Closing the Expectations Gap 2007

American Diploma Project Network

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California ColoradoConnecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho IllinoisIndiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine MarylandMassachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi MissouriMontana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New JerseyNew Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode IslandSouth Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah VermontVirginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Closing theExpectations Gap2007An Annual 50-State Progress Report on the Alignment of High School Policies with the Demands of College and Work

About AchieveCreated by the nation’s governors and business leaders,

Achieve, Inc., is a bipartisan, non-profit organization that

helps states raise academic standards, improve assessments

and strengthen accountability to prepare all young people

for postsecondary education, work and citizenship. Achieve

has helped more than half the states benchmark their aca-

demic standards, tests and accountability systems against

the best examples in the United States and around the

world. Achieve also serves as a significant national voice for

quality in standards-based education reform and regularly

convenes governors, CEOs and other influential leaders at

National Education Summits to sustain support for higher

standards and achievement for all of America’s schoolchildren.

In 2005, Achieve co-sponsored the National Education

Summit on High Schools. Forty-five governors attended

the Summit along with corporate CEOs and K–12 and post-

secondary leaders. The Summit was successful in making the

case to the governors and business and education leaders

that our schools are not adequately preparing students for

college and 21st-century jobs and that aggressive action will

be needed to address the preparation gap. As a result of the

Summit, 29 states joined with Achieve to form the American

Diploma Project Network — a coalition of states committed

to aligning high school standards, assessments, graduation

requirements and accountability systems with the demands

of college and the workplace.

For more information, visit Achieve’s Web site at

www.achieve.org.

Published in April 2007.

Copyright © 2007 Achieve, Inc. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in anyform or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photo-copy, recording, or any information or storage retrieval system, without permission from Achieve, Inc.

Editorial assistance and design: KSA-Plus Communications, Inc.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction

Align High School Standards with Real-World Expectations

Align High School Graduation Requirements with

College and Workplace Expectations

Align High School and Postsecondary Assessments

Hold High Schools and Postsecondary Institutions

Accountable for Student Success

Conclusion

Appendix: Key Questions Asked in Achieve’s Survey

Endnotes

3

5

7

10

16

20

25

27

28

Closing the Expectations Gap 2007 1

The Summit has sparked real action.During the past two years, a majorityof governors have made it a top priorityto raise standards and improve thepreparation of high school students.States have taken concrete steps toalign standards, raise graduationrequirements and increase the value ofthe high school diploma so that allstudents graduate better prepared forcollege and careers. One illustration ofthis commitment is the rapid growthin the number of states in theAmerican Diploma Project (ADP)Network, an alliance of states launchedat the Summit to close the gapbetween the expectations students areheld to in high school and those theywill face in college and the workplace.The Network began with 13 states; ithas now grown to 29 states thattogether educate nearly 60 percent ofthe nation’s public school children.

Achieve is committed to helping stateson this important agenda and monitor-ing progress nationwide. Prior to thesecond anniversary of the Summit,Achieve surveyed all 50 states about thestatus of their efforts to align high schoolstandards, graduation requirements,assessments and accountability systemswith the demands of college and work.

The results are promising: States havemade steady progress over the past year,and a greater number have made highschool reform a priority this year.

Highlights from This Year’s Survey

• STANDARDS — Twelve states reportthat their high school standards arealigned with postsecondary expec-tations, more than doubling thenumber from a year ago. Thirty-two

additional states report that theyare in the process of aligning theirstandards or plan to do so.

• GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS —Thirteen states require students tocomplete a college- and work-readycurriculum to earn a diploma, 11more than in 2005. Sixteen others

report plans to adopt college- andwork-ready diploma requirementsfor all students in the future.

• TESTING — Nine states currentlyadminister college readiness teststo all high school students as partof their statewide assessment sys-tems. Twenty-one other states

report plans to do so in the future.

Executive Summary At the 2005 National Education Summit on High Schools, governors from 45 statesjoined with business leaders and education officials to address a critical problem inAmerican education: Too few high school students graduate prepared for the demands ofpostsecondary education and 21st-century jobs. At the Summit, it was widely acknowl-edged that if states do not dramatically raise expectations and achievement in their highschools, America’s competitive position in the global economy could be at risk.

0 10 20 30 40 50

Aligned standards

Rigorous graduationrequirements

High school testsused by colleges

P–16 longitudinaldata system

High schools accountablefor college readiness

5

8

5

3

8

32

16

4

42

4 5

7

5

21

2

44

29

30

47

17

A Growing Number of States Have Policies To Help Ensure that High SchoolStudents Graduate College and Work Ready

Source: Achieve Survey/Research, 2007Note: For an overview of the policies in place in each state, see page 14.

Number of states in 2006

Number of additionalstates in 2007

Number of states inprocess/planning


• P–16 DATA SYSTEMS — Five states

report that they have longitudinaldata systems capable of tracking anindividual student’s progress fromkindergarten through college grad-uation. All but three others haveplans to develop such data systems.

• ACCOUNTABILITY — Nine states

factor college and work readinessinto their high school accountabilitysystems, providing incentives forimproving college-ready graduationrates. Eight other states plan tomove in this direction in the future.

The most progress has occurred in theareas of standards and graduationrequirements. Nearly every state hasaligned — or is in the process ofaligning — their high school standardswith the expectations of college facultyand employers. One-quarter of the statesare requiring all students to completea college- and work-ready curriculumto earn a diploma; only two states hadsuch requirements in place in 2005.Most states also are working to developdata systems that can track theprogress of individual students fromkindergarten through postsecondaryeducation, an essential component of a strong accountability system.

There has been less progress in highschool testing and accountability. Veryfew states are measuring whether theirhigh school students are ready for col-lege and work, and few are makingcollege and work readiness part of theirhigh school accountability formulas.Without better assessments and incen-tives for schools to improve student

readiness, necessary dramatic changesin U.S. high schools are not likely tooccur. Good standards simply are notenough; these other integral policiesmust be in place, too.

Given the complexity of this policyagenda and the multiyear effort it willtake to implement fully, state leadersmust maintain a sense of urgency. Ifstates are to succeed, this is what itwill take:

Gubernatorial Leadership. For the pastfive years, No Child Left Behind hashad an impact on standards andaccountability reforms in elementaryand middle schools. At the high schoollevel, governors have claimed the lead-ership mantle. The states that havemade the most progress almost alwayshave had the governor leading thecharge. If states are going to continueto make progress, governors must con-tinue to make this a top policy priority,bringing key stakeholders into theconversation and enlisting their sup-port. Business leaders — longtimechampions for standards-based reform— are critical allies. They have aunique ability to help students, parents,educators and the public understandthe demands of the global economy.

The Ability To Move on Multiple Fronts.

Developing and implementing goodpolicies takes time. Traditionally, stateshave taken them on one by one, start-ing with standards and then movingto assessments, curriculum and, finally,accountability. As sensible as this pro-gression may be, states will need to findways to move multiple pieces of the

policy agenda simultaneously if theyare going to respond to the growingpressures of the wider world.

Addressing Challenges. To implementthe new expectations states are settingfor high school students successfully,states must take greater responsibilityfor providing teacher and student sup-ports. States need to take on a new roleand create new types of partnershipswith local districts to meet capacityand student support challenges.

Cross-State Partnerships. Whether theyare improving standards, raising grad-uation requirements or working onother challenges, states have discoveredthat the issues they face are remark-ably similar. They have much to learnfrom each other. Increased opportuni-ties for networking and more formalpartnerships — such as the ADPAlgebra II exam initiative — willquicken the pace of reform.

Achieve, Inc.4

The statistics are alarming. Nationally,30 percent of high school students(and nearly 50 percent of black andLatino students) fail to earn adiploma.1 Of those students who dograduate and enroll in college or enterthe workforce, too many find they lackthe knowledge and skills necessary tosucceed. Nearly 30 percent of incom-ing first-year college students arerequired to enroll in remedial coursesin reading, writing or math. Only aminority of these students end upearning a degree.2

This lack of preparation will have sig-nificant and long-lasting effects onindividuals and the economy. About67 percent of today’s new jobs requiresome postsecondary education or train-ing, and that percentage is expected torise.3 The result is that employmentopportunities for individuals withouteducation and skills are quickly disap-pearing, while jobs that pay well andsupport a middle-class lifestyle nowrequire higher-level skills than everbefore. If U.S. workers cannot meetthe demand, U.S. competitivenesswill diminish, negatively affecting theliving standards of millions of citizens.

