Skip to main content
Log in

High school teachers’ perspectives on the English language arts Common Core State Standards: an exploratory study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Educational Research for Policy and Practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This was an exploratory study that examined high school teachers’ perspectives about their early experiences with the English language arts Common Core State Standards. The sources of data for the study included a survey and structured interviews. Twenty-three high school ELA teachers from one unified school district in Southern California participated in the study. The findings suggested that the teachers wanted to acquire more knowledge about many aspects of the CCSS for ELA. In addition, they perceived that their professional development and curricula materials were inadequate to meet the high standards set in the CCSS. Also, the teachers perceived that they were not ready to teach the ELA CCSS even though they believed that the standards would help students have satisfying personal and professional lives. The implications were discussed, including the need for schools to provide ongoing, high-quality professional development, and research-based, aligned curricula materials for high school ELA teachers. In addition, California and school districts have to make adequate financial investment to support implementation of the CCSS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Achieve, Inc. was founded in 1996 at the National Education Summit by leading governors and business leaders.

  2. ACT is an independent, not-for-profit organization that provides assessment, research, information, and program management services in the broad areas of education and workforce development.

  3. ASCD was formerly known as the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  4. Editorial Projects in Education are the independent, nonprofit organization devoted to raising awareness and understanding of critical issues facing American schools.

References

  • Achieve Inc (2004). The Expectation Gap: A 50-State Review of High School Graduation Requirements. Retrieved August, 27, 2013 from http://www.achieve.org/files/coursetaking.pdf.

  • Achieve Inc (2009). Closing the expectations gap: 4th annual 50-states progress report on the alignment of high school policies with the demands of college and careers. Retrieved August, 27, 2013 from: http://www.achieve.org/ClosingtheExpectationsGap2011

  • Achieve Inc (2011). Closing the expectations gap 2011: 6th annual 50-states progress report on the alignment of high school policies with the demands of college and careers. Retrieved August, 27, 2013 from http://www.achieve.org/ClosingtheExpectationsGap2011.

  • ACT Report (2008). The forgotten middle: Ensuring that all students are on target for college and career readiness before high schools. Retrieved August 27, 2013 from www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/ForgottenMiddle.pdf.

  • Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development (2012). Fulfilling the promise of the common core state standards: Moving from adoption to implementation to sustainability. Retrieved January 29, 2014 from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/commoncore/CCSSSummitReport.pdf.

  • Baumann, J., & Bason, J. (2011). Survey research. In N. Duke & M. Mallette (Eds.), Literacy research methodologies (2nd ed., pp. 404–426). New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beach, R. (2011). Issues in analyzing alignment of language arts Common Core Standards with state standards. Educational Researcher, 40(4), 179–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, R., & Baker, F. W. (2011). Why core standards must embrace media literacy. Education Week, 36(30), 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beach, R., Appleman, D., Hynds, S., & Wilhelm, J. (2011). Teaching literature to adolescents (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beach, R., Thein, A., & Webb, A. (2012). Teaching to exceed the English language arts Common Core State Standards: A literacy practices approach for 6–12 classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunch, G. C. (2013). Pedagogical language knowledge: Preparing mainstream teachers for English learners in the new standards era. Review of Research in Education, 37(1), 298–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • California Budget Act (2013). AB 86, Section 85 (Chapter 48, Statutes of 2013). Retrieved January 7, 2015 from http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/ab86sec85ch48s2013.asp.

  • California Department of Education (2013). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical studies for California public schools, Kindergarten through grade twelve. Sacramento, CA: Department of Education.

  • California Department of Education (2014). Common Core State Standards systems implementation plan for California. Retrieved February 5th, 2014 from: http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/documents/ccsssysimpplanforcaapr13.pdf.

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chingos, M., & Whitehurst, G. (2012). Choosing blindly: Instructional materials, teacher effectiveness, and the Common Core. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choppin, J., Davis, J., Drake, C. & McDuffie, A. (2013). Middle school teachers’ perceptions of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and related assessment and teacher evaluation systems. Retrieved July 19, 2014 from www.warner.rochester.edu.

