Tác động của việc áp dụng chuẩn chung giáo dục cho học sinh từ mẫu giáo đến phổ thông đối với giáo viên tại hoa kỳ

VIETNAM NATIONALUNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION GRADUATION PAPER THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS ON K-12 TEACHERS IN THE UNITED STATES Instructor: MS.HOÀNG THU PHƯƠNG (M.A) Student: NGUYỄN HÀ MY Academic year: QH2010 ‘’ HANOI, MAY 2014 ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ KHOA SƯ PHẠM TIẾNG ANH KHOÁ LUẬN TỐT NGHIỆP TÁC ĐỘNG CỦA VIỆC ÁP DỤNG CHUẨN CHUNG GIÁO DỤC CHO HỌC SINH TỪ MẪU GIÁO ĐẾN PHỔ THÔNG ĐỐI VỚI GIÁO VIÊN TẠI HOA KỲ Giáo viên hướng dẫn: THS HOÀNG THU PHƯƠNG Sinh viên: NGUYỄN HÀ MY Khóa : QH2010 HÀ NỘI, 5/ 2014 ACCEPTANCE PAGE I hereby state that I: Nguyễn Hà My, QH2010.F1.E1, being a candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of the College relating to the retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper deposited in the library In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan or reproduction of the paper Signature Nguyễn Hà My Date May 5, 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would first liketo thank my supervisor, Ms Hoàng Thu Phương, for the guidanceand advice she provided throughout my time as her student I would also like to thank all the staff members at the Faculty of Linguistics and Cultures of English-speaking Countries and Ms NguyễnLêHường, who helped me in my supervisor’s absence during the first semester I must pay homage to professor Kenji Hakuta and the 2013 Stanford University’s massive open online course named “Constructive classroom conversations: mastering language for the Common Core State Standards.” This is where my curiosity about k-12 education, U.S education policies, the standard movement and most importantly, my thesis topic were awakened Completing this thesis would have been all the more difficult were it not for the excellent recommendation and assistance provided by the two witty intellectuals HiếuTrần and Enrique James Gomez Discussions with my senior QuânHồngNgô, M.A candidateLê Minh Nguyễn and my colleagueLêTùngSơn were illuminating as well I am very appreciative of the time they gave me.Additionally I should acknowledge my debt to my cousin Nam Nguyễn, my two old classmates LêPhan and TrangĐỗ, my childhood friend LinhLinhNguyễnand my fellowQuyênVăn for granting me direct access to worldclass library systems Thanks are due to the members of my ‘owl’ class 10E1, especially LêThanhHà, also extended totumblr and my close friendsHaiAnhNguyễn and Herbie Kim who helped me not to lose perspective upon things when I was under constant pressure Last but not least, my heartfelt appreciation goes to my family: my mother, father, brother, sister-in-law and my newborn nephew who gave me a broad base of support throughout my undergraduate study ABSTRACT For the first time in American history, there is a single set of educational standards for students from kindergarten to grade twelve, the Common Core State Standards, that are voluntary adopted by almost all states In spite of its first draft’s release only four years ago in 2010, the Common Core State Standards have already been considered the most significant shift in the modern American education, affecting a wide variety of groups such as students, parents, teachers, education leaders, etc However, there is a lack of comprehension ofthe Common Core State Standardsoutside the United States, especially its effect on teachers and teaching preparation programs Hence, a systematic understanding may help fill the gap of knowledge in not only the most up-todate education initiative but also the rooted causes of future transitions in the American education system This study aims at investigating the impact of the Common Core State Standards on k-12 teachers and teaching preparation program, specifically the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Secondary research method is employed and the steps involve data, content analysis and synthesis On the basis of the investigation of the research, it can be concluded that for k-12 teachers there are up to some major changes that have already or likely to occur in their teaching profession, ranging from common expectations, goals, benchmarks for students; increased collaboration to changes in professional development and evaluation Even teachers of non-core subjects are also affected For the teacher preparation programs the study found that there are several substantial differences in student recruitment, disciplinary as well as professional courses, field experience and evaluation system Further research is recommended to study the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics or dig deeper into other areas of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Contents CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 10 1.1 Statement of research question and rationale for the study 10 1.2 Research goals / objectives .12 1.3 Significance of the study 12 1.4 Scope of the study .13 1.5 Methodology .13 1.6 Organization of the study 15 CHAPTER II: OVERVIEW OF K-12 EDUCATION AND TEACHER PREPRATION PROGRAMS IN THE UNITED STATES 17 2.1 K-12 education in the US 17 2.2 K-12 educational standards in the U.S 18 2.3 K-12 teachers in the U.S 19 2.4 K-12 teacher preparation programs in the U.S 20 3.1 Overview of English Language Arts in the U.S 22 3.2 Overview of the Common Core State Standards 22 3.3 The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts 24 3.3.1 The criteria that is used to develop the CCSS for ELA 24 3.3.1.1 Alignment with expectations for college and career success 24 3.3.1.2 Consistency across all states 25 3.3.1.3 Evidence and research-based 25 3.3.1.4 International benchmarking 27 3.3.2 The content of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts 27 3.3.3Key shifts in the content of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts 29 3.3.3.1 Regular practice with complex texts and their academic language 29 3.3.3.2Citing Evidence: Reading and writing grounded in evidence from text 31 3.3.3.3 Informational text: Building knowledge through content-rich nonfiction 32 3.3.4 The adoption of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts 33 4.1 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on K-12 teachers’ expectations for students 35 4.2 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on K-12 teachers’ goals and benchmarks for students 36 4.3 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on K-12 teachers’ collaboration 36 4.4 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on K-12 teachers’ teaching techniques 38 4.5 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on in-service k-12 teachers’ professional development 39 4.6 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on U.S teachers’ evaluation system 41 4.7 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on K-12 teachers of non-core subjects 42 5.1 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on the student recruitment of teacher preparation programs 45 5.2 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on disciplinary courses of teacher preparation programs 46 5.3 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on teachers’ professional development courses 47 5.4 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on k-12 teachers’ field experiences 48 5.5 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on the evaluation system of teachers’ preparation programs 49 6.1 Summary 50 6.2 Limitations of the research 51 6.3 Suggestions for further research .51 REFERENCES 53 CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1.1Statement of research question and rationale for the study In 1983 the U.S National Commission on Excellence in Education established a research report called A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform This publication is often considered a key event in modern U.S educational history as it pointed out that not only U.S student performance but also U.S schools were failing Additionally, since 1997 the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has developed and administered theProgramme for International Student Assessment, an international survey allowing participating countries to compare their students' performance over time and assess the impact of education policy decisions (The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2013) The overall performance of the U.S is at or below average among countries participating in those assessments As a result, a wave of standards-based reform has been swept over the U.S education system, pushing for more coherent policies because U.S education is widely accepted to be a function of individual states The emergence of this common standards movement represents one of the most important developments in education policy recently Two most wellknown examples are the Improving America’s Schools Act in 1994 and the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 These two standards incorporate their way into reauthorizations of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (TESOL International Association, 2013) Yet they both suffer from some serious drawbacksanddid not produce the results they intended, namely to raise proficiency levels for all (TESOL International Association, 2013) 10 most needed by school districts, issue guidance regarding teacher professional development or offer technical assistance 4.6The impact of the CCSS for ELA on U.S teachers’ evaluation system Revising teacher-evaluation systems so they align with the CCSS is a critical step states take to ensure successful implementation of the new standards Many states are already working to restructure their teacherevaluation systems In a survey taken by Kober&Rentner (2011), the result shows that 30 out of 46 states expect to change their teacher evaluation systems Additionally, 