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

It Takes a Vision: Conclusion

PDF versionPDF version

Perfecting the Wheel

Leadership matters when it comes to producing high-quality education standards. That is the first lesson that states that want to improve their own standards can take from the experiences of Massachusetts, California, and Indiana.

In Massachusetts, the venerable and affectionate Jack Rennie, a CEO, was loved by all. Without his efforts to get business, educators, and government to the table, the state's internal conflicts may well have prevented new standards from ever being written. In California, Governor Pete Wilson pushed hard for reform and created a political environment in which it could thrive. In Indiana, the role was played by tough-minded, politically savvy Governor Frank O'Bannon, who created an atmosphere that ensured that everyone felt welcome at the table--essential in a state that puts a premium on being nice.

In the end, however, tough, hand-to-hand combatants willing to find a way to make reform work in the face of overwhelming odds must enter the fray. Had it not been for Bill Evers's determination to find victory in defeat, California's math standards would have remained touchy-feely. In Massachusetts, Sandra Stotsky fought the good fight, standing firm for English standards not warped by whole language, and then ensuring rigor in math and science standards, too.

And, of course, there's Marion Joseph, a grandmother who saw her grandchildren being strangled by a failed curriculum and got in the face of anyone who would listen.

If strong leaders are the key to pushing standards through, an obsession with laissez-faire consensus-building guarantees that they'll fail. In both Massachusetts and California, early attempts at reforming standards were thwarted by committees more focused on keeping parties happy than making hard decisions. John Silber played the role of committee buster in Massachusetts, getting involved with standards-based reform at the time the Boston Globe called the process "inclusive to the point of paralysis."

Instead, "steered" consensus--bringing opposing parties around to accepting the importance of fact-driven, explicit standards--is important. At times, it takes the subtle hand of a Jack Rennie in Massachusetts, and at others, the iron hand of a Bill Evers in California.

Silber's decision to cut the size of the state board in half and rearrange the framework committees created a lot of tension between whole-language advocates and traditionalists in the world of English instruction--but it also broke the logjam.

Still, for all the knock-down fights that reformers had to win to achieve great standards, a key lesson is that bipartisanship is essential. When the Golden State learned in 1994 that its students were among the worst performing in the nation on reading and math NAEP scores, the public outcry forced both sides of the aisle to figure out a way to make it work.

Likewise in Indiana, as rust began creeping into the state, parents, higher-ed leaders, and even teacher union leaders had to concede that what was in place wasn't working.

Sometimes, bipartisanship must be forged. That was Jack Rennie's brilliance in Massachusetts. A court order to correct funding inequities could easily have led to more money, but no more accountability. Rennie forged a coalition of the willing when no one else thought it possible. But money helped, too--the Massachusetts teacher unions got the money they wanted in return for not pushing back against standards.

Finally, what set these states apart was their willingness to accept that standards are the starting point of any serious reform. That dedication lead leaders to demonstrate leadership, seek bipartisanship, fight the good fight, spend some money, and bring in expertise. States serious about reforming their education systems should look to those that succeeded in producing these standards and shouldn't hesitate to turn to California, Massachusetts, and Indiana for help. The results--for your state and its children--are well worth the effort.

* * * 

Joanne Jacobs, a freelance writer and blogger (joannejacobs.com) based in California, is the author of Our School: The Inspiring Story of Two Teachers, One Big Idea and the Charter School That Beat the Odds (Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), which tells the story of a San Jose charter high school that prepares Mexican-American students for college.

back to top

< Previous  Next >

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