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative (June, 2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved February 2014 from http://www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/ELA_Standards.pdf.

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (2006). Understanding mixed methods research. Retrieved February 22, 2012 from www.sagepub.com/upm-data/10981_Chapter_1.pdf.

  • Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (2012). The multi-layered curriculum: Why change is often confused with reform. National Education Policy Center. Retrieved September 3, 2013 from http://nepc.colorado.edu/blog/multi-layered-curriculum.

  • Dede, C. (2004). Enabling distributed-learning communities via emerging technologies. In Proceedings of the 2004 conference of the Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education (SITE) (pp. 3–13). Charlottesville, VA: American Association for Computers in Education.

  • Dillman, D., Smyth, J., & Christian, L. (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Editorial Projects on Education Research Center (2013). Findings from a national survey of teachers perspectives on The Common Core. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from http://www.edweek.org/media/epe_survey_teacher_perspctives_common_core_2013.pdf.

  • Gee, J. P. (2010). A situated sociocultural approach to literacy and technology. Retrieved July 17, 2014 from http://networkingworlds.weebly.com/uploads/1/5/1/5/15155460/approach_to_literacy_paper_gee.pdf.

  • Gibbs, T. J. & Howley, A. (2001). “World-class standards” and local pedagogies: can we do both? Thresholds in Education (Aug/Nov. 2001). Retrieved August 27, 2013 from: www.ericdigests.org/2001-3/world.htm.

  • Gonzalez, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J., & Caracelli, V. (2003). Making paradigmatic sense of mixed methods practice. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 91–110). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, G. A. & Moje, E. B. (2012). What is the development of literacy the development of?. In K. Hakuta & M. Santos (Co-chair), Understanding Language. Commissioned Papers on Language and Literacy Issues in the Common Core State Standards and Next Generation Science Standards (pp. 52–63). Retrieved January 14, 2014 from http://mes.sccoe.org/resources/ALI%202012/11_KenjiUL%20Stanford%20Final%205-9-12%20w%20cover.pdf.

  • International Reading Association (2012). Literacy implementation guidance for the ELA Common Core State Standards. Retrieved January 29, 2014 from http://www.reading.org/general/aboutira/white-papers.aspx.

  • Jiménez, R. T., García, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual Latina/o students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1), 90–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K. E. (2009). Second language teacher education: A sociocultural perspective. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kober, N. & Rentner, D. (2011). Common Core State Standards: Progress and challenges in school districts’ implementation. Center on Education Policy, Retrieved 07/17/2014, from http://www.edweek.org/media/epe_survey_teacher_perspctives_common_core_2013.pdf.

  • Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice. Mind, Culture and Activity, 3(3), 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, K., & Shaw, L. (2002). Developing a socially shared symbolic system. In E. Amsel, E. Amsel, J. P. Byrnes, & J. P. Byrnes (Eds.), Language, literacy, and cognitive development: The development and consequences of symbolic communication (pp. 27–57). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P. D. (2013). Research foundations for the Common Core State Standards in English language arts. Retrieved January 5th, 2015 from http://www.scienceandliteracy.org/sites/scienceandliteracy.org/files/pdf/Pearson_Research_Foundations_Common_Core_State_Standards_in_ELA.pdf.

  • Perry, L. (2012). What is literacy?—A critical overview of sociocultural perspectives. Journal of Language & Literacy Education, 8(1), 50–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Common Core Standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2013). The biggest fallacy of the Common Core Standards. Retrieved September 2, 2013 from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-ravitch/common-core-fallacy_b_3809159.html.

  • Reutzel, D. (2013). Implementation of the Common Core State Standards and the practitioner: Pitfalls and possibilities. In S. Neuman & L. Gambrell (Eds.), Quality reading instruction in the age of Common Core State Standards (pp. 59–74). Newark, DE: IRA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Santo, M., Darling-Hammond, L., & Cheuk, T. (2012). Teacher development to support English language learners in the context of Common Core State Standards. Retrieved June 18, 2014 from: http://ell.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/academic-papers/10-Santos%20LDH%20Teacher%20Development%20FINAL.pdf.

