An evaluation of standards-based reform
efforts in the Long Beach, CA middle schools

Update Memo:
Standards-Based Middle School Reform
Long Beach Unified School District, California

Barbara Brauner Berns, Gina Koency and Leslie Talbot
February 1997

(Berns, a Cambridge, MA-based education consultant, and her colleagues provide twice-yearly reports on middle school reform to the Clark Foundation.)

BACKGROUND

On August 30, 1997, we submitted a baseline evaluation report describing the status of middle school reform in Long Beach Unified School District (LBUSD). The report resulted from an examination of school and district level change in the spring of 1996. We were impressed by the district's overall positive spirit and its determination to make changes that will lead to improved student performance.

Our evaluation team found that the standards initiative was "alive and well." We identified the following important accomplishments: (1) completion, dissemination, and initial training on content standards in the core academic subjects; (2) draft standards for English Language Development (ELD) and health education; (3) use of standards to guide the selection of instructional materials and the design of professional development programs; and (4) beginning efforts to align standards and the district's plans for student assessment. We raised some questions about the connections between standards and the various district initiatives, including PRISM, the district's current accountability system, and Certification of Rigorous and Challenging Curriculum, the board's policy for ensuring high quality classroom instruction. We sensed that the district and area offices provided solid leadership and support to begin the standards implementation process.

At the school level we found differences among the four middle schools in our sample: Hamilton, Hill, Marshall and Stanford. Familiarity with content standards varied tremendously, with teachers' knowledge ranging from awareness to active attempts at implementation. Teachers' views ran the spectrum with some believing that standards would not cause them to teach in a different way, others who thought they had already begun to change classroom practice, and still others overwhelmed by the changes that standards will require. Increasingly, in all schools, we met teachers who kept student portfolios. Their form, content, and use varied from classroom to classroom. In general, schools were at different points in the "early" phase of standards-based reform

We also identified many commonalties among schools. We saw an increasing number of opportunities for dialogue and sharing among teachers by subject area and across grade levels. Department chairs became more instrumental in supporting teachers in the implementation of standards-based reform primarily through refocusing department meetings and providing forums for dissemination of successful practices. All sites had some focus on promoting new instructional approaches, meeting the needs of (diverse learners, and collaborative planning among teachers. Classroom instruction in selected schools appeared to include greater use of research-based strategies that emphasize student-centered instruction, which makes content relevant to students' lives. We noted, however, that to implement standards in their classrooms, teachers need additional training in both instructional strategies and subject matter knowledge. They also require strong support from principals who themselves understand the implications of standards for teaching, learning, and assessing students. Our last report suggested that middle school reform will not move forward in an intentional, steady, and positive way until both teachers and administrators are clear about how standards can inform teaching and learning.

INTRODUCTION

With the previous year's visit as background, evaluation team members Gina Koency and Leslie Talbot returned to LBUSD in December 1996 and Barbara Brauner Berns returned in early January 1997. The purpose of our visits was to learn more about LBUSD's progress with standards-based reform and follow up on issues raised during our first visit. Each evaluator spent one day per sample school, interviewing the principal and teachers and observing classrooms. (In some cases, Koency also did follow-up visits.) Our sample consists of 36 teachers identified by their principals as being interested and willing to "move forward"; they represent language arts, math, social studies, science, a few electives, and special education in grades 6-8. For most of these individuals, this was the second interview and observation. We also met with several student groups at each school, to understand better how students think about their school experience and standards-based reform.

At the district level the evaluation team wanted to learn about administrators' perceptions of their progress in implementing standards-based reform, as well as the challenges involved. The capacity and functions of central office are key to standards implementation. It is essential to examine these conditions now, because without strong and consistent support at the district level it is unlikely that principals and teachers can to address standards in ways that will result in improved student learning. Therefore, we met with the following administrators: Dr. Carl Cohn, superintendent of schools; Karen DeVries, director of special projects; Chris Dominguez, director of curriculum and instructional resources; Myrna Rivera Fujimoto, deputy superintendent; Dorothy Harper and Chris Steinhauser, area superintendents; Elizabeth Hartung-Cole, ELD curriculum leader; Kristi Kahl, administrative assistant for middle school reform; Cecelia Osborn, language arts curriculum leader; Rosi Pedersen, mentor teacher coordinator; Judy Seal, vice president of education for the Long Beach community partnership; and Dr. Lynn Winters, assistant superintendent of research, planning, and evaluation. In addition, Koency attended several meetings of the middle school advisory committee and participated in Carpe Diem, the district's second annual professional development day for middle school teachers. Information from our previous evaluation visit and a review of materials developed by the district or individual schools provided the core of our interview protocols for this visit.

