Today educators are faced with addressing national, state, and district standards designed to improve the educational outcomes of students. Aligning school curricula with standards has been a major focus in the last decade so that students can be successful in meeting important educational goals. "The standards movement is arguably a major force in education today, and some researchers assert the significance of the standards campaign will be huge" (Schmoker & Marzano, 1999 p 17). However, educators must also provide educational opportunities for students with exceptionalities to achieve these standards. In 1997, PL 105-17 The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments articulated this mandate in planning curricula for students with disabilities.
You can find information on national, state and local standards programs and their impact on students with exceptionalities in the following sections:
Standards and Goals
The terms goals, standards, and outcomes are often used interchangeably. Goals, however, can be seen more broadly and often include statements of shared visions, missions, or philosophies. Outcomes are often viewed as the descriptions of what students should know or do in order to achieve the stated goals. Specific curricula and content standards are then identified so that educators can focus instruction and learning. Standards are often referred to as benchmarks for student success (Bigge & Stumpf, 1999).
The intent of educators and community members in articulating clear standards is to: (a) clarify understanding, (b) improve communication, and (c) establish a collective purpose amongst all stakeholders involved in educating students (Rosenholtz, 1991). The impact of these efforts whether at the national, state or local level is to promote improved educational results and educational achievement for students in grades K-12 (Schmoker & Marzano, 1999).
Two types of standards are involved in most reform efforts: content standards and performance standards. "Content standards define what students are to know and what they are to be able to do. Performance standards define how well students must perform on content standards." (Ysseldyke, et al., 2000 p. 349).
Once common standards have been clearly identified, a local and/or state assessment system is typically implemented to gather information on how students and schools are doing in mastering them. In other words, data is collected and reported to evaluate schools' and states' effectiveness in providing students the curricula and educational opportunities to meet these standards. You can read about these assessments and students with exceptionalities by clicking on the link to Accountability Assessments.
National Education Standards and Goals
Beginning in the 1990's a major national focus occurred as The Goals 2000: Educate America Act was passed by Congress. This school reform effort provided an impetus for change at the national and local levels. Setting standards and national expectations for achievement resulted in many states setting goals and standards which closely reflect the national goals (Thurlow, 1994). Projects, such as the New Standards Project, were also developed . The New Standards Project, established in the early 1990's, is a voluntary national system. This project has established standards and performance-based assessments to measure student progress on identified competencies in areas including math, science, English, language arts and history. You can learn more about the New Standards Project by accessing links to information on the project provided at the end of this section.
National standards in various content areas such as English, social studies, mathematics and other areas has been heavily influenced by content specific organizations such as the International Reading Association and National Council of Teachers of English (English); National Council for the Social Studies (social studies); and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (Ysseldyke Algozzine, & Thurlow, 2000).
One federal project, The Nation's Report Card, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), assesses student performance in national samples in a number of subject areas. You can learn more about NAEP in the Accountability Assessment section of our web site.
State and Local Standards
Most states now have set mandated standards for students to achieve at varied or specific grade levels. In fact, specific state standards exist in all states, except Iowa (Ysseldyke, et al., 2000). Standards may be set at each grade level, however many states identify standards in increments, specifying levels of achievement to meet at 2-4 grade level increments (e.g., grades 4, 7, and 10) (O'Neill, 1999). The standards may be content driven or go across discipline areas in a broader context (Bigge & Stumpf, 1999). Click on the this link: Content Areas in Which States Have Developed Content Standards to see areas that states are addressing.
In order to gauge success on these standards, assessments are mandated at identified grade levels. Reports on the results of these assessments are provided to the respective communities at the state and local levels to provide a means of accountability. Standards provide a means for teachers to guide curriculum and instruction. Teachers and other educators are also addressing the use of standards in their on-going grading and assessments (Kearns, Kleinert, & Kennedy, 1999). Resources provided at the end of this section provide links to information about individual state efforts in standards setting in various content areas.
Examples of Standards
State standards can vary greatly in how they specifically address the various content areas. More information about the quality of state standards is discussed later. Here you can find a few examples of state standards in content areas. You can access many more examples of standards by investigating the resources provided at the end of this section.
Example of a State Standard in Science
|
|---|
| In science, students in Missouri public schools will acquire a solid foundation which includes knowledge of:
- Properties and principles of matter and energy.
- Properties and principles of force and motion.
- Characteristics and interactions of living organisms.
- Changes in ecosystems and interaction of organisms with their environments.
