The Content of Instruction Under Standards-Based Reform

Standards-based reform (SBR) has been an important policy in U.S. K-12 education for at least the last 25 years. The theory of change for SBR suggests that, with coherent content standards in core academic subjects, measurable goals for student learning, and appropriate supports and accountability measures, teachers will modify their instruction to align with standards and assessments, and student learning will improve. While many studies have evaluated the effects of SBR on achievement, few have addressed the content of instruction, the primary means by which SBR is intended to have its effects. The few studies of instruction have focused mainly on pedagogy, or they have suffered from serious methodological and substantive problems that bring into question the validity of their findings. The purpose of this dissertation is to address this gap in the literature by using survey data on the content of teachers’ instruction in mathematics, science, and English language arts and reading (ELAR) to investigate changes in a) alignment to standards and assessments, b) hours of instruction, and c) emphasis on various levels of cognitive demand (e.g., memorizing, procedures) in the years 2003-2009. In addition, attributes of the standards-based accountability system are studied for their relationship with instructional alignment. The methods used include fixed-effects models and three-level hierarchical linear modeling. The results suggest that alignment to standards and assessments in mathematics increased during the years 2003-2009 by approximately .3 to .5 standard deviations. Alignment also increased to science standards at grades 3-8, but there were no consistent changes in alignment in ELAR or at other grades. Shifts of instructional time were small and generally non-significant. Teachers were found to increase their focus on lower-level thinking (e.g., procedure, memorization) in most grades and all three subjects. Generally, these shifts brought teachers’ instruction into greater agreement with standards and assessments. Finally, alignment was higher when standards and assessments were well aligned with each other (average standardized effect size = .22σ), when the standards were broad and focused on many ideas (.50σ), and when the state had stronger policies emphasizing rewards and sanctions (.12σ). Implications for policy and research are discussed

Civic Engagement in Education: Insights from California\u27s Local Control Funding Formula

In this policy brief, we use the case of California\u27s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) to provide policy makers and educators guidance on how to involve the public in goal setting and resource distribution decisions. We provide clarity around who is and is not participating, why, and what broader lessons we can draw for implementing federal and state education policies mandating public engagement. Our findings indicate tremendous room for improvement. LCFF\u27s target populations (e.g., low-income, English learners) are not more likely to be aware of or participate in decisions than nontargeted groups, which suggests weak accountability for the use of public funds by the policy\u27s target populations. Although LCFF has defined a broad set of stakeholders, only a narrow segment of the public (i.e., individuals with stronger ties to and positive views of schools) is aware of and engaging with the policy. Finally, we find a substantial gap between actual participation in LCFF and interest in participation, which may relate to a lack of self-efficacy, time, trust, perceived appropriateness, and information. As states and districts respond to mandates for engagement, these results suggest the need for greater investments in: (1) communication, (2) targeting a range of stakeholders, and (3) capacity building

Polikoff, Morgan S., Andrew C. Porter, and John Smithson, How Well Aligned are State Assessments of Student Achievement with State Content Standards? American Educational Research Journal, 48(August, 2011), 965-995.

Discusses the rationale for and measurement of alignment of standards and assessments; reports an empirical study of 19 states and three subject areas with respect to the extent of alignment and the nature of misalignments

Social Studies Textbook Effects: Evidence From Texas

Well-informed decisions on curricular materials can be an efficient way to boost student achievement. Prior studies have employed experimental and quasi-experimental designs to investigate the effects of textbooks on mathematics achievement. This is the first study to consider textbook effects in social studies education. Within the context of a textbook adoption cycle in Texas, we use a difference-in-differences approach with district-level administrative data and estimate the effects of adopting a state-approved textbook on social studies achievement. We find no evidence of a practically meaningful adoption effect. We conclude by highlighting the need for further high-quality research in this often-overlooked school subject area

Setting proficiency standards for school leadership assessment: an examination of cut score decision making

Purpose: Performance evaluation informs professional development and helps school personnel improve student learning. Although psychometric literature indicates that a rational, sound, and coherent standard-setting process adds to the credibility of an assessment, few studies have empirically examined the decision-making process. This article sheds light on the inner workings of setting cut scores for leadership proficiency from the deliberative perspectives of expert-panel participants, including principals, teachers, district supervisors, and researchers. Research Design: Qualitative methods are used to observe and document a standards-setting process as it takes place and to analyze the results. Findings: The findings indicate that setting cut scores for principal leadership proficiency is a cognitively demanding but achievable process for effective implementation of carefully designed procedures. The study also provides insight regarding the influence of external factors, such as backgrounds of panelists, consideration of school contexts, and concerns about consequence during the standard-setting deliberation