On the basis of evaluation activities to date, we see genuine progress in LBUSD's implementation of standards. The district is attending to three important areas: developing standards beyond the core curriculum areas; designing a comprehensive assessment system; and providing professional development to improve the skills and knowledge of teachers who must implement standards in their classrooms. In the schools in our sample, principals and teachers are trying to make sense of the standards and are using them as much as they can, to change the way instruction takes place. The schools vary in their implementation efforts, but each appears to be advancing in a positive direction.

An Introductory Note

Before we begin, we remind readers that this document is a memo; we review recent accomplishments and struggles of LBUSD, raising issues that need attention as the district moves forward. This is not a comprehensive analysis of all of the data collected in LBUSD in December-January. Our next report, due in late summer, will reflect all of the data collected during Spring 1996, Fall 1996 and Spring 1997 visits to LBUSD.

DISTRICT SUPPORT FOR REFORM

Overview

LBUSD is moving ahead with the development and implementation of standards and preliminary designs for a comprehensive assessment system. At central office, area offices, and school building levels, administrators and teachers speak candidly and articulately about how reform is a messy business, particularly when no "tried and true" models exist for implementing standards-based reform. This is frustrating, because Long Beach educators want to move carefully, but expediently, and everything seems to take much longer because no one has experienced the process before.

Dr. Cohn, superintendent of schools, talked about this issue in a recent interview with us:

I think that a lot of our people struggle with this at times: what does a good model look like in the area of standards-based reform? Are we going where no one has ever gone before? And are we using our instincts, what we think is good and appropriated Are there some urban districts out there somewhere that are two years ahead of us that we can go look at and come back and accelerate our progress?

In terms of standards development, the process is moving forward more slowly than initially anticipated. This is due, in large part, to the situation pinpointed above by the superintendent, as well as the methodical approach taken by LBUSD, the breadth of stakeholder participation, and the size of the district. However, we continue to observe a growing alignment among standards, policies, curriculum, instruction, professional development, support programs for students, and assessment.

Whereas the district initially viewed standards as one component of systemic reform, they now are beginning to drive all of the reforms. Chris Dominguez, director of curriculum and instruction resources, provides a good illustration of the implications of standards on material selection:

Part of the paradigm shift is helping teachers move from the textbook guiding their instruction to standards driving their instruction. And we're hearing more and more now that teachers are beginning to understand that shift, that the standard is the focus and then you pull from multiple tools. The textbook is not a sacred thing, it's a resource. It's a tool. But it should be one of a variety.

Progress in the area of assessment is steady, but slower than expected. During our visit this fall, we found growing agreement about the essential components of a district assessment system that attempts to serve the purposes of monitoring standards, providing accountability, and improving instruction. This has resulted in recommendations to use different assessments for determining district, school and classroom levels of student performance. LBUSD now has a tentative timeline that key administrators believe is feasible and that includes (1) focusing assessment development efforts on selected standards in all content areas beginning with language arts and mathematics and (2) developing and setting performance standards to determine students' proficiency in meeting the standards. In addition, key changes will occur in this year's testing schedule and administration, scoring process, and student exemption system.

Professional development is one of the most critical components of standards-based reform; it provides the bridge for bringing the new standards and new assessment approaches into individual school buildings and classrooms. LBUSD offers a range of opportunities for teachers to improve their instructional skills, action research strategies, curriculum development capacity, and subject matter knowledge. There are many solid efforts (described with specificity in the district's recent report to the Foundation), but we found relatively little coherence and coordination among them. Most of the external development programs include standards; however, standards were not the basis for their design or selection. As is often the case with voluntary professional development programs, central office staff and principals lament that they do not necessarily attract teachers with the greatest needs.

The following section provides greater detail on each of these areas. We discuss progress and challenges with standards and assessment. In terms of standards, we address the following:

* Standards design and implementation
* Support for standards implementation
* Districtwide professional development
* Communication about standards
* Standards-related policies

STANDARDS

Standards design and implementation

At the center of middle school reform in LBUSD are content standards, developed by teams of educators to drive all other aspects of the school system. The current standards document is a multi-content and multi-level resource that specifies standards in the four core content areas: mathematics, science,, history, and language arts. Significant effort since our last visit has also led to the completion of draft standards for English Language Development (ELD) and health. Work on standards for visual performing arts, foreign language, and physical education will begin this summer. Discussions are underway about vocational educational education and career education standards.

