The Texas Adult Education Content Standards & Benchmarks

Understanding the Terminology of Content Standards

Throughout the state of Texas, adult education teachers and administrators are learning a new language – the language of content standards and benchmarks. Nearly 700 teachers and administrators from across the state gathered in Austin on June 24-26, 2007 for the release of the Texas Adult Education Content Standards and Benchmarks for ABE/ASE and ESL Learners and for training on how to use the standards and benchmarks in the classroom. Everyone was eager to receive a personal copy of the Implementation Guide version 1.0 which, at the time, was only available by attending the conference. Now, the complete Implementation Guide is available online at http://www-tcall.tamu.edu/taesp/guide/cover.html.

When learning any new language, vocabulary is always critical to understanding, so let us “come to terms” with the vocabulary of the Texas content standards and benchmarks. However, before I begin this vocabulary lesson, I must include some background information about standards-based educational reform as it applies to adult education because it provides the context to make the vocabulary terms more meaningful.

Standards-based educational reform efforts began in the mid-1980s to improve the quality of education in the United States’ K-12 schools and keep our country competitive with the other industrialized nations. The movement grew, and several reports recommending setting national goals and standards were published from 1992 to 1998. Three types of standards are discussed: content standards that identify what is to be learned; performance standards that define how well students should master the content and are measured by progress assessment; and program standards (also called indicators of program quality and opportunity-to-learn standards) that describe the quality of instruction and educational opportunity necessary for students to meet expectations.

In 1994, the National Institute for Literacy began an initiative to develop a framework for adult learning content standards. Equipped for the Future (EFF) is the National standards-based educational improvement model for adult basic education and English language learning designed to meet the needs of adult learners. The EFF standards represent a consensus of what is important for learners to know and be able to do and are linked to the primary purposes that motivate adult learners as parents, workers, and citizens. Visit http://eff.cls.utk.edu/ to learn more.

In adult education, the push for performance standards development (unlike the content standards of EFF) began with the passage of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act as Title II of the 1998 Workforce Investment Act. This legislation set program accountability requirements for programs receiving federal funds. In response, the Office of Vocational and Adult Education (OVAE) guided a project to create an outcome-based accountability system that included a uniform national database for collecting and reporting the states’ program data; this effort produced the National Reporting System (NRS). For a more detailed explanation of standards-based educational reform, read the article by Regie Stites in the September 1999 issue of Focus on Basics.

The overarching term is the first I will explore. Standards-based education (SBE) is a model for improving educational systems. SBE seeks to define the educational goals and bring into alignment the assessment, curriculum, instruction, and professional development needed to support learners in reaching the stated educational goals. Using SBE, teachers and administrators learn from student progress assessments and determine what improvements should be made to increase student success. The aim is an educational system that is accountable and committed to continual improvement.

For such a system to be fair, the components of the educational system should be in agreement – they should be aligned. “Alignment is a documented connection among standards, teaching, learning, and assessment” (Process Guide, 2005, p. B-1). If programs are to be held accountable for student progress, then student progress assessment, educational goals, and instructional practices should be aligned.

Now let us examine the key standards-related terms of the Texas Implementation Guide. Content standards define “what is important for students to know and be able to do within a specific content area.” For example, the Read with Understanding content standard describes a clear goal of the educational program, but it allows flexibility and does not prescribe specific content or teaching methods.

Just below each content standard in the Implementation Guide are several components of the standard. The components describe the kinds of actions one must perform, using the knowledge and skills gained, to achieve the overall goal of the content standard. A student should be able to perform these actions to show mastery of that content standard.

Each of the content standards is divided into several strands. Strands are similar to the components of the standards, but they describe the skills, knowledge, or strategies one would study, rather than the abilities one would demonstrate. Strands describe the areas of study which, when added all together, represent the learning needed to meet the standard. For example, Decode and Recognize Words, Vocabulary Development and Locate Information are three of the strands under the content standard Read with Understanding.

Any one of the strands is a continuum of ability from novice to master. Each strand divides this continuum of ability into six levels. Here is where alignment comes into play; the six levels are aligned with the NRS Educational Functioning Levels. Level one is Beginning Literacy; level six is either Advanced ESL or High Adult Secondary Education. As students move up from level to level, the work becomes more challenging and students become more capable of working independently. For each level of each strand, the writing teams wrote a benchmark.

Benchmarks “describe the more specific set of skills, knowledge, and strategies that learners need to develop and achieve in order to meet the standard at a particular level” (Implementation Guide, Glossary). Members of the writing teams, drawing on their years of experience, spent the majority of their time writing, discussing, negotiating, and revising the benchmarks. The benchmarks are written for teachers and describe the abilities students are expected to demonstrate at each level of each strand. The Texas benchmarks are written as exit levels and “represent what learners should be able to do upon exiting the level and moving to the next level” (Implementation Guide, Glossary). For the ABE/ASE benchmarks, students exiting level five should be able to pass the GED test, and level six benchmarks represent the knowledge and skills necessary for making a successful transition to post-secondary courses.

The examples below each of the benchmarks describe activities that learners might perform which are appropriate for that level. The examples are intended to clarify the meaning of the benchmarks.

The examples of proficient performance for each standard are written to be shared with learners. Proficient performance examples describe real-life activities and applications of the standard for each of the six NRS Educational Functioning Levels. They are intended to help learners recognize their progress and visualize their learning goals.

Finally, we come to curriculum. “Curricula provide detailed outlines of the knowledge and skills for different instructional levels and are a guide for teachers in planning lessons” (Implementation Guide, Glossary). Curricula are normally tailored to address learner and community needs at the local level. Where the standards and benchmarks set the broader goals and objectives for educational programs, curricula are more detailed plans of how to deliver instruction. Curricula often suggest textbooks, teaching methods, learning activities, or sequence.

There you have it, a lesson on the vocabulary of standards. In the next issue of Literacy Links, I will continue this discussion of standards-based education with a focus on using standards in classroom application. Oh, and be sure to prepare for a vocabulary quiz.

American Institutes for Research, Adult Education Content Standards Warehouse Project. (2005, August). A Process Guide for Establishing State Adult Education Content Standards. Developed under contract to the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult Education. [PDF - download Adobe® Acrobat® Reader]

Texas Center for the Advancement of Literacy and Learning, College Station, TX, Texas Adult Education Standards Project. (2007, June). Texas Adult Education Content Standards and Benchmarks for ABE/ASE and ESL Learners: Implementation Guide, Version 1.0. Retrieved August 22, 2007 from the Texas Center for the Advancement of Literacy and Learning Web site: www-tcall.tamu.edu/taesp/guide/toc.html.