Arizona reading success task force: report and recommendations

              Arizona Reading Success Task Force
REPORT
&
RECOMMENDATIONS
Submitted to the State Board of Education
Relating to Laws 1999, Chapter 231, H.B. 2130
January 3,2000
Committee Members:
Senator John Huppenthal, Chairman Dr. Mary North
Magdalene Brogan Elaine Panczak
Kay Byrd Sheila Rogers
Dr. Karen Sullivan-Burstein Linda Sheppard
Jeanie Eller Virginia Carey Tokar
Dr. Kenneth Goodman Laura Wilbur
Dr. Marj Jones
Liaisons to the Reading Success Task Force:
Representative Linda Gray Representative Karen Johnson
Table of Contents
I.
11.
111.
IV.
v.
VI.
VII.
-11.
IX.
X.
XI.
XII.
XIII.
XIV.
xv.
XVI.
XVII.
XVIII.
XIX.
XX.
XXI.
Task Force Overview and Recommendations
Laws 1998, Chapter 231, H.B. 2130
Minority Report
Agenda for Meeting June 24,1999
Minutes for Meeting June 24,1999
Agenda for Meeting July 19,1999
Minutes for Meeting July 19,1999
Agenda for Meeting August 10,1999
Minutes for Meeting August 10,1999
Agenda for Meeting September 1,1999
Minutes for Meeting September 1,1999
Agenda for Meeting September 9,1999
Minutes for Meeting September 9,1999
Agenda for Meeting September 23,1999
Minutes for Meeting September 23,1999
Agenda for Meeting October 20,1999
Minutes for Meeting October 20,1999
Agenda for Meeting November 3,1999
Minutes for Meeting November 3,1999
Agenda for Meeting December 8,1999
Minutes for Meeting December 8,1999
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachment D
Attachment E
Attachment F
Attachment G
Attachment H
Attachment I
Attachment J
Attachment K
Attachment L
Attachment M
Attachment N
Attachment 0
Attachment P
Attachment Q
Attachment R
Attachment S
Attachment T
Attachment U
XXII. Agenda for Meeting December 15,1999 Attachment V
XXIII. Minutes for Meeting December 15,1999 Attachment W
XXIV. Table of Contents of Research Material Attachment X
All materials submitted to the Committee and tapes of the meetings are onfile with the
Senate Resource Center.
ATTACHMENT
A
Reading Success Task Force
REPORT & RECOMMENDATIONS
To the Arizona State Board of Education
In September of 1998, the Arizona State Board of Education appointed Senator John Huppenthal,
Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, to chair and appoint a committee to develop research-based
reading curriculum content and instructional practices for kindergarten through third grade to
implement Laws 1998, Chapter 231, H.B. 2130. The State Board of Education requested that the
curriculum content recommended by the Reading Success Task Force be aligned with the state's
academic standards in the content areas of reading and language arts. An amount of $25,000 was
appropriated by the State Board of Education to the Reading Success Task Force for expenses related
to reimbursement of travel and per diem expenses.
In December 1998, the Reading Success Task Force was established with diverse membership
representing university professors, teacher trainers, special education and regular education teachers,
school administrators, reading research specialists and reading education curriculum coordinators from
various areas of the state, including phonics and whole language advocates. The primary legislative
sponsors of H.B. 2130 and the Chairman of the House Education Committee were invited to
participate as non-voting members at the meetings as were representatives from the Department of
Education staff, specializing in the state's academic standards in reading and language arts.
Over the course of a year, the Reading Success Task Force convened approximately 11 publicly
noticed meetings. The Reading Success Task force determined that it was essential to develop
statewide recommendations for a first-class reading curriculum by bringing to the table nationally
recognized experts who have conducted empirically validated research in the area of reading. In a
series of meetings, the following nationally recognized reading experts provided comprehensive
presentations to the Reading Success Task Force:
Bonnie Grossen, Ph.D.
Research Associate, University of Oregon
National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators
Robert Sweet, Jr.
Staff Member, Committee on Education and the Workforce
U.S. Congress
P. David Pearson, Ph.D.
Professor of Education
Michigan State University
Marilyn Jager Adams, Ph.D.
Research Associate, Harvard University
Graduate School of Education
Ken Goodman, Ed.D. and Yetta Goodman, Ed.D.
Professors of Education
University of Arizona
Judith R Birsh, Ed.D.
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Education, Department of Curriculum & Teaching
Program in Learning Disabilities, Teachers College
Columbia University
Peggy McCardle, Ph.D., MPH for G. Reid Lyon, Ph.D.
Associate Chief, Child Development and Behavior Branch
Center for Research for Mothers and Children
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
These nationally recognized reading experts gave formal presentations and provided numerous
research documents and other related articles to the members of the Reading Success Task Force. In
addition to these articles, the Committee read and discussed research from a wealth of studies funded
by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as well as studies by independent researchers. The
following definition of "research based instruction," used by NIH, independent research bodies, the
original House Bill 2130 and the federal Reading Excellence Act is consistent with the Reading
Success Task Force Report.
"research that employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation or experiment;
involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses and justify the
general conclusions drawn; relies on measurements or observational methods that provide valid
data across evaluators and observers and across multiple measurements and observations; and
has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a panel of independent experts
through a comparably rigorous, objective and scientific review."
In addition to the comprehensive list of research materials read by members of the Task Force as noted
in the attached material (Attachment V), the Reading Success Task Force Report also reflects research
summarized in the following national publications and reports:
Every Child Reading: An Action Plan adopted by the Learning First Alliance composed of the
following organizations:
American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education
American Association of school Administrators
American Federation of Teachers
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Council of Chief State School Officers
Education Commission of the States
2
National Association of State Boards of Education
National Association of Elementary School Principals
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Education Association
National Parent Teacher Association
National School Boards Association
The National Reading Panel Progress Report
The Panel includes "prominent reading researchers, leaders in elementary and higher education,
teachers, parents, and child development experts."
Presenting Reading DifJlculties in Young Children
Snow, C., Burns, S., and Griffin, P. (eds.) (1998)
Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science, What Expert Teachers of Reading Should Know and Be Able
to Do
American Federation of Teachers
What's Gone Wrong in America's Classrooms
Evers, Williamson M. (1 998)
The Reading Success Task Force met in day-long workshop settings to develop and consider the
following recommendations to guide and assist school districts and ensure a smooth transition with the
implementation of H.B. 2130. The Reading Success Task Force Report includes an emphasis on
reading and writing as well as skill development and appropriate practice.
The Reading Success Task Force presents the following report as guidance documents that may be
presented to all school districts in the form of an introductory letter fiom the State Board of Education,
with information about H.B. 2130, its implementation timelines and the following recommendations.
It is the hope of the Reading Success Task Force to move forward expeditiously to address the critical
need to improve the reading proficiency of Arizona's youngest readers. The following
recommendations are respectfully submitted to the Arizona State Board of Education for consideration
and adoption.
Senator John Huppenthal, Chairman
Magdalene Brogan, Elementary School Teacher
Kay Byrd, Director of Teacher Training
Dr. Karen Sullivan-Burstein, Professor of Education
Jeanie Eller, Director of Teacher Training
Dr. Marj Jones, Director of Instruction and Curriculum
Dr. Mary North, Director of Curriculum and Research
Elaine Panczak, Elementary School Teacher
Virginia Carey Tokar, Retired Educator
Liaisons to the Reading Success Task Force:
Representative Linda Gray & Representative Karen Johnson
Purposes
The Arizona Reading Success Task Force was organized to fulfill the following purposes:
Review the current research on the processes of reading and writing, how children learn to read and
write, what causes children to fail and effective instructional practices for teaching reading and
writing.
Define research based systematic phonics curriculum content and instructional practices.
Develop a philosophical position to guide decision making of the Reading Success Task Force.
Formulate and transmit recommendations to the State Board of Education and the Arizona
Legislature.
Addressing H.B. 2130 Mandates
"The rules shall require applicants for certijkates for common school instruction to complete a
minimum of forty-five classroom hours or three college level credit hours, or the equivalent, of
training in research based systematic phonics instruction fiom a public or private provider. "
"Beginning in the 2000-2001 school year, each school district that provides instruction for pupils in
kindergarten programs and grades one, two, and three shall conduct a curriculum evaluation and
adopt reading instruction programs, one of which shall be a research based systematic phonics
instruction program. "
"Each school district shall allow parents of pupils in kindergarten programs and grades one, two and
three to select the reading instruction program adopted pursuant to this subsection that the parent
determines is the most beneficial to the child. "
"Beginning in the 2001-2002 school year, all school districts that ofler instruction in kindergarten
programs and grades one, two and three shall accommodate every pupil whose parent selects one of
the reading instruction programs adoptedpursuant to subsection A. "
"Beginning in the 2000-2001 school year, the reading instruction programs used by the school for
kindergarten programs and grades one, two and three, pursuant to section 15- 718, subsection A. The
report card shall include a district comparison of test scores among the drperent programs of reading
instruction and shall identrjj the program of reading instruction used in each classroom. "
"The sum of $1,000,000 is appropriatedfiom the state general fund to the state board of education in
.fiscal year 1998-1999 to assist school districts in the initial training and continued development of
teachers in research based systematic phonics instruction. "
Philosophical Position
With the turn of the century, our nation's literacy needs have risen to an all-time high. Reading and writing are
the primary means of access to learning. All societies have developed oral language, but not all societies are
literate. Thus, the development of written language is the hallmark of a literate society. The following
statements describe common understandings derived from the review of current research.
1. Reading and writing are complex processes.
Expert reading and writing require the coordination of many subprocesses, therefore, learning to
read and write is also complex. Instruction should be systematic and explicit and the lesson content
should include the following: phoneme awareness; letter names and letter formation; phonics;
spelling; vocabulary development; syntax (structure of the language); and semantics
(comprehension).
2. From the beginning, instruction should be balanced between skill development and fostering
the desire to read for pleasure and information.
At the very earliest stages of learning, instruction should include analysis (whole to parts) and
synthesis (parts to whole).
3. All students can learn to read fluently and write expressively given appropriate instruction.
Children should be read to daily and, as soon as able, have the opportunity to read and write for
pleasure as well as to obtain or convey information. Using meaningful activities increases
motivation and enhances retention.
4. Instruction in listening, speaking, reading and writing should be integrated.
Instruction should teach the connection between listening comprehension and reading
comprehension and between spoken and written language. Use of these language arts skills should
also be integrated across content subjects.
5. Access to books and other materials is essential to reading development.
Support for classroom and school libraries should be encouraged so that a wide range of materials
(fiction and nonfiction books, magazines, media) is available to children and parents during the
academic school year and summer vacation months.
6. Staff development for new and continuing teachers should be encouraged and expanded.
Staff development for new and continuing teachers should include instruction in systematic
research-based phonics curriculum content and effective instructional practices.
7. University Colleges of Education should be encouraged to strengthen their teacher training
courses in the areas of systematic, research based instructional components and practices.
Teacher candidates should receive a conceptual foundation in the reading process, factors that
cause children to fail, and the different skills needed by beginning and proficient readers. Direct
instruction should be provided in phonemic awareness, explicit phonics, spelling, vocabulary
development, syntax and semantics. Candidates should demonstrate ability to diagnose reading
and writing difficulties, provide appropriate interventions and ongoing assessment of progress.
Recommendations
The following recommendations define the curriculum content and instructional practices to be
included in research-based systematic phonics instruction programs funded under appropriations
specified in H.B. 2130.
RECOMMENDATION ONE
The Reading Success Task Force recommends the following curriculum content and instructional
practices to be included in research-based systematic phonics instruction programs funded under
appropriations specified in H.B. 2 130.
Curriculum Content for Research-Based Systematic Phonics
Instruction Programs
a. Phonemic Awareness
The understanding that spoken words and syllables consist of sequences of basic speech sounds
b. Letter Names and Letter Formation
Rapid manipulation sequencing the 26 letters of the alphabet.
c. Systematic, Explicit Phonics Instruction
Direct teaching of sound-symbol relationships in isolation, decoding and word attack
d. Spelling Instruction
Direct teaching of a progression from sound symbols to rules of syllable division and
morphology, including prefixes, bases and suffixes
e. Vocabulary Development
Providing explicit information about a word's definition and usage and how shades of meaning
may vary with context
f. Syntax (oral and written)
A set of principles that dictate the sequence and function of words in a sentence to convey
meaning, including grammar, sentence variation, mechanics of language, and the writing
process
g. Semantics (comprehension)
The aspect of language concerned with meaning, including instruction in listening
comprehension of speech and reading comprehension of the written language using quality
literature
Instructional Practices for Research-Based Systematic Phonics
Instruction Programs
a. Diagnostic Teaching
An ongoing diagnosis of reading and writing difficulties, strategies for early and continuous
intervention and ongoing assessment of student progress
b. Current Research Findings
Implementation of reliable, replicable and scientifically validated research findings of the
reading process, the different skills needed by beginning and proficient readers, and factors
necessary for reading success. These include, but are not limited to, integrated instruction of
listening, speaking, reading and writing, appropriate time and opportunity for practice of
essential skills, and ample opportunities to individually and as a class read and react to quality
children's literature and to write for pleasure as well as to convey information.