Every subject area has its own standards document, organized according to seven units: content standards benchmarks (I); grade level curriculum objectives (II); resource management (III): assessment, including performance standards, tasks, rubrics, and anchor papers (IV); course outlines (V); parent communication (VI); and sample integrated units (VII). Specific subject areas are at different points in terms of these units. The district has completed units I, II, and III for the four core content areas. Current efforts focus on unit IV, and since this unit is an important accountability piece, we expect progress will be slow. (See section on assessment in this memo.) In ELD and health, units I and II are currently in draft form. We are not certain whether the district will develop all seven units for these two curriculum areas.

The ELD standards-setting effort has gained the attention of state officials as well as policymakers from other California cities with similar demographics. Staff will present ELD standards, which are closely related to the English language arts standards, to the board in April 1997. This timing is critical because ELD textbook adoption occurs this year in the state. Already the draft standards are driving the process. Accordingly, Elizabeth Hartung-Cole describes one of the textbook selection committee's experiences:

You take the pieces you want. Don't take the pieces you don't want. So that's been really a liberating force in the committee. Some of the teachers came in kicking and bashing the former textbooks they were using, saying, "Oh, we can't wait to get rid of these." And by the end, they go, "Well you know, I think we want to keep the first book because that really addressed the listening skills better than this [other] series." I said fine. "Do we have to keep the whole thing?" "No, you can just take the one book. You don't have to take the others." And you could just see their brains expanding, like, OK, now I get it.

Concurrently, a larger group will start writing and piloting tasks for listening and speaking. An orientation to the ELD standards was part of Carpe Diem with summer and fall targeted for reaching larger numbers of teachers. Not surprisingly, our interviews in the school revealed limited familiarity with ELD standards among those not on development committees. Our sense is that teachers will consider them a welcome resource for improving ELD instruction.

The health standards will guide sixth and seventh grade instruction. They will comprise a considerably smaller document than those developed for other core subjects. We heard some good feedback about the health standards, particularly about the inclusion of a violence prevention component. At the time of our visit, staff had neither disseminated the standards nor begun the training. Fortunately, our spring visit coincides with a health standards training session and will provide an opportunity to observe this "first step" of teacher orientation.

Support for standards implementation

Increasing teachers' knowledge and understanding of standards in all subject areas is an ongoing task that requires efforts at central office, area office, and school building levels. While approaches vary, all target the translation of standards into school-based and classroom implementation. Chris Steinhauser, newly appointed area superintendent in Area C, illustrates the challenge when he talks about our evaluation visit:

I hope you would hear that it [standards] is not an added on thing but The Program. In the beginning, I think when we introduced standards some people thought: how do I do standards? And it's not that way. The standards are The Program.

When we asked other district and area personnel what we should expect to hear and see in the schools, they hoped that principals and teachers would say something like, "I finally get it!" Their sense was that teachers were starting to make connections between their own instructional approaches and expectations and what students should know and be able to do. They anticipated we would see some frustration as well as some hope -- hope built on a better understanding of the implications for their own teaching, materials selection, assessment approaches, etc. They also expected that teachers would be able to give us concrete examples of collaboration with colleagues to change classroom practice and help each other and .students tackle the challenges of standards-based reform.

The perception that teachers' familiarity and comfort with standards has improved is based largely on the fact that central and area office, as well as individual schools, have increased professional development efforts to support teachers' understanding and use of standards. Again this year, Carpe Diem, the day-long series of sessions for middle school teachers and staff, included ideas for standards implementation, the use of new pedagogies, and the design of alternative approaches to assessment.

In all areas, area superintendents and/or staff now are proactive in helping middle school faculties make sense of standards and think about teaching and learning in different ways.

Area A Superintendent Dorothy Harper (as well as several middle school principals) talked with us about Area A's conference on standards, which provided an opportunity for school teams to share experiences about standards implementation. Plans are underway for a followup session in the spring. Prior to the day's event, a team from a less advanced school (in terms of standards) visited several more advanced schools in the area. What's more, all area offices regularly release funds for substitutes and release time in order to support professional development or give teachers the opportunity to meet with peers. In these ways, the district is trying to ensure that teachers begin developing the know-how to implement standards. The Office of Special Projects works with area offices and individual schools on how to access federal, state, and private/corporate funding to support changes related to standards implementation and accompanying reforms.

