David T. Conley Katie V. Drummond Alicia de Gonzalez Jennifer Rooseboom Odile Stout

1. Reaching the Goal: The Applicability and Importance of the Common Core State Standards to College and Career Readiness David T. Conley Katie V. Drummond Alicia de Gonzalez Jennifer Rooseboom Odile Stout

2. Research Questions • How applicable are the Common Core standards to college courses? • When they are perceived as applicable, how important are the Common Core standards to college courses? • 1897 postsecondary instructors made two straightforward judgments on a per-standard basis. • All instructors were asked to rate all standards.

3. Summary of Findings • Most Common Core standards received high ratings for applicability and importance. • ELA and literacy standards with highest ratings include those at higher levels of scope and breadth: • mastering comprehension of nonfiction text with grade-appropriate complexity • extracting key ideas and details from text • possessing general writing skills and writing routinely • using research to support written analysis. • Mathematics standards with highest ratings include those with an emphasis on thinking, reasoning, problem solving: • reasoning quantitatively • interpreting functions • The Standards for Mathematical Practice (emphasizing problem solving, analytic thinking, and other thinking skills) • 96% of respondents agree that the Common Core State Standards sufficiently challenge students to engage higher-level cognitive skills.

4. 1897 Courses Rated

5. 1819 Respondents: 2-year vs. 4-year

6. Respondents Geographically Distributed

7. Respondents by Institution Type

8. Applicability and Importance Rating Scales Instructors rated applicability of the CCSS for success in their course. If applicability rated in first three categories, then importance rated.

9. Number of Rated Statements

10. Applicability Ratings for ELA and Literacy:General Education Courses

11. Applicability Ratings for ELA and Literacy:Career Oriented Courses

12. Overall Applicability for ELA & Literacy • Percent of all respondents who rated at least one standard as either prerequisite, reviewed, introduced, or subsequent.

13. Importance Ratings • Importance and average ratings rolled up to the strand level • Respondents chose from among an interval scale: • 4 = most, 3 = more, 2 = less, and 1 = least. • Means are to summarize responses only. • Modal responses found in appendices indicate most popular responses.

14. Reading Standards for Literature • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=532

15. Reading Standards for Informational Texts • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=487

16. Writing Standards • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=504

17. Speaking and Listening Standards • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=1500

18. Language Standards • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=1549

19. Reading Standards Literacy in History/ Social Studies • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=571

20. Reading Standards for Literacy in Science &Technical Subjects • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=1063

21. Writing for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, &Technical Subjects • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=1257

22. Additional Data in Full Report • We present additional data in the report: • average importance ratings at the topic level (the two to four organizing categories or sub-areas) • ratings at the standard level, with the four importance ratings categories collapsed into dichotomous ratings: (1) more or most important, or (2) less or least important • standards that were rated above or below the average of other standards in the strand

23. Additional Data in Full Report • In an appendix, we show full ratings (applicability and importance frequencies) for each standard. • FOR EXAMPLE:

24. Applicability Ratings for Mathematics:General Education Courses

25. Applicability Ratings for Mathematics:CareerOriented Courses

26. Overall Applicability for Mathematics • Percent of all respondents who rated at least one standard as either prerequisite, reviewed, introduced, or subsequent.

27. Importance Ratings • Importance and average ratings rolled up to the strand level • Respondents chose from among an interval scale: • 4 = most, 3 = more, 2 = less, and 1 = least. • Means are to summarize responses only. • Modal responses found in appendices indicate most popular responses.

28. Number and Quantity Standards • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • One English response. n=796

29. Algebra Standards • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • No English responses. n=792

30. Functions Standards • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light blue bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=603

31. Geometry Standards • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=331

32. Statistics andProbability Standards • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=739

33. Mathematical Practices • Pie chart shows respondents to this strand by subject area. • Bar chart shows average importance rating at strand level by subject area. • Light green bars are subjects with <5% of responses. n=1339

34. Are the English Standards, Taken as a Whole, a Coherent Representation of the Fields of Knowledge Necessary for Success in Your Course? n = 1769

35. Are the Mathematics Standards, Taken as a Whole, a Coherent Representation of the Knowledge and Skills Necessary for Success in Your Course? n = 1706

36. Do the Standards Reflect a Level of Cognitive Demand Sufficient for Students Who Meet the Standards to Be Prepared to Succeed in Your Course? n = 1798

37. Do the Standards You Just Reviewed Omit Key Knowledge and Skills? n = 1785

38. Comments from Additional Questions • Two most common deficits of standards mentioned: • The standards should focus more on problem solving and critical thinking. • The wording of the standards could be improved for clarity.

39. How Applicable Are the Common Core Standards to College Courses? • Overall applicability is high. • Variations exists among content areas and across different strands. • The Speaking and Listening and Language strands are rated applicable across essentially all subjects.

40. How Important Are the Common Core Standards to Success in a Wide Range of Postsecondary Courses? • Importance rating of most ELA/L and many math standards exceeds 3 on a four-point scale. • The mathematics standards show a wider range of applicability and lower overall importance ratings. • Geometry category may be a candidate for further review. • The Standards for Mathematical Practices received the highest importance ratings from a very broad cross-section of respondents.

41. Do the Standards Prepare Students for Both College and Career? • Respondents tended to rate the reading and writing standards at the same applicability level for both baccalaureate and career-oriented courses. • Respondents from career-oriented course categories rated the Standards for Mathematical Practices importance nearly as high as mathematics and science instructors. • Some important overlap exists among Common Core standards that are applicable to and important for many general education courses and for many career-oriented courses.

42. Will Students Who Do Well on the Common Assessments Be Ready for College? • College and career readiness is a multidimensional construct, and content knowledge is only one of several key dimensions. • Achieving the goal of a college- and career-ready student is dependent on other factors that are not addressed by the Common Core standards. • The Common Core standards appear to be well aligned in English Language Arts/Literacy and mathematics, but other dimensions exist as well.

43. The Four Keys to College and Career Readiness Key Content Knowledge Key Cognitive Strategies Key Transition Knowledge & Skills Key Learning Skills & Techniques

44. Future Directions for Subsequent Research and Analysis • Look more in-depth at elements such as the ratings from specific content areas or from specific types of institutions. • Analyze content from the ~1800 syllabi submitted by respondents. • Compare the results from this survey with findings from other surveys that ask postsecondary faculty about the preparation of high school students. • Determine the relationship between the Common Core standards and the new version of the General Education Development (GED) certificate currently under design.

45. Feedback We welcome feedback or questions about the report: david_conley@epiconline.org