Component Four:
Measurable Goals and Benchmarks

A comprehensive school reform program has measurable goals for student performance tied to a state's challenging content and student performance standards (as those standards are implemented) and benchmarks for meeting the goals.

Introduction

Many schools have moved from being a collection of teachers doing their own thing to a true organization with a common understanding of purposes, goals for students, and strategies for getting students there. This section provides ideas for organizing a school around a clear framework for student progress and development driven by local, state, and national standards. It includes strategies that schools might incorporate in their comprehensive plan.

A publication of the National Research Council points out limitations of current thinking about accountability. The authors suggest that the assumption governing current state testing and accountability initiatives is as follows:

If states:

• Define expectations for student performance (through publishing standards documents, educators can provide guidance on what students should know and be able to do)
• Administer tests that assess the most critical topics, instructional goals, or standards
• Implement consequences for school performance, rewarding high performing schools and targeting low performing schools for assistance

Then:

• Students will learn at higher levels.

The authors point out that the missing piece in this test-driven approach to improvement is that many schools lack the internal capacity, not necessarily the will, to teach more effectively. Organizing instruction and assessment at the school and classroom level in the service of increasingly higher quality student learning is no small task. Some schools have been able to take on the challenge of higher standards for all students and realize significantly improved student outcomes. Others are taking a "grab bag" approach toward improving curriculum, instruction, and assessment, including some strategies that may be detrimental to students' long-term development (such as narrowing the curriculum—"teaching to the state tests," extensive test preparation and practice, and others).

The rewards and consequences for state test results tempt school leaders to become too narrowly focused on the short-term goal of increasing test scores while neglecting other important state standards outcomes that can't be tested on a one-hour state test. However, it is increasingly evident that quick fix strategies (e.g., intensive test practice) might work to get scores up for a few years, but scores will ultimately plateau without significant attention to the quality of teaching and learning experiences provided by teachers in the school. True accountability is as much improving the quality of instruction to better meet the needs of all students as it is about results on state tests.

Standards-Driven Comprehensive Reform

Studies of high performing schools indicate that school quality is a people process. It requires that teachers collaboratively implement a focused curriculum around clear goals for students and that teachers continually improve their instructional and assessment methods. Teachers design units and look at evidence of student learning together so that classrooms are deprivatized and teachers become learners in the sense of finding better ways to help all students be successful.

Standards-driven reform at the school level includes the following strategies:

1. Making sense of state and/or district standards documents and getting focused on what students need to be able to do as a result of their time in the school
2. Assessing student learning
3. Establishing a culture of internal accountability

(1) Making Sense of National, State, and District Standards Documents to Improve the Quality of Classroom Instructional Methods and Assessments

A school driven by state, district, and national standards spends time in grade-level or departmental team meetings reviewing and organizing standards into a guide for instructional planning. Teachers also examine student test data to learn what the data say about what students do and do not understand. They reflect on how their students perform in other areas (oral presentation skills, deep understanding of critically important concepts) not easily tested by traditional tests.

Resources for making sense of standards include the following: A Comprehensive Guide to Designing Standards-Based Districts, Schools, and Classrooms by Robert Marzano and John Kendall Mapping the Big Picture (Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12) by Heidi Hayes Understanding by Design by Grant Wiggins

Teams of teachers might work on clumping content standards into clusters of manageable instructional units. They try to come to consensus on instructional goals, such as the depth of student understanding desired for high-priority topics. They work together in writing new or revised curriculum units (or purchase commercially available instructional materials or programs matching their priorities). They collaborate to pull into better focus a curriculum that has typically been a mile wide and an inch deep. All involved understand that developing a more coherent and rigorous curriculum will take time and expertise.

Being standards-based means going from an instructional approach that says, "Here's the book—go teach" to one that says, "Here are the desired student outcomes—let's figure out how to use a range of instructional materials and assessments to get all students performing successfully."

One issue to keep in mind when mapping state or district standards onto the content and skills taught by teachers (which can be a first step in assessing alignment) is that objectives tested by a state test are a subset of the larger set of standards that are supposed to guide instructional planning. A single state test reflects only a small sample of all the topics, skills, and item types that could be on a test. Standards-based doesn't mean narrowing instruction and assessment in the classroom to mimic the content and format of the state test. Rather, it means organizing instruction and assessment in the classroom around a powerful set of topics, issues, essential questions, set of skills, etc. (with state, district, and national standards as guides).

