments: Issues and Implications in K-12 Schools (Alex Kumi-Yeboah and Kelli Sue Campbell); (5) Mobile Devices and Classroom Management: Considerations and Applications for Effective Use in an Elementary School Classroom (David Fuentes, Heejung An, and Sandra Alon); and (6) mLearning to Enhance Disaster Preparedness Education in K-12 Schools (Thomas Chandler and Jaishree Beedasy). Section 2: Theoretically Grounded and Innovative Teaching Approaches: (7) Using Tablets to Teach for Understanding in the Sixth Grade Social Studies Classroom (Nancye Blair Black); (8) Use of Tablet Computers and Mobile Apps to Support 21st Century Learning Skills (Michael Reichert and Chrystalla Mouza); and (9) The iPad: A Mathematics Classroom Tool for Implementing the Common Core State Standards Technology Vision (Sandra Alon, Heejung An, and David Fuentes). Section 3: Empirical Research Studies on the Effects of Using Tablets in K-12 Classrooms: (10) The Effects of Interactive Multimedia iPad E-Books on Preschoolers' Literacy (Marisol Estevez-Menendez, Heejung An, and Janis Strasser); (11) Planning for and Managing iPads in a PreK-4th Grade Independent, Co-Educational Elementary School (Natalie B. Milman, Angela Carlson-Bancroft, and Amy E. Vanden Boogart); (12) Teaching Mathematics with Tablet PCs: A Professional Development Program Targeting Primary School Teachers (Maria Meletiou-Mavrotheris, Katerina Mavrou, George Stylianou, Stephanos Mavromoustakos, and George Christou); (13) A Collective Case Study on Two Speech and Language Impaired Learners with Autism: The Instructional Implications of a Hybrid Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) and iPad App-Infused Model (Jacqueline R. Sabale); (14) Challenge-Based Learning Using iPad Technology in the Middle School (Christie Bledsoe and Jodi Pilgrim); (15) Practices and Attitudes of Students and Teachers Using iPads in High School Mathematics Classes (Murtaza Ozdemir); (16) Integrated Experiences: Teaching Grade 9 Mathematics with iPad Tablets (Carol Carruthers, Dragana Martinovic, and Kyle Pearce); and (17) Using iPads to Support K-12 Struggling Readers: A Case Study of iPad Implementation in a University Reading Clinic (Carrie E. Hong, Salika A. Lawrence, Geraldine Mongillo, and Marie Donnantuono). A compilation of references, a section about the contributors, and an index are included.   [More]  Descriptors: Educational Technology, Technology Uses in Education, Handheld Devices, Telecommunications

Regan, Blake B. (2012). The Relationship between State High School Exit Exams and Mathematical Proficiency: Analyses of the Complexity, Content, and Format of Items and Assessment Protocols, ProQuest LLC. This study examined the relationship between high school exit exams and mathematical proficiency. With the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act requiring all students to be proficient in mathematics by 2014, it is imperative that high-stakes assessments accurately evaluate all aspects of student achievement, appropriately set the yardstick by which students will be measured, and clearly communicate these expectations to teachers and administrators. As states across the country transition to the Common Core State Standards, a key goal of this research was to provide current mathematics assessment information for the two consortia charged with the responsibility of creating assessments aligned to these new standards for mathematics. With this goal in mind, the researcher collected assessment data from Massachusetts's, Minnesota's, and Ohio's high school exit exams. These states were selected based upon their use of a comprehensive exit exam to evaluate student readiness for graduation. For each exam, the researcher determined which complexity level, which content strand, and which item format best predicts student proficiency classification. He then critically evaluated each exam based upon its protocol and the National Research Council's definition of mathematical proficiency. Results indicated that no single complexity level, content strand, or item format had the best predictive power for all of the exams. The results indicated that the greatest amount of variation in items' predictive power occurred across complexity level and the least amount of variation occurred across content strand. In addition, the selected exams were found to appropriately assess mathematical proficiency with the following exceptions: (a) they did not meet Norman L. Webb's six-item criterion for categorical concurrence requirements for each complexity-by-content strand category, and (b) two of the four assessments were deemed to have misclassified some students as proficient because the cut score was set too low to require students to earn points from the full range of desirable mathematical behaviors. Results from this study reinforce the idea that exams that intend to assess mathematical proficiency should be designed appropriately and implemented with attention to detail in order to do so. In particular, categorical concurrence and cut score emerged as two critical factors in such assessments. [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: Exit Examinations, Mathematics Achievement, High School Students, Test Items