38 states either have completed or are working on plans to create or revise teacher evaluation systems to hold teachers accountable for their students’ mastery of the CCSS (Porter.et.al.,2012) The majority of states are in the process of incorporating a focus on teacher evaluation to successfully align with the expectation of the CCSS for ELA “To ensure that the new standards are being taught in the classroom, these new evaluation systems would need to take into account teachers’ ability to deliver CCSS-aligned instruction.” (Education First, 2012) In 2009, only 15 states required annual evaluations of all teachers, with some states permitting teachers to go five years or more between evaluations To hold teachers accountable for their students’ mastery of the CCSS, states include annual evaluations for all educators on multiple measures of effectiveness In 2013, 27 states and the District of Columbia require annual evaluations for all teachers These evaluations often consist of student learning growth gauged against academic standards and observations of teacher instructional practices The CCSS for ELA affect states’ policies in principle in a way that student growth and achievement will be weighted heavily in 41 assessments of teacher performance In 2009, only four states were using student achievement as an important criterion in how teacher performance was assessed In 2013, more than two-thirds of states require that teacher evaluations measure student growth and achievement as part of a teacher’s effectiveness rating 19 other states and the District of Columbia even require student growth and achievement to be the most significant factor in judging teacher performance Furthermore, almost every state (44 states and the District of Columbia) require that classroom observations be incorporated into teacher evaluations In 24 of those states and the District of Columbia, multiple annual observations are required as part of each evaluation for at least new teachers Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia provide specific guidelines for when classroom observations should take place during the year and 14 states and the District of Columbia require that at least some classroom observations are unannounced Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia are explicit that teachers receive feedback on classroom observations 4.7 The impact of the CCSS for ELA on K-12 teachers of non-core subjects Teachers who specialize in areas such as physical education, music, and art will be affected by the CCSS The perception is that these areas are expendable Many believe that they are extra programs that schools offer as long as funding is available and they not take critical time away from core subject areas As the pressure mounts to improve test scores from CCSS assessments, many schools could choose to end these programs thus allowing more instructional time or intervention time in the core areas 42 The CCSS themselves present opportunities for teachers of non-core subjects to integrate aspects of the CCSS into their daily lessons Teachers in these areas may have to adapt to survive They will have to be creative in including aspects of the CCSS in their daily lessons while remaining true to the academic roots of physical education, art, music, etc These teachers may find it necessary to reinvent themselves in order to prove their mettle in schools across the country 43 CHAPTER V: THE IMPACT OF THE COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS ON TEACHER PREPARATION PROGRAMS Although teacher quality has received much attention in the U.S education system yet teacher preparation has been under researched.U.S states have made unprecedented changes in their teacher policy but few have addressed the area of teacher preparation However, with the emergence of the CCSS, the importance of teacher preparation programs is stressed: “The CCSS should influence every part of every teacher preparation program For that to happen at the secondary level, teachers themselves need to understand the standards Teachers must have deep and appropriate content knowledge to reach that understanding; they must be adaptable, with enough mastery to teach students with a range of abilities; and they must have the ability to inspire at least some of their students to the highest levels of achievement If the standards are to succeed in changing education, we must prepare our teachers to make them succeed.” (Ewing, 2010, p 7) As stated, one of the most critical factors in successful implementation of the CCSS is the ability of k-12 teachers, including those entering the profession to bring the standards to life in their classrooms every day The CCSS for ELA represent a significant shift in the way teachers must teach, as the level or rigor and scope of the standards are different from current state standards Teacher preparation providers, both 44 traditional teacher programs and alternative route