Trending Topic Research File: Common Core State Standards
Common Core State Standards

Trending Topic Research File 

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS), released in 2010 for English language arts and mathematics, have been adopted by 45 states and the District of Columbia. In recent years, AERA’s journals have examined many aspects of the Common Core, including:

  • Differences between CCSS and previous standards
  • Whether CCSS represents an improvement
  • Underlying assumptions of CCSS
  • Process of the CCSS’ adoption

The following compendium of open-access articles are inclusive of all substantive AERA journal content regarding the Common Core published since 2009. This page will be updated as new articles are published. 

AERA Journal Articles

Note: Articles are listed below in reverse chronological order of publication. Click here for the list by author’s last name.

(Un)Commonly Connected: A Social Network Analysis of State Standards Resources for English/Language Arts
AERA Open, November 2017
This article examines the results of two quasi-experimental studies of the implementation and impact of the Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC), an intervention designed to support secondary teachers' transition to Common Core State Standars in Enlish language arts.
Authors: Emily M. Hodge, Serena J. Salloum, Susanna L. Benko

Supporting Common Core Instruction With Literacy Design Collaborative: A Tale of Two Studies
AERA Open, July 2017
This article examines the results of two quasi-experimental studies of the implementation and impact of the Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC), an intervention designed to support secondary teachers' transition to Common Core State Standars in Enlish language arts.
Authors: Joan Herman, Scott Epstein, Seth Leon

How Well Aligned Are Textbooks to the Common Core Standards in Mathematics?
American Educational Research Journal, December 2015
In the first analysis to investigate claims of alignment in the context of fourth-grade mathematics using tools capable of estimating the alignment of curriculum materials with the standards, results indicate areas of misalignment; including that the textbooks studied systematically overemphasize procedures and memorization relative to the standards, among other weaknesses.
Authors: Morgan S. Polikoff

Accountability Pressure, Academic Standards, and Educational Triage
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, September 2015
Using data from students in North Carolina, researchers found that as the rigor of state standards increased, test score gaps between low and high achievers and students near grade level also increased.
Authors: Douglas Lee Lauen, S. Michael Gaddis

Organized Interests and the Common Core
Educational Researcher, December 2013
Drawing on theories of political and policy learning and interviews with major participants in the diverse array of interest groups supporting the Common Core, this article examines the role these groups have played in development and implementation of CCSS. 
Authors: Lorraine M. McDonnell, M. Stephen Weatherford

Challenging the Research Base of the Common Core State Standards: A Historical Reanalysis of Text Complexity
Educational Researcher, October 2013
Researchers find that contrary to the authors of the English Language Arts component of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) – which builds a case for higher complexity in textbooks and reading materials for students by pointing to research showing a steady decline in the difficulty of student textbooks over the past 50 years – text complexity actually has either risen or stabilized over this time.
Authors: David A. Gamson, Xiaoofei Lu, Sarah Anne Eckert 

Science and Language for English Language Learners in Relation to Next Generation Science Standards and with Implications for Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Mathematics
Educational Researcher, May 2013 
Addressing the language demands and opportunities embedded in the science and engineering practices in the National Research Council’s “Framework for K-12 Science Education,” the authors also highlight implications for CCSS for English language arts and Mathematics.
Authors: Okhee Lee, Helen Quinn, Guadalupe Valdés

The Common Core State Standards’ Quantitative Text Complexity Trajectory: Figuring Out How Much Complexity Is Enough
Educational Researcher, March 2013
The authors propose a two-part analytical strategy for decision making surrounding the quantitative trajectory standard, the CCSS’s aim for all high school graduates to be able to independently read complex college and workplace texts through quantitative trajectory for text complexity exposure.
Authors: Gary L. Williamson, Jill Fitzgerald, A. Jackson Stenner

Upping the Ante of Text Complexity in the Common Core State Standards: Examining Its Potential Impact on Young Readers
Educational Researcher, January/February 2013
Researchers examine the theoretical and empirical support for assumptions underlying the CCSS’s acceleration of text complexity in grades 2-3 and identify patterns in American reading achievement and instruction in order to illustrate the consequences of an increase in the first step of the CCSS staircase of text complexity levels.
Authors: Elfrieda H. Hiebert, Heidi Anne E. Mesmer