Chitty, Laura Janine (2012). Multiliteracies in the Classroom: An Explanatory Sequential Mixed Methods Approach to Teachers' and Students' Perspectives toward Integration of Technology, ProQuest LLC. An increased number of students graduating from high school lack college and career readiness skills to earn credit in entry-level college courses or begin a career in an entry-level position. Many schools across America have prepared to address students' college and career readiness with the adoption of Common Core State Standards. Twenty-five teachers and 92 students participated in this dissertation study conducted at a high school (grades 10-12) in the southern United States. The purpose of this study was to describe and explain teachers' and students' perspectives toward the integration of technology that enhances multiliteracies in the classroom. An explanatory sequential mixed methods approach was used to guide this study. Data were collected from surveys to describe teachers' and students' beliefs, perceived barriers, and technology skill levels associated with multiliteracies enhanced by technology in the classroom. Descriptive statistics and independent t-tests were used for analysis of the quantitative data. Open thematic coding and axial coding were used for analysis of the qualitative data. Teachers' and students' interviews and classroom observations were used to further explain, clarify, and enhance the data collected from the surveys. Data results indicated that teachers and students strongly support the integration of technology in the classroom. Teachers and students indicated a statistically significant difference in technology skills associated with social literacy and multimedia. Teachers perceived time as the most significant barrier to integrating technology into the classroom; students viewed the school filter as the most significant barrier. Teachers viewed the role of technology as a tool to support students' cognitive development, to obtain and maintain students' attention, to facilitate administrative tasks, and to facilitate and promote students' college and career readiness. Students viewed the role of technology as a tool to gather information from the Internet and to enhance students' cognitive learning processes. [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: Multiple Literacies, Mixed Methods Research, Student Attitudes, Teacher Attitudes

Finnan, Leslie (2014). Common Core and Other State Standards: Superintendents Feel Optimism, Concern and Lack of Support, AASA, The School Superintendent's Association. For months, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) have been debated throughout the media, legislatures, education organizations, and households across the country. Education groups have released statements both in favor of the standards and opposed. As these arguments are being tossed around, 44 states and D.C. are implementing CCSS and other states are implementing new college and career ready state standards outside of the CCSS. AASA supports high standards for all students, be they through the CCSS or other state-specific standards, but believes that schools and districts should be given the time necessary to fully implement the standards before judging their success, and assessments should be used in the manner for which they were designed and evaluated before any high-stakes outcomes are attached to their results. AASA proposes a purposeful approach of "slow down to get it right," to ensure that schools and teachers have the resources they need to successfully implement the standards and aligned assessments in a way that bolsters student learning. This includes time and support for teachers to meaningfully adopt the standards into their teaching with curriculum and instructional materials aligned to the standards. It also requires a deliberate effort to ensure that the related assessments are used for the purposes for which they were designed. The CCSS-aligned tests were designed to assess student achievement, and any effort to rush implementation of them that includes using the test data to inform teacher evaluation is ill-conceived. Frustration over an arbitrary deadline to implement tests in a manner for which they were not intended threatens the good that stands to be gained from successful implementation of the CCSS and related assessments. Whatever happens in the news and the political debate, districts are already hard at work implementing these new standards and their related assessments. In order to see how the implementation of the new standards is faring. AASA conducted a survey of superintendents and administrators throughout the country in April, 2014. With 525 responses representing 48 states, the survey provides a glimpse into the planning and implementation of the new standards and assessments as well as the support superintendents are receiving from the state and community. Overall, most superintendents have already begun to implement the new standards, which they see as much more rigorous than previous standards. The new standards will increase students' critical thinking skills and ensure that they are more prepared for college and the modern workforce than previous standards did. School and district staff are viewed as prepared and engaged in implementation of the new standards. Several separate surveys show that teachers, overall, are very supportive of the new standards. The survey respondents have overwhelmingly already adopted CCSS. Out of the total responses, 86.5 percent have decided to adopt CCSS, while 8.3 percent have decided to adopt or are considering adoption of other new non-CCSS new state standards. Less than one percent report that their states are not considering new standards, be they CCSS or other state standards. Of those implementing either CCSS or other new state standards, most have already implemented the new standards. Over half (55.3 percent) are at least two years into the implementation, while 7.1 percent are implementing in the next school year (2014-2015). Given the overwhelming confusion regarding the standards and assessments by the public, it is encouraging that respondents overwhelmingly (92.5 percent) see the new standards as more rigorous than previous standards. Only 2.1 percent see them as less rigorous. In summary, given the time to be properly implemented, these new standards will provide a more rigorous curriculum and will ensure that students who graduate from high school are more ready for careers or college and will need less remediation.   [More]  Descriptors: State Standards, Superintendents, Administrator Attitudes, School Surveys