RECOMMENDATION TWO
The Arizona State Academic Standards and/or Performance Objectives for Language Arts be refined to
include the research findings collected by the Arizona Reading Success Task Force, specifically in the
areas of phoneme awareness and sound-symbol relationships.
RECOMMENDATION THREE
Develop statewide academic measures to assess the reading proficiency of K-3 readers in phonemic
awareness, comprehension, manipulation of the alphabetic principle, and basic reading skills. Other
questions used in the measure may relate to reading fluency, decoding fluency, volume of reading and
a question that measures reading motivation or how often a child reads for pleasure. Measures may be
conducted in a survey format to all traditional and charter public schools by an assessment group such
as the Technical Advisory Committee, which conducts work on the statewide A+ Program
administered by the Arizona Department of Education.
RECOMMENDATION FOUR
Establish a measurement on each Arizona School Report Card recording data on the per pupil dollar
amount used to recover the depletion of classroom books and/or the amount used in each classroom for
the purchase of new books in grades K-3.
RECOMMENDATION FIVE
Extend the Reading Success Task Force to continue efforts in moving Arizona's school children
toward reading proficiency and success.
Principles for Reading Success
These principles have been distilled from the findings of more than 30 years of research studies under two
federally firnded programs: the $1 billion Project Follow Through Study, and the $200 million in studies
conducted under the direction of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).
Research indicates that, to be eflective, these principles should be taught in the order in which they are
presented below.
Teach phonemic awareness directly in kindergarten.
Students should be taught that spoken words and syllables are made up of sequences of
elementary speech sounds. These skills may not develop naturally so they should be taught
directly and systematically.
Teach each elementary speech sound-spelling correspondence explicitly.
Students should be explicitly taught the single sound of each letter or letter combination. Each
day, there should be five or ten minutes of practicing the speech sounds of letters in isolation.
The balance of the lesson should provide practice in recognizing these speech sound-spelling
relationships in decodable text.
Teach frequent, highly regular speech sound-spelling relationships systematically.
Teach the students the 70 most common speech sound-spelling relationships. Students should
be taught each speech sound-spelling relationship before they read it in the context of words
and sentences. Systematic means the order of instruction should progress from easier to more
difficult speech sound-spelling relationships, and once a new speech sound-spelling
relationship is introduced, it should be practiced daily, first in isolation and then in the context
of words and sentences.
Teach students directly how to sound out words.
After students have learned two or three speech sound-spelling correspondences, begin
teaching them how to blend speech sound-spellings into words. Show them how to move
sequentially from left to right through spellings as they "sound out," or say the sound for each
spelling. Practice blending the speech sound-spellings of words composed of only those speech
sound-spelling relationships which have been previously taught.
Teach students speech sound-spelling relationships using connected, decodable text.
Students need extensive practice applying their knowledge of speech sound-spelling
relationships as they are learning them. Effective integration of phonics instruction and reading
practice can only occur with the use of decodable text composed of words that use speech
sound-spelling correspondences that have been systematically taught.
Teach reading comprehension using interesting teacher read stories.
Comprehension should be taught using teacher read stories that include words most students
have not yet learned to read, but which are part of their spoken vocabulary.
Teach decoding and comprehension skills separately until reading becomes fluent.
Both instructional activities should occur, but decoding and comprehension instruction should
be taught separately while students are learning to decode. Comprehension skills learned
through teacher read literature can be applied to students' own reading once they become fluent
decoders.
ATTACHMENT
B
Conference Erigrosssd
State of Arizona
House of Representatives
Forty -thi rd Legislature
Second Regular Session
1998
CHAPTER 231
FILED
Betsey Bayless
Secretary of State
HOUSE BILL 2130
AN ACT
AMENDING SECTIONS 15-203 AND 15-746, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; AMENDING TITLE
15. CHAPTER 7. ARTICLE 1. ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES. BY ADDING SECTION 15-718;
MAKING AN APPROPRIATION: RELATING TO LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION.
Be i t enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Section 15-203. Arizona Revised Statutes. is amended t o
read:
15-203. Powers and dutiez
A. The state board of education shall:
1. Exercise general supervision over and regulate the conduct of the
pub1 i c school system.
2. Keep a record of i t s proceedings.
3. Make rules for i t s own government.
4. Determine the policy and work undertaken by it.
5. Appoint i t s employees, on the recommendation of the superintendent
of public instruction.
6. Prescribe the duties of i t s employees if not prescribed by statute.
7. Delegate t o the superintendent of public instruction the execution
of board pol i ci es.
8. Recommend to the legislature changes or additions to the statutes
pertaining t o schools.
9. Prepare, publish and distribute reports concerning the educational
welfare of t h i s s t a t e .
10. Prepare a budget for expenditures necessary for proper maintenance
of the board and accomplishment of i t s purposes and present the budget t o the
legislature.
H.B. 2130
11. Aid i n the enforcement o f laws r e l a t i n g t o schools.
12. Prescribe a minimum course of study i n the common schools. minimum
competency requirements f o r the promotion of pupils from the t h i r d grade and
minimum course o f study and competency requirements f o r the promotion of
pupils from t h e eighth grade.
13. Prescribe minimum course o f study and competency requirements for
the graduation of pupils from high school.
14. Supervise and c o n t r o l t h e c e r t i f i c a t i o n of persons engaged i n
i n s t r u c t i o n a l work d i r e c t l y as any classroom, laboratory or other teacher or
i n d i r e c t l y as a supervisory teacher, speech t h e r a p i s t , p r i n c i p a l or
superintendent i n a school d i s t r i c t . including school d i s t r i c t preschool
programs, or any other educational i n s t i t u t i o n below the community college,
col 1 ege or uni versi t y 1 eve1 . and prescribe rules f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n , i ncl udi ng
rules f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n of teachers who have teaching experience and who are
trained i n other states, which are not unnecessarily r e s t r i c t i v e and are
s u b s t a n t i a l l y s i m i l a r t o the rules prescribed f o r the c e r t i f i c a t i o n of
teachers trained i n t h i s state. THE RULES SHALL REQUIRE APPLICANTS FOR ALL
CERTIFICATES FOR COMMON SCHOOL INSTRUCTION TO COMPLETE A MINIMUM OF
FORTY-FIVE CLASSROOM HOURS OR THREE COLLEGE LEVEL CREDIT HOURS. OR THE
EQUIVALENT, OF TRAINING I N RESEARCH BASED SYSTEMATIC PHONICS INSTRUCTION FROM
A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROVIDER. The r u l e s s h a l l not require a teacher t o
obtain a master's degree or t o take any additional graduate courses as a
condition of c e r t i f i c a t i o n or r e c e r t i f i c a t i o n .
15. Adopt a l i s t of approved t e s t s for determining special education
assistance t o g i f t e d students as defined i n section 15-761 and as provided
i n section 15-764. The adopted t e s t s shall provide separate scores f o r
q u a n t i t a t i v e reasoning, verbal reasoning and nonverbal reasoning and shall
be capable of providing r e l i a b l e and v a l i d scores at the highest ranges of
the score d i s t r i b u t i o n .
16. Adopt rules governing the methods f o r t h e administration of a l l
reading, grammar and mathematics proficiency examinations.
17. Adopt proficiency examinations f o r i t s use. The state board of
education shall determine the passing score for the proficiency examination.
18. Include within i t s budget the cost of contracting for the purchase.
d i s t r i b u t i o n and scoring of the examinations as provided i n paragraphs 16 and
17 of t h i s subsection.
19. Supervise and control the qua1 i f i c a t i o n s of professional
nonteaching school personnel and prescribe standards r e l a t i n g t o
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s .
20. Impose such d i s c i p l i n a r y action. including the issuance of a l e t t e r
of censure. suspension. suspension with conditions or revocation of a
c e r t i f i c a t e , upon a f i n d i n g of immoral or unprofessional conduct.
21. Establish an assessment. data gathering and reporting system f o r
pupil performance as prescribed i n chapter 7, a r t i c l e 3 of t h i s t i t l e .
H.B. 2130
22. Adopt a r u l e t o promote b r a i l l e l i t e r a c y pursuant t o s e c t i o n
15-214.
23. Adopt r u l e s p r e s c r i b i n g procedures f o r the i n v e s t i g a t i o n by the
department o f education o f every w r i t t e n complaint a l l e g i n g t h a t a
c e r t i f i c a t e d person has engaged i n immoral conduct.
24. By December 15. 1995, review the time frame required pursuant t o
section 15-539, subsection C, i n which a teacher i s allowed t o improve a f t e r
recei v i ng a p r e l iminary n o t i c e o f inadequacy o f classroom performance and
e s t a b l i s h an equivalent time frame t o accommodate teachers who are employed
i n year-round school year operation programs or other schools which do not
use the t r a d i t i o n a l school year calendar.
B. The s t a t e board o f education may:
1. Contract.
2. Sue and be sued.
3. D i s t r i b u t e and score the t e s t s prescribed i n chapter 7, a r t i c l e 3
o f t h i s t i t l e .
4. Provide f o r an advisory committee and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e law judges t o
conduct hearings t o determine whether grounds e x i s t t o impose d i s c i p l i n a r y
action against a c e r t i f i c a t e d person and whether grounds e x i s t t o r e i n s t a t e
a revoked o r surrendered c e r t i f i c a t e . The board may delegate i t s
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o conduct hearings t o i t s advisory committee and t o
a d m i n i s t r a t i v e law judges. Hearings s h a l l be conducted pursuant t o t i t l e 41.
chapter 6. a r t i c l e 10.
5. Proceed w i t h the disposal o f any complaint requesting d i s c i p l i n a r y
a c t i o n o r w i t h any d i s c i p l i n a r y action against a person holding a c e r t i f i c a t e
as prescribed i n subsection A, paragraph 14 o f t h i s s e c t i o n a f t e r the
suspension o r e x p i r a t i o n of the c e r t i f i c a t e o r surrender o f the c e r t i f i c a t e
by the holder.
6. Assess costs and reasonable attorney fees against a person who
f i l e s a f r i v o l o u s complaint or who f i l e s a complaint i n bad f a i t h . Costs
assessed pursuant t o t h i s paragraph s h a l l not exceed the expenses i n c u r r e d
by the s t a t e board i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the complaint.
Sec. 2. T i t l e 15. chapter 7, a r t i c l e 1. Arizona Revised Statutes. i s
amended by adding section 15-718, t o read:
15-718. Research based systematic ~ h o n i c si n s t r u c t i o n
A. BEGINNING I N THE 2000-2001 SCHOOL YEAR. EACH SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT
PROVIDES INSTRUCTION FOR PUPILS I N KINDERGARTEN PROGRAMS AND GRADES ONE. TWO
AND THREE SHALL CONDUCT A CURRICULUM EVALUATION AND ADOPT READING INSTRUCTION
PROGRAMS. ONE OF WHICH SHALL BE A RESEARCH BASED SYSTEMATIC PHONICS
INSTRUCTION PROGRAM. EACH SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL ALLOW PARENTS OF PUPILS I N
KINDERGARTEN PROGRAMS AND GRADES ONE. TWO AND THREE TO SELECT THE READING
INSTRUCTION PROGRAM ADOPTED PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION THAT THE PARENT
DETERMINES I S THE MOST BENEFICIAL TO THE CHILD.
H.B. 2130
B. BEGINNING IN THE 2001-2002 SCHOOL YEAR. ALL SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT
OFFER INSTRUCTION IN KINDERGARTEN PROGRAMS AND GRADES ONE. TWO AND THREE
SHALL ACCOMMODATE EVERY PUPIL WHOSE PARENT SELECTS ONE OF THE READING
INSTRUCTION PROGRAMS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.
Sec. 3. Section 15-746. Arizona Revised Statutes. i s amended t o read:
15-746. School r e ~ o r tc ards
A. Each school shall distribute an a n n u a l report card t h a t contains
a t least the following information:
1. A description of the school's regular, magnet and special
instructional programs.
2. A description of the current academic goals of the school.
3. A summary of the results achieved by pupils enrolled a t the school
during the prior three school years as measured by essential s k i l l s t e s t s and
the nationally standardized norm-referenced achievement t e s t as designated
by the state board and as reported i n the annual report prescribed by section
15-743. a summary of the pupil progress on an ongoing and annual basis.
showing the trends in gain or loss in PUPIL achievement over time in
reading, language arts and mathematics for all years i n which pupils are
enrolled in the school d i s t r i c t for an entire school year and for which this
information is available and a summary of the pupil progress for
PUPILS not enrolled i n a d i s t r i c t for an entire school year.