programs, prepare new teachers to teach the CCSS when they enter the classrooms Kober&Rentner (2011) pointed out that 21 U.S state education departments saw aligning the content of teacher preparation programs with the CCSS as either a minor or major challenge Generally there are five major changes occurring in U.S teacher preparation and professional development programs: “1 Increase selectivity and proactive recruitment to increase both the content knowledge of teachers and the diversity of the teaching force Alter the content of disciplinary courses for future and practicing teachers Alter the professional preparation courses for future and practicing teachers Identify, nurture and sustain high quality field experiences for all future teachers Design and maintain a data collection system (including both assessments and infrastructure) committed to continuous improvement.” (The Association of public and grant university, 2012, p 17) 5.1The impact of the CCSS for ELA on the student recruitment of teacher preparation programs The first change of the teacher preparation programs is to be more proactive in the student recruitment It consists of both increased selectivity and diversity in teacher preparation programs because high-achieving 45 students tend to be attracted to programs that they perceive as challenging and high-quality Early identification of prospective students might involve taking advantage of the assessments that will be developed for high school graduation Later identification of prospective teachers might entail partnerships with faculty from departments at university and advisors who could identify talented college students and help recruit them into teaching Two examples of effective early recruitment approaches are the 2011 UTeach model at University of Texas and the 2011 Undergraduate Learning Assistant program at University of Colorado Boulder(Riley, 2012) These programs involve disciplinary faculty who are involved in the identification, recruitment and preparation of future teachers 5.2The impact of the CCSS for ELA on disciplinary courses of teacher preparation programs There are changes that are likely to occur on disciplinary courses as higher education aligns curricular content with k-12 schools and the CCSS for ELA It expounds a strikingly different view of learning than what is common in many content courses for teachers As the CCSS for ELA outline the knowledge and skills that will be expected of k-12 students, k-12 teachers are also in need of standards that outline the knowledge to effectively teach the CCSS for ELA content When the CCSS are issued, they will need parallel efforts as well It is predicted that the trend of new research is to investigate what is necessary to teach the CCSS for ELA(Hanover Research, 2012) This revision should reflect the demands of teaching the CCSS and incorporate 46 the latest research However, it will not simply be sufficient to change the content of courses The opportunities to learn what prospective and practicing teachers need to master the CCSS is also important In addition to university based classes, these opportunities might include: “Immersion experiences (in the) habits of mind, practices and disposition Such experiences may be summer institutes, year-long professional development, on-line experiences, or incorporated in undergraduate courses Greater emphasis on field and clinical experiences.Professional learning communities, etc (that include) teachers at all levels and educators.” (Riley, 2012, p 12) 5.3The impact of the CCSS for ELA on teachers’ professional development courses A third change will involve revising the professional preparation of teachers These revisions include the pedagogical content knowledge that teachers need to teach the new standards as well as training prospective, practicing teachers about the standards themselves and how to read and interpret the assessment results As the CCSS for ELA expects k-12 students to achieve much more rigorous standards, teachers will also need extensive knowledge and training in how students learn and apply effective instructional strategies It is noted the importance of arming prospective and practicing teachers with a critical perspective on curricular choices: “Teachers are simultaneously drowning in a sea of materials (from textbooks to online lesson plan banks to modules from advocacy groups) and living in a curricular desert What they want is a voluntary but thoroughly crafted curriculum that brings life to the 47 standards, along with suitable textbooks, digital materials, supplemental readings, and so forth that they can use in their daily practice They also need and deserve help from disinterested expert evaluators regarding which of the many instructional materials that will be described (usually by their vendors) as “aligned” with the Common Core are truly matched to its cognitive expectations and sequencing Equally essential in the classroom are