But even more is at stake. To becomeengaged and productive citizens in thisincreasingly knowledge-based world,students will need to comprehend

complex written and mathematicalinformation to make important deci-sions about issues such as theirfinances and health care. They willneed to communicate in sophisticatedways and use technology in their dailylives. Individuals who lack these skillswill be left behind with few opportu-nities for civic engagement. Stateshave a moral imperative and an eco-nomic incentive to better prepareyoung people for the world they willenter after high school.

All students must complete a rigorouscurriculum that prepares them for suc-cess at two- and four-year colleges andin training programs necessary for jobsin the high-performance workplace.Unfortunately, states and school dis-tricts too often do not require all stu-dents to complete a college- and work-ready curriculum and routinely handout diplomas to students who lack theknowledge and skills they need forsuccess after high school. Achieve’sAmerican Diploma Project (ADP)research identified an “expectations gap”— a gap between the requirements forearning a high school diploma and themust-have knowledge and skills neededfor college and careers.

Closing the ExpectationsGap

To address this gap, the leaders at the2005 National Education Summit onHigh Schools committed to a multi-pronged action agenda to raise academicstandards and graduation requirements,build stronger data and assessmentsystems, better prepare teachers,redesign high schools, and hold K–12and postsecondary schools accountablefor improved performance.

Twenty-nine states — which togethereducate nearly 60 percent of thenation’s children — are working withAchieve in the ADP Network on a coresubset of these goals: to strengthenhigh school standards, curricula,assessments, and data and accountabilitysystems so that more students graduateready for college and 21st-century jobs.

Achieve launched the Network at theSummit in partnership with governorsand education and business leaders from13 states. Since then, an additional 16states have joined. In these 29 states,governors, state education officials,business executives and higher educationleaders are working together to improvethe preparation of all students for successin college and the workplace. Leadersin these states are committed to:

Introduction Our economy increasingly depends on high-skill jobs that require education andtraining beyond high school, but too few high school students graduate prepared forthe demands of postsecondary education and the world of work.


• Aligning high school standardswith the demands of college andwork;

• Requiring students to complete acollege- and work-ready curriculumso that earning a diploma ensuresthat a student is ready for post-secondary opportunities;

• Building college- and work-readymeasures into statewide highschool assessment systems; and

• Holding high schools and post-secondary institutions accountablefor student preparation and success.

A growing number of organizationsalso are working to help states accom-plish the goals of the 2005 Summit.Increasingly, these organizations andothers are speaking with one voiceabout the critical need to strengthenAmerica’s high schools and improvethe readiness of their graduates.

Achieve’s Second AnnualSurvey of State Policies

To monitor state progress in closingthe expectations gap, Achieve surveysall 50 states each year on the key sub-set of policies from the Summit actionagenda that form the basis for theADP Network.4 The survey specificallyasks about the progress states havemade in aligning standards with post-secondary and workplace expectations;requiring a college- and career-readycurriculum for graduation; developingcollege- and career-ready assessments;and holding high schools and post-secondary institutions accountable forstudents’ success in high school, col-lege and beyond. Following is a closerlook at results from Achieve’s secondannual survey.

NH

MDDENJ

MARICT

VT ME

OHPA

NY

WV VAINIL

WIMI

SC

NCTN

KY

MS AL GA

FL

MO

IA

MN

LA

AR

TX

OK

KS

NE

ND

SD

MT

CO

NM

WY

WA

OR

NV

ID

UTCA

AK

AZ

HI

American Diploma Project Network

ADP Network state

Achieve, Inc.6

Aligning high school standards withcollege and workplace expectations canbe accomplished only with the formalinvolvement of the postsecondary andbusiness communities. Working withK–12 educators, postsecondary systemsmust clearly define the skills that highschool graduates need to be ready totake and succeed in credit-bearing,non-remedial courses; business leaders,likewise, must articulate the skillsthat graduates need to be successfuland advance in their careers. High schoolstandards then need to be anchored inthese real-world expectations.

Progress Since the Summit

Since 2005, 44 states have committedto re-examining the alignment of theirhigh school standards to ensure thatthey reflect the knowledge and skillsthat high school graduates need to besuccessful in college and the work-place. Among these are the 29 statesin Achieve’s ADP Network.

• Twelve states report that their highschool standards are aligned with

real-world expectations, more thandoubling the number from a yearago, on the first anniversary of the2005 Summit. Then only fivestates — California, Indiana,Nebraska, New York and Wyoming

— reported that they had alignedtheir high school standards. Thisyear, seven new states — Arkansas,Delaware, Kentucky, Louisiana,Michigan, Rhode Island and West

Virginia — report having alignedand adopted college- and career-ready high school standards.Achieve has reviewed formally orverified the standards in Arkansas,California, Indiana, Kentucky,Louisiana, Michigan and Rhode

Island and found that they are well

aligned with the college- andcareer-ready knowledge and skillsdefined in the ADP benchmarks.5

• Twenty-seven states report thatthey are in the process of aligningtheir standards. Ten of the 27states report that their alignmentprocess is expected to concludesome time this year.

• Five additional states report plans toalign their standards with college-and career-ready expectations:Connecticut, Mississippi, Montana,South Dakota and Utah.

• Only six states — Alaska, Illinois,Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota andVermont — report that they have no

Align High School Standards with Real-WorldExpectations For the past 15 years, states have been developing and revising academic standards intendedto articulate the core knowledge and skills that students should learn from kindergartenthrough grade 12. These standards play an important role in the U.S. education system:They provide a foundation for decisions on curriculum, instruction and assessment, and theycommunicate core learning goals to teachers, parents and students. Unfortunately, very fewstates anchored their K–12 standards in the skills necessary for postsecondary success, sothese “first generation” standards have had a limited impact on the preparation of highschool students for college and careers.

5 12 39 44

5 7 27 5

2006 2007Plan to

alignIn process of

aligning

Many States Are Aligning College- and Work-Ready High School Standards

Source: Achieve Survey/Research, 2007

Number of states

Alignment complete


plans to re-examine their high schoolstandards to ensure that they alignwith the expectations of the highereducation and business communities.

Challenges

Postsecondary and BusinessEngagement For the alignment process to be suc-cessful, states’ postsecondary andbusiness communities must play aformal role. The value of their rolehinges on the ability of postsecondaryand business representatives to ensurethat the standards produced reflectthe demands of higher education andemployers and engender real buy-infrom those communities. Achieve hasworked with — or is currently work-ing with — 23 states to align theirstandards, and each state has madehigher education and businessinvolvement a top priority.

In Georgia and Louisiana, for instance,postsecondary representatives areequal partners at the table withK–12, defining their expectations for

incoming students and helping toshape the new high school standards.They understand the necessity ofadopting a single set of college-readystandards across all postsecondaryinstitutions, rather than differentstandards for each institution. As partof the process, postsecondary repre-sentatives have reviewed syllabi andstudent work from freshman coursesto clarify expectations for success inthose courses. They also have analyzeddata on high school course-taking andpostsecondary success. The highereducation systems in these states viewthis work as part of a larger strategyfor increasing the number of studentswho can enter their institutions pre-pared to succeed. Not only have theyhelped shape the high school standards,but they also plan to use those stan-dards in teacher training programsand as part of the process for placingstudents in credit-bearing courses.

Engaging employers in the alignmentwork has proven more challenging forstates. Unlike colleges, employers are

not in the business of defining educa-tion standards. During the originalresearch phase of ADP, Achieve and itspartners brought together focusgroups of employers from across theparticipating states to review drafts ofthe readiness benchmarks as they werebeing developed. The goal was toensure that the standards reflected thecore set of skills necessary for workreadiness and to identify specific stan-dards that are especially critical forparticular jobs. It was more efficientand effective to ask employers to reactto draft standards than to create theirown from scratch.

Vertical AlignmentOnce expectations at the end of highschool are aligned with the expecta-tions of colleges and employers, statesmust then back-map their standardsfrom the end of high school all theway down through the lower grades toensure that their K–12 standards arevertically aligned. This may requirerevising high school standards as wellas standards for elementary and mid-dle school. The goal is to have a systemof standards that reflects a steady pro-gression of knowledge and skills cul-minating in college and work readiness.To assist states in this work, Achieveis creating a set of model standards inEnglish and mathematics that areanchored in the ADP end-of-high-school benchmarks. The math standardswill be grade by grade from kinder-garten through grade 8 and course bycourse in high school. The Englishstandards will reflect a continuum frommiddle school through high school.