4. The school 's current expenditures per pupi 1 for classroom suppl ies.
classroom instruction excluding classroom suppl ies, admini s t r a t i on, support
services-students. and all other support services and operations. The
current expenditures per pupil by school shall include allocation of the
district-wide expenditures t o each school, as provided by the d i s t r i c t . The
report shall include a comparison of the school t o the state amount for a
similar type of d i s t r i c t as calculated in section 15-255. The method of
calculating these per pupil amounts and the allocation of expenditures shall
be as prescribed in the uniform system of financial records.
5. The attendance rate of pupils enrolled at the school as reflected
i n the school's average daily membership as defined in section 15-901.
6. The number of incidents that occurred on the school grounds and
t h a t required the intervention of local. state or federal law enforcement.
7. The percentage of pupils who have either graduated t o the next
grade level or graduated from h i g h school.
8. A description of the social services available a t the school s i t e .
9. The school calendar including the length of the school day and
hours of operations.
10. The total number of pupils enrolled at the school during the
previ ous school year.
11. The transportation services available.
1 2 . BEGINNING IN THE 2000-2001 SCHOOL YEAR. THE READING INSTRUCTION
PROGRAMS USED BY THE SCHOOL FOR KINDERGARTEN PROGRAMS AND GRADES ONE. TWO AND
H.B. 2130
THREE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15-718. SUBSECTION A. THE REPORT CARD SHALL
INCLUDE A DISTRICT COMPARISON OF TEST SCORES AMONG THE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS OF
READING INSTRUCTION AND SHALL IDENTI FY THE PROGRAM OF READING INSTRUCTION
USED IN EACH CLASSROOM.
HT 13. A description of the responsibilities of parents of children
enrolled a t the school.
33~ 14. A description of the responsibilities of the school t o the
parents of the children enrolled a t the school including dates the report
cards are delivered t o the home.
15. A description of the composition and duties of the school
council as prescribed in section 15-351 if such a school council exists.
0. The department of education shall develop a standardized report
card format t h a t meets the requirements of subsection A of this section. The
department shall modify the standardized report card as necessary on an
a n n u a l basis. The department shall distribute t o each school i n this state
a copy of the standardized report card that includes the required test scores
for each school. Additional copies of the standardized report card shall be
available on request.
C. After each school has completed the report card distributed t o it
by the department of education, the school, i n addition t o distributing the
report card as prescribed in subsection A of this section, shall send a copy
of the report card t o the department. The department shall prepare an annual
report t h a t contains the report card from each school i n this state.
D. The school shall distribute report cards t o parents of pupils
enrolled at the school. no later t h a n the last day of school of each fiscal
year. and shall present a summary of the contents of the report cards a t an
annual public meeting held a t the school. The school shall give notice a t
least two weeks before the public meeting that clearly states the purposes.
time and place of the meeting.
Sec. 4. train in^ in research based svstemati c ~honciz
instruction: exem~tion for teachers certificated bv
June 30. 1999
A teacher who holds a valid c e r t i f i c a t e t o provide common school
instruction on June 30. 1999 is exempt from the research based systematic
phonics instruction training requi rements of section 15-203. Arizona Revised
Statutes. as amended by this act.
Sec. 5. A ~ ~ r o ~ r i a t i oDnur:D ose
A. The sum of S1.OOO.OOO is appropriated from the state general fund
t o the state board of education in fiscal year 1998-1999 t o assist school
districts in the i n i t i a l training and continued development of teachers in
research based systematic phonics instruction. The state board of education
shall deposit the monies appropriated pursuant t o this subsection in a
separate account designated as the research based systematic phonics
instruction training f u n d .
H.B. 2130
8. Of t h e appropriation adopted pursuant t o subsection A of t h i s
section. the sum of $25,000 i s appropriated t o the state board of education
f o r the development o f the Arizona curriculum f o r reading success.
C. The appropriation made i n subsection A o f t h i s section i s exempt
from t h e provisions of section 35-190, Arizona Revised Statutes. u n t i l
July 1. 2001.
Sec. 6. Delayed r e ~ e a l
This act i s repealed from and a f t e r J u l y 1. 2006.
Assigned to EDUC & APP AS PASSED BY THE SENATE
ARIZONA STATE SENATE
Phoenix, Arizona
FINAL REVISED
FACT SHEET FOR H.B. 2 130
parental choice for reading success
Purpose
Requires school districts that provide instruction for pupils in kindergarten through third
grade to conduct a curriculum evaluation and adopt reading instruction programs. Allows parents
to select the method of language arts instruction for their child and requires school districts to
provide accommodations. Changes teacher certification requirements. Appropriates $1,000,000 for
teacher training, including $25,000 toward the development of a statewide reading curriculum.
Background
H.B. 2130 requires school districts that provide instruction for pupils in kindergarten through
third grade (specific school districts) to conduct a curriculum evaluation and adopt reading
instruction programs, including a research based systematic phonics instruction program (phonics).
Parents are allowed to choose the language arts instruction method most beneficial for their child
and school districts are required to accommodate the parents' choices.
H.B. 2130 also changes the certification requirement for common school teachers to include
a minimum of 45 classroom hours, three college level credit hours or the equivalent of instruction
in phonics.
There is extensive research literature on the topic of reading instruction and the research is
divided as to the effectiveness of reading methods. Studies are available to support a number of
reading instruction programs and studies have been conducted to counter or qualify other studies.
Reading experts are not in agreement as to the effectiveness of specific reading methods over other
methods.
The bill contains an appropriation of $1,000,000 from the state general fund for teacher
training in the prescribed instruction methods, including $25,000 to the State Board of Education
(State Board) for the development of the Arizona Curriculum for Reading Success.
Provisions
Classroom Instruction
FACT SHEET
H.B. 21 30 - Final Revised
Page 2
1. Beginning in the 2000-2001 school year, requires specific school districts to conduct a
curriculum review.
2. Allows parents to select the reading instruction program most beneficial for their child.
3. Beginning with the 2001 -2002 school year, requires specific school districts to accommodate
every pupil whose parent selects a reading instruction program.
Teacher Certzjication
4. Mandates the State Board to adopt rules that require all applicants for certificates for
common school instruction to complete a specific amount of training in phonics. Allows the
applicant to meet the requirement through either a public or private provider.
5. Exempts teachers with a valid teaching certificate as of June 30, 1999 from the phonics
training requirements outlined in statute.
General
6. Includes the following information on the school report card beginning in the 2000-2001
school year.
a) A district comparison of test scores among different programs of reading instruction.
b) An identification of the reading instruction prograrn(s) used by the school in
kindergarten through third grade and the specific reading instruction program used
in each classroom.
7. Appropriates $1,000,000 from the state general fund to the State Board for FY 1998- 1999
to assist school districts with training teachers in phonics. Designates $25,000 of the
appropriation to the State Board for the development of the Arizona Curriculum for Reading
Success. Exempts the appropriation from the provision relating to the nonlapsing of
appropriations.
8. Makes technical and conforming changes
9. Repeals the act from and after July 1,2006.
10. Contains a general effective date.
Amendments Adopted bv Committee of the Whole
FACT SHEET
H.B. 2 130 - Final Revised
Page 3
1. Strikes all provisions with the exception of the appropriation.
2. Decreases the appropriation from $1,600,000 to $1,000,000 and widens applicability to
include all language instruction content and practices.
Amendments Adopted by Conference Committee
1. Beginning in the 2000-2001 school year, requires specific school districts to conduct a
curriculum review.
2. Allows parents to select the reading instruction program most beneficial for their child.
3. Beginning with the 200 1-2002 school year, requires specific school districts to accommodate
every pupil whose parent selects a reading instruction program.
4. Mandates the State Board to adopt rules that require all applicants for certificates for
common school instruction to complete a specific amount of training in phonics. Allows the
applicant to meet the requirement through either a public or private provider.
5. Exempts teachers with a valid teaching certificate as of June 30, 1999 from the phonics
training requirements outlined in statute.
6. Includes the following information on the school report card beginning in the 2000-2001
school year.
a) A district comparison of test scores among different programs of reading instruction.
b) An identification of the reading instruction program(s) used by the school in
kindergarten through third grade and the specific reading instruction program used
in each classroom.
7. Limits the application of the appropriation from teacher training in language instruction in
general to teacher training in phonics. Designates $25,000 of the appropriation to the State
Board for the development of the Arizona Curriculum for Reading Success.
8. Makes technical and conforming changes
9. Repeals the act from and after July 1,2006.
10. Contains a general effective date.
FACT SHEET
H.B. 2130 - Final Revised
Page 4
House Action Senate Action
ED 2/18/98 DPA 8-4-0-2 ED 4/23/98 DP 4-3-0-0
APP 2/27/98 DPA 7-0-1-7 APP 4/24/98 DP 7-4-3-0
3rd Read 4/13/98 31-28-1-0 3rd Read 511 4/98 27-2- 1-0
Final Read 512 1/98 32-22-6-0 Final Read 512 1/98 17-12-1-0
Signed by Governor 5/29/98
Chapter 23 1
Prepared by Senate Staff
June 23,1998
ATTACHMENT
C
Achieving Reading Excellence for the Children of Arizona:
A Dissenting report @om JFom the majoriv report
To: Arizona State Board of Education
From the following members of the ReadingTask Force
Ken Goodman, Professor Emeritus, University of Arizona
Linda Sheppard, Curriculum AdvisorITeacher Mentor
Shiela Rogers, School Principal
Laura Wilbur, Community Education Director
The report of the majority of Task Force members is not one that we can support. If adopted, the
state Board of Education would be showing disregard for the prerogatives of local schools
boards to make decisions over school curriculum and methodology. It would show disrespect for
teachers, administrators, teacher educators, and pupils by imposing an invariant overly specific
reading curriculum and methodology on all. And we believe this curriculum and methodology is
without merit or support either in research or in the reading education community. It is too
simple and unbalanced to serve the needs of Arizona's children.
Senator Huppehthal has been eminently fair in his conduct of the meetings as chair of the Task
force. He continuously sought for consensus among the members of the task force but the
differences between us were too fundamental and too great. He helped the group to agree that
access to books for children to read is a vital part of any reading program and that libraries,
school libraries, and classroom libraries must be supported. We all agreed that teachers should
not have to spend their own money to buy books to maintain classroom libraries. We agreed that
the recommended curriculum should include time for reading of quality literature and time for
writing. And we agreed that assessment should involve sampling of target groups rather than
mass testing of all pupils. Beyond that we never came near consensus.
The majority recommendations go beyond the charge to the committee: They overspecify what
may or may not be taught, how they may be taught and in what sequence in phonics classrooms
mandated by H.B. 2130. They also would require that the teacher education course the law
mandates be narrowly confined to the overly specific content of the report. In effect they
establish a state reading methodology and a state reading curriculum. Further, a recommendation
would change the adopted standards in reading, insulting the integrity of the process that
produced the standards. Finally, the recommendations on testing of very young children in
kindergarten and first grade would require a change in the state law and thus goes beyond the
authority of the Board and its charge to the Task Force.
When H.B.2130 passed, a compromise took out of the bill the very specifications (even to the
phrasing) that the majority wants to put back in the application and enforcement of the law.
Many Senators would not have voted for the bill with those inclusions because they felt they
were disrespectful of teachers and would cause them problems. Putting these same specifications
in the Board's application of the bill would break the trust of those in the State Senate who voted
for the bill in its final form.
December 15, 1999
We specifically object to the following aspects of the report:
1. The delineation in detail of inclusions and exclusions in curriculum and methodology amounts
to micro-managing. So narrow are the options for teachers that they would find
themselves at risk if they deviated even unintentionally from the mandate.
Further more, enforcement of the mandate the report details would create an adversarial
nightmare for every teacher and administrator and it would require a monitoring force to
assure conformity. Agents would need to enter, regularly, each schoolroom and each
college classroom, to assure that every teacher and every teacher educator is conforming
to the narrow, curriculum, content and methodology the Board would be establishing.
The costs in money, time and teacher and pupil morale woould be staggering.
2. The report establishes a single, narrow and widely rejected reading curriculum and
methodology. In doing so, it misrepresents the research on the reading process, reading
development and reading instruction. For example, it cites the Follow-through research
which if anything showed the value of having alternative methodologies. That research
also showed that the quality of the teacher is far more important in literacy programs than
the methods or materials used. Tucson Early Education Model (TEEM) in which phonics
was developed in context, had as long a period of funding under follow-through as any of
the models funded.
The term reliable, replicable research is being misused to narrow a large body of
research into one narrow strand of experimental research. And the summaries of this
narrow strand, originating in the teachers' manual of a commercial reading program, has
been incorporated into the Task force report. That summary has been repudiated by the
staff of the National Institute of Child Health and Human development and has been
shown, in a government funded study. to be totally unsupported by the research it claims
to summarize.
