Teacher Implementation of College- and Career-Readiness Standards: Links Among Policy, Instruction, Challenges, and Resources

Abstract

Using state-representative teacher surveys in three states-Texas, Ohio, and Kentucky-we examine teachers' implementation of college-and career-readiness (CCR) standards. What do teachers report about the specificity, authority, consistency, power, and stability of their standards environment? How does their policy environment predict standards-emphasized instruction? Do these relationships differ for those who teach different subjects (math and English Language Arts [ELA]), different grades (elementary or high school), different populations (English Language Learners [ELLs], students with disabilities [SWDs]), and in different areas (rural, urban, or suburban)? We found elementary math teachers taught significantly more standards-emphasized content than elementary ELA teachers, whereas secondary ELA teachers taught significantly more standards-emphasized content than secondary math teachers. Teachers of SWDs and rural teachers taught significantly less of the emphasized content. In all three states, we found greater buy-in (authority) predicted increased emphasized content coverage among ELA teachers but not among math teachers.

Learning From Standards Deviations: Three Dimensions for Building Education Policies That Last

“…I have attempted to compensate for this lack of practitioner perspective by incorporating Moore’s critiques (Strauss, 2016). Related survey analysis suggests that teacher attitudes across these states are quite similar, though there are significantly more negative perceptions of CCR standards in those states that have made more frequent policy changes (Edgerton & Desimone, 2018). But overall, the remarkable sameness of the perceptions of teachers, principals, and superintendents across these states is a testament to the power of social media and national political coverage to shape attitudes toward the standards (Cheng et al, 2018; Edgerton & Desimone, 2019; Supovitz, 2017).…”

“…In these two instances, modifying rather than disparaging teachers’ favorite prior lessons might have helped build greater teacher support. Teacher buy-in is important to achieving a consensus on learning outcomes, according to teacher surveys, particularly among ELA teachers, where there is less consensus on what should be taught (Edgerton & Desimone, 2018). But in two of these interviews, concerns about administrative compliance subsumed teachers’ curricular preferences—in contrast to the many SEA interviews seeking to move away from compliance and toward a more supportive philosophy.…”

A Systematic Literature Review of College and Career Readiness Frameworks for Students With Disabilities

“…The findings of this systematic literature review have policy implications in that the current CCR initiatives (e.g., CCSS) place a strong emphasis on academics and postsecondary education (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council for Chief State School Officers, 2010). Given the fact that educators tend to follow national policy trends (Edgerton & Desimone, 2018), education legislation plays a critical role in ensuring students are ready for competitive careers. It is imperative that policy reflects the current CCR frameworks that have initial evidence of empirical support.…”

Further Teacher Training As A National System Component Of Professional Teacher Development

“…The scientists from 3 American states carried out researches of the level of teacher preparedness to implement the guidelines of modern educational policy. They worked out main directions in changes of further teacher training system to create its continuity (Edgerton & Desimone, 2018). In several studies devoted to the search of new strategies in teachers' professional development, researchers came to conclusion that first years of young teachers professional activities are extremely vital.…”