NH

MDDENJ

MARICT

VT ME

OHPA

NY

WV VAINIL

WIMI

SC

NCTN

KY

MS AL GA

FL

MO

IA

MN

LA

AR

TX

OK

KS

NE

ND

SD

MT

CO

NM

WY

WA

OR

NV

ID

UTCA

AK

AZ

HI

Standards Alignment by State


State reports alignedstandards

Alignment in process

Plans to align standards

Standards aligned —reviewed formally orverified by Achieve

Achieve, Inc.8

The 29 states in Achieve’s ADP Network are committed to

aligning their high school standards with what it takes to

succeed in postsecondary education and the workplace.

The goal of this effort is to ensure that students who

meet high school standards are prepared to enter and

succeed in credit-bearing courses in two- or four-year col-

leges or gain entry-level positions in high-skill jobs that

offer opportunities to advance.

An important step in this process is for K–12 leaders to

work with a broad spectrum of postsecondary and business

leaders to define the core reading, writing and mathemat-

ics knowledge and skills graduates need to be ready for col-

lege and work. When actively engaged in determining the

standards for readiness, postsecondary and business lead-

ers can help ensure that students are better prepared for

what awaits them after high school. Since February 2005,

Achieve has worked with — or is currently working with —

23 ADP states in their efforts to create standards that meet

this goal.

Already, important lessons are emerging:

English Language Arts

• Although high school English standards and courses

tend to emphasize literature, most of the reading stu-

dents will encounter in college or on the job is infor-

mational in nature (e.g., textbooks, manuals, articles,

briefs and essays).

• Most of the writing students will do in college and

work is to inform or persuade, often requiring stu-

dents to use evidence to support a position. Research

also is cited as an important skill for college and

work. State standards tend to give these types of

writing short shrift, emphasizing narrative writing

instead.

• The ability to work in teams and orally present one’s

work is cited by professors and employers as critical

for success. State standards do not always sufficiently

cover these skills.

Mathematics

• College faculty and employers cite a broad range of

mathematics content as important, including number

concepts, geometry, algebra, data analysis and statistics.

State standards sometimes fall short on data analysis

and statistics and often give only superficial treatment

to important geometric concepts, such as proofs.

• Reasoning and solving mathematical problems are

often cited as the most important skills for incoming

freshmen and employees. Yet state standards do not

always cover them explicitly.

K–12 leaders in ADP states — in partnership with post-

secondary and business leaders — are working to fill

these gaps. Successful efforts result in standards that are:

• Adopted by the state board of education as defining

the knowledge and skills in math and English that all

students should acquire by the end of high school;

• Adopted, endorsed or otherwise recognized by state

postsecondary systems and institutions as defining

the knowledge and skills necessary for placement

into credit-bearing courses; and

• Verified or endorsed by employers and the business

community as constituting skills necessary to enter

and succeed in the 21st-century workplace.

Over time, these new college- and work-ready standards

will be incorporated into a range of state policies and

practices, such as high school graduation requirements,

course descriptions, high school assessments, and post-

secondary placement policies and assessments.

Lessons from Aligning High SchoolStandards with the Demands ofCollege and Work

NH

MDDENJ

MARICT

VT ME

OHPA

NY

WV VAINIL

WIMI

SC

NCTN

KY

MS AL GA

FL

MO

IA

MN

LA

AR

TX

OK

KS

NE

ND

SD

MT

CO

NM

WY

WA

OR

NV

ID

UTCA

AK

AZ

HI

States Participating in Achieve’s Formal AlignmentReview Process

Alignment inprocess

Standardsaligned — formally reviewedby Achieve


For high school graduates to be pre-pared adequately, they need to takefour years of challenging mathematics— at least through Algebra II or itsequivalent — and four years of rigor-ous English aligned with college- andwork-ready standards. Although themost commonly used criterion forawarding a high school diploma con-tinues to be course-taking require-ments, until recently, few states settheir requirements at the appropriatelevel to ensure that graduates are prepared for success in college and the workplace.


In late 2004, Achieve first reviewedhigh school course requirements andconcluded that only two states —Arkansas and Texas — had set theirrequirements at a level that wouldensure graduates are prepared for suc-cess in college and the workplace.Since then, states have been movingrapidly to enact more rigorousrequirements.

• Thirteen states require students tocomplete a college- and work-ready curriculum, 11 more than in2005. By the first anniversary ofthe Summit a year ago, eightstates — Arkansas, Indiana,

Kentucky, Michigan, New York,Oklahoma, South Dakota and Texas —had raised their graduation require-ments to the college- and work-readylevel. In the past year, an additionalfive states — Delaware, Minnesota,Mississippi, New Mexico and Ohio —have adopted college- and career-ready diploma requirements for allstudents. Another 16 states reportplans to adopt such curriculumrequirements for all students in thenext few years.

• An additional five states —Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Oregon andUtah — have raised their gradua-tion requirements in the past year,but not to the level recommendedby ADP in mathematics. Althoughall five of these states will nowrequire at least three years of math,none explicitly requires all studentsto complete a math course beyondAlgebra I and Geometry.

Challenges

Mandatory versus DefaultStates raising their course require-ments to the level recommended byADP have taken two differentapproaches. Many of the earlier statesto adopt college- and work-readycourse requirements for all incominghigh school students — includingArkansas, Indiana, Oklahoma, South

Dakota and Texas — set the curricu-lum as the “default” diploma option.With the default option, studentsautomatically enroll in the college-and work-ready curriculum but may“opt out” of the requirements if theirparents sign a waiver. Four of thestates that have adopted a college- andwork-ready curriculum in the pastyear — Delaware, Minnesota, Mississippi

and Ohio — have made the courserequirements mandatory for all studentswithout any opt-out provisions. Ohio

will have a four-year period during

Align High School Graduation Requirements withCollege and Workplace Expectations Research by Achieve and others indicates that whether students go directly into college or the workforce after graduation, they need a common core of knowledge and skills in English and mathematics.

8 13 29

8 5 16

2006 2007Plan to raise

requirements

More States Have College- and Work-Ready Graduation Course Requirements


Number of states Course requirements in place

Achieve, Inc.10

which students may opt out of thenew Ohio Core requirements withparental consent, but then the Corewill become the mandatory curriculum.

As states decide whether to create apolicy that permits students to opt outof the college- and work-ready cur-riculum, they must confront two com-peting concerns. On one hand, somestudents arrive in high school unpre-pared for rigorous courses, and an opt-out provision provides a safety valvefor those students, allowing them totake a different set of courses and stillearn a diploma. On the other hand,policymakers worry that an opt-outprovision may encourage some schoolsor educators to counsel struggling stu-dents out of the rigorous coursesrather than provide them with thesupport and encouragement they needto aim higher and succeed. This isparticularly a concern with disadvan-taged students and others who tradi-tionally have been held to lowerexpectations.

It is important for states with opt-outprovisions to watch carefully to seewhich and how many students opt out asthey enter high school. In Oklahoma, 13percent of incoming 9th grade studentsopted out of the college-prep track thefirst year it counted. In Arkansas, 10 per-cent did the same.

Providing Student SupportsEven as states raise their graduationrequirements to meet 21st-centuryneeds, significant proportions of stu-dents enter high school substantiallybehind in their basic literacy and mathskills. More than two-thirds of 8thgraders score below proficient onNational Assessment of EducationalProgress (NAEP) reading and mathtests. Students who are furthestbehind tend to be concentrated inhigh-poverty schools and districts. Itwill be much more difficult for poorlyprepared students to meet higherexpectations and complete high schoolthan their better-prepared peers.

This is not a reason to lower expecta-tions, however. It is a reason to providethe necessary support to strugglingstudents. Adolescent literacy programswill be required to help students suc-ceed by strengthening their literacyskills. Some students need help withthe basics, while many more need helpdeveloping comprehension and writ-ing skills, particularly in academiccontent areas. Students entering highschool with weak math skills will needextra help to succeed in Algebra I.Schools and districts are using a vari-ety of strategies to provide this sup-port. For example, Chicago is offeringsummer bridge programs between 8thand 9th grades that provide opportu-nities for review and acceleration, ide-ally with the teacher that students willhave in the fall. Patterson High School inBaltimore uses double periods of mathto provide students time to catch upand offers courses to ease the transitionto high school.

Skill development is necessary but willnot be sufficient for every student byitself. Schools should use early warn-ing indicators to identify students whoare at risk of dropping out, such asstudents with precipitous drops inattendance and grades during the tran-sitions into middle and high school orwho do not earn enough credits to bepromoted from 9th to 10th grade.6

These types of indicators can be usedto target interventions for at-risk stu-dents and can lead to programmaticchanges at the school or district levelto create more supportive and effectivelearning environments.