3. The report proposes the violation of academic freedom in teacher education programs and
seeks to over-specify the content of teacher education courses and how it may be
delivered. From the Middle Ages on. societies have made Universities and their faculties
autonomous, free to pursue knowledge and to apply that knowledge to issues and
problems. There is little to gain and much to lose in undermining the autonomy of
reading educators.
4. All of the outside speakers spoke about balance in the reading program. There is no pretense of
balance in this report. Recommendation One would set absolutes and exclude all other
aspects of a balanced reading and language arts curriculum. Furthermore it is a one-size-fits-
all program that ignores ethnic. cultural, linguistic, social and economic differences
among learners. This is a specific, direct instruction, part-to-whole, linear view of the
December 15, 1999
reading curriculum. There is no room for teachers to fit the program to the needs of
learners or use their professional knowledge and experience in their decision making.
5. The report would impose on the reading standards already in place its own narrow view of
reading instruction and its narrow focus on initial reading instruction. It is thus attempting
to retrospectively overthrow the process by which the standards were developed.
6. The section titled "Principles for Reading Success" is a redundant restatement of a narrow
unbalanced linear view of instruction. It adds that the "elements" must be taught in a
specific order. There is no research support for such a mandate. The principles include no
opportunity for developing readers to choose what they read. They may only hear the
teacher read stories with words "most students have not yet learned to read". Yet
research shows that reading real literature plays a key role in reading development and no
research supports the notion that requiring the preteaching of words makes it easier to
learn to read.
7. If the Board mandates the recommendations of the panel, local districts and schools would
only be able to choose from a small number of commercial reading programs most of
which are 30 or more years old. The current open adoption policies in Arizona schools
would be ended if schools were restricted to the small set of commercial programs that
come close to following the mandate.Teachers would be reduced to their least common
denominator, prohibited from using their knowledge and their professional insights into
their pupils.
8. The report proposes to force teachers, teacher educators, and other professionals to change to
tightly constrained, narrow and invariant behaviors and decision making. Quite apart
from the merits of the changes being mandated, such forced change is not only
unwarranted, but it won't work. Meaningful change can't be forced. The most effective
professional teachers will resist the change being forced on them or choose to leave
teaching. And without effective teachers no program can be successful.
What follows are our own recommendations to the State Board of Education. We believe that no
policy should become a mandate to be forced on teachers and learners. Whatever the State Board
adopts should be clearly stated as advisory and not mandatory. Specification should come at the
local and school levels and in the classrooms of the state.
The goals of Arizona education:
That all children should learn:
to read and write for a range of personal and social purposes
to choose to read and write for these purposes including reading for their own pleasure
Page 3
December 15, 1999
Some principles:
Access to books and other materials is essential to reading development.
There must be support for public, school and classroom libraries so that
a wide range of materials of all kinds: fiction and nonfiction, books, magazines
and media are available to every child and that child's parents and teachers.
Teachers should not have to spend their own money to provide a classroom
library. Programs such as Reading is Fundamental (Smithsonian) that distribute
paperback books should be implemented statewide in Arizona.
Reading and writing are complex processes of making sense of print.
In making sense of print readers use several kinds of information at the same time.
They draw on their knowledge of language including phonics, language structure
and meaning and their life experience in making sense of print. So it is important
that what they read and write make sense and that there is time in the school day
for reading and writing for real purposes.
Learning to read and write is also complex.
All children who have learned oral language can learn to read and write.
Children, in literate communities like Arizona, begin to learn to read and write
before they come to school. They learn from the print that surrounds them and
from observing members of their families reading and writing.
Children vary in the paths they take to learning to read and write and how long the
process takes. Some children move easily and naturally into reading and writing,
often before starting school. Others take longer. They need to hear books read to
them. They need time to develop personal purposes for reading and writing. They
need many experiences with books and other print materials and with writing.
The two processes support each other: we learn to read by writing and we learn to
write by reading.
Classrooms should be rich in meaningful print. Children should be encouraged to
respond to the print in their classrooms.
Instruction needs to include attention to all aspects of reading and writing
The Board should advise local boards, administrators and teachers that the full
curriculum and methodology must be balanced in a variety of way: There must be balance:
In attention to parts and wholes
In attention to reading and writing
Page 4
December 15, 1999
In attention to skills and comprehension
In use of direct and indirect instruction
In inclusion of a range of materials and genre
In a range of methodologies and teaching styles
In how individual children are instructed
We need to avoid overspecification.
Goals and methods should be specific enough to make them clear but should not
include highly specific materials, instructional sequences, or methodologies and
they should not exclude any specific materials, instructional sequences or
methodologies.
No specific commercial programs should be promoted by law or mandate. No
criteria should be so explicit that they only fit a few commercial programs.The
existing policy that districts are free to choose their own texts should not be
violated.
Programs don't teach children to read and write; teachers do that.
Teachers need support but not control. No law or mandate should restrict the professional
judgement of teachers in how best to teach a particular child or group of children. There
should be a strong program of staff development for teachers which treats them with
respect and which is not narrow or coercive. The majority report would turn teacher
development into indoctrination with teachers being told what they must do and what
they may not do. Good teaching cannot be coerced. Placing teachers in adversarial
positions leads them to be defensive and resistant to change. Even worse, it pushes the
most effective teachers out of the system.
Support for Teacher education in Arizona needs to be expanded. We must expand the
capacities of the state's colleges of education to educate more professional teachers.
Teaching must be seen as an attractive profession for young people. Teacher educators
must also be treated with respect and must be partners in any attempts to improve literacy
education in Arizona.
Research on reading and writing
Research on the processes of reading and writing, on how children learn to read and
write, and on how to teach reading and writing effectively provide an important base for
decisions by teachers, teacher educators and policy makers. But there need to be cautions
in the application of this research.
Page 5
December 15, 1999
We need to have a broad definition of research in order to use the rich findings of the
wide range of research on reading and writing.
There is no simple and direct way of applying research findings to curriculum and
instruction. The findings of research need to be integrated with information from other
sources to produce effective instruction.
We need to avoid confusing field testing of specific materials with impartial research.
While field testing instructional materials is important, it takes place after the materials
are developed and thus can have little influence on the programs.
We need to beware of the "Diogenes" factor. Diogenes was the ancient Gnek who
roamed the world, lantern in had looking for an honest man. In the case of many
commercial programs, all of the research on them has been done by the authors or others
with a vested interest in the programs. At the best that makes their findings questionable.
Let's keep the reading wars out of Arizona
We had an opportunity to keep Arizona from becoming the bitter battleground that Texas
and California have become. In our deliberations we sought to avoid the hysteria and
crisis mentalities evident elsewhere. In the end the Task Force majority has taken the
pupils and teachers of Arizona into the battleground. We hope the Board will understand
that real change needs a calm atmosphere and takes time.
We need to be inclusive and collaborative, not combative. We need to include parents,
teachers, and teacher educators in any initiatives. There needs to be an open forum and a
free marketplace of ideas. If there is a lesson in the public outcry over the AIMS testing it
is that exclusion of parents and teachers from the process of creating and implimenting
the test left it without a constituency. There is enough blame and responsibility to go
around. We need to avoid finger-pointing. Above all, we need to keep the welfare of the
children of Arizona in mind. They cannot prosper in bleak, hostile, and joyless
classrooms with harried embattled teachers.
Page 6
ATTACHMENT
D
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
Meeting Notice Open to the Public
READING SUCCESS TASK FORCE
DATE: Thursday, June 24,1999
TIME: 10:OO a.m. to 12:OO p.m.
PLACE: Senate Majority Caucus Room
AGENDA
1. Introductory remarks
Senator John Huppenthal, Chairman
2. Discuss charge of Reading Success Task Force
3. Presentation by Arizona Department of Education Staff
Overview of the Arizona Academic Standards for Language Arts
4. Discuss desired outcomes for developing curriculum "BENCHMARKS"
5. Develop forum and topics of presentations by guest speakers
6. Review time line and schedule future meetings
[ Note: This meeting time is subject to change pursuant to any conflict with a Special Legislative
Session. ]
Persons with a disability may request a reasonable accommodation, such as a sign language
interpreter, by contacting the Senate Secretary's Office, (602) 542-4231 (voice). Requests should
be made as early as possible to allow time to arrange the accommodation.
Constitution --
ATTACHMENT
E
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
READING SUCCESS TASK FORCE
Minutes of the Meeting
Thursday, June 24,1999
10:OO a.m., Senate Majority Caucus Room
Members Present
Senator John Huppenthal
Representative Linda Gray
Maggie Brogan
Kay Byrd
Virginia Carey Tokar
Pamela Clark
Judy Zola
Larry Perkins
Members Excused
Representative Dan Shottel
Laura Wilbur
Representative Karen S. Johnson
Dr. Mary North
Michele Lauchner for Jeanie Eller
Dr. Ken Goodman
Dr. Sharon Arthur Moore
Christine Loots for Linda Sheppard
Elaine Panczak
Sheila Rogers
Senator Huppenthal called the meeting to order at 10:10 a.m. and requested members
to introduce themselves.
CHARGE OF THE READING SUCCESS TASK FORCE
Senator Huppenthal explained the statutory mission of the Task Force is to develop a
proposal of "benchmarks" for Arizona's new reading success curriculum for pupils in
kindergarten through grade three to be aligned with the state's academic language arts
standards. He urged another important mission of the Task Force will be to develop a
consensus list which should result in a task list.
Statistically speaking, and based on the National Assessment of Educational Progress,
Senator Huppenthal pointed out that 50 per cent of Arizona's fourth graders do not have
basic reading skills, and 70 per cent do not have proficient reading skills. He submitted
that these statistics are debatable but do indicate a problem. Additionally, he noted that
an increasing number of children who are entering the system come from households
that do not have a culture of literacy where reading has not been a function within the
family. He noted that although there are varying opinions about how to resolve the
Reading Success Task Force
June 24,1999
Page 1
issue of illiteracy, there is much common ground to be shared and from this will come
the consensus and tasks lists.
PRESENTATION BY THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Marie Lesko, Arizona Department of Education (ADE), School and Student
Accountability Division, introduced herself and stated she has taught language arts in
Arizona for the past 20 years. Currently she is involved in implementing the Arizona
Standards and travels around the State working with teachers in staff development
workshops specifically with regard to writing standards. She stated she is also involved
in the development of the Assessment of the Instrument to Measurement Standards
(AIMS) in the language arts area. She explained the presentation would be an overview
of Arizona's Academic Standards, specifically reading performance objectives and the
framework for this for kindergarten through twelfth grade.
Carolyn Watson, Director of Standards Division, ADE, introduced herself and stated
her background is in teaching eighth grade social studies as well as high school. Ms.
Watson explained she tours Arizona putting on workshops for teachers to educate and
alert them about the Standards and she offers professional development training to
these teachers.
Ms. Watson explained that in 1983 a report was issued called, A Nation at Risk, which
she described as an "alert call" to educators indicating that there were serious problems
across the United States regarding the lack of basic reading skills in school aged
children. The report brought about the question of how teachers can help students to
know more and do a better job in school and beyond school. This resulted in most
states adopting academic standards. Presently almost all states have some form of
academic standards programs.
Ms. Watson distributed a handout titled, Academic Standards Timeline, (Attachment A),
spanning from the spring of 1995 to April 2000, and briefly explained its content.
Ms. Watson continued with her overview of academic standards explaining the process,
the standards design teams, the resources, the standard setting process, and the
criteria for state standards. Additionally, she explained the benefits of the standards
which include common expectations, academic equity, addressing the area of mobility,
alignment, accountability, and guidelines. (Attachment B).
Ms. Watson then distributed the booklet titled, Arizona Academic Standards, Arizona
Student Achievement Program, (Attachment C). She briefly described the components
of the program which include academic standards which have been developed and
adopted in language arts, mathematics, science, the arts, comprehensive health,
foreign language, technology and workplace skills. Ms. Watson stressed that the
academic standards define the "what" and not the "how."
Reading Success Task Force
June 24,1999
Page 2
Senator Huppenthal requested Ms. Watson to explain how the reading and writing
standards were developed. Ms. Watson responded the standards were developed from
input given by groups of teachers, parents, educational specialists and consultants.
Senator Huppenthal asked when the first AIMS test for third graders will occur. Ms.
Watson responded in April of 2000, next spring. Senator Huppenthal asked if there
were any data from the field-testing. Ms. Watson responded there was not. Ms. Lesko
clarified that range finding was done in the previous two weeks and the scoring is
currently being calculated. Senator Huppenthal asked if when the data came in, the
information would be shared or if it were part of the development of the test. Ms. Lesko
explained the information would be available to be shared.