Curricular Coherence and the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
Educational Researcher, November 2012
Exploring the relationship of the CCSS in Mathematics (CCSSM) to student achievement, these researchers found a high degree of similarity between CCSSM and standards of the highest-achieving nations on the 1995 Third International Mathematics and Science Study and that states with standards more like CCSSM have higher 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress scores on average.
Authors: William H. Schmidt, Richard T. Houang 

Assessing the Quality of Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
Educational Researcher, May 2011
Commenting on “Common Core Standards: The New U.S. Intended Curriculum,” the authors whether the CCSS are an improvement over most state mathematics standards and question whether schools and districts have the capacity to support effective implementation.
Authors: Paul Cobb, Kara Jackson

Assessing the Common Core Standards: Opportunities for Improving Measures of Instruction
Educational Researcher, May 2011
Responding to comments on their “Common Core Standards: The New U.S. Intended Curriculum,” the authors suggest additional perspective that should be considered when addressing quality and change, stating additional conceptualizations of mathematics and English language arts content as well as how to define and measure alignment among content standards, materials, assessments, and instruction should be explored.
Authors: Andrew Porter, Jennifer McKaken, Jun Hwang, Rui Yang

Issues in Analyzing Alignment of Language Arts Common Core Standards With State Standards
Educational Researcher, May 2011
A commentary on “Common Core Standards: The New U.S. Intended Curriculum,” the author offers possibly reasons for the lack of focus found in the CCSS.
Author: Richard W. Beach

Common Core Standards: The New U.S. Intended Curriculum
Educational Researcher, April 2011
This article compares the Common Core with then-current state standards and assessments, standards in top-preforming countries, and teachers’ descriptions of their own practices.
Authors: Andrew Porter, Jennifer McKaken, Jun Hwang, Rui Yang

Is There a de Facto National Intended Curriculum? Evidence from State Content Standards
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, September 2009
This analysis found considerable variability among states’ content standards, but that a small core curriculum exists across states in the content areas of English language arts and reading, science, and mathematics.
Authors: Andrew Porter, Morgan Polikoff, John Smithson


By Author

Benko, Susanna L.slbenko@bsu.edu

Beach, Richard W. - rbeach@umn.edu



Cobb, Paul paul.cobb@vanderbilt.edu

Eckert, Sarah Anneseckert@agnesirwin.org

Epstein, Scott - epstein@cresst.org 

Fitzgerald, Jill - jfitzgerald@lexile.com

Gaddis, S. Michael - mgaddis@psu.edu

Gamson, David A. - dag17@psu.edu

Herman, Joan - herman@cresst.org

Hiebert, Elfrieda H.hiebert@textproject.org

Hodge, Emily M. - hodgee@montclair.edu

Houang, Richard T. - houang@msu.edu

Hwang, Jun - junhwang@gmail.com

Jackson, Kara kara.jackson@mcgill.ca

Lauen, Douglas L. - dlauen@unc.edu

Lee, Okhee - olee@nyu.edu

Leon, Seth- leon@cresst.org

Lu, Xiaoofei - xxl13@psu.edu

McDonnell, Lorraine M.mcdonnell@polsci.ucsb.edu

McKaken, Jennifer - jmcmaken@dolphin.upenn.edu

Memser, Heidi Anne E.hamesmer@vt.edu

Polikoff, Morgan polikoff@usc.edu

Porter, Andrew andyp@gse.upenn.edu

Quinn, Helen - helen.quinn@stanford.edu

Salloum, Serena J. - sjsalloum@bsu.edu

Schmidt, William H. - bschmidt@msu.edu

Smithson, John - johns@wcer.wisc.edu

Stenner, A. Jackson - jstenner@lexile.com

Yang, Rui - rayeryoung@gmail.com

Valdés, Guadalupe - gvaldes@stanford.edu

Weatherford, M. Stephen - weatherford@polsci.ucsb.edu

Williamson, Gary L.gwilliamson@lexile.com

James Spillane Discusses CCSS

James Spillane Discusses Research Directions on Standards-Based Reform and Common Core
Share This
Designed by Weber-Shandwick   Powered by eNOAH