Rothman, Robert (2009). Common Standards: The Time Is Now. Issue Brief, Alliance for Excellent Education. After years of debate, the nation is now taking a bold step toward ensuring that all students graduate ready for college and careers. Under the leadership of the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, a panel has drafted a set of Common Core State Standards for college and career readiness. These standards will raise expectations for all students and will be the same no matter where students happen to live. That would represent a sea change in American education, one that is sorely needed. The wide variations that currently exist are unacceptable and are especially harmful to low-income students and students of color. All states and schools should expect every student to graduate from high school ready for college and careers. This brief outlines the need for common standards that are rigorous, clear, and focused and suggests ways that common standards will help lay the foundation for a stronger education system that will prepare all students for college and careers.   [More]  Descriptors: Careers, State Standards, Disabilities, Low Income Groups

Wat, Albert (2012). Governor's Role in Aligning Early Education and K-12 Reforms: Challenges, Opportunities, and Benefits for Children. White Paper, National Governors Association. To increase student learning and achievement, more and more states are pursuing reforms in "both" early care and education (ECE) programs and the K-12 education system. Many states are implementing the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) to promote all students' readiness for college and careers, while engaging in reforms prompted by the Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge (RTTT-ELC) grant competition to expand children's access to high-quality programs for early learning. Ideally, these initiatives would support and reinforce each other's goals and approaches to education–especially across the birth-to-grade 3 continuum, when research shows children acquire critical skills for academic success. Well-aligned ECE and K-12 reforms and policies would enable states to develop common expectations on what children need to know and be able to do as they transition from early childhood programs to the primary grades. Unfortunately, in most cases, aligning reforms in the early learning and K-12 systems is challenging. Typically, these efforts are led by different state entities and policymakers with limited knowledge of one another's goals and strategies. ECE and K-12 leaders also tend to have different approaches to teaching and learning and even different beliefs about the objectives. As policymakers who have the responsibility for the well-being and education of children of all ages, governors are uniquely situated to bring state agencies together and develop a coordinated strategy to align ECE and K-12 policies so they better serve all children, starting at birth. Doing so requires leaders from both systems to analyze what their respective goals, approaches, and reform strategies have in common and how they differ. This process can help governors, their staff, and other state policy leaders develop concrete action steps that promote greater alignment of ECE and K-12 reforms in key areas: (1) Leadership and Governance; (2) Learning Standards; (3) Child Assessments; (4) Accountability; (5) Teacher/Leader Preparation and Professional Development; and (6) Resource Allocation and Reallocation.   [More]  Descriptors: Academic Achievement, State Standards, Resource Allocation, Teaching Methods