Dr. Goodman asked what happens to children if test scores indicate they have not
achieved. Ms. Lesko responded that third, fifth, and eighth graders will still be
promoted, that the test, in and of itself, would not be a reason to retain a child.
However, she noted that districts may choose to make this one of their criteria. At the
high school level, starting in the tenth grade, students will have five opportunities to take
the test. If they do not pass after the fifth testing, they will not receive their diploma.
She pointed out that the state is obligated to allow testing five times up through the
twelfth grade and then as many times as necessary through an individual's twenty-second
birthday.
Dr. Goodman asked what happens if a parent chooses not to let their child test. Ms.
Watson responded that basically, a child will not receive a diploma in Arizona without
having taken the required tests.
A discussion ensued regarding admittance to colleges and universities and problems
associated with this process for students who do not take state standardized tests.
Representative Gray pointed out that she did not believe universities would admit
students who have not passed state standardized tests.
Ms. Byrd indicated that universities concentrate more attention on student's ACT and
SAT scores and not on high school testing because they have no idea of each state's
standards.
Ms. Watson indicated she had recently attended a meeting which included educators
and representatives from several businesses such as the Phoenix Suns, America West,
and U.S. West. The meeting brought about questions from business leaders to
educators as to what students are being taught because the general consensus among
business leaders is that kids are being sent to them who are not well educated, who are
not proficient, and who are not prepared to enter the workforce.
Ms. Lesko stated that the task of the committee that put together the Arizona State
Standards for reading and writing was to focus on what students in Arizona should know
and be able to do based on grade level. She reiterated that the focus was not to define
Reading Success Task Force
June 24, 1999
Page 3
"how" teachers, parents and children achieve this. She maintained that it was the
philosophy of the Language Arts Committee that students use language skills to
understand academic subject matter and to enrich their lives. They develop literacy at
different rates and in a variety of ways. Consequently, language arts, skills and
processes should be taught in a variety of learning situations. With these concepts in
mind, the Committee formulated these standards and reached a consensus on what it is
that students should know and be able to do.
Ms. Lesko explained there are four standards in language arts; one for reading, one for
writing, one for listening and speaking, and one for hearing and presenting. She
emphasized that students learn and effectively apply a variety of reading strategies to
comprehending, interpreting, and evaluating a wide range of tasks and, therefore, the
standards do not dictate or define methodology in terms of writing and reading
instruction.
Referring to page three of the Arizona Academic Standards, describing foundations, Ms.
Lesko pointed out some of the word recognition and decoding strategies such as
phonetic skills, context clues, picture clues, word order, prefixes and suffixes to
comprehend written selections.
Senator Huppenthal asked what "decoding in context" refers to. Ms. Lesko responded
that it describes the decoding of a word based on its context in a sentence, and not just
through sound-letter association.
Senator Huppenthal asked if this is the standard of the skill that a child would have, or if
it is a teaching standard. Ms. Lesko responded that all of the standards are what the
student needs to know and be able to do.
Senator Huppenthal asked if the standard would be that some words have different
pronunciations in different contexts, and therefore, the student should be able, given a
different context of the same letter combination, to pronounce the word differently
because it is being used differently. He asked if this were the standard.
Dr. Moore stated she served on the Performance Objective Committee and that the
notion the Committee was getting at was not just about when a word is pronounced
differently in context, but that students are seeing decoding as a way to get to the
meaning of any word.
Senator Huppenthal, referring to how a standard is defined, stated that a standard is like
a hurdle, and if one has the ability, one can clear the hurdle. He stated he was trying to
understand what the hurdle is to define the meaning of the word. Ms. Lesko responded
that students learn and effectively apply a variety of reading strategies for
comprehending, interpreting and evaluat~nga wide range of texts.
Ms. Byrd stated that NlCHD brain research indicates that proficient readers have four
strategies in reading and decoding words and that in order to comprehend well, a
Reading Success Task Force
June 24,1999
Page 4
reader must be a good decoder. The first three strategies are sound-symbol
relationship, structural analysis, and print awareness. On the other hand, poor readers
use only one strategy; words in context.
Dr. Goodman pointed out that if the standards permit the possibilities of different
teachers with different understandings to move toward their objectives in different ways
then he has no objections. However, if the State begins specifying a specific sequence,
then the standards are turned into a curriculum. He stated that though phonics plays a
role in reading, the State needs to be careful that in trying to improve teaching of
reading, it does not narrow the methodology of teaching.
Senator Huppenthal indicated he had read up on the NlCHD research and found it
"fairly persuasive." However, the counter-point is that good readers read and there is a
high correlation between the amount of reading a child accomplishes and their reading
skills. He wondered if there were a prominent modality among these good readers in
terms of how they became proficient readers.
Tape 1, Side B
Dr. North stated that if the standard dictates that by the end of a certain sequence a
student needs to be able to decode in context, then this is a "standard." But if the
concern is how to get the children to be able to do this, then it becomes a curriculum
issue.
Ms. Clark stated many young children today do not come from reading backgrounds,
but that children who have been read to, bring their knowledge to the printed page. If a
child does not have this, teachers have the additional job of preparing children to read a
variety of texts. She noted the process of learning to read is very complex.
Senator Huppenthal ventured it had always been his assumption that high test scores
are associated with effective teaching strategies of particular schools. However, he
brought out that it was determined that parents who read to their children choose to
send their children to particular schools-the same schools demonstrating high reading
levels. These same children, while good readers who are above grade level, still
advance at a similar rate as other children. He stated that with regard to the conflict
between literature based reading and phonics based reading, he feels it is imperative
that a child drill the basic phonetic sounds. However, he acknowledged a problem can
appear if children are drilled for too long and that a length of about eight minutes is as
long as a drill should be. He contended that the gap between phonetically based and
literature based movements is not large and that what is needed is to learn to teach
children to love to read. He expressed concern that by the time a child reaches
kindergarten, the amount of time that can be devoted to learning to read is diminished.
If the child has not already developed reading skills, the limited time factor for learning
to read can pose a problem
Reading Success Task Force
June 24,1999
Page 5
Dr. Goodman responded, saying that one thing that clouds all the research
methodology is that the best predictor of test results is "the father's income."
Furthermore, he indicated that most studies are done by people with no vested interest
in the results. With regard to the issue of phonics versus literature based methods, he
stated success of either depends on how the two approaches have perceived the issues
of language, phonics and sequence and how interchangeable they are.
Senator Huppenthal submitted that the difficulty he has with the literature based
approach is the inability to read efficiently if the phonetic pronunciations have not been
deeply engrained. This in turn, might turn a child away from learning to love to read and
from reading as much as would be beneficial.
Ms. Zola expressed support for the idea of matching up teachers and students based on
a teacher's particular method of teaching, and a student's particular method of learning.
Senator Huppenthal requested Dr. Goodman to comment on the NICHD research which
focused on literature based training versus a control group. Dr. Goodman responded
that his difficulty with the study is that it is rarely possible to isolate what happens in
different classrooms. He explained that in the study, there was no control over of what
reading was taking place at home and no control over the teachers involved in the
study. Additionally, he added that he has repeatedly asked Barbara Foreman and her
colleagues to show him the data from the study but has had no success. Other issues
with the study involve who the teachers were and how they had been trained, as well as
the testing itself. He said it was defined very narrowly as the ability to read real words
and nonsense words with the assumption that this was a demonstration of reading
ability. He expressed disagreement with this saying that in his opinion, reading ability is
the ability to make sense of words.
Ms. Watson distributed an e-mail article and an article titled Grade by Grade Reading
Skills Listed by Duke Helfand of the Los Angeles Times, which unveiled a collection of
grade-by-grade skills children should master to become proficient readers and writers,
(Attachments D and E).
Ms. Byrd explained that at the Arizona Multisensory Training Institute, they train
teachers who are post graduates who have already gone through teacher certification.
She stated that they do not recruit these teachers, rather the teachers seek them out
because they do not feel they are prepared to teach children how to read.
Senator Huppenthal commented that he sees teachers as "independent contractors"
who each execute their own strategy. He said he is skeptical of any approach which
may mandate or influence how teachers teach unless what is mandated is persuasive
as opposed to coercive and that the approach must appeal to people's hearts, minds,
and logic. He contended that the Reading Success Task Force must develop
consensus items in order to successfully persuade thinking. Additionally, Senator
Huppenthal agreed that the research from NlCHD needs to be appropriated and
studied. He said what he does know of it makes logical sense to him. However, the
Reading Success Task Force
June 24,1999
Page 6
literature based movement, the idea that good readers read, that actual reading is the
key to developing good reading, also makes good sense.
Kimberly Yee, Senate Research Analyst, explained that the large binders distributed
to each member, contain a compilation of information obtained from members of the
Task Force. Referring to a Reading Success Task Force handout, (Attachment F), she
added that four guest speakers have been confirmed for August through November
noting that the guest speakers were nominated by members of the Task Force. She
indicated a guest speaker is still needed for the July meeting and members were
encouraged to submit names to her. She noted that other speakers who were
recommended by members of the task force have been invited to speak, however,
either they have not responded to the invitation or they have declined to speak.
Dr. Goodman remarked that the speakers noted on the handout were all of a singular
position and he requested more of a variation with regard to the speakers orientation.
Senator Huppenthal pointed out that there is an open speaker's slot in July and he
invited Dr. Goodman to invite someone to fill that vacancy. Dr. Goodman further
submitted that the current speaker list lacked an individual with expertise in Arizona.
Ms. Panczak suggested two books for reading for members; one titled, Why Our
Children Can? Read, and Reading Reflex, both by Diane McGuinness. She noted the
books explain that much research indicates that poor readers fail because they do not
know how to "break the code."
Senator Huppenthal requested staff to check if funds were available in the event any
member of the Task Force was interested in reading the books.
Ms. Moore suggested the possibility of having an e-mail bulletin board site as a way for
members to connect between meetings. Senator Huppenthal requested Ms. Yee to
consult with Legislative Computer Services regarding the possibility of using the ALlS
website for this purpose.
Senator Huppenthal requested members to submit topics for presentation by the guest
speakers. Dr. North suggested topics might include:
1) Addressing the definition of "research based"
2) Addressing the issues associated with the NICHD studies
3) Having Ms. Goodman respond to some of Dr. Goodman's concerns
Dr. North pointed out that one of the speakers is Marilyn J. Adams and suggested that
perhaps Ms. Adams might talk about her sixty years of independent research which
validates the research done by NICHD.
With regard to libraries, Senator Huppenthal stated that approximately a year ago he
met with Dr. Goodman and a researcher named Allington from New York State. In
doing some research, he indicated that only 25 percent of children go to the library to
Reading Success Task Force
June 24,1999
Page 7
check out books. He urged that because of this, it is imperative that books be made
available in classrooms.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:OO p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Monica Mclver
Committee Secretary
Tapes and attachments filed with the Office of the Secretary of the Senate.
Reading Success Task Force
June 24,1999
Page 8
PI
Academic Standards Timeline
1995-1996
Spring 1995 Summer 1995 (9128195; 1011 6-1 8/95; 1/8/96)
Supt. Keegan directed In response, State Board Academic Summits held in 9
that a student of Education requested
b
content areas with about 100
Achievement plan be 11 development of state representatives (teachers,
developed standards students, parents, business and
community leaders)
Oct. & Nov. 1996
1996-1997 Content Advisory Committee (1 43 September 1996
(1 0126196;
12/1/96/2/6/97)
Drafts 1,2 and 3
finalized and mailed
Teachers) prepared draft 1 of State Board approved
statewide. members) refined PO's.
Mar. - Aug. 1996 'I'he State Hoard adopted these
Performance Objectives (Po's) for grades 3,5, 8 and 1 2 for
reading, writing and mathematics.
Technical Advisory Committee (23 CRT pilot testing
slandards: workplace skills,
technology (3124); con~prehens~ve
I~ealtht,h e arts, Bt foreign
language (4128)
State Board finalized and
adopted reading, writing
and mathematics
b
standards.
Academic Standards Timeline (cont'd)
Apr.-May 1997 June 23,1997 May - Nov. 1997
Science standards
public hearings held.
Aug. 1997 Oct. 1997
Dec. 1997 Feb. 1998
(PO's) drafted.
Request for proposal to be finalized for
AIMS testing in reading, writing alld
mathe~natics.S tatewide Academic
Standards prescntarionb bcg~ns.i lalldhook
Plans for dissemination of all academic
Science PO'S to be finalized.
Standards Team Training
planned. Contract for AIMS
--+
standards finalized.
State Board adopted science +
standards.
+
---+
Science Advisory
Committee selected;
Performance objectives
Standards Advocacy Team
Training begins.
Academic Standards Timeline (cont'd)
Aug. 1998 Oct. 1998 Nov. 1998
r disseminated.
Feb. 99 March 1999
Social Studies Design team convenes.
The Arts perf. obj. written. Science
standards amendments written.