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Reiber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Vol. 1: Problems of general psychology. New York, NY: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lasisi Ajayi.

Appendix

Appendix

Survey

Please check the box \((\checkmark )\) that corresponds to your answer.

Section A: Biographical data

figure a

Section B: ELA teachers’ knowledge of the ELA Common Core Standards

 

Strongly agree

Agree

No opinion

Disagree

Strongly disagree

7. I have a clear understanding of the ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

8. I have a clear understanding of the difference between the former California ELA standards and ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

9. I have a clear understanding of alignment of the former California ELA standards with ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

10. I have a clear understanding of classroom implementation of ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

11. I have a clear understanding of assessment of ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

Please, provide examples of the knowledge of ELA CCSS you may have in this box:

 a.

 b.

 c.

 d.

 e.

Section C: Professional development and training related to English-language arts Common Core Standards

figure b
 

Strongly agree

Agree

No opinion

Disagree

Strongly disagree

15. The professional development and training for ELA Common Core State Standards were of great quality

1

2

3

4

5

16. The professional development and training prepared me to use the best practices for teaching ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

17. The professional development addressed alignment between former California ELA standards and ELA Common Core Standards

1

2

3

4

5

18. The training prepared me to teach college and career reading standards for literature

1

2

3

4

5

19. The training prepared me to teach college and career reading standards for information text

1

2

3

4

5

20. The training prepared me to teach college and career readiness anchor standards for writing

1

2

3

4

5

21. The training prepared me to teach college and career anchor standards for speaking and listening

1

2

3

4

5

22. The professional development prepared me to teach college and career readiness anchor standards for language

1

2

3

4

5

23. The professional development prepared me to teach language progressive skills

1

2

3

4

5

24. The training prepared me to teach text complexity

1

2

3

4

5

25. The training prepared me to collaborate with colleagues to teach ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

26. The training prepared me to use specific strategies to teach ELA Common Core State Standards to specific student groups (e.g., ELLs)

1

2

3

4

5

27. The professional development prepared me to adapt assessment to ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

28. The training prepared me to use grade-level appropriate curricula materials and textbooks

1

2

3

4

5

29. The professional development prepared me to use grade-level appropriate technology

1

2

3

4

5

Please, provide additional information relating to how professional development and training in your school has prepared you to teach ELA Common Core State Standards:

 a.

 b.

 c.

 d.

 e.

Section D: Curricula materials and textbooks for teaching ELA Common Core Standards

 

Strongly agree

Agree

No opinion

Disagree

Strongly disagree

30. I need access to ELA Common Core State Standards curricula materials and textbooks

1

2

3

4

5

31. ELA Common Core State Standards textbooks allow me to make choices of WHAT to teach

1

2

3

4

5

32. ELA Common Core State Standards textbooks allow me to make choices of HOW to teach

1

2

3

4

5

33. I need more information on how to align the former California standards with ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

34. I need more information about ELA Common Core State Standards curriculum

1

2

3

4

5

35. I need more training in using technology and digital media to teach ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

36. I need more training to help my students read high-quality texts closely and critically

1

2

3

4

5

37. I need more training to guide my students to use research-based strategies when reading complex texts

1

2

3

4

5

38. I need more time to collaborate with my peers on ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

39. I need more professional development activities on assessment of students

1

2

3

4

5

Please, specify other resources you may need to teach ELA Common Core State Standards below:

 a.

 b.

 c.

 d.

 e.