Reumann-Moore, Rebecca; Sanders, Felicia (2012). Robust Implementation of LDC: Teacher Perceptions of Tool Use and Outcomes. Brief Two, Research for Action. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has invested in the development and dissemination of high-quality instructional and formative assessment tools to support teachers' incorporation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) into their classroom instruction. Lessons from the first generation of standards-based reforms suggest that intense attention to high quality instructional tasks (City, Elmore, Fiarman, & Teitel, 2010; Hiebert and Carpenter, 1992; Hiebert and Wearne, 1993; Jones et al, 1994) and use of formative assessments embedded in those tasks (Black et al, 2004; Clarke and Shinn, 2004; Fuchs, 2004; Tunstall, 1996) are essential if teachers are to meet the demands of the CCSS. Experts from the Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) developed a set of templates that can be customized by English/language arts (ELA), social studies and science teachers into writing tasks designed to facilitate CCSS-based student literacy and content learning and provide teachers with feedback about student mastery. LDC also developed a module structure that teachers can use to create a plan for teaching students the content and literacy skills necessary to complete the writing task. The tools are designed to target the "instructional core" by: (1) Raising the level of content; (2) Enhancing teachers' skill and knowledge about instruction, content and formative assessment; and (3) Catalyzing student engagement in their learning so that they will achieve at high levels (City et al., 2010). These tools have been in use for two years (the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 school years). This brief highlights and assesses the status of elements of robust implementation of the LDC tools, which are represented by the small blue circles in the Theory of Action. These six indicators, which fall into two main categories–Teacher Beliefs and Knowledge and Classroom Changes–are instrumental in understanding teachers' disposition towards the tools and their perceptions of how their instruction and student learning have changed as a result of their participation in the LDC initiative. Robust implementation should lead to several intermediate and long-term outcomes, among them Broad and Deep Instructional Change. The authors present their findings for this outcome as well.   [More]  Descriptors: Secondary School Teachers, Science Instruction, Teacher Surveys, Mixed Methods Research

Research For Action (2012). Enacting Common Core Instruction: How School District Leadership Drove Implementation of LDC and MDC in Kenton County, KY. Funded by The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) and Math Design Collaborative (MDC) offer a set of instructional and formative assessment tools in literacy and math, which were developed to help educators better prepare all students to meet the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and succeed beyond high school. Following two years of extensive data collection in eight sites throughout the country, Research for Action (RFA) is producing four case studies to illustrate how the LDC and MDC tools have been adopted in different settings and contexts, and which approaches and supports have contributed to the successful adoption and use of the tools. The case studies provide a set of "road maps" for other sites that will be adopting or scaling up the tools. They are grounded in the three overlapping conditions found to be necessary for effective scale-up of these tools: (1) Effective leadership at multiple levels; (2) Alignment with the CCSS, curricula, and state assessments; and (3) Meaningful and ongoing professional learning opportunities (PLOs). These conditions provide the organizing framework for the case studies and guide RFA's analysis of the strategic approaches undertaken by state, regional, local, and network entities that enabled strong initial implementation. Each case study illustrates how the tools were implemented and scaled under a specific set of circumstances that are likely to be applicable to many other sites. As such, they are intended to inform further exploration and discussion on how to effectively rollout the LDC and MDC tools across a wide range of districts and schools. This document describes how Kenton County, Kentucky used district-level leadership to roll out the LDC and MDC tools. It is comprised of the following sections: (1) A brief overview of the educational reform context in Kentucky and Kenton County; (2) A description of the central role of Kenton County district leaders in shaping the early success of MDC and LDC implementation; and (3) An overview and description of seven district-led strategies that have impacted early adoption and success of the MDC and LDC initiatives.   [More]  Descriptors: Academic Standards, State Standards, Instructional Leadership, Educational Change