AIMS field test administered to all Standards newsprint
AIMS High School Study Guide
disseminated.
Spanish. s s
1l th& 12'~gr ade students.
April 1999 April 2000
First statewide AIMS H.S. Assessment First statewide AIMS assessment
document for parents
disseminated.
___+
administered to class of 2001. AIMS state
sample administered to grades 3, 5 & 8.
AIMS state sample administered in
Performance standards
setting team convened.
Science Standards
ad~ilinistered to grades 3, 5 and 8.
The Process
i r Setting Standards -
Content Area Design Teams
Began 1995, Standards adopted 18L6
Setting Performance Objectives -
Content Advisory Committees
Reading, Writing, Mathematics, Science
1I Technical Advisory Committee
I 1 m Special Populations Advisory Committee
I I
"UII L., VY r v r . r ur .." --. . -. -- -- ---. ..-... . ..
Y V I l Lb "I. '"I . I ' "1 ,.& "-. . ". -" ". .,."". .-..a . .... ..-
Arizona Academic Standards
Clear, concise statements of what
we expect all K-12 public school
students to know and be able to
do.
Expectations for learning in all our
schools.
; . THE CONTUCT FOR ESTASLSHING STANDARD8
An Orientation to Arizona Academic
Standards
Standard
Related concepts for each level of achievement
- Readiness (Kindergart en) - Foundations (Grades 1-3)
- Essential (Grades 4-8)
- Proficiency (Grades 9-12), and
- Distinction (Honors)
Performance objectives for each croneept
y~7m.l
I ., . ):. t.13f : Standards: Benefits
L*m ACADEMIC EQUITY
All students are given the
opportunity to learn a
common core of concepts,
, ,
skills and information that
have been deemed to be
significant and important.
3r. Orr, AD€ 03.98
Standards: Benefits
4. ALIGNMENT
Dr. Orr, ADE 03.98
In, I
I Standards-based School Practice
is Driven by Three
I
I (Decezpth~ekg~w~ ple) Questions:
1. What da we wamt students to know
and be able $a da .... and how well?
2. How will we know that they know it?
3. What will we da abut it if they don 't? .
Arizona
ademic Standards
Arizona Student Achievement Program
AI-izona Department of Education
Lisa Graham Keegan
Supel-intendent of Public Instruction
UR7E AnDT-MINGu
dCa Anguratgse W orkt~lace Skills
ARIZONA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
1998
Kenneth R. Bennett, President
(Lay Member, 1995- 1999)
Dr. Mary Garcia, Vice President
(District Superintendent. 1996-2000)
Lisa Graham Keegan, Executive Officer
(Superintendent of Pu blic Instruction)
Todd Bankofier
(Lay Member, 1998-2002)
Dr. Lattie Coor
(University President, 1995- 1999)
Thava Freedman
(Community College Board Representative, 1997-2001)
Bruce Kulp
( C o u nS~c hool Superintendent, 1998-2002)
Janet Martin
(Lay Member, 1997-2001)
Felicia Muller
(Teacher Representative. 1996-2000)
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Corinne L. Velasquez, Administrator
1535 West Jefferson
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
(602) 542-5057
FAX (602) 542-3046
August 1998
Dear Parents, Guardians and Patrons,
The mission of the Arizona Department of Education is to ensure academic excellence.
Improving student achievement is our ovemding goal. Establishing academic standards-benchmarks
for what students should know and be able to d e i s crucial to achieving that goal.
Building on the origind Arizona Essential Skills, the standards are the result of countless hours of
work by comrnited educators and the community at large, and months of public input. They
represent the best of what Arizonans want for their children and their schools. We are incredibly
grateful to everyone who participated in their development.
The standards presented in this booklet-for reading, writing and mathematics-are those which
will be initially assessed by Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS). We believe
these are the educational foundation for all public schools in Arizona. As these standards are put
into practice in Arizona schools, students, teachers and parents will clearly understand what is
expected of them. We will have a concrete way to measure our successes-and be accountable
for student performance.
Our children deserve the best education we can give them. Setting rigorous academic standards is
an important h tst ep in that process. We urge everyone who has a stake in the education of our
children to use these standards to promote academic success. With clearly defined expectations
of our students and teachers, excellence is sure to follow.
Sincerely,
Introduction
Experience has shown that setting high expectations for students improves academic achievement.
Students excel when challenged.
With this in mind, the Arizona Department of Education, under the direction of the State Board of
Education, embarked on an effort in 1995 to produce clear, rigorous academic standards for all students.
The goal was to provide parents and teachers with specifics as to what our students should know and be
able to do. The standard-setting process involved educators; parents, students and members of the
business community, drawing on current research and standards developed nationally and by other states,
as well as the Arizona Essential Skills. At every step of the way we asked what it would take to provide
Arizona students with a world-class education to prepare them for the 21st century.
The results of this effort, the Arizona Academic Standards, provide a road map for public education in
Arizona. They chart a course by which all students can acquire the knowledge and skills they will need
to succeed in an increasingly complex world. They are tools students, parents and teachers use to assess
academic achievement.
The reading, writing and mathematics standards were deemed the most important by the State Board of
Education because they serve as the foundation for all other learning. A statewide test is being
developed in these three areas to measure student progress and school performance. The State Board
also anticipates adding a test in science subsequent to the implementation of the tests in reading, writing
and mathematics. Parents will have a clear idea of how well their children and their schools are doing.
Standards have also been developed for science, the arts, comprehensive health, foreign language,
technology, and workplace skills. Social studies standards are under development. These content areas
are designed to give schools guidance in setting and assessing rigorous academic goals across all subject
areas. Copies of those standards may be obtained at your local school, district office, Arizona
Department of Education at 602-542-6236, or through the Internet (www.ade.state.az.us).
Understanding and Using the Standards
Each standard defines what students should know and be able to do at various levels of achievement:
readiness (lundergarten), foundations (grades 1-3). essentials (grades 4-8). proficiency (grades 9-12) and
distinction (honors). Within each standard is one or more performance objectives. Performance
objectives describe the results of learning. They describe what a student would do to show that she has
achieved desired knowledge andlor skills.
The standards and performance objectives will be used to develop a statewide test. Although the formal
test, Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS), will be administered only to students in grades
3.5.8 and high school. it is expected that teachers at all grade levels will use the standards and
performance objectives to prepare students for their future.
Setting academic standards is a major step toward improving student achievement in Arizona. Many
teachers, administrators and committee members are hard at work within their school districts aligning
their cumculum, instruction and assessments to the state standards. In setting clear expectations for
student performance and informing parents, teachers, and schools of the expectations, our students,
teachers, and schools car. be more accountable for achieving the academic standards.
While these standards are the foundation for student success, they are only one componeni of the Arizona
Student Achievement Program (ASAP). The following page provides a broad overview of this important
program. We are committed to providing all Arizona children access to extraordinary education through
this strong focus on academic achievement.
ARIZONA STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT PROGRAM
The Arizona Student Achievement Program (ASAP) is a program created to set new standards for teaching and
learning and includes assessment, accountability and reporting of student achievement. Since norm-referenced tests
cannot determine whether a student has mastered the ability to perform a specific task, Arizona's Instrument to
Measure Standards (AIMS) is being designed to measure a student's performance against a specific set of criteria
(i.e., language arts and mathematics standards adopted by the State Board of Education).
COMPONENTS OF THE PROGRAM
Academic Standards
Academic standards have been developed and adopted in language arts, mathematics, science, the arts,
comprehensive health, foreign language, technology, and workplace skills.
Social studies standards are in the development process.
Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS)
Tests to measure the standards will be adopted by the State Board of Education and administered to all students in
grades 3.5.8 and high school in reading, writing and mathematics. For graduation purposes, the grade 12 tests will
be available to students starting in grade 10. Students will be given five opportunities to take each standard test.
Once a student demonstrates proficiency on a particular standard, the student is finished being tested on that
standard. The State Board also anticipates adding a test in science subsequent to the implementation of the reading,
writing and mathematics tests.
Statewide testing of all students in high school will begin in the spring of 1999 and in the spring of 2000 for grades
3.5 and 8. The State Board of Education will set performance standards. Statewide testing will be done annually
for students in grades 3.5, 8 and high school. The high school test will be used as a portion of the graduation
requirement, pursuant to A.R.S. 15-701 .O1 (A) (3), beginning with the graduating class of 2001.
Norm-Referenced Test
The norm-referenced test. Stanford 9. is given to all students annually in grades 2-1 1, pursuant to A.R.S. 15-741 (A) (3)
as amended by Section 1 1, HB2005 of the 4* Special Session.
District Achievement Plan
All Anzona districts and charter schools are requlred to teach curriculum aligned to the Arizona Academic Standards
and must document this effort. Plans are 10 be prepared by the school districts and charter schools for aligning
cuniculum and assessments to the adopted standards. Dismcts and charter schools are also required to document
student progress on the standards through regular assessment to ensure students are given multiple opportunities to
become proficient on the standards.
Reports
School Report Cards (i.e.. state, district and school results of the norm-referenced test and AIMS)
Norm-Referenced Test Pupil Home Reports
AIMS Pupil Home Reports
Table 1. Language Arts Stcrdizrds
I
Language Arts Standards
Reading and ~ r i b g
STANDARD 1: Reading
Students learn and effectively apply a variety of reading strategies for comprehending,
interpreting and evaluating a wide range of texts including fiction, nonfiction, classic and
con temporary works.
STANDARD 2: Writing
reading and writing
LANGUAGE ARTS STANDARDS AND PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES
Reading and Writing
STANDARD I: READING (adopted by the SIntc Board of Education 07.08.96)
Students learn and effectively apply a variety of reading strategies for comprehending,
interpreting and evaluating a wide range of texts including fiction, nonfiction, classic and
contemporary works.
