8 minute read
Power Standards
by NYSASCD
Power Standards: The Answer to the Reality of Too Many Standards and Too Little Time
Douglas B. Reeves
Douglas B. Reeves, Ph.D., is an award-winning administrator and teacher, as well as the author of more than 40 books and more than 100 articles on leadership and education. He has twice been named to the Harvard University Distinguished Authors Series and was named the Brock International Laureate for his contributions to education. Dr. Doug Reeves currently provides a variety of research-based coaching and educational services to organizations around the world through The Center for Successful Leadership. Previously, he founded the Leadership and Learning Center, which works to improve the quality of educational systems for students around the world. Doug articles and videos are available as free downloads at CreativeLeadership.net. He Tweets @DouglasReeves. He lives in Boston.
Introduction
Even before the global pandemic, teachers around the globe faced a conflict between the time available for instruction and the avalanche of academic standards and curricula. Now, with post-COVID learning loss pervasive (World Bank, 2021), it is more important than ever to recognize that schools do not have the time to address every standard. The question is, with the time available during the school day, which standards are most important? In this article, we consider the need for Power Standards, the method for creating them, and how educational leaders can help teachers and students focus on what matters most.
Why Power Standards?
The fundamentally flawed assumption in every set of academic standards is that students need only one year of instruction to achieve proficiency. That assumption was inappropriate before the pandemic, as state and national data suggested that significant numbers of students were not reading on grade level before the pandemic (Green & Goldstein, 2019) and it is wildly inaccurate in the postpandemic world in which teachers are struggling not only with learning loss, but in regression in behavior and
classroom norms. In my travels around the United States, I hear every week of teachers struggling with kindergarten and first grade students who have regressed in toilet training, third grade teachers who report that students irregular polygons.” “You do have to teacher argumentative essays and you do not have to teach prepositional phrases.” But this will never happen. No interest group goes to the state capital to advocate for what
do not know letters and numbers, and middle school students who are reading at a primary level. Failure to recognize the reality of this learning loss is as bad as failure to recognize the threat of the pandemic in the spring of 2020. When students need more than a year of learning to catch up, then there are only two options: A 36-hour school day or a focus on fewer standards and curriculum demands.
States and other educational systems have been notably ineffective in establishing Power Standards, declaring that they have “priority standards” and “essential standards” that often are little more than an accumulation of existing standards. These are the same demands on teachers and students with a different label. Intellectual integrity requires that if there really is a list of priority standards, then the governing authorities will state with clarity what teachers do not have to do. “You do have to teach number operations and you do not have to teach teachers do not have to teach. Every year, there are additional demands for curriculum – financial literacy, more comprehensive world history, quantitative reasoning, or a more comprehensive history of slavery in the United States – all without adding a single second to the time teachers are allowed to provide this instruction. More than twenty states have added the requirement to teach cursive writing to students, a demand that will presumably displace the time students need to recognize the letters they are supposed to write in elegant script. The establishment of standards are an inherently political process and therefore state governments are predisposed only to add burdens to the curriculum without subtracting anything.
The Criteria for Power Standards
There are three criteria for Power Standards: leverage, endurance, and essentiality. By leverage, I mean that
proficiency in one standard leads to proficiency in several other standards. For example, proficiency in nonfiction writing is strongly associated with success in mathematics, social studies, science, and reading comprehension (Reeves, 2020). In some of the most successful schools I have observed, including high-poverty schools, the elevation of nonfiction writing as a priority is strongly associated with success in every other area of academic achievement. Rather than the conventional approach that “October is informational writing month,” these schools support nonfiction writing in every class and every subject, from kindergarten through 12th grade. Another example of leverage is the ability of students to create and understand tables, charts, and graphs, a skill that is essential not only in math class, but also in science and social studies. colleagues in 9th grade, “What do I need to do this year in order to send students to you next year with confidence and success?” This inter-grade dialog is at the heart of Power Standards. It leads to the resolution of the Standards Paradox—that is, there are too many standards and yet too few standards. The 9th grade teacher, for example, may say, “You don’t have to cover every 8th grade standard, but you do have to address these six essentials,” and then the same 9th grade teacher may also say, “Even though this is not in the state standards, here are some other Power Standards to consider: Keep an assignment notebook, know how to ask for help before it’s a crisis, and know how to break down a project into smaller tasks so that it’s not overwhelming.”
