Challenging the Research Base of the Common Core State Standards: A Historical Reanalysis of Text Complexity

Educational Researcher

Volumn 42, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 381-391

  Gamson, David A ^a   Lu, Xiaofei ^a   Eckert, Sarah Anne ^b  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b The Agnes Irwin School   (United States)

Author keywords

curriculum; educational reform; history; reading; textbooks

Indexed keywords

EID: 84884760856     PISSN: 0013189X     EISSN: 1935102X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X13505684     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Catching up to college and career readiness. Iowa City, IA: ACT; 2012:.
2. Adams M. J.Advancing Our Students' Language and Literacy: The Challenge of Complex Tasks.American Educator. 2010-2011;34 11 (4): 53.
3. AudS.HussarW.JohnsonF.KenaG.RothE.ManningE. ZhangJ. (2012). The Condition of Education 2012 (NCES 2012-045). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.
4. Baker D.,Knipe H.,Collins J.,Leon J.,Cummings E.,Blair C.,Gamson D.One hundred years of elementary school mathematics in the United States: A content analysis and cognitive assessment of textbooks from 1900 to 2000.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 2010;41:383-423.
5. Berliner D. C.Our impoverished view of educational research.Teachers College Record. 2006;108:949-995.
6. Blair C.,Gamson D.,Thorne S.,Baker D.Rising mean IQ: Cognitive demand of mathematics education for young children, population exposure to formal schooling, and the neurobiology of the prefrontal cortex.Intelligence. 2005;33:93-106.
7. Carroll J. B.,Davies P.,Richman B.The American Heritage word frequency book. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin; 1971:.
8. Chall J. S.Readability revisited: The new Dale-Chall readability formula. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books; 1995:.
9. Chall J. S.Learning to read: The great debate. 1996). Learning to read: The great debate (3rd ed.). Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College.Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College; 1996:.
10. Chall J. S.,Conard S.,Harris S.An analysis of textbooks in relation to declining SAT scores. New York: Advisory Panel on the Scholastic Aptitude Test Score Decline; 1977:.
11. Chall J. S.,Conard S. S.,Harris-Sharples S.Should textbooks challenge students? The case for easier or harder textbooks. New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Teachers College, Columbia University; 1991:.
12. Durkin D.What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction.Reading Research Quarterly. 1978-1979;14:481-533.
13. Durkin D.Reading comprehension instruction in five basal reader series.Reading Research Quarterly. 1981;16:515-544.
14. Fisher D.,Frey N.,Lapp D.Text complexity: raising rigor in reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association; 2012:.
15. Graham P. A.S.O.S.: Sustain our schools. New York, NY: Hill and Wang; 1992:.
16. Grissmer D.The continuing use and misuse of SAT scores.Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 2000;6:223-232.
17. Hayes D. P.Sociology Technical Report. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University; 2003:.
18. Hayes D. P.,Wolfer L. T.,Wolfe M. F.Schoolbook simplification and its relation to the decline in SAT-Verbal scores.American Educational Research Journal. 1996;33:489-509.
19. Hiebert E. H.Beyond single readability measures: Using multiple sources of information in establishing text complexity.Journal of Education. 2011;191 (2): 33.
20. Hiebert E. H.The Common Core's staircase of text complexity: Getting the size of the first step right.Reading Today. 2011-2012;29 (3): 26-27.
21. Hiebert E. H.,Mesmer H. A. E.Upping the ante of text complexity in the Common Core State Standards: Examining its potential impact on young readers.Educational Researcher. 2013;42:44-51.
22. Huey E. B.The psychology and pedagogy of reading, with a review of the history of reading and writing and of methods, texts, and hygiene in reading. New York, NY: Macmillan; 1908:.
23. Loveless T.Washington, DC: Brookings Institution; 2012:.
24. Lu X.Automatic measurement of syntactic complexity in child language acquisition.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics. 2009;14 (1): 3-28.
25. Marks C. B.Word frequency and reading comprehension.Journal of Educational Research. 1974;67:259.
26. Mathews M. M.Teaching to read, historically considered. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1966:.
27. McGregor A. K.The effect of word frequency and social class on children's reading comprehension.Reading. 1989;23:105-115.
28. McGuffey W. H.,Gorn E. J.The McGuffey readers: Selections from the 1879 edition. Boston, MA: Bedford Books; 1998:.
29. Mesmer H. A.,Cunningham J. W.,Hiebert E. H.Toward a theoretical model of text complexity for the early grades: Learning from the past, anticipating the future.Reading Research Quarterly. 2012;47:235-258.
30. Michel J.-B.,Shen Y. K.,Aiden A. P.,Veres A.,Gray M. K.,. Aiden E. L.Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books.Science. 2011;331 (6014): 176-182.
31. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers (NGA/CCSSO). (2010a). The Common Core State Standards. Washington, DC: Author.
32. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers (NGA/CCSSO). (2010b). The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects, Appendix A: Research Supporting Key Elements of the Standards. Washington, DC: Author.
33. Pearson P. D.Handbook of research on reading comprehension. Israel S. E.Duffy G. G., ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2009:3-31.
34. Popp H. M.Toward a literate society: The report of the Committee on Reading of the National Academy of Education with a series of papers commissioned by the committee. Carroll J. B.Chall J. S., ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1975:101-146.
35. Porter A.,McMaken J.,Hwang J.,Yang R.Common Core Standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum.Educational Researcher. 2011;40:103-116.
36. Reardon S. F.Whither opportunity? Rising inequality, schools, and children's life chances. Duncan G. J.Murnane R. J., ed. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011:91-115.
37. Resnick D. P.,Resnick L. B.The nature of literacy: An historical exploration.Harvard Educational Review. 1977;47:370-385.
38. Rothstein R.The way we were? The myths and realities of America's Student Achievement. New York: Century Foundation; 1998:.
39. Schmidt W. H.,Houang R. T.Curricular coherence and the Common Core State Standards for mathematics.Educational Researcher. 2012;41:294-308.
40. Smith N. B.American reading instruction. 2002). American reading instruction. Special edition. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Newark, DE: International Reading Association; 2002:.
41. Snow C.Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program for reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand; 2002:.
42. Steelman L. C.,Powell B.Bewitched, bothered, and bewildering: The use and misuse of state SAT and ACT scores.Harvard Educational Review. 1996;66:27.
43. Sullivan D. P.William Holmes McGuffey: Schoolmaster to the nation. Rutherford, NJ: Associated University Presses; 1994:.
44. Toutanova K.,Klein D.,Manning C.,Singer Y.Feature-rich part-of-speech tagging with a cyclic dependency network. Proceedings of the 2003 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics; 2003Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: The Association for Computational Linguistics; 2003. 252.
45. Venezky R. L.A history of the American reading textbook.Elementary School Journal. 1987;87:246-265.
46. Westerhoff J. H.McGuffey and his readers: Piety, morality, and education in nineteenth-century America. Nashville: Abingdon; 1978:.
47. Williamson G. L.,Fitzgerald J.,Stenner A. J.The Common Core Standards' quantitative text complexity trajectory: Figuring out how much complexity is enough.Educational Researcher. 2013;42 (2): 59-69.