NH

MDDENJ

MARICT

VT ME

OHPA

NY

WV VAINIL

WIMI

SC

NCTN

KY

MS AL GA

FL

MO

IA

MN

LA

AR

TX

OK

KS

NE

ND

SD

MT

CO

NM

WY

WA

OR*

NV

ID*

UTCA

AK

AZ

HI

Status of Graduation Course Requirements by State

Source: Achieve Survey/Research, 2007*Plans to raise requirements to the ADP level.

Raised requirements inpast year, but not toADP level

Plans to raise gradua-tion requirements

College- and work-ready diploma in place


Struggling students need these andother supports, such as extended learning time and services, to addressnon-academic needs. They also needwell-prepared and effective teachers.There is growing evidence that schoolswith the greatest concentrations of dis-advantaged students are most likely tohave the least-prepared, least-experiencedteachers.7 States, districts and teachers’organizations need to work together todevelop and implement the policies,contract provisions, incentives andworking conditions that help get thebest-prepared teachers to the schoolswhere they are most needed.

States alone cannot deliver all of theneeded services, and rarely is there asingle agency or level of governmentresponsible for providing all of thesesupports within a state. But thatshould not be an excuse for inaction.The combined and coordinated effortsof state and local education agencies,institutions of higher education, andcommunity-based organizations arenecessary to provide students with thesupport they need. States must pro-vide the leadership and resources toensure that this happens.

Ensuring Consistent Course RigorAs states raise course requirements,they will need to put safeguards inplace to ensure that courses taught inhigh schools throughout the state areconsistently rigorous and aligned withthe state standards. Otherwise, thecontent or instruction in the moreadvanced courses may become watereddown as more students are required totake them.

Recognizing this problem, states aretaking different approaches to ensureconsistent course content and rigor:

• Twenty-nine states are pursuingend-of-course testing. Thirteenstates already have end-of-coursetests in place, and 16 more plan todevelop end-of-course tests tomeasure whether students havemastered the essential knowledgeand skills in core courses. Roughlyhalf of these states currently haveor plan to have end-of-course testsin advanced courses such asAlgebra II and 11th grade English.

• Thirty-eight states produce course-level standards, model curricula orother instructional materials forschools to guide classroom instruc-tion. As states revise their highschool content standards, theyshould ensure that these tools accu-rately reflect those expectationsand that they are broadly accessible.

Rhode Island has created a statewideapproach to validating local districtcourses’ alignment with the statehigh school standards. Beginning thisspring, the state will review all dis-trict high school curricula to deter-mine whether they are adequatelyaligned with the state standards. Thestate will endorse diplomas only indistricts where curricula meet statestandards. Delaware also plans torequire all districts to submit theircourse content for review. Thisapproach may be more practical insmaller states. Larger states may con-sider conducting targeted audits orcreating tools to allow districts to

conduct their own review of coursecontent in their high schools.

Moving Beyond Carnegie UnitsToward Credit by ProficiencyCarnegie units measure seat time, notperformance. Performance is whatmatters. Some states are beginning tolook beyond Carnegie units at otherways for students to demonstrate pro-ficiency and satisfy college- and work-ready graduation requirements. Thegoal in these states is to ensure that allstudents master the college- and work-ready content defined in state academicstandards, while also providing districtsthe flexibility to design and implementcourses and curricula as they choose.

In 2003, the Rhode Island Board ofRegents ushered in a new high schooldiploma system, requiring all studentsto demonstrate proficiency in “corecontent knowledge” and “appliedlearning skills” in English languagearts, mathematics, science, social stud-ies, the arts and technology alignedwith state standards. Core contentknowledge proficiency will be deter-mined mainly through performance onassessments, but students may also useprojects, portfolios and course grades.Proficiency in the applied learningskills will be determined by an evenwider array of demonstrations, includ-ing speeches, projects, performances,essays, collections of short stories orjournals.

Another example is Pennsylvania, wherethe Governor’s Commission on Collegeand Career Success recently issued itsfinal report of high school reform rec-ommendations designed to raise

Achieve, Inc.12

achievement for all students within atraditional local control framework.The first recommendation wouldrequire all students to demonstrateproficiency on the state’s academicstandards in the core subjects by eitherpassing a series of state-developed,end-of-course tests — the GraduationCompetency Assessments (GCAs) —or scoring proficient or above on the11th grade Pennsylvania System ofSchool Assessment. Although studentswould be able to decide which assess-ment system to use to demonstrateproficiency, all districts would berequired to administer the GCAs inthe core subjects.

Each of the 13 states that have raised graduation course requirements to

the level recommended by ADP has raised the requirements primarily in

math because deficiencies in high school graduates’ math performance are

most glaring to employers and postsecondary institutions. Many also have

raised requirements in science. None of the states has cut back on require-

ments in the humanities to make room for more math and science. Because

students need a well-rounded education, each of these states also estab-

lished course-taking requirements in English, history/social studies and

civics, and most specify requirements in foreign languages and the arts.

As States Raise High School GraduationRequirements in Math, Do Other Subjects GetSqueezed from the Curriculum?

AR DE IN KY MI MN MS NM NY OH OK SD TX

English 4.5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.5

Mathematics(through atleast Algebra II)

4 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 4

Science 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4

Social studies 3 3 3 3 3 3.5 4 3.5 4 3 3 4 4

Fine arts* 0.5 0

7

1 1 1 1 0 1

6

1 1 1

Foreign language*

0 2 0 2 0 0

9.5

1

9 7

2

Career tech,electives andother courses*

7 8 8 1 7 7 6 6.5

Totalrequiredcourses

22 24 20 22 18 21.5 24 24 22 20 23 22 26

First graduatingclass affected

2010 2011 2011 2012 2016 2015 2012 2013 2010 2014 2010 2010 2011


* States approach elective requirements in a variety of ways. They may specify that students com-plete electives chosen from a set of prescribed courses or subjects that in some states includesfine arts and foreign language. They also may bundle electives into various course sequences orconcentrations from which students choose. Finally, states simply may require students to take anumber of electives without any structure of specificity. A number of states combine theseoptions, requiring several prescribed elective courses or a choice from among several elective con-centrations, while also providing students with flexibility in how they fulfill the remaining electives.

“Other courses” include health, physical education and other required non-academic courses.

College- and Work-Ready High School Graduation Course Requirements


StateAlign high school standards with college and workplace

expectations

Align high school graduationrequirements with college and

workplace expectations

Use high school tests for college placement

Develop a P–16 longitudinal data system

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CA

CO

CT

DE

FL

GA

HI

ID

IL

IN

IA

KS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MA

MI

MN

MS

MO

MT

NE

NV

NH

NJ

NM

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

SC

SD

TN

TX

UT

VT

VA

WA

WV

WI

WY

TOTAL YES 12 13 9 5TOTAL

PLAN/PROCESS 32 16 21 42

Overview of Key Survey Results for Each State

Achieve, Inc.14

Policy in place

In process of aligning standards

Plans to implement

ADP Network state

Hold high schools accountable for graduating students college

and work readyPolicies in place 2006 Policies in place 2007 State

lllll lllll AL

lllll lllll AK

lllll lllll AZ

lllll lllll AR

lllll lllll CA

lllll lllll CO

lllll lllll CT

lllll lllll DE

lllll lllll FL

lllll lllll GA

lllll lllll HI

lllll lllll ID

lllll lllll IL

lllll lllll IN

lllll lllll IA

lllll lllll KS

lllll lllll KY

lllll lllll LA

lllll lllll ME

lllll lllll MD

lllll lllll MA

lllll lllll MI

lllll lllll MN

lllll lllll MS

lllll lllll MO

lllll lllll MT

lllll lllll NE

lllll lllll NV

lllll lllll NH

lllll lllll NJ

lllll lllll NM

lllll lllll NY

lllll lllll NC

lllll lllll ND

lllll lllll OH

lllll lllll OK

lllll lllll OR

lllll lllll PA

lllll lllll RI

lllll lllll SC

lllll lllll SD

lllll lllll TN

lllll lllll TX

lllll lllll UT

lllll lllll VT

lllll lllll VA

lllll lllll WA

lllll lllll WV

lllll lllll WI

lllll lllll WY

9 15 21 1 OR 2 POLICIES IN PLACE

8 3 7 3 OR MORE POLICIES IN PLACE Closing the Expectations Gap 2007 15

To help prepare students academicallyfor a successful transition from secondaryto postsecondary education and the work-place, states need to go beyond theirexisting tests. They need a componentof their high school assessment systemsthat measures the more advanced skillsvalued by postsecondary institutions andemployers. If states build more rigorousassessments into their high school test-ing systems, postsecondary institutionscan use these exams to make placementdecisions. This will send a powerful andconsistent signal to students and schoolsabout what it takes to be ready.