Section E: Readiness to implement English language arts Common Core Standards

 

Very prepared

Somewhat prepared

No opinion

Somewhat not prepared

Not at all prepared

40. I have the knowledge and skills to teach ELA Common Core State Standards to all students

1

2

3

4

5

41. I am prepared to teach ELA Common Core State Standards to English Language Learners

1

2

3

4

5

42. I am prepared to teach ELA Common Core State Standards to gifted and talented (GATE) students

1

2

3

4

5

43. I am prepared to teach ELA Common Core State Standards to students with disabilities

1

2

3

4

5

44. I am prepared to teach ELA Common Core State Standards to students from low-income families

1

2

3

4

5

45. I have aligned my curriculum with ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

46. I have incorporated ELA Common Core State Standards into my teaching practice

1

2

3

4

5

47. My school is prepared to implement ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

48. My school district is prepared to implement ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

49. California is prepared to implement ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

50. My school is prepared to provide support for teachers to implement ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

51. My school provides instructional resources that align with ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

52. My school provides textbooks that align with ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

53. My school provides access to technology and digital media to teach ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

54. My school provides staff support to teach ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

Please, write in the box other ways you think you are ready to implement the ELA CCSS:

 a.

 b.

 c.

 d.

 e.

Section F: Teachers’ attitude to teaching English language arts Common Core Standards

 

Strongly agree

Agree

No opinion

Disagree

Strongly disagree

55. ELA Common Core State Standards allow me to determine how I will help my students meet the Standards within my school setting

1

2

3

4

5

56. ELA Common Core State Standards will better help me improve my instruction

1

2

3

4

5

57. ELA Common Core State Standards provide a tool to teach knowledge and skills that are important to my students

1

2

3

4

5

58. ELA Common Core State Standards provide me strategies to teach students to critically and analytically read literature texts

1

2

3

4

5

59. Today’s knowledge economy requires me to teach students the knowledge and skills imbedded in ELA Common Core State Standards

1

2

3

4

5

60. ELA Common Core State Standards allow me to teach my students to synthesize ideas from multiple sources

1

2

3

4

5

61. ELA Common Core State Standards allow me to connect instruction to students’ agency (e.g. interests, capabilities, abilities, practices, etc.)

1

2

3

4

5

62. ELA Common Core State Standards allow me to prepare students to have more satisfying personal lives

1

2

3

4

5

63. ELA Common Core State Standards allow me to prepare students to have more productive professional lives

1

2

3

4

5

64. ELA Common Core State Standards allow me to promote students’ active engagement with complex texts

1

2

3

4

5

65. ELA Common Core State Standards allow me to teach students to have fun while at the same time engaged and hard-working in my class

1

2

3

4

5

Please, write below other aspects of your attitude to teaching ELA Common Core State Standards:

 a.

 b.

 c.

 d.

 e.

Interview questions

  1. (1)

    What is your philosophy of English language arts (ELA) instruction?

  2. (2)

    What are your views about the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for ELA?

  3. (3)

    What are your views regarding the implementation of the CCSS for ELA in your school?

  4. (4)

    Comment on whether or not the CCSS for ELA will help you improve your instruction of English language arts and classroom practices.

  5. (5)

    Describe your views of the professional development activities specifically on the CCSS for ELA (if any) that you have received in your school.

  6. (6)

    Please, describe your readiness to teach the CCSS for ELA.

  7. (7)

    What are your views about the notion that the CCSS will guide your instruction and help you deliver a high-quality education for students in ELA?

  8. (8)

    Comment on the instructional resources (if any) in your school that will help you implement the CCSS for ELA effectively?

  9. (9)

    Comment on whether or not the CCSS for ELA will help you prepare your students to be college or career ready.

  10. (10)

    What challenges (if any) do you have in implementing the CCSS for ELA in your school?

  11. (11)

    What opportunities (if any) have the CCSS given you as an ELA teacher?

  12. (12)

    Please, comment on any aspects of the CCSS for ELA that may not have been covered in this interview questions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ajayi, L. High school teachers’ perspectives on the English language arts Common Core State Standards: an exploratory study. Educ Res Policy Prac 15, 1–25 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-015-9174-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-015-9174-3

Keywords

Navigation