The second issue is that state or district standards may be imperfect. Some collections of standards are so lengthy that they would produce superficial levels of understanding if teachers tried to teach to them all. Some documents have standards that are vague or unclear and need to be reworked into more meaningful goals for students. In some cases, the standards—as constructed at the state or district level—may not be easily understood by students and parents. Some schools translate the state or district standards into statements of expectations that students can understand (for example, starting statements of expectations with the words "I can·" so that students are led into a self-assessment mode).

(2) Assessing Student Learning 

Working together to restructure and focus a curriculum takes time and good collective thinking as well as building teacher capacity to assess student learning. When done well, classroom assessment carefully aligned to clear instructional objectives can be a means of raising student motivation and achievement. The student assessment cycle is critical if students are to perform at higher levels. The cycle includes the following:

1. Setting clear instructional goals
2. Assigning purposeful, high-quality work
3. Establishing clear criteria that guide students in producing quality work
4. Providing feedback to students that helps them understand their mistakes
5. Using data to improve subsequent instruction

Conversations and information about these aspects of classroom assessment need to become a professional development priority. As indicated above, a vital aspect of the assessment process—the component perhaps least used by teachers—is the use of data (student responses) to inform changes in instruction. Teachers can't assume students are learning or growing in their skills and knowledge just because the content or skill was taught or covered. If the goal is to help all students develop the needed skills and knowledge, then one aspect of the teacher's assessment responsibilities is to examine what students can do as a result of their units or lessons and to adjust instruction to meet the needs of students who are not getting it.

Some schools are finding that engaging teachers in collectively analyzing the reasons behind poor performance on a specific classroom assignment has a powerful impact on the school community.

Having conversations about student work serves several purposes. It helps build common language and understanding about assessment, contributes to a greater collective vision of what a quality piece of work is so that teachers' expectations are aligned, contributes to seeing each student as a learner (understanding the thinking of a particular student), and focuses attention on analyzing why students respond the way they do to a particular task.

Check the following resources to learn how teachers can talk about the quality of work students are producing in their classes: Looking at Student Work (A Window into the Classroom): A Video from Annenberg Institute for School Reform. Looking Together at Student Work: A Companion Guide to Assessing Student Learning (1999), Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University Listening to Student Voices, a Laboratory Network Program project

The prime consideration in looking at student performance data of any kind is whether they actually represent the intended instructional goals, vision, or focus of the school. State test data are an important source of information for monitoring school improvement. However, student learning can be measured in other ways. Richer data are better data for school improvement purposes. Teachers in schools driven by standards often work together in developing end-of-unit assessments or common developmental rubrics that describe student progress on important skills. They realize that important skills such as those listed below need to be assessed across the curriculum:

• Applying content knowledge to solving new kinds of problems
• Analyzing and commenting on important issues
• Reading for information—reviewing and summarizing research
• Speaking in front of an audience and responding to questions
• Explaining a critical concept to someone else
• Using technology

Good classroom assessments created by teachers working together can lead students to develop thinking and reasoning, the kind of deep and critical skills that standardized tests often do not assess. 

Teachers report that alternative classroom assessments (those other than simple, pencil-and-paper tests) personalize the learning process for students and help teachers understand students' thinking.

 

Developing performance assessments from scratch can be overwhelming. However, these types of assessment are especially valuable for schools with low levels of student engagement as they often result in immediate improvement in student motivation. See more information on professional development in classroom assessment.

(3) Establishing a Culture of Internal Accountability

In schools engaged in comprehensive reform, teacher evaluation practices are consistent with a vision of the teacher as a professional. School administrators provide feedback to teachers on all aspects of their work: the quality of their planning, instruction, assessment, interactions with and impact on students, and contribution to the school community. Just as important, teachers analyze their own effectiveness and continually improve based on feedback from a variety of sources: students, parents, peers, and administrators. Questions like those below are commonplace in schools focused on a clear set of desired outcomes agreed upon by all teachers. Individual teachers reflect and act on them, and teams of teachers assist each other in changing instruction according to what they learn.