Although states have made significantprogress in aligning high school stan-dards and course requirements with

college and work, they have made less progress in upgrading high schoolassessments. A growing number ofstates, however, are planning to buildcollege- and work-ready assessmentsinto their high school testing andaccountability systems. Thirty statesreport that they either have or plan tohave such an assessment in place inthe near future.

• Nine states currently administertests as part of their statewide highschool assessment systems that alsoare used by higher education toplace incoming students.n New York administers end-of-course

Regents Exams that are used forhigh school accountability andcollege placement.

n California and Texas have com-prehensive high school assess-ments, taken by students in the11th grade, that are used forfreshman course placement inhigher education.

n Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky,Maine and Michigan all have incor-porated a national college admis-sions test — the ACT or SAT —into their state’s assessment sys-tems. Kentucky and Michigan haveboth adopted the ACT into theirassessment systems in the past year,while Idaho requires all students totake the SAT, ACT or COMPASS.

• Twenty-one other states reportplans to build college- and work-ready assessments into theirstatewide testing systems.

Align High School and Postsecondary Assessments As states align their high school standards and graduation requirements with the demandsof college and work, they also must build assessments rigorous enough to measure collegeand work readiness. Achieve’s research suggests that few states have such assessments inplace today. Most high school tests, particularly those used for graduation, measureknowledge and skills students learn early in high school. Without sufficient emphasison the advanced high school content that students will need to be successful in college,state assessments will fall short of measuring readiness for postsecondary pursuits.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Advancedend-of-course tests

to measurecollege readiness

Comprehensivehigh school tests

to measurecollege readiness

College admissionstests for all students

to measure readiness

1

2

1

18

5

3 3

19

7

7

State Strategies for Assessing College Readiness of High School Students Vary

Plan to implement tests



Number of states

Number of additional states in 2007

Achieve, Inc.16

State Strategies forCollege- and Work-ReadyTesting

A number of strategies are emergingas states work to build college-readytests into their high school assessmentsystems. The most widely pursuedstrategy is end-of-course tests. Otherstates are considering modifying theirexisting high school tests to makethem better measures of postsecondaryreadiness. Finally, a number of statesare incorporating the ACT or SATinto their assessment systems andrequiring all students to take thoseexams.

It is too early to tell which strategieshold the most promise. Whicheverpath states pursue, the assessmentsmust meet two important goals: Theymust measure college and workplacereadiness adequately, and they mustalign well with the state high schoolstandards. If either goal is sacrificed,the value of the assessments will becompromised, and their impact onstudent preparation will be limited.

Using High School End-of-Course Exams To Signal CollegeReadinessEighteen states are planning to developend-of-course assessments in advancedhigh school courses that will measurecollege readiness. One state — New

York — already has such exams inplace. New York is the only state inwhich postsecondary institutions findthe state’s end-of-course high schooltests — the Regents Exams — chal-lenging enough to determine whetherincoming students are prepared to

enroll in credit-bearing courses. Forseveral years, the City University ofNew York (CUNY) has used scores onthe Regents Exams for admissions andcourse placement decisions at its four-year institutions.8 According to stateofficials, the State University of NewYork system (SUNY) likewise hasadopted the use of the Regents Examsas a placement measure. This approachsignals to high school students interested

in attending CUNY or SUNY thatperformance on the Regents Examswill have a direct impact on theirchances for success in college.

The 18 other states that are planningto create end-of-course exams willneed to administer the tests in higher-level courses, such as Algebra II and11th grade English. Unfortunately,most states with end-of-course exams

StateEnd-of-course tests used for

college placement

Comprehensive high school tests used for college

placement

College admissions testsgiven to all high school

students

AZ

AR

CA

CO

CT

FL

GA

HI

ID

IL

IN

KY

LA

ME

MD

MA

MI

MN

MS

NJ

NM

NY

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

TX

VA

WV Sour

ce:

Ach

ieve

Sur

vey/

Rese

arch

, 20

07

Strategies for Assessing CollegeReadiness by State Plans to have in futureIn place


do not currently have tests at this level.For the tests to serve as true collegereadiness measures, higher educationmust help develop and/or review theseexams to ensure they reflect the skillsneeded for college success.

One reason end-of-course tests aregrowing in popularity is that they canbe tied to the curriculum standardsand courses students are required totake to graduate. The tests also aremore sensitive to instruction becausethey are taken right after a studentcompletes a course. End-of-course testsalso allow states to monitor rigor con-sistency in courses taught statewide.

There are challenges associated withend-of-course testing, however. First,this approach could increase the amountof testing required by a state, depend-ing on the number of courses for whichthe state develops an assessment. Second,the content of end-of-course tests foradvanced courses might be right butthe timing might not be from highereducation’s perspective. For example,if students take Algebra II in the 10thgrade — two years before enteringcollege — higher education institu-tions would need to determinewhether results on that test could beused for placement or whether addi-tional information (e.g., evidence ofcontinued course-taking in advancedmathematics or additional measureslater in high school) would be needed.

Setting a College-Ready CutScore on Comprehensive HighSchool ExamsTwo states use their comprehensive highschool assessments as college-ready

measures; five other states are consid-ering this strategy.

• California has amended its 11thgrade assessments to make themsufficient for signaling collegereadiness. As a result, the CaliforniaState University (CSU) system usesthese tests for course placement.

• Texas uses the same assessment —the 11th grade Texas Assessment ofKnowledge and Skills (TAKS) —as both the high school graduationtest and a college placement exam.9

• Five additional states — Connecticut,Florida, Georgia, Minnesota andRhode Island — plan to reviewtheir existing comprehensive highschool assessments to determinewhether they are capable of signal-ing college readiness.

Building on the state’s 11th gradestandards-based tests in English andmathematics, the CSU system andCalifornia’s education departmentworked together to design additionaltest questions that are aligned to thestate’s 11th grade standards and assessthe advanced skills incoming freshmenneed to be successful in entry-levelcourses. Students who score well onthat 11th grade test and continue totake challenging courses in their senioryear of high school are exempt from theCSU-required mathematics and Englishplacement tests. The amended 11thgrade exams also serve to alert highschool students in time to adjust theirsenior-year coursework if they needadditional preparation for college.

Through the Texas Success Initiative,Texas set a college-ready cut score onthe 11th grade TAKS that, if reached,indicates that the student will notrequire remediation at a state institu-tion of higher education. Texas setsone passing score for high schoolgraduation and a higher cut score todetermine whether students are readyfor credit-bearing college courses.

Georgia plans to move in a similardirection. The state is working to modifythe Georgia High School GraduationTest (GHSGT) to bring it into align-ment with the new high school stan-dards and course requirements the stateexpects to adopt in the next two years.The goal is for the GHSGT to be rigor-ous enough and have a college- andwork-ready cut score that higher educa-tion institutions can factor into place-ment decisions.

This strategy holds the most potentialin states that give their standards-based assessments in the 11th gradebecause those tests have the ability totap higher-level knowledge and skillsand because they are taken closer tothe end of high school when collegesare more likely to honor scores forplacement. This strategy would bemuch more difficult to pursue instates with 10th grade tests.

Incorporating CollegeAdmissions Tests into HighSchool Testing Systems Six states are incorporating national col-lege admissions tests (the ACT andSAT) into their high school assessmentsystems, requiring all students — notjust the college bound — to take them.

Achieve, Inc.18

• Four states — Colorado, Illinois,Kentucky and Michigan — haveincorporated or are in the process ofincorporating the ACT into theirhigh school assessment systems.

• One state — Maine — has incorpo-rated the SAT into its high schoolassessment system.

• Idaho will now require all highschool students to take the ACT,SAT or COMPASS placement test.

• West Virginia reports that it plans toadopt a policy that builds collegeadmissions tests into its highschool assessment system.

Given the widespread use of the ACTand SAT for college admissions andthe credibility these tests have in thepostsecondary community and thebroader public, it is understandablethat states would consider them foruse in high schools. Giving all studentsthe opportunity to take these testsmay encourage students who did notview themselves as college material topursue that path. Also, because mostcollege-bound students already takeone of these tests in high school,incorporating them into an assessmentsystem will not increase the number oftests these students need to take.