interim assessments (that break the full-year standards down into manageable but explicit chunks) and plenty of training in how to use all of this.” (Finn & Petrilli, 2010, p 7) Professional programs(Finn & Petrilli, 2010) and college education for teachers will change to provide educators a better understanding of student requirements at different grade levels Since the higher education and new college programs will focus on providing teachers with the right tools to meet the CCSS, it will be easier to implement them in the classroom setting Teachers will find that higher education will be altered to provide better tools based on the state standards and common core requirements As the programs focus on meeting the rigorous standards, instructors and students learning new teaching techniques will face stringent criteria to get through the program 5.4The impact of the CCSS for ELA on k-12 teachers’ field experiences Field experiences are essential to learning to teach because a teacher cannot escape the need to learn how to enact practices with real students in real classrooms Thus, it is particularly important that all k-12 teachers be given opportunities to witness high quality instruction which is aligned with the CCSS for ELA as well as to learn from senior, experienced teachers 48 Developing communities of practice including both practicing and prospective teachers provides opportunities for higher education faculty to simultaneously engage in improving practice in schools and nurturing the next generation of U.S k-12 teachers 5.5The impact of the CCSS for ELA on the evaluation system of teachers’ preparation programs The last change requires ongoing assessment of individual teachers throughout their training Data are analyzed regularly for the purpose of giving individual feedback and the improvement of the programs There might be significant challenges associated with the transition from state educational systems to the CCSS for ELA Furthermore, as part of the teacher credentialing process, states set standards for prospective teachers to meet in order to be eligible for an initial teaching credential These standards define the skills and abilities teachers need to possess in order to effectively prepare their students for success States reported using standards recommended by national organizations when developing their standards for teaching credentials The majority of states in 2011 reported using, modifying, or referencing national standards in the development of their state teacher standards, according to Hanover (2012) 49 CHAPTER VI: CONCLUSION 6.1 Summary In short, this study considers the CCSS for ELA and examines the impact on k-12 teachers and teacher preparation programs in the U.S From the outcome of our investigation, it is possible to conclude that the CCSS for ELA has the potential forsubstantial changes in both k-12 teachers and teacher preparation programs With respect to the first research question about the impact of the CCSS for ELA on k-12 teachers in the U.S, seven changes have or are likely to occur Teachers’ expectations, goals and benchmarks are consistent across all states that adopt the CCSS, leading to easier transitions for both moving students and teachers and unprecedented level of discourse as well as collaboration among teachers of all level Additionally teachers have to make certain changes in their instructional practices aligned with the CCSS, therefore sharpen their knowledge in the areas that the CCSS for ELA emphasizeby participating in various types of professional development The observations of teachers’ ability to deliver CCSS-aligned instruction, together with students’ achievement, are key areas of new teachers’ evaluation system As regards the second research question about the impact of the CCSS for ELA on teacher preparation programs, there are five substantial differences The student recruitment is more proactive in terms of selectivity and diversity Changes in disciplinary and professional courses consist of new content knowledge and trainings that are related with the CCSS These preparation programs also include field experience that provides opportunities to witness high-quality, experienced teachers Furthermore, 50 like teachers’ evaluation system, the assessment of teacher preparation programs are taken regularly for the purpose of giving individual feedback and the improvements of the programs 6.2 Limitations of the research Despite the researcher’s attempts in justifying the methodology of the study as well as collecting and analyzing the data with careful consideration, still this study is subject to at least three limitations First, due to the characteristics of secondary research,the data employed in the paper depends heavily on publications released by U.S educational organizations Second, the time available to investigate the research problem is constrained within several months It prevents the researcher to dig deeper into