EdWatch
105 Peavey Rd, Ste 116
Chaska, MN 55318
651-646-0646
www.edwatch.org

Review of the Minnesota Academic Standards

March 15, 2003

Review of the Minnesota Academic Standards
By Karen R. Effrem, MD

INTRODUCTION: Overall, these standards are an incredible improvement over the Profile of Learning standards with regard to academic content, rigor, and specificity. As a mother of three, a pediatrician, and a taxpayer who has reviewed many curricula as well as policy statements, and state and federal education law, I strongly support them and the process by which they were developed. I am deeply grateful to the members of the committees that made the sacrifice to develop them so well on such a tight time schedule using such a wide variety of resources. Each standard topic and subtopic will be reviewed specifying both strengths and weaknesses.

The most important issue is the parameters of the standards. Because the other standards, especially the Civics, History, Geography and Science standards, are embedded and integrated into language arts curricula, it is necessary for the language arts standards to be aligned with Minnesota's other strong academic standards in the other subjects, as outlined in House File 2. That Profile repeal bill, which passed the House nearly unanimously, reads in part:

Reading:

There is a strong phonetic basis for learning to read, while still recognizing that here are high frequency sight words that do not follow rules and must be memorized.
Advanced phonetic analysis to decode unfamiliar words is given significant and correct emphasis in the upper grades.

In 1st and 2nd grade, there is no discussion of the various rules for decoding words based on the rules of common words, such as, "an 'e' at the end of a one syllable word usually makes a vowel say its name" or "'C' says 's' with 'e, i, or y'" or "'G' says 'j' with 'e, i, or y'" These are powerful tools to help students read and spell a vast majority of words in the English language. If this is what is meant by Standard 1.14, "Use word patterns to decode unfamiliar words," then I strongly agree and support that standard, but I think perhaps it could be clearer.

This subtopic contains many specific strategies to increase comprehension while reading, such as use of dictionaries, context, comparing and contrasting setting, characters, and plot, finding main themes, and creating outlines and summaries.

In standard 2.4 for grades k-2, while it is good to have children learn word meaning from context, they should also be learning how to and then directed to look up unfamiliar words in a dictionary. The word dictionary is not mentioned under this subtopic until 3rd grade. In grades 4 and 5, electronic dictionaries are mentioned, and use of a dictionary is relegated to the research subtopic. Students should not depend on an electronic dictionary or spell check, but know how to find these things themselves using printed materials.
One frequently recurring standard wants students to relate text to life experiences. While it is good to do this, not everyone's life experiences are the same, which will lead to a situational understanding. Teachers should also help relate texts to some common literary, cultural, and or historical standard, particularly that covered in the Profile repeal bill, HF
What are the chants that kindergartners are supposed to make up with a teacher in standard 2.6 and what purpose does that serve?
The terms "graphic and semantic organizers" and "text structures" need to be better defined.
What is the combination of strategies that students will use to "demonstrate the ability to comprehend, interpret and evaluate a variety of texts" in standard 2.1 for the grades 6-8. It is not clarified.

The list of how to expand vocabulary is long, thorough, and excellent. The use of Greek and Latin roots, parts of speech and prefixes/suffixes is very important and it is very good that it is so specific.
Especially important is the use of explicit vocabulary instruction, mentioned in grades 6-12, phonetic analysis, and use of a dictionary when it is mentioned.

There is too heavy a reliance on using contextual clues for word meaning. That standard is used repeatedly and the use of a dictionary is mentioned very sparingly. It should be the other way around.
The standard, "Connect personal experiences and prior knowledge to build vocabulary," is used repeatedly in grades k-5 and the standard regarding explicit vocabulary instruction is not used until grades 6-12. There should be explicit, grade appropriate vocabulary instruction from k-12 with less emphasis on life experiences, which can be highly variable.

Writing:

In addition to being able to spell sight words and other common words, standard 5.5 in grade 2, "Apply spelling rules to write sequences of phonograms to produce correctly spelled written English," is excellent, and should be present in some form at every grade level.
The various stages and elements required for written composition are listed explicitly starting in grade 3 and are well defined in grades 6-8.
The basic elements of grammar are discussed well in the early grades of k-2.