• What is the purpose of this lesson/unit and how does it contribute to student progress towards standards? What are the expected outcomes?
• What did students learn as a result of this lesson or unit? Can students explain why it was important to learn the skill or understand the concept?
• Were my expectations for students clear so that they were not guessing about what a quality product looks like?
• How could this lesson or unit be improved to reach more students?
• Which students didn't get it and how can they be helped without making them feel like failures? How can errors become part of the learning process instead of a punishment?

School leaders view teachers as professionals needing opportunities to work together to develop or fine-tune instructional materials, such as lessons, units, and assessment approaches. The leaders emphasize the importance of providing meaningful and challenging work for students to do. Resources, support, and structures are provided to teacher work groups. Leaders are cognizant of the fact that the skills and confidence to take on this kind of joint analysis must sometimes be developed as the reform progresses. 

Teacher evaluation systems designed in part to encourage professional growth (formative teacher evaluation) should require teachers to set professional growth goals and seek out feedback on their teaching. To complement the formative teacher evaluation component, a summative component should provide clear expectations for what it means to be a good teacher across a set of critical categories (planning, instruction, assessment, classroom management, impact on students, professional development, contribution to the school community). The summative process should engage teachers in presenting evidence of their performance in these categories to their instructional leaders or evaluators rather than just as passive recipients of a rating.  

(See additional information on teacher evaluation in support of improved student learning.)

District staff who have a good understanding of state standards and best classroom practices can help teachers find or develop quality instructional materials. Some central office staffs in districts committed to comprehensive reform see themselves as service organizations providing technical assistance to the schools.

They are present in the schools; they problem solve with schools; they identify research and resources for schools; they help schools use time creatively to allow for collaborative planning among teachers; and they observe in classrooms and give formative (not performance appraisal) feedback to principals.

It is important that schools engaged in comprehensive reform understand that the primary message of standards for schools is the clarity of purpose and attention to the learning of all students. Continuously improving instruction and assessment around clear goals and expectations for students is the school improvement process.

References 

M. Schmoker, and R. J. Marzano, (1999). "Realizing the Promise of Standards-based Education." Educational Leadership 56 (6): p 21.

Improving Student Performance: The Role of District-Level Staff. Evaluation Brief. Vol. 2, No. 4. March 2000. Public Schools of North Carolina. Department of Public Instruction. p. 4

Return to top of page

Patronis Elementary in the Bay District of Florida took the Florida Sunshine State Standards as the centerpiece for curriculum and assessment reform. The school's focus on standards and teacher-developed performance assessments aligned with the standards emerged from the vision of the principal. After several years at Patronis, the students have come to expect and demand meaningful assignments with clear purposes. They question busy work. They understand the idea of looking at exemplars to help them understand the quality of work expected of them. Patronis teachers understand that their units must be organized around standards. Teachers' favorite activities don't have a place unless they can be justified in terms of standards. Teachers understand that performance assessments must supplement traditional tests if students are to learn how to reason, apply knowledge, and produce quality work.

The principal of Patronis Elementary says math is probably the subject area that has the farthest to go in becoming standards-based. "The idea of standards-based means that teachers choose and organize instructional materials around standards with the end in mind (ideally as assessed by performance tasks). The difficulty is that the textbook is a crutch for many teachers, and the development of performance assessments around which you can aim your instruction takes time (compared to the end-of-chapter tests available in texts)."

After several years of work on curriculum refinement and development of integrated units, the principal at Patronis Elementary started asking teachers to look at student work together. The principal commented, "The norm of working in isolation is a very strong one and it took me almost two years of effort to convince teachers to open up and let others see the kind of work students did in their classrooms and critique the work. It was hard for teachers to get past the feeling that critiques of student work were intended as finger pointing and blaming rather than as constructive analysis and sharing. Teachers have always displayed student work on walls and bulletin boards, but having conversations about why a student or students may have performed poorly is a much more difficult conversation."

At Patronis Elementary in Bay District, Florida, the principal describes her role as constantly keeping teachers focused on the desired student outcomes. Teachers know to talk in terms of which standards they are teaching to. The principal sees herself as lead-teacher, familiar with standards, curriculum, and classroom assessments.