| Title: |
The Enduring Struggle of Standards-Based Reform: Lessons from a National Research Center on College and Career-Ready Standards. EdWorkingPaper No. 22-622 |
| Language: |
English |
| Authors: |
Morgan S. Polikoff; Laura M. Desimone; Andrew C. Porter; Michael S. Garet; Amy Stornaiuolo; Katie Pak; Toni M. Smith; Mengli Song; Nelson Flores; Lynn S. Fuchs; Douglas Fuchs; T. Philip Nichols; Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University |
| Source: |
Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. 2022. |
| Availability: |
Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University. Brown University Box 1985, Providence, RI 02912. Tel: 401-863-7990; Fax: 401-863-1290; e-mail: annenberg@brown.edu; Web site: https://annenberg.brown.edu/ |
| Peer Reviewed: |
N |
| Page Count: |
23 |
| Publication Date: |
2022 |
| Document Type: |
Reports - Evaluative |
| Descriptors: |
Academic Standards; College Readiness; Career Readiness; Educational Change; Longitudinal Studies; National Competency Tests; School Districts; Outcomes of Education; Teaching Methods |
| Assessment and Survey Identifiers: |
National Assessment of Educational Progress |
| Abstract: |
Standards have been at the heart of state and federal efforts to improve education for several decades. Most recently, standards-based reforms have evolved with a focus on more ambitious "college- and career-ready" (CCR) standards. This paper synthesizes the results of a seven-year national research center focused on the implementation and effects of CCR standards. The paper draws on evidence from a quasi-experimental longitudinal study using NAEP data, a cluster-randomized trial of an alignment feedback intervention, and detailed implementation data from state-representative surveys and case studies of five districts. Situating our work in a "policy attributes theory," we find important gaps in the theory of change underlying current standards-based reform efforts. We conclude that the CCR standards movement is not succeeding in achieving its desired outcomes. We make specific suggestions for improving instructional policy, including (a) providing more specific instructional guidance, (b) reconceptualizing professional learning, (c) building buy-in through the involvement of trusted leaders, (d) providing better supports for differentiation, and (e) devoting attention and guidance to the intersection of content and pedagogy, and (f) addressing persistent deficit thinking among educators. |
| Abstractor: |
As Provided |
| Entry Date: |
2025 |
| Accession Number: |
ED672121 |
| Database: |
ERIC |