Another mechanism for school support is direct technical assistance, consultation, and problem-solving from area office staff Chris Steinhauser, Area C Superintendent, emphasized the "support that is given out there [in the schools]." He described this specific strategy in the following way:

When we come out to the schools, I always say we're going to ask you some really hard questions. It may make you feel uncomfortable. It's not meant to attack. It's meant to support and you need to ask tough questions. Professional development needs to be connected to standards. Assessment practice needs to be connected with standards. Parent education needs to be connected to the standards. We need to talk and walk everything about the same thing.

Area offices require all middle schools to develop standards implementation plans, although sites create their own designs and evaluation methods. This results in different approaches in the different schools. With variability in the backgrounds and experience of principals and leadership teams, we found contrasts in the implementation process. This approach is fine as long as the goal is quality plans with the potential for timely and targeted standards-based instruction.

Districtwide professional development

While area offices and individual schools provide support and training for teachers, districtwide professional development is also essential for helping teachers to use standards to address teaching and learning in new ways. From our earliest visits to the district, we found effective professional development and observed good transference of strategies into the classrooms.

During our most recent visits, we identified various approaches for professional development, including short-term workshops, ongoing study groups, year-long seminars, and on-site coaching. Since the development of standards, curriculum leaders, together with program designers (primarily external consultants), have tried to cover specific standards in these programs. It is important to acknowledge, however, that standards are not, for the most part, at the center of these efforts; instead, many of the programs seem to accommodate them. In the future we expect that the district will develop professional development opportunities starting with standards-based needs.

We applaud the fact that LBUSD demonstrates a strong commitment to a few major professional development programs and stays with them over time. This allows a core group to participate in training and subsequently become "teacher leaders" in their buildings, or to assist colleagues in the district's other middle schools. This is most obvious in the district's relationship with Writing to Learn, which focuses on purposeful writing in au curriculum areas. Over 200 middle school teachers have participated in this effort. A newer, but equally compelling, professional development experience is the National Faculty program to enhance teachers' knowledge in history and math/science. Over 40 teachers are part of this effort, which began last summer. It appears that LBUSD will continue and even expand this program. In addition, with its major emphasis on literacy, the district also supports training in reciprocal reading, which now includes about sixty teachers. Again, this is an effort the district plans to expand.

While the district finds these programs valuable, it has begun to look more closely at using its own in-house experts to provide intensive support for teachers. Through the use of a math coach model (with a strong focus on implementation of math standards), LBUSD releases an outstanding math teacher to work with individual math teachers and whole departments in selected schools. Principals and teachers find this an effective approach, and Kristi Kahl suggests this is a model worthy of replication in other academic disciplines. We encourage the district to think seriously about approaches that make better use of their own teacher leaders in designing and conducting professional development and support of their peers. Strengthening and expanding upon this model would be a good next step.

While a number of the districtwide programs seem solid, we find little cohesion and coordination among them. This is not surprising given that over the past several years, one person/team in the district has not had primary responsibility for professional development. Therefore, professional development programs exist as independent efforts supported by particular grant programs or curriculum areas. For their effort to be comprehensive, the district must designate human and fiscal resources to (a) determine the needs of middle school educators; (b) identify the scope, quality, and participation in professional development currently available for middle school teachers; (c) analyze the gap between the need and availability; (d) learn more about the strengths and weaknesses of various professional development models; and (e) develop a comprehensive plan for professional development that balances the needs of the district, schools, individual educators, and students. Without a plan, LBUSD is often in the position of accepting any "good" program that comes along, and that program may not be what is most important in terms of the larger goals and needs of the district or individual schools.

The time seems right for the district to tackle this issue. In our recent interview with Dr. Cohn, we discussed the need for a more coherent professional development effort, one that had teacher leadership at its core. He shared his views on the current situation: "What we've got now is high quality disparate efforts. And it needs to be anchored and it needs to be centered properly. It [professional development] has been a front burner issue with me for the past few months."

Dr. Cohn shared information with us about the district's newest program: a full-service professional development center for one particular feeder 'family" (elementary, middle, and high school) that will have support from outside funding. This is neither a whole-district effort, nor an approach that was part of an already existing professional development plan. Nevertheless, the superintendent believes that it could be the impetus to figure out how to provide equally accessible professional development for the rest of the school system This is neither a pipe dream, because additional support may be available through moneys from the desegregation settlement discussed in previous reports to the Foundation.

