Stars by Which To Navigate?

View Best in Class

The Grading

Common Grading Metric

Reviewers compared each set of standards to subject-specific content expectations (see pages 11–16). Based on that comparison, they assigned the standards two scores, one for “content and rigor,” the other for “clarity and specificity.” “Content and rigor” is scored on a 0-7-point scale while “clarity and specificity” is scored on a 0-3-point scale, as follows.

Content and rigor

7: Standards meet all of the following criteria:

• Standards are top-notch in terms of the content chosen. The coverage of the subject is suitable, good decisions have been made about what topics to include, and nothing of importance has been overlooked. (No more than 5 percent of the content outlined in the subject-specific content expectations is missing.)
• Not only is the appropriate content covered by the standards, but it is covered well (i.e., in a high quality manner).
• Good decisions have also been made about what content should be left out. Excellent standards do not include much superfluous material. (No more than 5 percent of the content in the standards is unnecessary.)
• Standards distinguish between more important and less important content and skills either directly (i.e., by articulating which are more or less important) OR via the number of standards dedicated to particular content and skills (i.e., more important content/skills have more standards while less important content/skills have fewer standards). The standards do not overemphasize topics of little importance or underemphasize topics of great importance.
• The level of rigor is appropriate for the targeted grade level(s). Students are expected to learn the content and skills in a sensible order and an appropriately increasing level of difficulty. The standards, taken as a whole, define a core literacy for all students in the subject under review; at the same time, the standards that run through grade 12 are sufficiently challenging to ensure that students who achieve proficiency by the final year of high school will be ready for college or work and citizenship.
• The standards do not overemphasize the importance of students’ life experiences or “real world” problems. They do not embrace fads, suggest political bias, or teach moral dogma. They do not imply that all interpretations are equally valid (regardless of logic or the adequacy of supporting evidence). The standards also avoid other major subject-specific problems identified by the reviewers. While the standards are not perfect, any defects are marginal.

6: Standards fall short in one or more of the following ways:

• Some crucial content (as specified in the subject-specific content expectations) is missing (at least 5 percent and up to 20 percent).
• The content is covered satisfactorily but not in a high quality manner.
• Some of the content in the standards is unnecessary (at least 5 percent and up to 20 percent).
• Standards do not fully distinguish between more and less important content and skills (i.e., importance is neither expressly articulated nor conveyed via the number of standards dedicated to particular topics). In other words, the standards overemphasize no more than one or two topics of little importance or underemphasize no more than one or two topics of great importance.
• Standards at particular grade levels are not quite as rigorous as they could be, or are too rigorous (i.e., expectations are slightly too high or too low).
• There are minor problems or shortcomings (e.g., one or more of the problems listed in the last paragraph under score 7 affects the standards in a small way, or there are other minor subject-specific problems).

5: Standards fall short in one or more of the following ways:

• Some crucial content is missing (at least 20 percent and up to 35 percent).
• While most of the appropriate content is covered by the standards, the content is nonetheless covered in a manner that is not satisfactory (i.e., the standards cover the right material but do not cover that material robustly, thus, the material is shortchanged in some way).
• Some of the content in the standards is unnecessary (at least 20 percent and up to 35 percent).
• Standards do not distinguish between more and less important content and skills (i.e., importance is not articulated or conveyed in any way). The standards often overemphasize topics of little importance or underemphasize topics of great importance.
• Standards generally need to be more or less rigorous than they are at certain grade levels (i.e., expectations are too high or too low).
• There may be an important shortcoming (perhaps one of the problems listed in the last paragraph of score 7, or there are other subject-specific problems).

4: Standards fall short in one or more of the following ways:

• At least 35 percent and up to 50 percent of crucial content is missing.
• Some of the content in the standards is unnecessary (at least 35 percent, and up to 50 percent).
• There may be a few critical shortcomings (as listed above) although the standards contain no serious errors.

3: Standards fall short in one or more of the following ways:

• At least 50 percent and up to 65 percent of crucial content is missing.
• At least 50 percent and up to 65 percent of the content in the standards is unnecessary.
• There are serious problems or shortcomings or errors in the standards, although (the standards have some redeeming qualities and there is some evidence of rigor).

2: Standards fall short in one or more of the following ways:

• At least 65 and up to 80 percent of crucial content is missing.
• At least 65 percent and up to 80 percent of the content in the standards is unnecessary.
• There may be several serious problems, shortcomings, or errors (as listed above).

• 1: Standards fall short in one or more of the following ways:*

• At least 80 percent of crucial content is missing.
• At least 80 percent of the content in the standards is unnecessary.
• There are numerous problems, shortcomings, or errors (as listed above).

0: Standards fall short in one or more of the following ways:

• The content of the standards does not address or barely addresses the subject-specific content expectations.
• The content is poorly chosen and fails to provide the level of rigor appropriate for the targeted grade level(s).
• Content is full of problems, shortcomings, and errors (as listed above).

Clarity and Specificity

3: Standards are coherent,clear,and well organized.
The scope and sequence of the material is apparent and sensible. They provide solid guidance to users (students, teachers, curriculum directors, test developers, textbook writers, etc.) about the content knowledge and skills required to do well on the exam. The right level of detail is provided. The document(s) are written in prose that the general public can understand and are mostly free from jargon. The standards describe things that are measurable (i.e., can lead to observable, comparable results across students and schools). The standards as a whole clearly illustrate the growth expected through the grades.

2: The standards are somewhat lacking in coherence, clarity, or organization.
The scope and sequence of the material is not completely apparent or sensible. The standards do not quite provide a complete guide to users as to the content knowledge and skills required to do well on the exam (i.e., as a guide for users, there are shortcomings that were not already addressed by the content and rigor score). The standards provide insufficient detail. The prose is generally comprehensible but there is some jargon and some vague or unclear language. Some standards are not measurable.

1: The standards are somewhat coherent, clear, and organized.
They offer limited guidance to users (students, teachers, curriculum directors, textbook writers, etc.) about the content knowledge and skills required to do well on the exam, but there are significant shortcomings (as a guide for users) that were not already addressed by the content and rigor score. The standards are seriously lacking in detail, and much of their language is vague enough to leave unclear what is being asked of students and teachers.

0: The standards are incoherent and/or disorganized.
They are not helpful to users. The standards are sorely lacking in detail. Scope and sequence is a mystery.

Final Grades

A final grade for each set of standards is calculated by adding the “content and rigor” score to the “clarity and specificity” score.

A = 9 or 10 points
B = 7 or 8 points
C = 5 or 6 points
D = 3 or 4 points
F = 0, 1, or 2 points

• Tweet
• A A A RESIZE
• PRINT