Common Core

Yesterday, NAEP released the results on its civics exam (see our chart below). Of the grades tested, only fourth graders showed gains―and those gains were minimal―in the last decade. Across the grades, a minority of students tested “at or above” proficient.

NAEP defines “basic”—where about 75% of students fell on this test―as “partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge.”  With a glance at cut scores, though, a basic score falls somewhere staggeringly short of expectations. At Grade 4, a score of 136/300 clocks in at basic. That’s a 46% percent―a solid F, if your school uses the letter grading system―on any other test. By the same measure, “proficient,” or “solid academic performance,” is cut at 59%―still an “F.” Grades 8 and 12 have similar expectations. Of course, NAEP scores aren’t designed to be reported this way, but we think it is good to be reminded from time to time of the low level of performance that terms like “basic” and “proficient” actually represent.

The NAEP test is a good one.  It tests the “knowledge, intellectual and participatory skills, and civic dispositions” of American students―through questions addressing five important components:*

• What is civic life, politics and government?
• What are the foundations of the American political system?
• How does the government established by the Constitution embody the purposes, values, and principles of American democracy?
• What is the relationship of the United States to other nations and to world affairs?
• What are the roles of citizens in American democracy?

These are key questions. Who doubts that our students need to be able to earn more than a failing grade in their understanding of the underpinnings of our government and their responsibilities as citizens?

Not surprisingly, students whose teachers report emphasizing civics knowledge scored higher on the exam. Yet, apart from NAEP, few states test civic understanding. And, in a time of budget worries, states like Maryland consider these tests easy cuts. With little incentive to teach social studies under NCLB’s current testing requirements, the subject continues to lose ground to the tested subjects (English and math). In their recommendations for ESEA reauthorization, the folks at Fordham suggest mandated testing beyond English and math. An interesting, if potentially controversial, idea.

Better standards, assessments, curricula, teacher preparation―something needs to change if students are to report more than a basic knowledge of their government.

Stephanie Porowski

*If you’re curious, The Answer Sheet has a great run-down of the knowledge and skills tested by the exam, as well as some sample questions.

Why are Governor O’Malley and Maryland legislators going out of their way to anger the state’s school teachers and jeopardize students’ reading performance? The budget that has been offered by the Governor and is now in the General Assembly drops the state’s high school exit exam in American government. This is a test Maryland teachers are enthusiastic about, in part because the existence of the test gives the subject of government standing in the curriculum and keeps it from getting sidelined by more test prep in reading and math skills.

Also, if Maryland wants to maintain its impressive performance on the NAEP reading test the state would be wise to hang on to the American government test. Evidence shows that it is by increasing students’ knowledge of a wide range of subjects, including civics, that students become better readers. Dropping the test may not only guarantee that Maryland high schoolers will graduate knowing less about our nation’s government, but that they will be poorer readers, too. Is that a gamble Maryland’s elected leaders are willing to take?

Lynne Munson

In Plessy v. Ferguson, the United States Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment

1. supported segregation
2. protected the rights of slave owners
3. guaranteed the right to an attorney
4. upheld freedom of expression

This question* comes directly from Maryland’s American government exam, a graduation requirement ensuring that students learn about segregation and the Civil Rights movement, about political systems, geography, and human interdependence, for starters.

But Maryland is poised to cut this assessment. A blow to learning from the governor of a state with Ed Week’s #1 education ranking.

When Maryland adopted this requirement (along with a biology test) three years ago, the state endowed subjects beyond NCLB-tested math and reading with a guaranteed place in high school curricula … and with all-important funding.

So Baltimore schools’ head rightly asks: “[W]hat does it signal, that government is suddenly less relevant than the other subjects? Why government and not the other tests?” We’d like to hear Governor O’Malley’s answer.

Although Maryland does hope to join with other states to develop a common social studies assessment, the state wouldn’t assess the subject again until at least 2015. We wonder—what happens to social studies in the four + year void? Could government and history courses be the new arts and foreign language programming—branded disposable in state budgets, and, consequently, by education officials?

Shame on Maryland and its governor for cutting Government from its budget. Let’s hope other states choose to support deep learning—teaching their students the history of “separate but equal,” its legacy, and its overturning.

*Answer 1 is the correct choice.

Stephanie Porowski and Meagan Estep