We are optimistic that LBUSD will soon begin to tackle the issue of a coordinated professional development plan that balances the needs of the district, individual schools, and educators, all within the context of standards-based reform We are particularly hopeful because Chris Dominguez has been elevated to the position of assistant superintendent of curriculum, instruction, and professional development, giving professional development the place it deserves if LBUSD is going to provide the learning environment that is essential to improving middle school student performance substantially. Given the creativity, sensitivity, and sound knowledge of pedagogy and specific subject matter knowledge among many Long Beach educators, we believe that, collaborating with Chris, they can establish a workable and effective plan through a comprehensive, participatory approach, much like that employed in the development of curriculum content standards.

Standards-related policies

In the past, we found that many district administrators, principals, and teachers expressed concern about how to prepare students for standards and how to support those who could not pass the standards. These worries appear to have developed into new two major areas of emphasis: reading and the new eighth grade initiative. Both focus increased attention on the lowest achieving students in the district.

Reading initiative

Our previous report to the Foundation highlighted the Middle School Task Force and reading strategies seminars that were designed specifically to help middle school teachers work with students with inadequate reading skills. This effort resulted from concerns that sixth graders often lacked the reading skills necessary to perform adequately in regular classrooms and that the situation would only deteriorate with the initiation of standards-based instruction.

Therefore, while efforts in grade 3 focused on improving reading skills, the middle schools needed additional emphasis. During the spring and summer, teachers participated in study groups and training; an examination of various strategies revealed that reciprocal teaching seemed most in sync with the needs and styles of LBUSD teachers. Through this approach, participating teachers began learning how to teach students to read and extract information from text. During our recent visit, we heard a lot from teachers about the value of this strategy. In classroom observations, we noticed more students reading. At this point, at least 60 middle school teachers serve as a core of reading leaders and use at least some reciprocal teaching approaches.

Eighth grade initiative

The eighth grade initiative (also called "multiple F initiative") is another example of policy emanating from the new press for achievement of curriculum standards. Through this initiative, the district sends a message to students and the community that social promotion is over in Long Beach. As a result, the district will provide an alternative placement for grade 8 students who have received more than two Fs at the end of the spring semester grade report. They will not be able to attend grade 9 at any of the LBUSD high schools. The alternative program is still in the design phase, but we understand that standards will be the starting point for curriculum development. The focus will be on strengthening the students' academic performance in basic literacy and math. Technology and community service may be key components. Dorothy Harper, area superintendent and an architect of the plan, explains it as though speaking directly to students:

No longer can you just do time and go on to high school and expect to perform or do well.. The key challenge in implementing this will be to make sure the students stay engaged... I think it's really about helping kids to see themselves as achievers. The reason you [the students] will be here is so that you will do better in high school. And, yes, we still expect you to be able to go to college if you want to! This does not say anything about what we predict for you in the future.

According to Dr. Cohn, this initiative also serves as "a plan to rescue the most academically at-risk kids in our system" The spin-offs of this program have already become apparent: early identification of problems; teachers regularly sitting down with parents; sustained conferences on how students are doing; and, in some schools, a decrease in grade 8 discipline referrals. Several schools in our sample have already restructured parent conferences for Saturdays to make them more convenient for working parents and those who do not live in the neighborhood. The superintendent believes that administrators and teachers already find that "youngsters are going into eighth grade with a seriousness of purpose if they want to go to regular high school."

Another residual effect of this initiative is that schools now pay more attention to grading practices. There appears to be little consistency in what constitutes an A or F in a particular class, department, or school. The eighth grade initiative, with its strong consequences, has caused teachers and principals to assess their own situations. In one of the areas, we heard about efforts to ensure efficacy and consistency among the schools. Likewise, in a school in another area, we heard about the development of minimal requirements for grading in language arts and social studies.

Although the central office staff tried to encourage schools to look at their grading practices, nothing much had happened. However, the eighth grade initiative pushed many principals and teachers to move grading to the top of their agendas. They are concerned about issues of fairness and possible parent appeals and suits, if there are no commonalties among grading procedures. The district recognizes this might be problematic, but will not allow it to prevent the initiative from moving forward.

Communication about standards

Communicating standards to the parent community and community-at-large is challenging in a district the size of LBUSD. Therefore, efforts are currently underway to make standards more visible and "user friendly." Schools place laminated posters in well traveled areas, and brochures are available at all school sites. Frequent mailings to parents include not only the standards themselves, but information about how a particular school might be addressing them. Parent meetings and conferences are becoming commonplace and, more and more, stress achievement of standards.

Internal communication, identified as problematic in previous reports, seems to be improving but is still not where Myrna Rivera Fujimoto, deputy superintendent, thinks it should be. The district now has a communications specialist, and area offices pay increasing attention to this situation through different approaches to get the message out about standards implementation. The one-day conference in Area A, described above, may be replicated in other areas.