There are, however, challenges associ-ated with this strategy. In a recentreport, Achieve analyzed the mostcommonly used college admissionsand placement tests with an eyetoward their use in statewide highschool assessment systems. The analy-sis revealed that although admissionstests do some things very well, there

are gaps in what they measure.10

Neither the ACT nor the SAT includesthe full range of advanced conceptsand skills reflected in the ADP bench-marks and, increasingly, in state highschool standards. Therefore, simplyincorporating these tests as they areinto state high school testing systemsis an insufficient strategy.

To be effective, states need to augmentthe ACT and SAT with additionalquestions or performance measures toensure stronger alignment with statestandards and to assess the moreadvanced concepts and skills that col-lege faculty say are important. Statesare approaching augmentation in dif-ferent ways. Maine, for example, is

administering an augmented form ofthe SAT to all 11th grade students.The state worked with the CollegeBoard to develop supplemental itemsin data and statistics — an area ofmathematics that is covered in thestate standards but not extensivelyassessed on the SAT. Similarly,Michigan administers the ACT andWorkKeys to all 11th graders, alongwith 15 additional mathematics itemsthat measure content not covered oneither test. Kentucky plans to adminis-ter both the ACT and the state assess-ment to all students. To reduce testingtime, the state has analyzed both testsand will eliminate items from thestate test that cover content measuredby the ACT.

Achieve is working with nine states to develop and administer a com-

mon Algebra II end-of-course test. The nine states — Arkansas, Indiana,

Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania and

Rhode Island — are partners in the ADP Network.

The test is being developed based on a set of content specifications that

were created jointly by the states — and are aligned with the ADP

benchmarks. The specifications include a common core of content that

will be given across all states, plus a few modules that give states the

flexibility to go beyond the core.

This collaborative effort provides participating states with a number of

benefits. First, the test will promote consistency and rigor in Algebra II

courses within and among the states, which is important for equity across

diverse schools. Second, the test will serve as an indicator to students

that they are prepared for college-level work and can be used by post-

secondary institutions to place students into credit-bearing mathematics

courses. Third, the test will allow the public to compare the performance

of students across states. Achieve anticipates that, over time, additional

states will administer the Algebra II end-of-course test, making comparisons

even more powerful.

Common Algebra II Test


The ability of states to hold highschools accountable for improving stu-dent transitions to college and workdepends on the quality of their assess-ments and data systems. States needmore reliable measures of college andwork readiness, including more robusthigh school assessments, as alreadydiscussed. They also need a longitudi-nal data system with the capacity totrack student progress from highschool through postsecondary educa-tion. With such capacity, states will beable to trace a student’s postsecondarysuccess (or failure) back to his or herhigh school experience and use thatinformation to strengthen the experi-ence for the next class of students. Aneffective longitudinal data systemwould enable policymakers to comparehigh school course-taking, grades andassessment results with college course-taking patterns, success in first-yearcollege courses, and persistence andcompletion rates.

Progress Since theSummit: P–16 LongitudinalData Systems

Last year, only three states reportedhaving a P–16 longitudinal data sys-tem in place, with 31 states reportingthat they were working to establishsuch systems. This year — based onthe responses to Achieve’s survey anddata from the Data Quality Campaignand the National Center for HigherEducation Management Systems —two additional states report havingoperational longitudinal data systemscapable of connecting student-levelcohort data from K–12 and highereducation.11 An additional 42 states

report plans to have data systems withthis capacity operational in the next

few years, bringing the total number ofstates that have or plan to build P–16data systems to 47.

• Five states report that they haveonline P–16 longitudinal data systems capable of tracking anindividual student’s progress fromkindergarten through college grad-uation. One year ago, only Florida,Louisiana and Texas had such sys-tems in place; this year two newstates — Arkansas and Massachusetts

— report that they have new oper-ational P–16 longitudinal data systems. Florida’s P–20 data systemalso includes employment data,providing a body of data linkingsuccess in school to success in theworkplace.

Hold High Schools and Postsecondary InstitutionsAccountable for Student Success The mission of high schools is to prepare all students for college, careers and citizen-ship. Unfortunately, preparedness is barely a factor in high school accountability sys-tems — if it is even measured at all. In most states, accountability models are driven byattendance, graduation rates, and performance on high school assessments that often arenot adequate measures of college and work readiness.

53 47

42

2006 2007 Plan to implement data systems

3 2

Almost All States Plan To Implement P–16 Longitudinal Data Systems


Number of states

Data systems in place

Achieve, Inc.20

• Eight additional states — Alabama,Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Nevada,Tennessee, Utah and Wisconsin —report that they can match individ-ual student records from K–12longitudinal data systems withthose students’ records in the highereducation data systems, givingthem the capacity to trace studentachievement in higher educationback to the feeder high schools.Each of these states has plans tobuild seamless longitudinal datasystems that will include K–12 and higher education data.

• Thirty-four more states have plans todevelop or make operational P–16longitudinal data systems that moni-tor individual students’ progressthrough elementary, secondary andpostsecondary education.

• The remaining three states —Alaska, Vermont and West Virginia —report having no plans to adoptP–16 longitudinal data systems.

Challenges

Working in the Context ofPrivacy LawsAs states continue to develop P–16longitudinal systems that focus onindividual students’ growth and suc-cess, care must be taken to ensure thiswork can be done in accordance withthe federal Family Education Rightsand Privacy Act (FERPA) to protectstudent privacy. Although FERPAlimits a state’s ability to disclose indi-vidual students’ records in some cases,the law does permit states to use student-level data to evaluate and auditstate and local programs for school anddistrict accountability; monitor andanalyze assessment, enrollment andgraduation data; perform studies toimprove instruction; share studentrecords among schools; and maintainteacher identification systems that linkteachers and students. AlthoughFERPA safeguards student privacy, itby no means prohibits states frombuilding robust P–16 longitudinal

data systems and using them toimprove teaching and learning inhigh schools.12

Using Data To RaiseAchievement and GraduationRatesAs states raise standards in high school,they must pay close attention to themost vulnerable students — those atthe greatest risk of dropping out — sothat they receive the support necessaryto meet the higher standards andgraduate from high school. A growingbody of research suggests that well-designed early warning data systemsthat incorporate a variety of indicatorsfrom test scores and course grades toattendance and classroom engagementare effective tools for identifying stu-dents at risk of dropping out as earlyas 4th or 6th grade.13 Such systemswould provide ample time for schoolsto intervene with supports and pro-grams designed to help students getback on track. Additionally, analyzingteacher-level data can allow states, districts and schools to identify thestrengths and weaknesses of individualteachers and to develop more tailoredprofessional development to improveinstruction. Florida, for example,recently developed a new data-driventeaching tool called SunshineConnections. Teachers have access tostudent performance data; classroommanagement tools; and interactiveconnections to other teachers, curricularmaterials and professional developmentopportunities. With proper training,teachers are able to use these data toimprove student learning.

NH

MDDENJ

MARICT

VT ME

OHPA

NY

WV VAINIL

WIMI

SC

NCTN

KY

MS AL GA

FL

MO

IA

MN

LA

AR

TX

OK

KS

NE

ND

SD

MT

CO

NM

WY

WA

OR

NV

ID

UTCA

AK

AZ

HI

Status of P–16 Longitudinal Data Systems by State


Planning P–16 longitudinaldata systems

P–16 longitudinal datasystems in place


0 5 15 3010 20 25 35 4540 50

Graduatingwith college-ready

diploma

College-goingrate

Collegeremediation rate

3

2

5

4 5

1 4

1 2

0

12

7

8

Few States Factor College Readiness into High School Accountability Systems



Number of states

Progress Since theSummit: AccountabilitySystems

As more states begin to administercollege- and work-ready assessments toall students and develop the capacityto track student progress from highschool through postsecondary educa-tion, they also need to create meaning-ful accountability systems that holdhigh schools responsible for graduat-ing students ready for college and theworkplace. At a minimum, anaccountability system that measurescollege and work readiness should takeinto account an accurate graduationrate and whether students have com-pleted a college- and work-ready cur-riculum; have demonstrated proficiencyon a college- and work-ready assessment;have enrolled in college; and havebeen placed into credit-bearing, non-remedial courses in reading, writingand mathematics.

Measuring an Accurate HighSchool Graduation RateIn 2005, the National GovernorsAssociation (NGA) convened a taskforce to create a more valid, reliable and

consistent measure of the high schoolgraduation rate. All 50 governors signedthe NGA Graduation Rate Compact,agreeing to develop a common, four-year, adjusted-cohort graduation rate.14

Rather than rely on estimated gradua-tion rates, the agreed-upon rate tracksthe progress of each student, measuresthe percentage of students who graduatewithin four years of entering 9th gradeand measures the percentage of dropouts.This is an extremely important step.For the first time, it allows each stateto have an accurate picture of its per-formance. Governors who have takenoffice since the Compact was signedshould review their state’s efforts andprovide the necessary leadership toensure the development and use of thismeasure.