- Processes (such as plate movement, water cycle, air flow) and interactions of earth's biosphere, atmosphere, lithosphere, and hydrosphere.
- Composition and structure of the universe and the motions of the objects within it.
- Processes of scientific inquiry (such as formulating and testing hypotheses).
- Impact of science, technology, and human activity on resources and the environment.
|
| Source: From Missouri's "Show Me" Standards |
Example of a State Standard in Reading
|
|---|
Washington Essential Academic Learning Requirements in Reading
1) The student understands and uses different skills and strategies to read.
| To meet this standard, the student will: | | 1.1 | use word recognition and word meaning skills to read and comprehend text such as phonics, context clues, picture clues, and word origins:
roots, prefixes, and suffixes of words | | 1.2 | build vocabulary through reading | | 1.3 | read fluently, adjusting reading for purpose and material | | 1.4 | understand the elements of literature - fiction | | 1.5 | such as story elements, use of humor, exaggeration and figures of speech | | 1.6 | use features of non-fiction text and computer software such as titles, headings, pictures, maps, and charts to find and understand specific information |
2) The student understands the meaning of what is read.
| To meet this standard, the student will: | | 2.1 | comprehend important ideas and details | | 2.2 | expand comprehension by analyzing, interpreting and synthesizing information and ideas | | 2.3 | think critically and analyze authors' use of language, style, purpose, and perspective |
3) The student reads different materials for a variety of purposes
| To meet this standard, the student will: | | 3.1 | read to learn new information
such as reading science and mathematics texts, technical documents and for personal interest | | 3.2 | read to perform a task
such as using schedules, following directions, filling out job applications, and solving problems | | 3.3 | read for literary experience in a variety of forms such as novels, short stories, poems, plays, and essays to understand self and others | | 3.4 | read for career applications |
4) The student sets goals and evaluates progress in reading
| To meet this standard, the student will: | | 4.1 | assess strengths and need for improvement | | 4.2 | seek and offer feedback to improve reading | | 4.3 | develop interests and share reading experiences |
|
| Source: Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction: Washington Essential Academic Learning Requirements |
Concerns About Standards
The specificity and perceived quality of standards varies across states (e.g., Marzano & Kendall, 1998). A number of on-line resources provide a listing of specific state standards in relevant content areas and/or analyses of the quality of these standards. These resources can be found at the end of this section.
The American Federation of Teachers is one organization, which provides an annual report, Making Standards Matter, on statewide efforts to raise academic standards. States are "graded" in their quality of content standards. (e.g. American Federation of Teachers, 1999). These reports concludes that difficulties exist for states in setting strong English and social standards, as well as in establishing standards which provide a foundation for a common core of learning.
Researchers from the Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory (McREL) conclude that, "One of the growing problems facing many American educators is that far too many standards have been identified." (Marzano & Kendall, 1998b) In analyzing over 116 national and state level standards documents , McREL researchers found over 200 separate standards covering 3,093 specific topics or benchmarks. Professionals question the feasibility of addressing all the identified benchmarks.
Impact of Standards on Students with Exceptionalities
While most standards-based reform programs make reference to establishing and assessing common standards for all students, few programs throughout the early and mid 1990's actually addressed students with disabilities or included those knowledgeable about students with exceptionalities in their planning and implementation (Benner, 1998; Ysseldyke, et al., 2000). Past practices that reinforced separate systems of education for those with and without disabilities continued. These practices can result in a reduced access to the general education curriculum and in lowered expectations for those students with disabilities. These constitute actual and attitudinal barriers for students with disabilities. In order to benefit form the outcomes of standards-based reform, all students must be a part of the process.
The combined input of professionals, families, advocates, and legislators in drafting PL 105-17 The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 1997 provided a mandate, which addressed many of these barriers. PL 105-17 outlines provisions, which relate to school curriculum, standards, school reform efforts and students with disabilities. These include the:
- Documentation of the general education curriculum goals and standards applicable to students with disabilities on the Individualized Education Program.
- Documentation of participation in state and district-wide testing, including necessary modifications if appropriate on the Individualized Education Program.
- Reporting of state and district-wide assessment performance of students with disabilities in the same manner as for students without disabilities by state education agencies.
You can find a complete summary of the law by going to the Current Legislation section of our web site.
More data and information about the impact of standards-based education on the educational outcomes of students with disabilities will be needed to accurately judge the actual impact of these reforms on school achievement and post-school success. However, it is the intent of the law to foster improved school results.