ASSESSMENT

Our review of assessment highlights the following areas:

* Recruitment and training of highly qualified individuals
* Tentative agreement on the structure of the assessment system
* Determination of roles for existing assessments
* Priority setting for assessment needs
* Development of needed assessments
* Decisions concerning student exemptions

LBUSD recognizes the need for a sound assessment system to meet three goals: (1) to monitor progress toward student achievement of content standards; (2) to serve as an accountability mechanism; and (3) to inform and improve classroom instruction. The new performance assessments, which will be an integral part of the assessment system, are meant to target areas where teachers and students can direct their efforts. As currently envisioned, the system will consist of a range of tests to meet the demands required for a variety of standards and the need for related information. The challenge of creating an assessment program requires both time and personnel with experience in the area of assessment development, particularly with respect to contemporary models such as performance measures. Furthermore, the lack of validated performance models and trained teachers to develop assessments is not only a concern for LBUSD's efforts, but a nationwide problem that will take time to resolve.

Throughout the district, educators talk about the necessity of such a system but we see three key questions, as yet unanswered: First, will the district be able to develop the capacity to design assessments with a pool of well trained teachers? Second, will there be adequate fiscal resources to establish and implement such a comprehensive system, a very expensive undertaking? Third, since this is new territory, will the district and public be patient with a possibly slow but steady timetable for development and refinement?

Many districts are reticent to undertake such efforts because of these big and often "thorny" issues. Therefore, we applaud LBUSD for going forward. It is the one site that is struggling with the difficult technical cost, and policy issues associated with a large-scale assessment that includes both standardized and authentic assessment strategies.

As we interviewed staff and reviewed documents, we identified the following activities, key decisions and related issues underlining the district's assessment initiative:

Recruitment and training of highly, qualified individuals: The district has recruited bright, interested and experienced teachers to participate in the design of valid performance assessments, a monumental task. These teachers participated in training by consultant Everett Kline, through a Foundation grant to the Council for Basic Education. He helped teachers focus on assessment tools and performance standards, and the majority of participants found the session useful and the presenter effective. Half of the participants did not, however, see the connection between this session and building an assessment system This was a first step, and additional ongoing training is essential for this group. We are unclear about what future plans are underway and hope that the district will consider intensive training supplemented by strong support from central office.

Tentative agreement on the structure of the assessment system: During our last visit, we learned that the district had tentatively identified, by content area, which content standards will be assessed by the norm-referenced test, performance measures, or classroom-based tests. Agreement on this approach provides a giant leap and will allow efforts to begin.

Determination of roles for existing assessments: LBUSD plans to use the norm-referenced portion of the CAS2, the district's student testing program, ITAS, again this spring to assess middle grade students. However, the norms exceed the five-year limitation imposed by the state, and the district will need a new test for next year. In addition to a new norm-referenced test, the district also wants to institute a quality standardized assessment in Spanish. Therefore, the district is now establishing guidelines for reviewing and evaluating potential assessments.

Another challenge is to find a norm-referenced test that can be used to assess a broader range of standards. For example, the mathematics part of the ITAS is useful for assessing a few of the content standards, particularly that dealing with computation. The proposed performance tests will include the open-ended mathematics items that have been developed (to assess a variety of content standards in mathematics), and the direct writing test used to assess language arts standards 10 and 11. Classroom-based measures include running records, special projects, and portfolios. Assessments such as these entail lengthy testing times and therefore are more appropriately implemented at the classroom level.

The district has made another key decision: to create an assessment matrix at the level of the benchmarks, not just at the level of the standards. (This matrix will have benchmarks along one side and multiple assessment tools across the top.) Mathematics has developed a preliminary matrix following this pattern, identifying ITAS items and open-ended items for each content standard at the benchmark level. Language arts staff are currently working on their matrix, and the other core content areas will follow a similar process.

Priority-setting for assessment needs: The district, realizing the challenge of developing assessments to fit all 32 broad standards in the core curriculum, identified a portion of the standards in each of the four core content areas as a starting place for developing assessments. In language arts, for example, the focus will be the standards that address reading. By the end of this year, the district anticipates completing the assessment system for the content standard on reading including the performance standards tied to these reading content standards. This approach will involve training teacher groups in the four content areas simultaneously in order to ensure a common understanding for all involved. The district anticipates this approach will be more successful than past efforts to develop performance tasks that proved to be good instructional activities rather than solid testing items. The district expects that mathematics and language arts will complete their selected content standards all the way to the performance standards this year.