READINESS (Kindergarten)
Students know and are able to do the following:
1. Identify characters in a story and retell stories in sequence
After listening to a selection:
a. Identify main characters
b. Retell story line in sequence
2. Predict elements and events in a story
After listening to a selection:
a. Make predictions based on title, cover, illustrations, text
3. Identify facts in nonfiction material
After listening to a selection:
a. Identify facts from nonfiction material
4. Use phonetic skills to decode simple words
a. Identify consonant sound/symbol relationshps in the context of words
5. Comprehend the meaning of simple written selections, using prior knowledge,
letterlsound relationships and picture clues
a. Demonstrate an understanding of print concepts (e.g., directionality, pictures, letters,
words, return sweep, book handling skills)
b. Derive meaning from picture clues
c. Derive meaning from illustrations/print using prior knowledgelexperience
d. Derive meaning from print using sound/aymbol relationships
language arts
FOUNDATIONS (Grades 1-3)
Students know and are able to do all of the above and the following: J
1. Use phonetic skills to decode words u~cb~d
a. Decode words in context using beginning, middle and find letterlsound relationships
2. Use word recognition and decoding strategies such as phonetic skills, context clues,
picture clues, word order, prefixes and suffixes to comprehend written selections
a. Derive meaning from a written selection using readingdecoding strategies
- phonetic clues
- context clues
- picture clues
- word order
- structural analysis (e.g., prefixes, suffixes)
- word recognition
3. Use reading comprehension strategies such as drawing conclusions, summarizing,
making predictions, identifying cause and effect, and differentiating fiction from
nonfiction
a. Draw conclusions based on the text
b. Restate information from a reading selection
c. Predict events, actions and behaviors using prior knowledge and/or details to comprehend
a reading selection
d. Identify cause-and-effect relationships
e. Differentiate fiction and nonfiction texts
4. Identify facts and the main idea, sequence events, define and differentiate characters,
and determine an author's purpose in a range of traditional and contemporary
literature
a. Identify the main idea and relevant facts in a reading selection
b. Sequence a series of events from a reading selection
c. Compare characters (e.g., traits, roles, similarities, differences) in a reading selection
d. Identify the author's main purpose (e.g., to inform, to entertain, to persuade, to describe)
in a reading selection
5. Analyze selections of fiction, nonfiction and poetry for their literary elements such as
character, setting, plot, sequence of events and organization of text
a. Compare characters, plot (including sequence of events), settings across reading
selections
b. Explain whether the events in the reading selection are real or fantasy
reading
c. Describe structura~e lements of poetry (e.g., rhyme, rhythm, repetition)
d. Describe the literary elements of fiction and nodiction
6. Read and comprehend consumer information such as forms, newspaper ads, warning
labels and safety pamphlets
a. Explain the meaning of specific signs (e-g., traffic, safety, warning)
b. Restate information found in consumer literature (e.g., safety pamphlets, newspapers,
catalogs)
c. Compare information in written advertisements
d. Fill out a variety of forms (e.g., contest entry, requests for information)
7. Follow a list of directions and evaluate those directions for clarity
a Follow a set of written directions
b. Evaluate written directions for sequence and completeness
8. Recognize the historical and cultural perspectives of literary selections
Note: For instructional pwposes-not for stute assessment
a. Identify similarities and differences relating to theme, plot, setting, character and point of
view in literature from different cultures
b. Compare real-life experiences to events, characters and conflicts in literary selections
from different cultures
c. Recognize that some words in literary selections come from a variety of cultures
ESSENTIALS (Grades 4-8)
Students know and are able to do all of the above and the following:
1. Use structural analysis skills such as identifying root words, prefixes, suffies and word
origins to decode words unfamiliar in print
(Grades 4-5)
a. Identify root words
b. Infer meanings of words in a selection through knowledge of prefixes and suffixes
c. Confirm meaning of words using context clues
(Grades 6-8)
a. Identify the effect of prefixes and suffixes on root words
b. Confm meaning of figurative, idiomatic and technical language using context clues
language arts
2 Use reading strategies such as making inferences and predictions, summarizing,
paraphrasing, differentiating fact from opinion, drawing conclusions, and determining
the author's purpose and perspective to comprehend written selections
(Grades 4-5)
a. Identify the main ideas; critical and supporting details; and the author's purpose, feelings
and point of view of the text
b. Distinguish fact from opinion
c. Summarize the text in own words (assessed at district level only)
d. Compare and contrast the text (e.g., characters, genre, cultural differences, fact, fiction)
e. Determine cause-and-effect relationships
f. Identify the text in chronological, sequential or logical order
g. Make an inference using context clues
(Grades 6-8)
a. Identify the main ideas; critical and supporting details; and the author's purpose, feelings
and point of view of the text
b. Distinguish fact from opinion
c. Summarize the text in own words (assessed at district level only)
d. Compare and contrast the text (e.g., characters, genre, cultural differences, fact, fiction)
e. Determine cause-and-effect relationships
f. Summarize the text in chronological, sequential or logical order
g. Predict outcome of text
3. Analyze selections of fiction, nonfiction and poetry by identifying the plot line (i.e.,
beginning, conflict, rising action, climax and resolution); distinguishing the main
character from minor ones; describing the relationships between and motivations of
characters; and making inferences about the events, setting, style, tone, mood and
meaning of the selection
(Grades 4-5)
a. Distinguish the main characters from the minor characters
b. Summarize the plot line to include cause and effect
c. Explain the interaction of major and minor characters in a selection
d. Draw defensible conclusions based on events and settings
e. Differentiate fiction, nonfiction and poetry based on their attributes
f. Explain cause and effect within the plot
(Grades 6-8)
a. Describe the setting and its relationshp to the selection
b. Describe the motivation of major and minor characters in a selection
c. Draw defensible conciusions, based on stated and implied information according to style,
meaning and mood
d. Differentiate fiction, nonfiction or poetry based on their attributes
e. Identify the theme
reading
4. Identify the author's purpose, position, bias and strategies in a persuasive selection
(Grades 4-5)
a. Identify the author's purpose and use of details to support the purpose
b. Describe the author's use of strategies to convince or persuade
- bandwagon
- peer pressure
- "loaded" words
c. Identify the author's bias
(Grades 6-8)
a. Identify the author's purpose and use of details to support the purpose
b. Describe the author's use of strategies to convince or persuade
- bandwagon
- peer pressure
- "loaded" words
c. Identify the author's bias
5. Evaluate an instructional manual such as assembly directions or user's guide for clarity
and completeness
Note: Can be used for 5th and 8th grades, depending on difJiculty of manual used for the assessment
a. Identify the components of an instructional manual (e.g., directions, tools required, parts
needed, illustrations, diagram sequence, bold face for relevant steps)
b. Incorporate information from the illustrations
c. Locate support help in manual or from manufacturer
d. Identify the sequence of activities needed to carry out a procedure
e. Identify information that is either extraneous or missing (e.g., directions, tools required,
parts needed, illustrations, diagram sequence, bold face for relevant steps)
6. Compare and contrast the historical and cultural perspectives of literary selections
Note: For instructional purposes-not for state assessment
(Grades 4-5)
a. Compare one author's perspective of a historical character, setting or event with another
historical or contemporary literary selection (e.g., essays, autobiographies, fiction,
nonfiction)
b. Compare the lives and experiences of characters in history to present-day individuals who
have similar goals or face similar challenges
c. Compare versions of traditional or contemporary literature from different cultures for
similarities and differences related to theme, plot, character, setting and point of view
language arts
(Grades 6-8)
a. Compare one author's perspective of a historical character, setting or event with another
historical or contemporary literary selection (e.g., essays, autobiographies, fiction,
nonfiction)
b. Compare the lives and experiences of characters in history to present-day individuals who
have similar goals or face similar challenges
c. Compare versions of traditional or contemporary literature from different cultures for
similarities and differences related to theme, plot, character, setting and point of view
PROFICIENCY (Grades 9-12)
Students know and are able to do all of the above and the following:
1. Apply reading strategies such as extracting, summarizing, clarifying and interpreting
information; predicting events and extending the ideas presented; relating new
information to prior knowledge; supporting assertions with evidence; and making
useful connections to other topics to comprehend works of literature and documents
a. Extract critical details or elements of literature
b. Summarize the main points
c. Make predictions based on evidence presented
d. Extend ideas presented in the text
e. Connect prior knowledge to information available
2. Recognize, analyze and evaluate an author's use of literary elements such as mood,
tone, theme, point of view, diction, dialog and figurative language (e.g., metaphors,
allusions, symbolism, similes) in selections of challenging fiction, nonfiction and poetry
a. Identify the author's use of literary elements (e-g., theme, point of view, diction, dialog,
character, setting, plot and figurative language)
b. Analyze the author's use of literary elements and figurative language
c. Support a judgment of the effectiveness of the author's use of literary elements and
figurative language
3. Evaluate the author's persuasive techniques in written selections such as editorials,
essays, reviews and critiques
a. Distinguish use of fact and opinion
b. Identify purpose (thesis, point of view, stand) of a selection and the response desired
from the reader
c. Evaluate the author's bias and use of persuasive strategies to accomplish a purpose
- faulty logic
- word choice
- sentence structure
reading
- propaganda techniques
- organizational pattern
4. Evaluate technical journals or workplace documents for purpose, organizational
pattern, clarity, reliability and accuracy, and relevancy of information
a. Critique consistency and clarity of purpose
b. Critique effectiveness of organizational pattern (e.g., logic, focus, consistency, visual
appeal)
c. Evaluate information for
- relevance
- cl&ty
- understandability
- logic - reliability and accuracy (e.g., expertise of author, appropriate use of statistics,
diagrams, charts)
5. Analyze classic and contemporary literature selections, drawn from American and
world literature, for the universality of themes such as the individual's role in society,
interdependence, and the interaction between man and nature
a. Draw a logical inference about the theme and support the inference with evidence from
the selection (e.g., symbolism, setting, characterization, irony, conflict)
b. Compare andor contrast universality of themes with real-life experiences andlor other
works of literature
DISTINCTION (Honors)
Students know and are able to do all of the above and the following:
1. Analyze complex texts drawn from American and world literature in several historical
periods and movements to discern the universality of themes such as the individual's
role in society, interdependence, and the interaction between man and nature; and the
author's use of literary elements and styles
2. Use a full range of strategies to judge the reliability, accuracy, effectiveness, and
persuasiveness of literary criticism and analysis, professional and technical journals,
and professional-level reading materials
3. Develop and support a theme or thesis about the craft and significance of a body of
literature, both classic and contemporary, from a diverse selection of writers
language arts
STANDARD 2: WRITING (adopted by the State Board of Education 08.07.96)
Students effectively use written language for a variety of purposes and with a variety of audiences.
READINESS (Kindergarten)
Students know and are able to do the following:
1. Relate a narrative, creative story or other communication by drawing, telling and
writing
a. Create a narrative by drawing, telling and/or emergent writing
b. Create a story by drawing, telling and/or emergent writing
c. Create a message by drawing, telling and/or emergent writing
2. Spell simple words
a. Apply letter/sound relationships as emergent writers
3. Write the 26 letters of the alphabet
a. Copy the 26 letters of the alphabet
FOUNDATIONS (Grades 1-3)
Srudenrs know and are able ro do all of the above and the following:
1. Use the writing process, including generating topics, drafting, revising ideas and
editing, to complete effectively a variety of writing tasks
a. Generate topics through prewriting activities (e.g., brainstorming, webbing, mapping,
drawing, writer's notebook, K-W-L charts, scaffolds, group discussion)
b. Align purpose (e.g., to entertain, to inform, to communicate) with audience
c. Write a fust draft with the necessary components for a specific genre
d. Revise draft content (e.g., organization, relevant details, clarity)
e. Edit revised draft using resources (e.g., dictionary, word lists and banks, thesaurus, spell
checker, glossary, style manual, grarnmar and usage reference)
f. Proofread revised draft
g. Present final copy according to purpose (e.g., read aloud, display, publish, mail, send,
perform)
2. Use correct spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar and word usage, and good
penmanship to complete effectively a variety of writing tasks
In final copy of student's own writing tasks:
writing
a. Spell high frequency words correctly
b. Punctuate endings of sentences
c. Capitalize sentence beginnings and proper nouns
d. Use standard, age-appropriate grammar and word usage (e.g., basic subject-verb
agreement, complete simple sentences, appropriate verb tense, regular plurals)
e. Write legibly
3. Write a personal experience narrative or a creative story that has a beginning, middle,
and end and uses descriptive words or phrases to develop ideas and advance the
characters, plot and setting
a. Write a narrative
- establish a beginning, middle and end - use sensory details to describe
-0R-b.
Write a story
- use sensory details to describe setting and characters
- develop a story line with a problem and events leading to a solution
4. Gather, organize and accurately, clearly and sequentially report information gained
from personal observations and experiences such as science experiments, field trips and
classroom visitors
a. Record observations (e.g., logs, lists, graphs, charts, tables, illustrations)
b. Write an introductory statement
c. Report events sequentially
d. Write a concluding statement
5. Locate, acknowledge and use several sources to write an informational report in their
own words
a. Use resources (e.g., video tapes, magazines, informational books, reference materials,
interviews, guest speakers. Internet) and report information in their own words
b. Write an introductory statement. followed by details to support the main idea
c. List resources used by title
6. Write well-organized communications, such as friendly letters, memos and invitations,
for a specific audience and with a clear purpose
a. Organize content, including necessary components of the selected format, for a specified
audience
b. Place commas correctly in components (e.g., heading, greeting, closing, address) unique
to letters, memos, invitations
language arts
ESSENTIALS (Grades 4-8)
Students know and are able to do all of the above and the following:
Note: In developing the Essentials Lcvel concepts, students should use the writing process, including
genemting topics, drafting, revising ideas and editing, to complete effectively a variety of
writing tasks (see Foundations Level la-g, page 9)
1. Use correct spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar and usage, along with varied
sentence structure and paragraph organization, to complete effectively a variety of
writing tasks
(Grades 4-5)
a. Spell correctly
b. Punctuate correctly (e.g., sentence endings, commas in a friendly letter's greeting and
closing, commas in a series, abbreviations, quotations in dialog, apostrophes)
c. Apply rules of capitalization (e-g., sentence beginnings, titles, abbreviations, proper nouns)
d. Apply standard grammar and usage (e.g., subject-verb agreement, simple and compound
sentences, appropriate verb tense, plurals)
e. Organize paragraphs with a variety of sentence structures (e.g., simple, compound)
(Grades 6-8)
a. Spell correctly
b. Punctuate correctly (e.g., sentence endings, commas in a series, commas in compound
sentences, abbreviations, quotation marks, colon in a business letter greeting, apostrophes)
c. Apply rules of capitalization (e.g., sentence beginnings, titles, abbreviations, proper
nouns, direct quotations)
d. Apply standard grammar and usage (e.g., subject-verb agreement; simple, compound and
complex sentences; appropriate verb tense; plurals; prepositions)
e. Organize paragraphs with a variety of sentence structures (e.g., simple, compound, complex)
2. Write a personal experience narrative or creative story that includes a plot and shows
the reader what happens through well-developed characters, setting, dialog, and themes
and uses figurative language, descriptive words and phrases
(Grades 4-5)
a. Write a personal experience narrative
- develop a story line in a sequence that is clear
- use descriptive words and phrases
-0R-b.
Write a story
- develop a story line in a sequence that is clear
- develop the characters
- describe the setting
- use dialog when appropriate
- use descriptive words and phrases
writing
(Grades 6-8)
a. Write a personal experience narrative - develop a story line in a sequence that is clear - use figurative language or descriptive words and phrases
-OR-b.