Debate also exists about the use of common standards applied to all students. Given the varying characteristics, needs, and abilities of students with disabilities, applying one set of standards to this diverse group of learners can be challenging. In fact, in some respects a common standards-based approach can come into conflict with the individually designed educational approach, which is the cornerstone of special education for students with disabilities. Additionally, for some students with exceptionalities, some or all of the standards may be inappropriate to their curricular needs. (Bigge & Stumpf, 1999). This may hold true especially for those students for whom a life skills or functional curriculum has been decided as most appropriate. If common standards do not address these skills, curricular focus on the most valuable skills needed by an individual student can be diluted.
Some states have programs though in which standards apply to all students, yet have differentiated the strategies or means of achieving the standards. One example is in New York State. The length of time a student takes a course in earth science varies here (i.e., two semesters or three semesters) providing students with a span of time in which to learn and demonstrate skills (Office of Education, 1996).
Another state, Kentucky, has addressed the specific needs of students with more severe disabilities for whom the common standards are viewed as inappropriate. By providing a mechanism for accountability on alternate assessments, these students too are included in accountability reform yet retain educational goals and objectives appropriate to their individual needs. (Kearns, Kleinert, & Kennedy, 1999). Click on Accountability Assessment to learn more about this area of reform and students with disabilities.
Michigan has also initiated an alternate system of standards. Specific outcomes have been identified for students receiving special education services in various eligibility areas such as, autism, educable mental impairment, speech and language impairments, and others. (McLaughlin & Warren, 1994).
One proposed solution to establish an inclusive standards systems involves establishing one set of standards with an expectation for a range of varied student performance (Shriner, Ysseldyke, & Thurlow, 1994). In this system the measurement of progress on the identified standards can be based on the progress of each individual. Data can be attained by establishing a baseline measurement of a student's performance on a standard over time. (Office of Education, 1996).
However, in order for this solution to be effective standards will need to be broad enough to allow the participation of those with special needs whose curricular focus may be more functional . Ysseldyke and his colleagues (2000, p. 354) provide the following examples of broad and narrow standards.
- Broad standard: "the ability to use quantitative information in ways needed to be successful in one's environment."
- Narrow Standard : "the ability to use algebraic procedures to solve complex mathematical problems."
Yet, some analyses of the standards movement cite vague or broad standards as problematic and less rigorous in achieving effective reform (e.g., The American Federation of Teachers, 1999; Marzano & Kendall, 1998). Clearly decisions on what outcomes and standards should be applied and what consequences there are for schools and students will continue to be an issue (McLaughlin & Warren, 1994). Currently it is best practice to presume at first that a student will participate in the local standards unless the IEP team has documented that an alternate curriculum focus is more appropriate for individual needs.
Click on: Recommendations for Students with Disabilities and Standards -Based Reform to see best practice information from the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Students with Disabilities and Standards-Based Reform (1997)
Resources on Standards-Based Education
Online Documents on Standards-Based Education
American Federation of Teachers (AFT). (1999). Making Standards Matter: 1999 Report: [Online]. Available:
http://www.aft.org/edissues/standards99/Judging.htm. This fifth annual report by the AFT evaluates state efforts in standards reform. State by state information and analyses are provided
Education Commission of the States (1997). So you have standards… now what? [Online]. Denver, CO. Available:
http://www.ecs.org/ecs/ecsweb.nsf/e2addb66bd0b131587256770005fd465/744930aa50b6c6bb872566ef007bb10d?OpenDocument
Learning Disabilities Association (1995). Learning disabilities and educational standards. Learning Disabilities Association fact sheet. [Online].