Two-thirds of states factor or plan tofactor the NGA Compact graduationrate into their state high schoolaccountability formulas. This demon-strates significant progress from lastyear when only a few states had adoptedor finalized plans for its use.

This summer, the NGA will publishits annual report on the 50 states’

progress in adopting and implementingthis graduation rate into their reportingand accountability systems, providingcomparable, up-to-date information.

Holding High SchoolsAccountable for WhetherStudents Earn College- andWork-Ready DiplomasBecause the mission of high school isto graduate all students ready for col-lege and work, states must factor thepercentage of students who graduatehaving completed a college- and work-ready curriculum into their accounta-bility systems.

• Seven states — Delaware, Georgia,Indiana, New York, North Carolina,Oklahoma and Texas — hold highschools accountable for increasingthe percentage of graduates whocomplete a college- and work-readycurriculum. In last year’s survey,only three states reported this aspart of their high school accounta-bility systems.

• Five additional states have plans tofactor this indicator into theiraccountability systems.

Number of additional states in 2007

Plan to hold schools accountable

Achieve, Inc.22

• Another dozen states publiclyreport the percentage of highschool students taking a college-and work-ready curriculum.

Holding High SchoolsAccountable for the College-Going and Remediation Ratesof Their GraduatesA strong accountability system shouldprovide incentives to high schools toincrease the percentage of studentswho enroll in college and are placedinto credit-bearing courses that counttoward a degree. All too often, first-year college students are required toenroll in remedial courses, and a largepercentage of those students will neverearn their postsecondary degrees.

• Three states — Georgia, Missouri

and Rhode Island — report thatthey hold high schools accountablefor the college-going rates of theirgraduates.

• Three states — Georgia, Oklahoma

and Rhode Island — factor collegeremediation rates into their highschool accountability systems.

• Five others plan to factor college-going and remediation rates intotheir accountability systems.

• An additional 21 states publiclyreport their college remediationrates but do not factor them intotheir high school accountabilitysystems.

Factoring College and WorkReadiness Tests intoAccountability SystemsAchieve was interested in learningwhich states, if any, factor the percent-age of high school students scoring“college and work ready” on a stateassessment into their high schoolaccountability systems. However,because few states have high schoolassessments in place that are capable ofmeasuring college and work readiness,this is difficult if not impossible formost states to accomplish right now.Achieve intends to return to this issuein the future and hopes to find exam-ples of states taking this importantpolicy step.

Challenges

For states to implement effectiveaccountability systems that holdschools accountable for preparing allstudents for college and work, theywill need better assessments and moresophisticated data systems. These willtake time to develop. But statesshould not wait for them to be inplace before addressing the problemsin high schools and providing incen-tives for schools to improve.

First Things First: Reduce theDropout RateRegardless of what formula a statecurrently uses to measure graduationrates, every state knows which high

StateGraduating with

college-ready diplomaCollege-going rate College remediation rate

AR

DE

GA

HI

IN

LA

ME

MN

MO

NJ

NY

NC

OK

PA

RI

TX

WI

Sour

ce:

Ach

ieve

Sur

vey/

Rese

arch

, 20

07

How States Hold Schools Accountable forStudents’ College Readiness Plans to have in future

In place


schools have the largest numbers ofdropouts. Those schools need immedi-ate attention. One study estimatesthat half of the nation’s dropouts comefrom just 15 percent of America’s highschools.15 States should target supportsand interventions in these schools.

States also need to create incentives for schools and districts to reduce thedropout rate by factoring it more significantly into their high schoolaccountability formulas. Louisiana’s

Accountability Commission, for exam-ple, has planned an accountability sys-tem that encourages schools to focuson dropout prevention and recovery andto produce graduates who are collegeand career ready. Trying to correct thefact that schools often score higher ontest-driven accountability ratings whenthey push low-performing students out,Louisiana will hold schools account-able for dropout rates and studentachievement on the state assessments.Each student outcome — from drop-ping out of high school to graduatingwith academic or career/technicalendorsement — will be worth a cer-tain amount of points on the “gradua-tion index” that goes into a school’saccountability rating. When studentsdrop out, schools will lose points. Thesystem also will encourage schools tocontinue working with students whofail to graduate within four years. If astudent upgrades his or her “outcome”after four years, the school’s accounta-bility rating will reflect that increasein a student’s status.

Provide Incentives for Collegeand Work ReadinessAll students should complete a college-and work-ready curriculum. States thathave not yet raised their diplomarequirements to the college- and work-ready level must find other ways toencourage both students and schools toaim higher.

One strategy is to factor the percentageof graduates who complete a college-and work-ready curriculum into thehigh school accountability formula andreward schools that increase thosenumbers. Only seven states do thistoday. States also can provide incen-tives for school districts to raise theirlocal graduation requirements in theabsence of a state college- and work-ready requirement.

It also is important to provide stu-dents with incentives to aim higher.State postsecondary systems have animportant role to play here. In Indiana,the state four-year institutions requirestudents to complete the Core 40(Indiana’s version of the college- andwork-ready curriculum) to be admitted.Last year, the federal governmentbegan providing additional money —the Academic Competitiveness Grants— to low-income students who areeligible for federal Pell grants and takea college-preparatory curriculum inhigh school. States that have defined acollege- and work-ready curriculumshould use it to determine eligibilityfor these grants. Over time, this willboth encourage low-income studentsto take a more rigorous curriculum andreward them financially for doing so.

Achieve, Inc.24

At the second anniversary of the 2005National Education Summit on HighSchools, it is encouraging that statesare taking action to close the expecta-tions gap and restore value to the highschool diploma. During the past twoyears, states have made substantialprogress in some areas, but overall,much work remains.

Momentum is strongest in standardsand data systems. Most states haverecognized that those areas need to bestrengthened first because they createthe foundation for the rest of the poli-cies. A growing number of states alsohave raised graduation requirementsfor all students, including some thathave had to work through a complexset of local control issues. Less progresshas been made in putting rigoroushigh school assessments in place anddeveloping systems in which highschools are accountable for preparingstudents for college and work.

Given the complexity of this policyagenda and the multiyear effort it willtake to implement fully, state leadersmust maintain a sense of urgency. Ifstates are to succeed, this is what itwill take:

Gubernatorial Leadership

For the past five years, No Child LeftBehind has had an impact on stan-dards and accountability reforms inelementary and middle schools. At thehigh school level, governors haveclaimed the leadership mantle. Thestates that have made the mostprogress almost always have had thegovernor leading the charge. If statesare going to continue to makeprogress, governors must continue tomake this a top policy priority. Notonly do they need to push for theright legislation, but they also need touse the bully pulpit to educate par-ents, educators and the public on theurgent need for higher standards.Raising standards is always met withsome degree of apprehension and cyni-cism. Governors and other state lead-ers have a responsibility to bring keystakeholders into the conversation andenlist their support. Business leaders— longtime champions for standards-based reform — are critical allies.They have a unique ability to helpstudents, parents, educators and thepublic understand the demands of theglobal economy.

The Ability To Move onMultiple Fronts

Developing and implementing goodpolicies takes time. Traditionally,states have taken them on one by one,starting with standards and then mov-ing to assessments, curriculum and,finally, accountability. As sensible asthis progression may be, states willneed to find ways to move multiplepieces of the policy agenda simultane-ously if they are going to respond tothe growing pressures of the widerworld. For example, states in the processof aligning high school standards withcollege and workplace demands ortackling the implementation of newgraduation course requirements shouldbe working on parallel tracks to putnew high school assessments in placeand to factor college- and work-readyexpectations into their high schoolaccountability systems.

Addressing Challenges

To implement the new expectationsstates are setting for high school stu-dents successfully, states must takegreater responsibility for providingteacher and student supports. It iscritical for states to ensure that teachers

ConclusionThe world that today’s high school students will encounter is vastly different from theone their parents faced. The economy has changed, along with the skills young peopleneed to be successful. Yet as demands in postsecondary institutions and the workplacehave grown, the expectations for high school graduates have not kept pace. The resultis that the American high school diploma has lost its currency.


are qualified to teach more rigorouscourses and for states to provide the sup-ports teachers and students need to besuccessful. For students to be successfulin a college- and work-ready curriculum,they need to enter high school well pre-pared and be supported throughout. Moststates do not have strong track records in these areas; they typically focus onstandards, testing and accountability andleave the rest to local districts. This mustchange. States need to take on a new roleand create new types of partnerships withlocal districts to meet capacity and studentsupport challenges.