Practical Impact of Power Standards
The second criterion for Power Standards is endurance. Some standards are transitory, applying only to a single grade. But others endure—that is, they recur year after year. An example is the requirement for students, typically starting in 3rd or 4th grade, to support a claim with evidence. This formula of “claim, evidence, and reasoning” recurs in middle and high school, and when a standard persists across grade levels, that suggests that it is a Power Standard.
The third criterion is essentiality. That is, if I am teaching 8th grade, I need to ask my
When it comes to professional learning initiatives, teachers and school leaders demand above all practical application. When Power Standards are implemented, there are direct applications that will save time for teachers and improve student achievement. First, the time devoted to assessments can be substantially reduced. Teachers are very frustrated with the amount of time devoted to comprehensive assessments that, while labeled as “formative,” would be more accurately labeled as “uninformative.” A formative assessment only deserves that appellation
if it informs teaching and learning. That never happens with a 30-item assessment that takes away an hour of class time and the results are delivered weeks later. A truly formative assessment can include only four For example, if the Power Standard is to produce an essay in science, social studies, or English Language Arts that demonstrates proficiency in making a claim supported by evidence, then a proficient student might
A truly formative assessment can include only four or five items, with immediate feedback from the teacher, immediate application of that feedback, and immediate evidence of learning from the student.
or five items, with immediate feedback from the teacher, immediate application of that feedback, and immediate evidence of learning from the student.
A second result from Power Standards is greater respect for teacher feedback and immediate application of that feedback. In the traditional submission of homework and unit tests, teachers lose hours of time at home, especially at night and on weekends, to grade papers. Yet I have yet to see a student pick up that graded paper and exclaim, “Thanks so much for the detailed feedback!” Rather, the students look at the grade and discard the paper. With Power Standards and miniassessments, feedback is provided in real time and students can respect and apply the feedback immediately.
The third impact of Power Standards is that teachers have the opportunity to provide both support and enforcement in real time. be required to state a claim, produce three arguments, each supported by evidence with appropriate citations, and a logical conclusion. As soon as a student has produced the work, the teacher can then challenge the student to get to the next level by extending this work with a claim and counter-claim, evidence and contrasting evidence, and then a conclusion that evaluates the credibility of the evidence and states a conclusion based on that analysis. All of this can happen in class, not after days in which students wait for feedback.
Conclusion
The implementation of Power Standards is not without risk. Critics will allege that teachers who focus on the most important standards are omitting vital curriculum that the critics believe are important. While I deeply respect these critics, it is the responsibility of teachers and educational leaders to focus on what matters most. We
cannot wait on state authorities to decide what standards to omit, as that is a political impossibility. In fact, every teacher in the world makes choices every day about what to teach. The only decision, therefore, is whether these curriculum choices are made by design or default. Using the Power Standards framework will help teachers to make these decisions in a collaborative and deliberate manner.
REFERENCES
Green, E. L., & Goldstein, D. (2019, October 30). Reading Scores on National Exam
Decline in Half the States. https://www.
nytimes.com/2019/10/30/us/readingscores-national-exam.html
Reeves, D. (2020). Achieving Equity and
Excellence: Immediate Results From the
Lessons of High-poverty, High-success Schools. Solution Tree Press.
Reeves, D. (2021). Fearless Schools. Creative
Leadership Press167.
World Bank. (2021, December 6). Learning
Losses from COVID-19 Could Cost this
Generation of Students Close to $17
Trillion in Lifetime Earnings. https://