the topic Third, the fact that the researcher is neither a local inhabitant nor a student majoring in American Studies results in certain bias to some extent 6.3 Suggestions for further research The issue of the CCSS is an intriguing one which could be usefully explored in further research It is recommended that future research be undertaken in the following areas:  The CCSS for Mathematics  The relevance of adopting the CCSS  The implementation of the CCSS  The impact of the CCCS on k-12 students or Engli (MerriamWebster online dictionary) language learners  The implication of the CCSS for U.S higher education 51  The comparison of the CCSS with national standards in other countries 52 REFERENCES Common Core State Standards Initiative: Prepared for the Warren Institute, Education Roundtable (2010) Retrieved February 2014, from Achieve About (2013) Retrieved February 2014, from National Governers Association: http://www.nga.org/cms/about The Council of Chief State School Officers (2013) Retrieved February 2014, from Who we are: http://www.ccsso.org/who_we_are.html Aspen Institute Education and Society Program (2013) Implementation of the Common Core State Standards: A transition guide for school-level leaders Washington D.C Aud, S W.-F (2013) The Condition of Education 2013 Washington, DC: U.S Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics Cochran-Smith, M; Feiman-Nemser, S; McIntyre, J; (2008) Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3rd ed.) New York, New York, United States: Routledge Education First (2012) Overview of the Common Core State Standards Washington D.C Ewing, J (2010) The Common Core Math Standards: Implications for Teacher Preparation Retrieved March 2014, from Opportunityequation: http://opportunityequation.org/?=404;http://opportunityequation.org:8 0/teaching-and-leadership/common-core-math-teacherpreparation&reqp=1&reqr= 53 Finn, C E., & Petrilli, M J (2010) Now What? Imperatives and Options for “Common Core” Implementation and Governance Washington, D.C.: Thomas B Fordham Institute Hanover Research (2012, July) Teacher Professional Development for Common Core Transition Washington DC Kendall, J (2011) Understanding the Common Core State Standards Virginia: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning Kober, N., & Rentner, D (2011) KobeCommon Core State Standards: Progress and challenges in school districts' implementation Washington DC: Kober, N & Rentner, D (2011) Common Core State Standards: Progress andCenter on Education Policy McDonnell , L M., & Weatherford, S M (2013) Evidence Use and the Common Core State Standards Movement: From Problem Definition to American Journal of Education, 10-15 Merriam-Webster online dictionary (n.d.) Retrieved February 2014, from Language arts: Language arts 2013 In Merriam-Webster http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/la nguage%20arts National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, C o (2010) Common Core State Standards Washington, D.C., United States National Research Center (2011) Classroom assessment and the national science education standards Washington D.C.: National Academy Press Riley, C (2012) Teacher Preparation and the Common Core State Standards New Mexico Common Core Summit (pp 10-12) Achieve Snyder, D T., & Dillow, A S (2013) Digest of Education Statistic 2012 Washington DC: National Center for Education Statistics Institute of Education Sciences, U.S Department of Education 54 TESOL International Association (2013) Overview of the Common Core State Standards Initiative for English Language Learners TESOL issue brief, 3-7 The Association of public and grant university (2012) The Common Core State Standards and teacher preparation: The role of higher education Washing DC The future ready project (2012) Basic facts about k-12 education in the United States Retrieved January 2014, from Achieve: http://www.futurereadyproject.org/sites/frp/files/Basic_Facts_About_ Education.pdf The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (n.d.) Retrieved February 2014, from About PISA - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2013) About PISA Organisation fohttp://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/ U.S Department of Education (2013) Preparing and Credentialing the Nation’s Teachers: The Secretary’s Ninth Report on Teacher Quality Washington DC 55 ... ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ KHOA SƯ PHẠM TIẾNG ANH KHOÁ LUẬN TỐT NGHIỆP TÁC ĐỘNG CỦA VIỆC ÁP DỤNG CHUẨN CHUNG GIÁO DỤC CHO HỌC SINH TỪ MẪU GIÁO ĐẾN PHỔ THÔNG ĐỐI VỚI GIÁO VIÊN... GIÁO DỤC CHO HỌC SINH TỪ MẪU GIÁO ĐẾN PHỔ THÔNG ĐỐI VỚI GIÁO VIÊN TẠI HOA KỲ Giáo viên hướng dẫn: THS HOÀNG THU PHƯƠNG Sinh viên: NGUYỄN HÀ MY Khóa : QH2010 HÀ NỘI, 5/ 2014 ACCEPTANCE PAGE I... higher in public schools ($53,100) than in private schools ($40,200); the average class size for public school teachers was 22 students in primary schools, 17 students in middle schools, and 18