Lawrence, Nancy; Sanders, Felicia (2012). Robust Implementation of MDC: Teacher Perceptions of Tool Use and Outcomes. Brief Three, Research for Action. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has invested in the development and dissemination of high-quality instructional and formative assessment tools to support teachers' incorporation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) into their classroom instruction. Lessons from the first generation of standards-based reforms suggest that intense attention to high quality instructional tasks (City, Elmore, Fairman, & Teitel, 2010; Hiebert and Carpenter, 1992; Hiebert and Wearne, 1993; Jones et al, 1994) and use of formative assessments embedded in those tasks (Black et al, 2004; Clarke and Shinn, 2004; Fuchs, 2004; Tunstall, 1996) are essential if teachers are to meet the demands of the CCSS. Experts from the Shell Centre have developed a set of Formative Assessment Lessons (Lessons) for secondary mathematics teachers to facilitate CCSS-based student mathematics learning and provide teachers with feedback about student understanding and mastery. The tools are designed to target the "instructional core" by: (1) Raising the level of content; (2) Enhancing teachers' skill and knowledge about instruction, content and formative assessment; (3) Catalyzing student engagement in their learning so that they will achieve at high levels (Elmore, 2010). These tools have been in use for two years (2010-2011 and 2011-2012 schools years). This brief highlights and assesses the status of elements of robust implementation of the MDC tools, which are represented by the small blue circles in the Theory of Action. These six indicators, which fall into two main categories–Teacher Beliefs and Knowledge and Classroom Changes–are instrumental in understanding teachers' disposition towards the tools and their perceptions of how their instruction and student learning have changed as a result of their participation in the MDC initiative. Robust implementation should lead to several intermediate and long-term outcomes, among them Broad and Deep Instructional Change. The authors present their findings for this outcome as well. They provide a brief overview of data sources and then examine: (1) the three indicators of robust implementation related to teacher beliefs and knowledge; (2) the three indicators of robust implementation related to classroom changes; and (3) signs of broad and deep instructional change. Brief 3 closes with recommendations and questions.   [More]  Descriptors: Learner Engagement, Mathematics Education, Formative Evaluation, Educational Change

State Education Standard (2012). The Voices of Non-Adopters: Members of the Virginia and Nebraska State Boards of Education on Why Their States Did Not Adopt the Common Core Standards. On June 24, 2010, the Virginia Board of Education unanimously adopted a statement expressing its continuing commitment to Virginia's Standards of Learning (SOL) and opposition to making participation in federal grant and entitlement programs contingent on word-for-word adoption of the newly developed Common Core State Standards in reading and mathematics. Prior to this action, then-Board of Education President Eleanor Saslaw released a statement regarding the board's support for the SOL over adopting the Common Core. The Standards of Learning are clear, rigorous, and understood and trusted by Virginia teachers. Whatever adjustments that might be needed to ensure alignment of the SOL with the Common Core can be made without disrupting instruction and accountability, and within the existing process through which the board exercises its constitutional authority to establish standards for the commonwealth's public schools. When the idea of Common Core Standards was first brought forward, the Nebraska State Board of Education was strongly supportive. The idea that the development of the Common Core Standards would be a voluntary, collaborative effort across the states held great promise. At the conclusion of the process, states could adopt the standards, align with them, use them as a resource or benchmark for the development of their own standards, or reject them altogether. But suddenly, this brilliantly conceived process was hijacked. Despite previous protestations by the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) that the agency would leave alone the process of Common Core Standards development, USDE suddenly announced that anyone who expected federal money had better adopt them. Yet after the USDE's announcement, many states immediately announced their adoption of the then-nonexistent Common Core Standards. The ham-handedness of the federal government immediately and irrevocably changed the process from the pursuit of excellence to the pursuit of money. Consequently, in Nebraska, the State Board of Education members separated their selves from this effort. They already were in the midst of redeveloping and increasing the rigor of their language arts standards. In the unanimous view of the board–Republicans and Democrats alike–they rejected the federal government's "top-down cram down" approach. They have been criticized for their refusal to knuckle under to the Common Core, most notably by the Fordham Foundation, for which they otherwise have great respect. But they believe there is something dangerous and disconcerting about a federally mandated one-size-fits-all approach to educational standards.   [More]  Descriptors: State Boards of Education, Core Curriculum, State Standards, Alignment (Education)