First Annual Implementation Report
Goal I. Establish new standards and programs for students that ensure high achievement.
Introduction.
While it should go without saying that the central work of Education Reform is to improve student learning, it is noteworthy to report the degree to which the first year of implementation has successfully focused on students.
The most important work of Education Reform is the creation of statewide student standards. There are four, inter-related components of this work:
- the Common Core of Learning,
- curriculum frameworks and content standards,
- statewide student assessments; and 4) performance standards and graduation requirements.
The Common Core of Learning.
At its April, 1993 meeting, in anticipation of the passage of the Education Reform Act, the Board of Education adopted a resolution that declared:
The Common Core of Learning refers to the broad set of educational goals which indicate what students should know and be able to do at the end of schooling; in essence they reflect what citizens highly value and see as essential for success in our democratic society."
In September, after an extensive search, the Board appointed a diverse forty-member Commission to " develop and recommend to the Board .... educational goals, stated in terms of measurable outcomes...[to] be used as the foundation for the development of curriculum standards, for students, schools and professionals."
The Commission began meeting in the Fall, first reviewing the best of similar work that had been done in other states. The Commission determined that an extensive outreach effort would be needed to involve all segments of the Commonwealth in a common dialogue about what students should know and be able to do. Commission members met with people and gathered input on the Common Core at public meetings, workplaces, and in their homes. Ten well publicized regional open-house forums were held to directly solicit comments. In January, the Commission held a two-day televised forum at the State House to hear from distinguished speakers from government such as Governor Weld, Senator Kennedy, and Justice Stephen Breyer; from academia such as Boston University President John Silber, Harvard President Neil Rudenstine, Mt. Holyoke President Elizabeth Kennan, Northeastern President John Curry, Simmons President Jean Dowdall, and UMASS President Michael Hooker; and from business such as the corporate leaders of Fleet Bank, New England Telephone, and Pacer Systems.
In addition to Commission members meeting directly with over 10,000 people, a twenty-two minute videotape entitled" Voices of Reform" was developed and distributed along with 50,000 brochures to every school council and school committee in the state. The local discussions that followed led to the Commission receiving over 1,400 written responses. Through all of the public testimony and input, certain common themes emerged. People expressed their feelings of loss for an education system that no longer prepared children adequately for the challenges that they face. They expressed their recognition that changes that had occurred in the workplace and the home required a new approach to education. Most of all, people expressed their desire for new, higher educational standards.
The fact that so much agreement occurred would not have been so significant if the agreement did not provide a mandate for change. For example, many people expressed their desire for students to develop work skills such as the ability to work in teams, yet schools traditionally have stressed individual achievement. People expressed their beliefs that certain core skills and essential knowledge were so indispensable to students' future success, that no student in any school should go without them.
In February, the Commission agreed on a first draft of the Common Core which identified thirty-nine common expectations for students. 45,000 copies of the draft were printed and distributed widely across the state. A second round of six public hearings was held in which oral and written testimony was received from over 1000 people leading to major revisions to the Common Core. This second draft reflected the concerns that were raised in response to the first draft, specifically that the Common Core should more clearly state its academic expectations. After a few changes, the Commission presented a third draft of the Common Core to the Board of Education on June 21. On July 14, the Board of Education voted to approve the Massachusetts Common Core of Learning. A full copy of the final document is included in Part Two of this report.
Curriculum Frameworks and Content Standards.
The role of curriculum frameworks is to translate the Common Core of Learning into specific content standards and recommended teaching practices in seven areas: mathematics, science and technology, history and social sciences, English, the arts, foreign languages, and health.
Like that of the Common Core, the process that is being undertaken to develop the frameworks is as important as the final product. In April, 1993, as part of a federally funded Department of Elementary and Secondary Education initiative called Project PALMS, several thousand invitations were mailed to principals, teachers, department heads, college deans and presidents, cultural institutions, and professional associations inviting people to participate in the development of frameworks for mathematics and for science and technology. In June, forty practitioners were appointed to two working committees and other interested parties were informed that they could become involved in other ways. In February, 1994, after a similar outreach effort, members were appointed to serve on working committees for the five other areas and for a single, Statewide Curriculum Framework Advisory Council to oversee the development of frameworks in all seven areas.
Also like the Common Core Commission, the framework committees held numerous meetings, hosted public forums, and developed materials which were distributed to every school and district. The framework committees differed from the Common Core Commission in that the emphasis of the effort has been focused more on classroom teachers and other direct educational practitioners. The rate of participation has been extremely high, with participants reporting that their involvement exemplified the ideals of good professional development. The ongoing work at the state and local level to discuss and develop curriculum frameworks has provided Massachusetts educators with exciting opportunities to engage in a valuable dialogue about their profession with their colleagues.