Write a story - develop a story line in a sequence that is clear
- develop the characters
- describe the setting
- use dialog when appropriate - use simile, metaphor or descriptive words and phrases
3. Write a summary that presents information clearly and accurately, contains the most
significant details and preserves the position of the author
(Grades 4-5)
Note: For instructional purposes-not for state assessment
(Grades 6-8)
a. Use own words except for material quoted
b. Preserve the author's perspective and voice
c. Contain main ideas of eventlarticle/story plus the most significant details
d. Present clearly written and organized information
4. Write an expository essay that contains effective introductory and summary statements
and fully develops the ideas with details, facts, examples and descriptions
(Grades 4-5)
Note: For instructional purposes-not for slate assessment
(Grades 6-8)
a. Write an expository essay that begins by stating the thesis (purpose) with an effective
introductory statement or paragraph; provides smooth transitions; and ends with either a
paragraph concluding the development of the thesis, a summary or a clincher statement
b. Use own words (except for quoted material) to develop ideas accurately and clearly with
supporting details, facts. exmplcs or descriptions
c. Use personal interpretation. analysis. evaluation or reflection to evidence understanding
of subject
language arts
5. Write a report that conveys a point of view and develops a topic with appropriate facts,
details, examples and descriptions from a variety of cited sources
(Grades 4-5)
a. Write a report in own words that states, develops and provides a concluding statement for
a point of view (perspective) about a topic that is narrow enough to be adequately
covered
b. Use logical sequence (including transitional words and phrases such asfirst, next, then)
c. Provide support through facts, details, examples or descriptions that are appropriate,
directly related to the topic and from a variety of cited sources
(Grades 6-8)
a. Write a report in own words (except for quoted material) that states, develops and
provides a concluding statement for a point of view (perspective) about a topic that is
narrow enough to be adequately covered
b. Organize a report with a clear beginning, middle and end including use of smooth
transitions
c. Provide support through facts, details, examples or descriptions that are appropriate,
directly related to the topic, and from a variety of cited sources
d. Use personal interpretation, analysis, evaluation or reflection to evidence understanding
of subject
6. Write formal communications, such as personal or business letters, messages, directions
and applications, in an appropriate format and for a specific audience and purpose
(Grades 4-5)
a. Write a formal communication in an appropriate format for a specific audience and
PurPose
b. Organize ideas in a meaningful sequence using transitional words or phrases (e.g.,first,
next, then)
c. Express ideas that are clear and directly related to the topic
(Grades 6-8)
a. Write a formal communication in an appropriate format for a specific audience and
purpose
b. Organize ideas in a meaningful sequence using smooth transitions
c. Express ideas that are clear and directly related to the topic
7. Write a response to a literary selection by supporting their ideas with references to the
text, other works or experiences
(Grades 4-5)
a. Write a clear response supported with examples from the text, other works or experiences
b. Relate own ideas to supporting details in a clear manner
c. Organize response with a clear beginning, middle and end
writing
(Grades 6-8)
a State clearly a position that is interpretive, analytic, evaluative or reflective
b. Support inferences and conclusions with examples from the text, personal experience,
references to other works or reference to non-print media
c. Relate own ideas to supporting details in a clear and logical manner
d. Provide support adequate to the literary selection (e.g., short poem vs. novel)
8. Demonstrate research skills using reference materials such as a dictionary,
encyclopedia and thesaurus to complete effectively a variety of writing tasks
(Grades 4-5)
a. Implement a research strategy that includes
- selecting an appropriate source for a specific research purpose
- utilizing reference materials (e.g., dictionary, thesaurus, encyclopedia., informational
trade books, multimedia sources, Internet) - writing a paraphrase of information from a source - recording relevant information (e.g., notes, graphs, tables) taken from a research
source
- organizing notes and integrating notes into a finished product
- incorporating notes into a finished product
(Grades 6-8)
a. Implement a research strategy that includes
- selecting the best source for specific research purpose
- taking notes that summarize and paraphrase information relevant to the topic
- incorporating notes into a finished product
PROFICIENCY (Grades 9- 12)
Studenrs know and are able to do all of rhe above and the follow in^:
Note: In developing the Projkiency Love1 concepts, students should use the writing process, including
generating topics, dmjhng, revising ideas and editing, to complete effectively a variety of
writing tusk (see Foundorions Love1 la-g, page 9)
1. Use transitional devices; varied sentence structures; the active voice; parallel
structures; supporting details, phrases and clauses; and correct spelling, punctuation,
capitalization, grammar and usage to sharpen the focus and clarify the meaning of their
writings
a. Use transitions (e.g., conjunctive adverbs, coordinating conjunctions, subordinating
conjunctions) where appropriate
b. Vary sentence structure (e.g., compound, complex, compound-complex)
c. Use active voice as appropriate to purpose (e.g., creative writing, expository.writing)
language arts
d. Use parallel structure appropriateIy
e. Sharpen the focus and clarify the meaning of their writing through the appropriate use of
- capitalization
- standard grammar and usage (e.g., subject-verb agreement, pronoun agreement and
consistency of verb tense) - spelling, with the use of a dictionarylthesaurus (as needed)
- punctuation (e.g., comma, ellipsis, apostrophe, semicolon, colon)
2. Write a persuasive essay (e.g., an editorial, a review, an essay, a critique) that contains
effective introductory and summary statements; arranges the arguments effectively;
and fully develops the ideas with convincing proof, details, facts, examples and
descriptions
a. Write a thesis statement to convey a point of view about a subject
b. Develop the point of view with ample and convincing support (e.g., details, facts,
reasons, examples and descriptions) appropriate to audience and purpose
c. Create an organizational structure that includes an effective beginning, middle and end
d. Use persuasive word choice and sentence structure (e.g., connotation, strong verbs,
repetition and parallelism)
3. Write an analysis of an author's use of literary elements such as character, setting,
theme, plot, figurative language and point of view
a. Develop a thesis that states a position about the author's use of literary elements
b. Support the thesis with relevant examples from the selection
c. Analyze the author's use of literary elements (e-g., character, setting and theme)
d. Organize the analysis with a clear beginning, middle and end
4. Craft a cohesive research document that develops a logical argument or thesis; contains
comprehensive, supporting information from a variety of credible and cited resources;
and conforms to a style manual
a. State a point of view, position or argument about the subject
b. Organize with a beginning that states the thesis, a middle that develops the thesis, and an
end
c. Support a point of view, position or argument, utilizing facts, examples, details andlor
quotes from credible, accurate sources
d. Follow the guidelines of a selected style manual consistently
5. Write formal communications, such as a rbum6, manuals and letters of application, in
appropriate formats, for a definite audience and with a clear purpose
a. Establish a clear purpose for a specific audience
b. Use a clear and appropriate organizational pattern following a standard format for the
assigned communication
writing
c. Include only relevant information
d. Use language with an appropriate degree of formality
6. Write a narrative or story that develops complex characters, plot structure, point of
view and setting; organizes ideas in meaningful sequence; and includes sensory details
and concrete language to advance the story line
a. Write a first- or third-person narrative or story - develop a point of view - present events in a logical order - develop events that convey a unifying theme or tone - include sensory details, concrete language and/or dialog - use literary elements (e.g., plot, setting, character, theme)
DISTINCTION (Honors)
Students know and are able to do all of the above and the following:
1. Expand writing experiences by experimenting with language, form and genres (e.g.,
poetry, screen plays and public policy documents)
2. Reflect the subtleties of language and polished literary style in their writings including
the power of imagery and precise word choice, and the use of such literary devices as
foreshadowing, flashbacks, metaphors, similes, symbolism and idioms
3. Analyze, synthesize, evaluate and apply principles of formal logic in expository writing
tasks
language arts
Language Arts Glossary
acknowledge To cite the source of information in a written piece.
address To speak to, to deal with.
adequate Sufficient, competent, satisfactory.
advance To put forward, propose.
allusion An indirect reference to something assumed to be familiar.
analytic Noting relationships, reasoning from the interrelations of a subject.
anticipate To foresee, to realize beforehand.
appropriate Consistent with accepted standards, suited to an end or purpose.
cluster A group of the same or similar elements.
cohesive Consistent, tending to unify.
complex Composite, intricate, complicated.
concrete Precise. specific.
contain To have within, to include, to have as component parts.
contemporary In existence now, present, current, present-day.
convey To communicate or make known.
craft To construct, create.
create To produce through artistic or irnagnative effort.
creative Original, inventive, innovative.
credible Worthy of belief because of precision; valid, convincing, true.
credit To acknowledge work done, to cite.
effective Producing a desired effect, efficient.
exclude To reject, to prevent from being included or considered.
expository Explanatory, interpretive.
figurative language Use of figures of speech, symbolic language.
language arts glossary
genre Type or class, classification of literature.
good penmanship Readable formation of letters, the art of handwriting.
high frequency word A word that appears many more times than others in ordinary reading material.
idiomatic Pertaining to expressions of language that do not mean what they literally say.
interpretive Serving to explain, explanatory.
K-W-L A reading comprehension strategy to determine what a student knows, wants to know and has
learned.
list To itemize, to make a list of.
maintain To support, sustain.
meaningful Effectively conveying meaning, feeling or mood; important, significant.
metaphor A figure of speech in which a comparison is implied by analogy but not stated.
paraphrase To restate text or passage in another form or words.
personal experience First-hand experience.
perspective View, outlook.
preserve To keep or maintain intact.
reflective Characterized by or disposed to serious thought; contemplative, deliberative.
relate To give account of, describe, report.
relevant Having a bearing on or connection with the matter at hand.
r&urni A brief written account of personal. educational and professional qualifications and experience.
scaffold To build one idea upon another.
sensory Pertaining to the senses.
simile A figure of speech in which two essentially unlike things are compared.
skim To look through reading matter casually.
symbolism Attributing symbolic meanlngs or significance to obiects, events or relationships.
traditional Conventional.
language arts
Table 1. Mathematics Standards
Mathematics Standards
STANDARD 1: Number Sense
Students develop number sense and use numbers and number relationships to acquire basic
facts, to solve a wide variety of real-world problems, and to determine the reasonableness of
results.
STANDARD 2: Data Analysis and Probability
Students use data co!lection and analysis, statistics, and probability to make valid inferences,
decisions and arguments and to solve a variety of real-world problems.
STANDARD 3: Patterns, Algebra and Functions
Students use algebraic methods to explore, model and describe patterns, relationships and
functions involving numbers, shapes, data and graphs within a variety of real-world
problem-solving situations.
STANDARD 4: Geometry
Students use geometric methods, properties and relationships as a means to recognize, draw,
describe, connect, and analyze shapes and representations in the physical world.
STANDARD 5: Measurement and Discrete Mathematics
Students make and use direct and indirect measurement, metric and U.S. customary, to
describe and compare the real world and to prepare for the study of discrete functions, fractals
and chaos which have evolved out of the age of technology.
STANDARD 6: Mathematical Stmcture/Logic
Students use both inductive and deductive reasoning as they make conjectures and test the
validity of arguments.
mathematics
MATHEMATICS STANDARDS AND PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES
(adopted by the State Board of Education 08.26.96)
Throughout all of the following six standards, students will use reasoning, communication
skills, and appropriate manipulatives (concrete materials) and technology within real-world
problem-solving situations to make connections within mathematics and between mathematics
and other disciplines.
STANDARD I: NUMBER SENSE
Students develop number sense and use numbers and number relationships to acquire basic facts,
to solve a wide variety of real-world problems, and to determine the reasonableness of results.
Students know and are able to do the following:
READINESS (Kindergarten)
1. Develop an understanding of number meanings and relationships
2. Demonstrate one-to-one correspondence between elements in collections (sets) (e.g.,
nine blocks is as many as nine ducks)
3. Use manipulatives (concrete materials) to count, order and group
4. Recognize relationships between concrete representations, number names, and
symbolic representations of numbers (e.g., understand that three rocks can be
represented as three circles, the numeral 3 and the word three)
FOUNDATIONS (Grades 1-3)
1. Represent and use numbers in equivalent forms through the use of physical models,
drawings, word names and symbols (e.g., using concrete materials and fraction
equivalents to represent and compare halves, thirds, fourths, eighths and tenths)
a. Make a model to represent a given whole number
b. Identify a whole number represented by a model with a word name and symbol
c. Construct equivalent forms of whole numbers (e.g., 15 + 5 = 10 + 10)
d. Make a model to represent a given fraction (e.g., geometric model-shading a picture, set
model-part of an egg carton) (halves, thirds and fourths)
e. Identify the fraction represented by a model with a word name and symbol (halves, thirds
and fourths)
f. Identify a given model that is divided into equal fractional parts (halves, thirds and
fourths)
mathematics
2. Relate counting, grouping and place-value concepts to whole numbers (e.g., reading and
writing the number represented when objects are grouped by thousands, hundreds,
tens and ones)
a. Read whole numbers up to one thousand
b. Write whole numbers up to one thousand
c. Order whole numbers (e.g., smallest to largest, largest to smallest) up to one thousand