State standards are not enough for Cave Creek Unified students to exceed academically

At the December 8, 2009 board meeting the Cave Creek Unified district admitted to the governing board that the district "does not develop additional standards" above and beyond what the state of Arizona defines.  This was novel in two ways. First, it was an admission that over the past 10 years the district was claiming that they had their own "Cave Creek Academic Standards" which exceeded the state standards but now we find out that this actually was not the case. Second, what the district is admitting is that it has no written or proscribed in-depth standard extensions, but instead relies on textbook manufactures to provide enrichment and haphazard professional development to come up with further learning opportunities.  Seems like relying on textbook companies and using professional development (which walks out the door with teacher turnover) is abdicating the primary responsibility of the district and the governing board.  In fact in the Cave Creek Unified Student handbooks claims that the district’s Governing Board goal is to “EXCEED STATE STANDARDS”.

How do you have a curriculum and program that exceeds state standards if you don’t write it down?

The presentation continues with the Cave Creek Unified administration claiming that it does extend the state standards, but there is little evidence of this presented. The presentation veers off on to 21st century skills (which are really 20th century skills wrapped in expensive software and computers) and then proceeds to spend most of the time trying to prove that the state standards are detailed and rigorous.  Farther along in the discussion the district goes even further to admit that the number one goal is to teach to the AIMS standards.

To see the folly in this thinking that AIMS and the Arizona State standards are enough, we turn to the NAEP.  The NAEP is:

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (often abbreviated NAEP) is a periodic assessment of student progress conducted in the United States by the National Center for Education Statistics, a division of the U.S. Department of Education. The assessment covers the areas of mathematics, reading, writing, science, and more.[1] Assessments in world history and in foreign language are anticipated in 2012.[2] NAEP results, released as "The Nation’s Report Card", are used by policymakers, state and local educators, principals, teachers, and parents to inform educational administration.

Those focused on education at the national level understand that the NAEP is the gold standard in allowing educators to compare the progress of students nationally.  The NCES also performs a study of state standards and maps these standards to not only compare state standards, but to see how state standards compare to the NAEP standard.  This study is called the Mapping State Proficiency Standards Onto NAEP Scales 2005-2007 study.  When we look at Arizona standards and how it compares to the NAEP we find (click to enlarge):

So it is clear that an AIMS Excelling score is barely meeting what the NAEP considers a basic level of achievement.  The AIMS Excelling score is nowhere near the NAEP Proficient level.  When we consider that 25% of CCUSD 8th graders didn’t even pass the AIMS math test, one has to wonder what exactly is going wrong in our district and that maybe its current path is the wrong one. 

Enrichment and professional development is not a replacement for the district fully making an effort to have every student in the district exceed academically.  We knock the district for not even meeting the performance of surrounding local schools, but the reality is that our students are in a global competition for college and eventually for jobs.  The district needs to understand that it must delineate standards that exceed state, national, and global expectations, and that this process begins with implementing a curriculum that demands rigor, mastery, and relevancy.

A local Arizona educator said it best:

"Don't be fooled by AIMS scores or state labels such as "excelling. It (the AIMS) is so basic we can't even use it as a benchmark of quality on a national landscape; people just laugh. If that's where we're setting the bar, we're not a college prep."