The selection of a small number of standards to assess initially represents practicality and realism. In spite of the need to focus on all content areas, the design of high quality assessments requires a slow but steady effort by committed teachers with support from knowledgeable educators or consultants at the district level. Therefore, the district's priority setting makes good sense.

Development of needed assessments: Mathematics curriculum leader, Dixie Dawson, leads the process of developing, piloting, and revising measures. The first accomplishment is the development of "draft" open-ended mathematics tasks, correlated to the content standards and now being piloted by selected teachers. The piloting teachers will collect student work that will form the basis for rubric development and the establishment of anchor papers for scoring purposes. At testing time, the district will administer only one of the open-ended items, with slight modifications. In science and history the process of developing tasks is slower, partly because district reviewers found that the initial items worked better as instructional activities than as student assessments.

Decisions concerning student exemptions: This year all middle school students, including LEP and special education, will participate in CAS2. The district will report data for these students separately. The district recognizes that assessing progress toward meeting the standards means the progress of all students. This decision is also tied to the initiatives at third and eighth grade and Title I regulations. Of course, certain modifications will be considered for these student populations.

We believe that the progress made to date is appropriate, especially if the new system can be used to monitor standards progress, serve as an accountability tool, and inform instruction. It is always difficult to serve several masters, and there are few good models for LBUSD to build upon. However, with its ingenuity, creativity, and technical knowledge, we believe that the district will move forward. We hope the district will turn to the research community as well as to others' thinking about the design of large-scale assessment in order to learn from others' successes and failures. This is indeed an ambitious enterprise and one they should not have to undertake alone.

One of the most critical concerns is to acknowledge the limited knowledge teachers have with respect to testing, either about standardized testing or performance measures. The problems the district experienced in its previous effort to develop assessment support our view. Therefore, we suggest repeated and expanded training and support throughout the time teachers are working on the various components of the assessment system. This will not only help improve the validity of instruments, but will enhance the capacity and confidence of participating teachers. Ultimately, the district and its students will benefit.

Last, we raise some concerns about the district's commitment to a comprehensive assessment system. We did not hear any convincing information that the district has developed a fiscal or staffing plan to support such a comprehensive assessment system -- one that will require new development, piloting, revisions, administration, scoring, and reporting processes. Nor did we see evidence of the community's commitment to support less traditional components of the system. Therefore, when we return to LBUSD, we expect to hear more discussion about these issues at the central office and board level.

If we had to summarize the status of assessment, we would quote Lynn Winters: "There's a real press for [student] evaluation in this district... The demand is in place. Our ability to meet it is not [yet]." But, we would add, the understanding of what it takes is definitely expanding.

STANDARDS IMPLEMENTATION AT THE SCHOOL LEVEL

Hamilton, Hill, Marshall and Stanford Middle Schools comprise our sample. In these schools, we found that standards implementation demonstrates steady, often uphill progress. Each school builds on last year's experiences and is moving in a positive direction, trying to make sense of the standards and how to make them the center of teaching and learning in their buildings. The schools differ greatly, however, in the pace of the changes that are occurring.

Our sample represents the range of middle schools in LBUSD. As such, we do not expect them to be at the same place or to have the same way of "doing things." Recognizing this, we were delighted to hear about sharing among the principals of all our sites. Each principal believes there is something she can learn from her colleagues, as well as from area office staff.

In each school we identified some impressive initiatives to promote opportunities for teachers to learn from each other. These include such activities as peer observations; buddy programs; instructionally-focused department meetings; team meetings and faculty meetings; study and action research groups; and sharing strategies learned at different formal programs away from the school. Participating teachers are increasingly likely to use strategies learned from these experiences in their classrooms.

Among our four sample schools, we learned about many activities geared to standards
implementation. While we do not want to tell the stories of individual schools in this report,
we can list efforts that indicate a growing culture of standards. As stated in previous reports, within every school there are "pockets of excellence." Our perception, however, is that during each visit, more teachers in our sample are coming on board, trying new approaches, and becoming more reflective and active about implementing standards.

