This study identifies seven major trends in how states and districts are implementing college- and career-ready standards for general education students and for two special populations often the target of education policy—English language learners (ELLs) and students with disabilities (SWDs). We draw on state-representative teacher, principal, and district surveys in three states—Kentucky, Ohio, and Texas—and case studies in nine districts. We ground our study in the policy attributes framework, which suggests implementation is stronger the more specific, authoritative, powerful, consistent, and stable a policy is. We find states are being less prescriptive in their policies surrounding the standards and are including fewer or less forceful rewards and sanctions (power). Local districts are providing more detailed, standards-aligned professional development (specificity) and supporting materials to guide teachers’ standards implementation (consistency). Districts are using “softer” power mechanisms instead of the “strong” rewards and sanctions of earlier waves of reform. This results in higher buy-in (authority) but creates challenges for districts in providing the necessary supports for teachers. In ELL policy, two national organizations are providing much of the specificity and consistency for standards implementation, and they do this through mechanisms of authority rather than through power mechanisms. For SWDs, implementation support is focused on compliance, and the enduring tension between standardization and individuality persists. Creative district approaches and moderate to high levels of authority hold promise for this wave of college- and career-ready standards.

No abstract

Recently, the possibilities for leveraging ''big data'' in research and pedagogy have given rise to the growing field of ''learning analytics'' in online education. While much of this work has focused on quantitative metrics, some have called for critical perspectives that interrogate such data as an interplay between technical infrastructures and contingent social practices. Following such calls, this article conceptualizes ''learning analytics'' as an assemblage of technical, designed, and sociocognitive dimensions. Drawing on DeLanda's articulation of assemblage theory, we examine the ways online learning unfolds within and across these scales by using illustrative quantitative and qualitative data-click-data, user-generated content, and student interviews-from three online higher education courses. We consider how insights generated from such a stance might contribute to critical perspectives on how power circulates in online learning environments-a framework we call ''critical learning analytics.'' We conclude by offering some possibilities for which such a framework might be put to use-not only to map learning analytics as assemblage, but also to imagine how they might be assembled otherwise to promote more ethical instruction and more equitable student flourishing.

No abstract

No abstract