Thomas B. Fordham Institute - Advancing Educational Excellence

The State of State Standards 2006

August 29, 2006

by Chester E. Finn, Jr., Michael J. Petrilli, Liam Julian

* notes that states have updated these standards since our last review.

Two-thirds of schoolchildren in America attend class in states with mediocre (or worse) expectations for what their students should learn. That's just one of the findings of Fordham's The State of State Standards 2006, which evaluates state academic standards. The average state grade is a "C-minus"--the same as six years earlier, even though most states revised their standards since 2000.

Does this make the case for national standards? See our other new report, To Dream the Impossible Dream: Four Approaches to National Standards and Tests, to find out.

Read Chester E. Finn, Jr.'s August 31, 2006, testimony before the No Child Left Behind Commission on this topic.

Read the media release for both reports.

Contents

Utah

PDF versionPDF version

*English-C

  • Evaluation and Assessment, 1-6
  • Secondary Language Arts Criterion-Referenced Test Blueprints, 7-11
  • Elementary Language Arts Core Curriculum, K-6
  • Language Arts Standards, K-6, 2003
  • Language Arts Standards, 7-11,1999
  • Utah: Summary of its English Language Arts and Reading Standards
  • Utah K-3 Literacy Framework for Successful Instruction and Intervention
  • Utah Direct Writing Assessment
  • Evaluation and Assessment: Elementary Language Arts

Utah's English standards are a dichotomy. Its primary grade standards are quite good, but its secondary grade standards leave much to be desired. For example, in grade 9, students are expected to "determine when and where to use comprehension strategies before, during, and after reading." They are also highly repetitive, with little increase in complexity from grade to grade. The orientation is focused on process rather than content. This is unwise. Further, Utah includes within these documents no literary material of merit. It gives no recommended reading list, no names of authors, no information on literary traditions. And oddly, the state seems to go out of its way to deny America's status as a country with its own civic culture, as American literature garners no mention in its English standards. It is only by virtue of its well-done primary grade standards that Utah escapes a lower grade.

Read the full report on Utah's English standards here.

Mathematics-D

  • Core Standards, revised May 2003

Here's a statement only an education theorist could love: "[C]urrent research makes clear that how mathematics is taught is as important or more important than the mathematical concepts being taught." That's the clarion call to using dice, tiles, blocks, and calculators that opens Utah's middle and high school standards, and the standards-writer certainly took the hint. Manipulatives are everywhere in these standards. For example, when working with "algebraic properties and symbols," students are encouraged to solve problems "numerically: from a table or guess and check," "algebraically, including the use of manipulatives," "graphically," or "using technology," which would seem to include just about everything but solving the problem. Probability is conflated with arithmetic several times in the lower grades, and nowhere are students told to memorize basic number facts. Serious deficiencies in coverage of advanced topics, not surprisingly, abound.

Read the full report on Utah's math standards here. 

 
Science-C

  • Integrated Science Standards, 2005

This document has its shining attributes. Its science process material--material that is often prone to insubstantial representation--is thoughtfully integrated with disciplinary content. But although the standards contain many well-reasoned sentiments ("objectivity is a matter of degree," for example), other propositions are less admirable. Students are instructed that "science is a search for meaning," which is certainly more than a tad problematic. Content is unsatisfactory. Biology gets the best treatment, and evolution is presented forthrightly. Physical science does not fare so well and modern physics is entirely absent. Earth/space science content is thin and K-8 chemistry doesn't offer proper preparation for high school. The use of mathematical problem solving is minimal. Certainly these standards contain worthy portions, but, when weighed in bulk, they are far less impressive. 

Read the full report on Utah's science standards here. 

 
U.S. History-C

  • Social Studies Core Curriculum: Grades K-6, 2000; Grades 7-12, 2002, Utah State Office of Education

Utah's history instruction begins in third grade with the study of "indigenous (native) people of the United States," and students move into Utah's state history the next year. U.S. history takes the stage in fifth grade. The first half of fifth grade is U.S. history before 1800, and the second half is divided between the 19th and 20th centuries. The content is generally good, but because Utah presents information in topic strands (instead of chronological segments) events are artificially separated. Thus, the Constitution's development is not mentioned after the Revolution--instead, students skip from the Revolution directly to 19th century westward expansion. The Constitution is presented separately, under the "events and leaders in the United States through the nineteenth century" section. The eighth grade U.S. history sequence, which recovers information from exploration to westward expansion, is mostly comprehensive. Not so in high school, when important political history--such as mentioning FDR in relation to the New Deal--is missing. Utah's standards alternate between good and comprehensive, and bad and incomplete. Significant restructuring will be required to get this document up to snuff.

Read the full report on Utah's U.S. history standards here. 

 
World History-F

  • Social Studies Core Curriculum: 2002

Utah third graders are asked to "investigate how environments and communities change over time through the influence of people." Comparisons are drawn between early Native Americans and South American cultures, such as the Inca. This first exposure to world history is made useless, however, because the standards do not provide enough information for students to make such comparisons. The state loves comparisons, but much of the time the standards leave out crucial information, or they attempt to compare entities, which would normally defy such evaluation. For example, fourth graders are asked to compare the governments and economies of Utah and Japan: "identify and compare major industries of Utah and Japan." Such statements are of little value, and students would be much better served by receiving basic information about Japan. Much of the world history content is housed under a required high school course on "World Civilizations." But it is sequenced in no comprehensible way, and has very little in the way of specifics or general coherence. Shame on Utah for not caring about the world!

Read the full report on Utah's world history standards here. 

back to top

< Previous  Next >

© Copyright 2003-2010 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute. All Rights Reserved.

Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook