david t. conley katie v. drummond alicia de gonzalez jennifer rooseboom odile stout

Reaching the Goal: The Applicability and

Importance of the Common Core State Standards to College and Career Readiness

David T. ConleyKatie V. DrummondAlicia de Gonzalez

Jennifer RooseboomOdile Stout

2

① How applicable are the Common Core standards to college courses?

② When they are perceived as applicable, how important are the Common Core standards to college courses?

1897 postsecondary instructors made two straightforward judgments on a per-standard basis.

All instructors were asked to rate all standards.

Research Questions

3

Most Common Core standards received high ratings for applicability and importance.

ELA and literacy standards with highest ratings include those at higher levels of scope and breadth:

mastering comprehension of nonfiction text with grade-appropriate complexity

extracting key ideas and details from text possessing general writing skills and writing routinely using research to support written analysis.

Mathematics standards with highest ratings include those with an emphasis on thinking, reasoning, problem solving:

reasoning quantitatively interpreting functions The Standards for Mathematical Practice (emphasizing problem

solving, analytic thinking, and other thinking skills) 96% of respondents agree that the Common Core State

Standards sufficiently challenge students to engage higher-level cognitive skills.

Summary of Findings

4

1897 Courses RatedContent area Course category N TotalEnglish language arts

Composition I312

1315

Composition IIEnglish Literature

MathematicsCalculus

302College AlgebraStatistics

ScienceBiology

281Chemistry Physics

Social science

Introduction to Economics

420Introduction to PsychologyIntroduction to SociologyU.S. HistoryU.S. Government

Business management

Human Resource Management

243

582

Introduction to AccountingIntroduction to Business ManagementIntroduction to Marketing

Computer technology

Computer Science I153Database Management Systems

Fundamentals of Programming

HealthcareAnatomy and Physiology

186Foundations of NursingHuman DevelopmentPharmacology

1819 Respondents: 2-year vs. 4-year

6

Respondents Geographically Distributed

7

Respondents by Institution Type

Instructors rated applicability of the CCSS for success in their course.

If applicability rated in first three categories, then importance rated.

Applicability and Importance Rating Scales

Prerequisite Reviewed Introduced Subsequen

tNot

Applicable

Least Less More Most

8

9

Number of Rated Statements

MathematicsNumber and Quantity Algebra Functions Geometry Statistics and Probability Mathematical Practices Total statements 200

English language arts and literacy

Reading for Literature Reading for Informational Texts WritingSpeaking and Listening Language Reading for Literacy in History/Social Studies Reading for Literacy in Science and Technical Subjects Writing for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical SubjectsTotal statements 113

10

Applicability Ratings for ELA and Literacy: General Education Courses

11

Applicability Ratings for ELA and Literacy: Career Oriented Courses

12

• Percent of all respondents who rated at least one standard as either prerequisite, reviewed, introduced, or subsequent.

Overall Applicability for ELA & Literacy

13

Importance and average ratings rolled up to the strand level

Respondents chose from among an interval scale: 4 = most, 3 = more, 2 = less, and 1 =

least. Means are to summarize responses

only. Modal responses found in appendices

indicate most popular responses.

Importance Ratings

14

Reading Standards for Literature• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject

area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

n=532

15

Reading Standards for Informational Texts

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by

subject area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

n=487

16

Writing Standards• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject

area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

n=504

17

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject

area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

Speaking and Listening Standards

n=1500

18

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject

area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

Language Standards

n=1549

19

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by

subject area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

Reading Standards Literacy in History/ Social Studies

n=571

20

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject

area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

Reading Standards for Literacy in Science &Technical Subjects

n=1063

21

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject

area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

Writing for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, &Technical Subjects

n=1257

22

Additional Data in Full Report

• We present additional data in the report:• average importance ratings at the topic level (the

two to four organizing categories or sub-areas)• ratings at the standard level, with the four

importance ratings categories collapsed into dichotomous ratings: (1) more or most important, or (2) less or least important

• standards that were rated above or below the average of other standards in the strand

23

• In an appendix, we show full ratings (applicability and importance frequencies) for each standard.