Below are some indicators of progress:

Teams of teachers (in specific academic departments) examine existing curriculum and syllabus, with an eye toward teaching the standards. They identify standards to be covered by grade, review and refine the existing curriculum as appropriate; develop new projects to meet specific standards; and develop performance assessments.
Teachers compile and share lessons that they believe meet the standards and stimulate student learning and growth.
Teachers discuss consistency 'in grading academic subjects and citizenship and consistency in homework. In a few situations, they develop a shared method of grading.
Teachers identify specific language and content standards to serve as school-wide standards, requiring attention by all departments.
Teachers use rubrics and are beginning to share the "same" rubric among different classes where students have common assignments. In many cases, these are aligned to CAS2 or content standard/benchmarks.
Teachers create performance assessments for use across school projects and grade levels.
Teachers pilot the use of different types of portfolios, including electronic portfolios, to document and assess student work.
Teachers plan and implement extended standards-based projects (one each trimester) that require students to do visual writing, and oral presentations.
Teachers prominently display the district's large laminated posters, outlining the content standards. Likewise, these often appeared in the schools' main offices and corridors.
Teachers display student work, frequently in hallways, school walls and common areas as well as classrooms. Often the work notes standards relevant to the particular work.
When teachers write daily classroom agendas on the board, they reference specific content standards to be addressed during the day.
· Schools disaggregate test score data by ethnicity and gender and use this data to improve instruction.
Schools increase the opportunities for teachers to meet with parents and families to talk about student performance and share student work.
Students are well aware of the standards, and teachers believe they have helped clarify expectations for students and their families.

In individual schools and classes where we saw progress in terms of standards implementation, we also observed more authentic classroom instruction. For example, there is evidence of:

High expectations for student performance; explicit explanations of what teachers expect
Strong encouragement and "push" for students to perform at higher levels
Multiple instructional strategies within single classroom periods
Frequent use of supplemental resources
Creative assignments that require higher-order thinking skills by students
Communities of learners among teachers
Growing communities of learners among students.

In general the schools and classes that are furthest along put a high priority on student work. In academic team meetings and grade level meetings, teachers often share and reflect on individual student work. This often includes evaluating student work and lessons for inclusion of standards, and whether lessons will help students to achieve standards. Likewise, more and more of the building-based professional development includes at least some component of analyzing student work.

Where individual schools or teachers are struggling with implementation of standards, we found less rigorous assignments and, not surprisingly, lower quality work. These teachers seemed to have a more limited repertoire of skills for meeting the needs of diverse learners. They also seemed frustrated, largely because students were having difficulty understanding assignments. In these situations, teachers frequently had problems with some of the newer,standards-based texts.

Regardless of progress toward standards implementation, the schools face similar challenges:

Teachers, in their attempts to implement standards, frequently focus on coverage as opposed to depth. Some feel compelled to cover all the standards that pertain to their subject area, even if students "aren't ready to move on."
Teachers want to use content standards in their teaching; however, this sometimes means they try to "fit them in" into whatever they are doing. Many still do not see that the standards must drive the instruction.
Teachers struggle with the issue of time to work on standards-related activities; there is still a lot done on their "own time" with their own resources.
Teachers face additional challenges created by the increasing inclusion of special needs students in regular classrooms. Their knowledge and familiarity with strategies and ways of supporting students seem limited.
Schools have a strong focus on literacy. Some have incorporated elective classes for reading; others have developed special classroom activities and tutorials. The emphasis on reciprocal reading and similar approaches is evident across sites. Teachers appear particularly concerned about building reading skills (a focus on vocabulary and reading for understanding).

CONCLUSION

Our general sense is that LBUSD, at all levels of the system, is deeply committed to standards-based middle school reform. The central and area offices continue to look at ways they can improve support to the schools and how they can align the many initiatives that are part of existing school operations and reform efforts. In terms of standards development, the district now has six sets of standards (two in draft) and plans for others. The issue of assessment is complex and deserves attention in terms of what will be feasible given costs, technical issues, capacity, and community support. Professional development, necessary to bring about changes in curriculum instruction, and assessment, is critical. While we believe that it has been solid, yet fragmented, we are optimistic that the time is finally ripe for developing a coordinated and comprehensive professional development program.

Among the classrooms in our sample schools, we see progress. In many situations, we observed a growing recognition of the importance of standards to drive teaching and learning. In many schools, educators are changing their approaches to instruction and assessment. They seem to be working coflaboratively within subject matter teams to develop consistency among classes. Most importantly, they appear to be raising their expectations of students and the work they will perform.

It is difficult to change the teaching and learning environment in schools and to implement standards-based reforms. We found wide variety within and among schools. Thereforedepending on where they started, schools need substantially different types of support in order to advance their efforts. However, leadership at the building level (principals and "teacher leaders") seems strong, and we will watch for change over time.

##

Back to "Momentum builds for school reform"

An evaluation of standards-based reform efforts in the Long Beach, CA middle schools

An evaluation of standards-based reform
efforts in the Long Beach, CA middle schools