The spelling of words that are not sight words is really only discussed in grade 2. After that, it is subsumed under writing strategies. Because spelling is so important for proper written communication, much more time should be spent on spelling as its own element in the other grades.
The elements of grammar are really only discussed on grades k-2. After that it is subsumed under writing strategies as an application. Grammar should be taught better before it is just applied. It is highly unlikely that grammar will be known and understood by the end of 2nd grade. The standards for grammar need to be clearer and in other grades and skills such as diagramming sentences should be included.
The elements of an "organized writing process" are not defined until 6th grade.
A software editing package should not be applied until that skill is learned independently.

The specificity and level of complexity of these standards expand in a grade-level appropriate fashion.

Standards should be added on how to do footnotes and endnotes and under what style conventions.
What does the American Psychological Association have to do with writing or research style?

Having good handwriting is important for written communication.
Understanding how to type is an important skill.

Keyboard skills should be taught in the later grades after good handwriting, grammar, spelling and punctuation skills are well established.

Listening and Speaking:

These skills are important and expand in complexity and specificity in an age-appropriate fashion.

In standard 1.3 for grades 4 and 5, active listening is important, but in the American culture, making eye contact with the speaker during an oral presentation is culturally appropriate and no other type of eye contact need be taught.
In standard 1.3 for grades 6-8, students should be responsible for evaluating themselves only for oral presentations. It is the teacher's responsibility to evaluate their peers.

These standards prepare students for the various types of speaking and oral presentations that they will have to make.

While students should know how to evaluate various types of oral presentations that they hear, it is the teacher's responsibility to do the final evaluation and grading of oral presentations.

It is very important for students to know how to evaluate various media.

The skills of evaluating media should be moved from grades 6-8 to grades 9-12 when students have more knowledge and understanding about societal, cultural, and historical standards with which to evaluate bias, etc. Those standards should include what was in the House Profile repeal bill, HF 2. In addition, increased exposure to the Internet should be reserved for when students are developmentally more mature and their academic reading, writing, and research skills are more solidified.

Literature:

Students are required to read a wide variety of types of literature.
Students must understand the various elements of literature, including how arguments are made and various themes. This was especially well laid out in Grade 6-8.
American and British literature was specifically mentioned in grades 6-8 and 10-12.
There is not a specific reading list, which would have a tendency to limit the selections used.

Because the national standards of the federal curriculum, particularly history, civics, and science, are integrated into several reading/literature curricula, the standards should specifically say that literature should follow the specifics of HF 2.
Kindergarten standard 1.6 should be removed and or placed in another grade. These children should be allowed to be children. They have the rest of their lives to distinguish reality from fantasy.
In grades 3-5 there is no mention of American literature and an inordinate emphasis on fairy tales, myths, legends, etc. from other cultures. This fits in with the federal curriculum's aims to promote earth-centered religions and radical environmentalism while denigrating Christianity, Western civilization, and private property. That standard (1.7) should be removed. However, if standard 1.7 stays, then there must be a corresponding standard to mention and promote American and Western literature that is grade appropriate and or it should be strengthened to say at the end "...that have had a significant effect on American and Western culture and history."
Standard 1.10 in grades 6-8 says in part, "Respond to a variety of high quality traditional, classical and contemporary works specific to American intellectual and cultural history..." That part of the standard should be replicated in every grade.
The rest of standard 1.10 in grade 6-8 says, "...as well as significant works from other cultures and countries." That part of the standard should be strengthened to say, "...that have had a significant effect on American and Western culture and history."
Standard 1.1 in 11th grade should be changed to read "Describe how and whether the culture of the selected text has contributed significantly to American and Western culture, history, or civilization.
The standard that reads, "Read and analyze works from American, British or world literature," should be strengthened to say , "...and describe how this work has or has not contributed to American and Western culture and civilization."

********

MREdCo is entirely user-supported. The continuation of our research and distribution work is entirely dependent on individual contributors.
If you want to assure that our work continues, Link to -- www.edwatch.org

Please e-mail us to subscribe to this MREdCo e-mail service.