Work on the seven frameworks is expected to continue through the Fall with each framework committee completing an initial draft by January of 1995. A structure for the frameworks has been developed in which several common chapters would created in areas such as philosophy of teaching and school structure and distinct chapters would be created for the specific content standards and teaching practices associated with each discipline. Final drafts of the frameworks are scheduled to be presented to the Board of Education for approval next Spring.
Statewide Student Assessments.
Since 1988, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has administered a statewide student assessment called the Massachusetts Educational Assessment Program (MEAP). The MEAP has been administered every other year since then with its fourth and final run in 1994.
The Education Reform Act of 1993 calls for several important changes to the state's system of student assessment. First, whereas the MEAP provided results only at the school building and district level, the new assessment system will provide results for individual students. Second, whereas the MEAP was administered once every other year and comprised mostly of multiple choice questions, the new assessment calls for a much more comprehensive approach including portfolio evaluations, performance tasks, and other more authentic assessment techniques. Third, whereas MEAP exempted certain students with special needs or limited English proficiency, the new assessment will be designed to be more inclusive.
A fourth way in which the new assessment system will be different is that, whereas MEAP created de facto content standards, the new assessment system awaits full development until content standards are developed independently by the seven curriculum frameworks committees. This distinction is particularly important in light of the general philosophy of Education Reform that statewide standards must be developed with full participation of all key constituencies. It is also important because it is the standard that should drive the assessment, not vice versa. Only after the Common Core of Learning has described in general and the curriculum frameworks committees in specific the Commonwealth's expectations for student performance can an appropriate assessment system be developed.
Performance Standards and Graduation Requirements.
The final way in which the new assessment system will be different from the MEAP is that it will become the center piece in a comprehensive system of accountability. Beginning with the Class of 1999, no student in Massachusetts will receive a high school diploma without receiving a Certificate of Competency based on their performance on their 10th grade state assessment.
This type of "high stakes" assessment will create a growing tension between the push towards making the assessment authentic to reflect the expectations of the Common Core, and the need to make the assessment reliable and objective to create accountability. Work has begun to collaborate with other states through the nationally recognized New Standards Project to create reliable and authentic assessment instruments. In light of the magnitude of this issue, the decision was made to devote the entire FY'95 assessment budget to the development of a new assessment system. During the 1994-95 school year, the Department will begin developing test items based on the curriculum frameworks and the Common Core and will pilot new assessment approaches in a few sample districts. While development work will continue for the next several years, components of the new assessment system will begin statewide administration in the 1995-96 school year.
Other Programs that Support Students in Achieving the State Standards
Over the next few years, as the student content and performance standards take full form, all other programs that relate to student performance will become increasingly evaluated and coordinated by these standards. In their purest form, special education, bilingual education, early childhood education, adult basic education and other programs that target support for specific segments of the learning population exist primarily to support students in achieving the goals of the Common Core and the content standards of the curriculum frameworks.
A similar change will occur in vocational programs when standards are developed for occupational proficiency. One of the major emphasis of Education Reform and the new federal School-to-Work Act is to both increase the focus on job training programs and to further integrate vocational and academic programs. A coordinating council of regional education boards, employers, vocational educators, and other key stakeholders has been convened in a group called the Mass Jobs Council to focus on the statewide needs of job training. In addition , as vocational and academic standards take form, all schools are to ensure that every student graduates with adequate preparation either to enter higher education or the world of work. In recognition of the fact that students are not well served when they are placed in a so called " general track" that is neither college preparatory nor specifically vocational, the Education Reform Act directs schools to file a plan for the elimination of the general track by September, 1994. Resource materials have been distributed to every school to assist them in generating this plan.
Longer School Days and Longer School Years.
If schools are to meet the enormous demands of assisting students in meeting these new standards, it may become necessary to increase the amount of time that students spend directly involved in education. To explore these issues, the Board of Education appointed eighteen community and education leaders in November, 1993 to the Massachusetts Commission on Time and Learning. In its first few months, the Commission met regularly to consider existing norms and requirements and to outline a vision statement. The 5,000 copies of the vision statement were printed and distributed across the state along with an invitation to participate in six well attended regional forums held in June. The Commission will continue its work throughout the Fall and plans on presenting its final report to the Board in December, 1994 and to the Legislature in January, 1995.
Previous || Next
Return to Table of Contents
|
State Government · State Services 