Available:
http://www.ldanatl.org/factsheets/Ed_Standards.html
Marzano, J. R. (1997). Eight questions you should ask before implementing standards-based education at the local level. [Online]. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Regional Education Laboratory. Available:
http://www.mcrel.org/stgandards/articles/8-questions.asp
Marzano, R. J. (1996). Eight questions about implementing standards-based education. ERIC/AE Digest Series. [Online]. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED410230). Available:
http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed410230.html
Marzano, R. J. & Kendall, J. S. (1998). Awash in a sea of standards. [Online]. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory, Inc. Available:
http://www.mcrel.org/standards/articles/awash-printer.asp
Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (1997). The rise and fall of standards-based education. [Online]. A National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) Issues in Brief. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory, Inc. Available:
http://www.mcrel.org/products/standards/fallrise.asp
Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Parental satisfaction with schools and the need for standards education. Research Report. [Online] (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED352206). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED). Available:
http://www.uncg.edu/edu/ericcass/achieve/docs/par_sat.htm
Olson, L. (1999). Shining a spotlight on results. Quality Counts '99. Education Week on the Web [Online]. Available:
http://www.edweek.org/sreports/qc99/ac/mc/mc-intro.htm
United States Department of Education (1996, Spring). Improving America's schools: A newsletter on issues in school reform. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/IASA/newsletters/standards/index.html
Web Resources on Standards-Based Education
- Achieve, Inc
http://www.achieve.org/achieve/achievestart.nsf
- Achieve, Inc. is a nonprofit, independent, bipartisan organization. Originally created at the 1996 Education Summit, its goal is to focus national attention on educational improvement. The Achieve website provides an on-line clearinghouse of standards information and abstracts of programs in participating states. A searchable data base of standards and assessment information can be used. The "links" menu options provides access to state government websites. A hyperlink is provided for standards and assessment information as applicable for the various states.
- Mid-Continent Regional Education Laboratory (McREL)
http://www.mcrel.org/standards/articles/index
- The McREL site offers access to a number of articles and resources on standards.
- Putnam Valley Central Schools, Developing Educational Standards
http://www. putwest.boces.org/standards.html
- This site provides a broad array of information about standards-based education. Links are provided to the on-line standards provided by state education agencies. Information on standards by subject area is also available. Numerous on-line documents and articles on standards, as well as professional organizations involved in the standards movement can also be accessed.
- National Center on Education Outcomes
http://www.coled.umn.edu/nceo
- This site, funded by the U.S. Department of Education and the University of Minnesota, provides current information on assessment, accountability practices and policies, content and performance standards, and national and state data collection programs as they relate to school reform efforts to students with and without disabilities.
- New Standards: Performance Standards and Assessments for the Schools
http://www.ncee.org/OurPrograms/nsPage.html
- The New Standards Project is coordinated by the National Center on Education and the Economy and the Learning Research and Development Center at the University of Pittsburgh. The project was initially set out to "create a system of internationally benchmarked standards for student performance and an assessment system …" The project released performance standards at the elementary through high school levels in the areas of mathematics, English language arts, science and applied learning in December, 1996. This web site includes links to products and services provided by the project, samples of the standards and the New Standards newsletter.
- Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory : Catalog of school reform models
http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/natspec/catalog/index.html
- Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (NWREL) in collaboration with other regional laboratories and the Education Commission of the States has compiled a website entitled The Catalog of School Reform Models. Descriptions of 64 school reform models including entire-school reform and standards-based models are included. The site offers a hypertext version and a Portable Document Format (PDF) of the catalog.
- U.S. Department of Education. State Education Agencies
http://http://www.ed.gov/Programs/bastmp/SEA.htm
- This web page located off of the U.S. Department of Education's home page contains both hypertext links and pointers to state education agencies. Many of the state agencies have links to their education reform and state standards programs.
- Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI): Education Reform & Accountability.
http://www.k12.wa.us/reform/
- This section of the OSPI website provides background , samples, and documents related to this state's efforts to address education reform in setting common state-wide standards, benchmarks, and an assessment system. Special accommodations for students in this state can also be accessed.
Print Resources on Standards-Based Education
Benner, S. M. (1998). Special education issues within the context of American society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Bigge, J. L., & Stump, C. S. (1999). Goals, outcomes and standards. In Curriculum assessment and instruction for students with disabilities (pp. 35-59). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Kearns, J. F., Kleinert, H. L., & Kennedy, S. (1999). We need not exclude anyone. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 33-38.
McLaughlin, M. J., & Warren, S. H. (1994). Performance assessment and students with disabilities: Usage in outcomes-based accountability systems. CEC Mini-library: Performance assessment. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
O'Neil, J. (1999). Core knowledge and standards: A conversation with E.D. Hirsch, Jr. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 28-31.
Schmoker, M., & Marzano, R. J. (1999). Realizing the promise of standards-based education. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 17-21.
Shriner, J. G., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Thurlow, M. L.. (1994). Standards for all American students. Focus on Exceptional Children, 28(5), 1-19.
Thurlow, M. (1994). National and state perspectives on performance assessment and students with disabilities. CEC mini-library: Performance assessment. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B., & Thurlow, M. (2000). Critical issues in special education (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