Cross-State Partnerships

Whether they are improving standards,raising graduation requirements or work-ing on other challenges, states have dis-covered that the issues they face areremarkably similar. Although local sensi-bilities and unique political challengesmay lead states to pursue their own time-lines and solutions, learning from otherstates that have overcome tough obstaclesis often an important starting point. Noone should have to re-create the wheel.States have much to learn from eachother, and increased opportunities fornetworking and more formal partnerships— such as the ADP Algebra II exam ini-tiative — will quicken the pace of reformand lead to more consistent policies andexpectations nationwide.

Achieve, Inc.26

Section I — High SchoolAcademic Standards

• Has your state gone through a for-mal process to align high schoolacademic standards in mathematicsand English with the skills necessaryfor success in both credit-bearingcollege courses and entry-level,well-paying jobs?

• Describe or document the roleplayed by your state higher educationinstitutions and business communityin the creation of your current highschool academic standards.

Section II — Course-TakingRequirements

• Has your state in the past year created a requirement that all studentscomplete a college- and work-readycurriculum as defined by theAmerican Diploma Project (ADP)?Has your state otherwise raised ormodified its graduation require-ments in the past year?

• Please indicate which of the follow-ing policies your state has in place— or plans to implement — toensure that district course offeringsare consistent and equally rigorous:model curricula for required courses,state academic standards that articu-late content of required courses,

end-of-course exams for requiredcourses in the core subjects.

• Please indicate which support andincentive policies your state has inplace — or plans to implement —to help all students complete a college-and work-ready curriculum.

Section III — High SchoolAssessments

• Does your state administer assess-ments capable of measuring collegeand work readiness to all highschool students, and if so, are theresults of that test used by statehigher education institutions?

• Is your state developing or planningto develop any new high school testscapable of measuring college andwork readiness that will serve highereducation purposes?

Section IV — P–16 DataSystems

• Does your state have a single P–16longitudinal data system that tracksstudents from kindergarten throughcollege graduation?

• Is your state able to match studentrecords from a K–12 longitudinaldata system with student records inthe higher education data system(s)?

Section V — Reportingand AccountabilitySystems

• Does your state hold high schoolsaccountable for improving theirgraduation rates using the NGAGraduation Rate Compact formula?

• Does your state accountability sys-tem incorporate indicators thatreveal how high schools improve thecollege and work readiness of theirstudents?

n The percentage of graduates whoearn a “college- and work-ready”diploma or complete a “college-and work-ready” set of courserequirements

n The percentage of high schoolgraduates enrolling in a post-secondary institution withinsome window of time after highschool graduation

n The percentage of high schoolgraduates who enroll in remedialcoursework in either English ormathematics at state postsecondaryinstitutions

APPENDIX: Key Questions Asked in Achieve’s SurveyAchieve’s 2007 50-state survey of high school policies is an updated version of the previous year’s survey, with a continued focus on aligned standards, graduation requirements, assessments, and data and accountability systems. The questions fromthis year’s survey are paraphrased below.


1. Greene, Jay P. and Marcus A.Winters. Public High School

Graduation and College Readiness

Rates: 1991–2002. EducationWorking Paper, No. 8. Center forCivic Innovation at the ManhattanInstitute, 2005.

2. Parsad, Basmat and Laurie Lewis.Remedial Education at Degree-

Granting Postsecondary Institutions in

Fall 2000. NCES 2004-010.Washington, DC: U.S. Departmentof Education, National Center forEducation Statistics, 2003.

3. Carnevale, Anthony P. and DonnaM. Desrochers. Standards for What?

The Economic Roots of K–16 Reform.Princeton, NJ: Educational TestingService, 2003.

4. All 50 states responded to this year’ssurvey. Achieve followed up withstates when necessary to clarifytheir responses or to get additionalinformation. Achieve also conductedresearch to supplement stateresponses as needed. In the end,Achieve made the decision to modifysome state responses to make thedata comparable.

5. ADP research found that there is acommon core of knowledge andskills, particularly in English andmathematics, that students mustmaster to be prepared for post-secondary education or careers. Inmathematics, these benchmarks

represent content found in a rigorousfour-year course sequence thatincludes courses such as Algebra Iand II and Geometry, as well asconsiderable data analysis and sta-tistics. The English benchmarksdemand strong oral and writtencommunication skills and consider-able research and analysis. Logicand reasoning skills also are a criti-cal element of the benchmarks.

6. Jerald, Craig D. Identifying Potential

Dropouts: Key Lessons for Building an

Early Warning Data System. Whitepaper prepared for Achieve, Inc.,2006.

7. Peske, Heather G. and KatiHaycock. Teaching Inequality: How

Poor and Minority Students Are

Shortchanged on Teacher Quality. TheEducation Trust, 2006.

8. Students who are not ready forcredit-bearing coursework at thefour-year CUNY institutions aretransferred to the system’s two-yearinstitutions for remediation.

9. There is pending legislation inTexas that would replace the TAKSwith a series of end-of-course tests.At the time of this report’s publi-cation, that legislation had notbeen voted on.

10. Achieve, Inc. Aligned Expectations?

A Closer Look at College Admissions

and Placement Tests. 2007.

11. For more information about theData Quality Campaign and whatprogress states are making in devel-oping longitudinal data systems, visitwww.DataQualityCampaign.org.For more information about theNational Center for HigherEducation Management Systems,visit www.nchems.org.

12. Data Quality Campaign.Maximizing the Power of Education

Data While Ensuring Compliance with

Federal Student Privacy Laws: A Guide

for State Policymakers. March 2007.

13. Jerald, 2006.

14. NGA Graduation Rate Compactformula = [on-time graduates inyear X] ÷ [(first-time entering 9thgraders in year X - 4) + (transfersin) - (transfers out)].

15. Balfanz, Robert and NettieLegters. Locating the Dropout Crisis:

Which High Schools Produce the

Nation’s Dropouts? Where Are They

Located? Who Attends Them? ReportNo. 70. The Johns HopkinsUniversity, September 2004.

Endnotes

Achieve, Inc.28

Achieve Board of Directors

Co-ChairsGovernor Michael F. EasleyState of North Carolina

Arthur F. RyanChairman & CEOPrudential Financial, Inc.

Vice Co-ChairsKerry KillingerChairman & CEOWashington Mutual

Governor Edward G. RendellCommonwealth of Pennsylvania

Board MembersCraig R. BarrettChairman of the Board Intel Corporation

Governor Ernie FletcherCommonwealth of Kentucky

Governor Jennifer GranholmState of Michigan

Jerry JurgensenCEO Nationwide

Governor Tim PawlentyState of Minnesota

Edward B. Rust, Jr.Chairman & CEOState Farm Insurance

Chairman EmeritusLouis V. Gerstner, Jr.Former Chairman & CEO IBM Corporation

PresidentMichael CohenAchieve, Inc.

TreasurerPeter SayreControllerPrudential Financial, Inc.

Achieve would like to thank the individuals and organizations who contributed tothis report.

This report would not have been possible without the cooperation and assistance ofthe state education chiefs and their agency staff, who responded to our survey andprovided us with state-specific information.

We also would like to thank the State Higher Education Executive Officers andNational Center for Higher Education Management Systems, who helped us surveystate postsecondary systems and shared with us their insights on these challengingissues of alignment from the higher education perspective.

We would like to thank the following members of the Achieve staff for their hardwork on this report: John Kraman, senior policy analyst, who led the research, analysisand writing of the report; Kate Blosveren, policy analyst, who provided criticalresearch and analytical support; Jacqueline Lopez, research assistant, who providedadditional support; Laura McGiffert Slover, director of content and policy research,and Sandy Boyd, vice president for advocacy and outreach, both of whom providededitorial advice and support; and Matthew Gandal, executive vice president, whoserved as the report’s senior editor.

We would like to thank Adam Kernan-Schloss, Kathy Ames and Claire Perella atKSA-Plus Communications, Inc., for their editorial and design contributions.

Finally, Achieve would like to thank the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for providing generous funding for this report and the broader work of the AmericanDiploma Project Network.

Michael Cohen

Acknowledgments

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California ColoradoConnecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho IllinoisIndiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine MarylandMassachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi MissouriMontana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New JerseyNew Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode IslandSouth Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah VermontVirginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

1775 Eye Street NWSuite 410Washington, DC 20006Phone (202) 419-1540www.achieve.org

Closing the Expectations Gap 2007

Documents

Transcript of Closing the Expectations Gap 2007