FOR EXAMPLE:

Additional Data in Full Report

24

Applicability Ratings for Mathematics: General Education Courses

25

Applicability Ratings for Mathematics: Career Oriented Courses

26

Overall Applicability for Mathematics• Percent of all respondents who rated at least one standard

as either prerequisite, reviewed, introduced, or subsequent.

27

Importance and average ratings rolled up to the strand level

Respondents chose from among an interval scale: 4 = most, 3 = more, 2 = less, and 1 =

least. Means are to summarize responses

only. Modal responses found in appendices

indicate most popular responses.

Importance Ratings

28

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by

subject area.• One English response.

Number and Quantity Standards

n=796

29

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by

subject area.• No English responses.

Algebra Standards

n=792

30

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by

subject area.• Light blue bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

Functions Standards

n=603

31

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by

subject area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

Geometry Standards

n=331

32

• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by

subject area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

Statistics and Probability Standards

n=739

33

Mathematical Practices• Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area.• Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject

area.• Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses.

n=1339

34

Are the English Standards, Taken as a Whole, a Coherent Representation of the Fields of Knowledge Necessary for Success in Your

Course? n = 1769

36

Are the Mathematics Standards, Taken as a Whole, a Coherent Representation of the

Knowledge and Skills Necessary for Success in Your Course?

n = 1706

38

Do the Standards Reflect a Level of Cognitive Demand Sufficient for Students

Who Meet the Standards to Be Prepared to Succeed in Your Course?

n = 1798

40

Do the Standards You Just Reviewed Omit Key Knowledge and Skills?

n = 1785

42

Comments from Additional Questions

Two most common deficits of standards mentioned: The standards should focus more on problem solving

and critical thinking. The wording of the standards could be improved for

clarity.

43

How Applicable Are the Common Core Standards to College Courses?

Overall applicability is high. Variations exists among content areas and

across different strands. The Speaking and Listening and Language

strands are rated applicable across essentially all subjects.

44

How Important Are the Common Core Standards to Success in a Wide

Range of Postsecondary Courses?

Importance rating of most ELA/L and many math standards exceeds 3 on a four-point scale.

The mathematics standards show a wider range of applicability and lower overall importance ratings. Geometry category may be a candidate for further

review. The Standards for Mathematical Practices received

the highest importance ratings from a very broad cross-section of respondents.

45

Do the Standards Prepare Students for Both College and

Career?

Respondents tended to rate the reading and writing standards at the same applicability level for both baccalaureate and career-oriented courses.

Respondents from career-oriented course categories rated the Standards for Mathematical Practices importance nearly as high as mathematics and science instructors.

Some important overlap exists among Common Core standards that are applicable to and important for many general education courses and for many career-oriented courses.

46

Will Students Who Do Well on the Common Assessments Be Ready for

College?

College and career readiness is a multidimensional construct, and content knowledge is only one of several key dimensions.

Achieving the goal of a college- and career-ready student is dependent on other factors that are not addressed by the Common Core standards.

The Common Core standards appear to be well aligned in English Language Arts/Literacy and mathematics, but other dimensions exist as well.

Key Learning

Skills &

Techniques

Key Co

gniti

ve

Stra

tegie

s

Key Content

Knowledge

Key

Trans

ition

Knowled

ge &

Skills

The Four Keys to College and Career Readiness

48

Future Directions for Subsequent Research and Analysis

Look more in-depth at elements such as the ratings from specific content areas or from specific types of institutions.

Analyze content from the ~1800 syllabi submitted by respondents.

Compare the results from this survey with findings from other surveys that ask postsecondary faculty about the preparation of high school students.

Determine the relationship between the Common Core standards and the new version of the General Education Development (GED) certificate currently under design.

We welcome feedback or questions about the report:

david_conley@epiconline.org

49

Feedback