Position Papers on Ohio's New Learning Math Standards and Assessments from The Ohio Council of Teachers of Mathematics and The Ohio Math and Science Coalition
Ohio Council of Teachers of Mathematics
Ohio’s New Learning Standards in Mathematics
Position statement
March 21, 2015
The Ohio Council of Teachers of Mathematics (OCTM) is an active community of mathematics
educators who work toward excellence in teaching and learning at all levels throughout the state of
OCTM strongly supports Ohio’s New Learning Standards in Mathematics. These standards have been
in development since 2009 and are research-based and evidence-based. They draw from the best state
standards, are internationally competitive, and were developed by experts in mathematics education
with input from many Ohio teachers. These standards offer a foundation for rigorous, focused, and
coherent mathematics instruction that promotes problem solving, conceptual understanding, reasoning,
and computational fluency. This foundation will help to ensure the readiness of all Ohio students for
college and careers when they graduate from high school and that they are prepared to participate fully
The historical approach to teaching mathematics has been largely focused on memorization of rules
and procedures rather than mastery of concepts, leaving students feeling timid about their
mathematical abilities. Even for many adults, this anxiety about mathematics has persisted. With
Ohio's New Learning Standards, we have an important opportunity to transform our students’
relationship with mathematics. As schools across the state have transitioned to these standards,
students have begun to learn and appreciate mathematical concepts and processes at much deeper
levels. This deep understanding supports the development of mathematical proficiency and reasoning
skills that enable students to apply mathematics effectively in careers and in everyday life.
OCTM is committed to helping educators interpret and enact Ohio’s New Learning Standards in
Mathematics. Substantive opportunities for ongoing, job-embedded professional development are vital
to ensure that all teachers understand and are prepared to implement the standards and that all
administrators and policymakers understand teachers’ needs. When properly implemented, the
standards will support all students’ access to, and success in, high-quality mathematics programs.
It is important to recognize that Ohio’s New Learning Standards are not curriculum, specific
instructional strategies, local or statewide assessments, or graduation requirements. Although
influenced by the standards, these areas are different from the standards and fall under local and/or
state control. We encourage policymakers to carefully consider each of these distinct elements when
making decisions for Ohio schools.
Most important, educators, parents, and community leaders must acknowledge that systemic
improvement occurs over periods of years, and a long-term commitment to supporting Ohio’s New
Learning Standards is necessary. The ongoing enactment of standards must reflect both current and
ongoing research on student learning and practitioners’ experiences with the standards. OCTM is
committed to working with educators and other stakeholders, over the short term and the long term, to
best support high levels of mathematics learning by all students.
Ohio’s New Learning Standards in Mathematics
Position statement
March 21, 2015
The Ohio Council of Teachers of Mathematics (OCTM) is an active community of mathematics
educators who work toward excellence in teaching and learning at all levels throughout the state of
OCTM strongly supports Ohio’s New Learning Standards in Mathematics. These standards have been
in development since 2009 and are research-based and evidence-based. They draw from the best state
standards, are internationally competitive, and were developed by experts in mathematics education
with input from many Ohio teachers. These standards offer a foundation for rigorous, focused, and
coherent mathematics instruction that promotes problem solving, conceptual understanding, reasoning,
and computational fluency. This foundation will help to ensure the readiness of all Ohio students for
college and careers when they graduate from high school and that they are prepared to participate fully
The historical approach to teaching mathematics has been largely focused on memorization of rules
and procedures rather than mastery of concepts, leaving students feeling timid about their
mathematical abilities. Even for many adults, this anxiety about mathematics has persisted. With
Ohio's New Learning Standards, we have an important opportunity to transform our students’
relationship with mathematics. As schools across the state have transitioned to these standards,
students have begun to learn and appreciate mathematical concepts and processes at much deeper
levels. This deep understanding supports the development of mathematical proficiency and reasoning
skills that enable students to apply mathematics effectively in careers and in everyday life.
OCTM is committed to helping educators interpret and enact Ohio’s New Learning Standards in
Mathematics. Substantive opportunities for ongoing, job-embedded professional development are vital
to ensure that all teachers understand and are prepared to implement the standards and that all
administrators and policymakers understand teachers’ needs. When properly implemented, the
standards will support all students’ access to, and success in, high-quality mathematics programs.
It is important to recognize that Ohio’s New Learning Standards are not curriculum, specific
instructional strategies, local or statewide assessments, or graduation requirements. Although
influenced by the standards, these areas are different from the standards and fall under local and/or
state control. We encourage policymakers to carefully consider each of these distinct elements when
making decisions for Ohio schools.
Most important, educators, parents, and community leaders must acknowledge that systemic
improvement occurs over periods of years, and a long-term commitment to supporting Ohio’s New
Learning Standards is necessary. The ongoing enactment of standards must reflect both current and
ongoing research on student learning and practitioners’ experiences with the standards. OCTM is
committed to working with educators and other stakeholders, over the short term and the long term, to
best support high levels of mathematics learning by all students.
Position Paper on the Uses of Large-Scale Assessments of Mathematics and Science in Ohio
The Ohio Mathematics and Science Coalition is a respected organization of leaders from education,
business, and the public sector that draws on research and best professional practice to advocate for
excellence in mathematics and science education for all Ohio students.
Since 1995 OMSC has facilitated collaboration among Ohio stakeholders to create a shared statewide
vision for continuous, systemic and sustainable improvement.
The OMSC supports assessment as an important part of teaching and learning and of accountability
systems. Both large-scale and classroom assessments are appropriate and necessary for a high-quality
educational system. The uses of assessments should be dictated by the purposes for which they were
designed. There are a variety of valid ways to delineate the “purposes” of assessment. The OMSC
believes that assessments, including tests, can appropriately be used to (1) monitor student progress, (2)
make instructional decisions, (3) provide data to better communicate with parents and the public about
individual and group progress, (4) evaluate programs and (5) ensure accountability of the system. Some
of these purposes are served by classroom assessments--tests or tasks or observations developed or
adapted by the classroom teacher (purposes 1, 2, and 3)--and some of these purposes are addressed by
large-scale assessments developed by states, groups of states or assessment companies (purposes 3, 4,
and 5).
All assessments should be developed with careful attention to the objectives being measured. The
OMSC supports Ohio’s New Learning Standards; such standards are necessary to ensure equitable
access to high quality learning opportunities for all students, regardless of economic status, geographic
location or other local conditions. Assessments should be carefully evaluated in order to ensure that
they are both valid (assess what they purport to assess) and reliable (accurate) for their intended uses.
OMSC supports state initiated large-scale assessments based on standards, to the extent that they
provide valid and reliable information regarding student progress and for program evaluation and
accountability relative to the standards.
Large-scale assessments are important and useful tools--for educators and for policy makers. When
data show that large numbers of students have not learned specific content, this may indicate
weaknesses or gaps in the curriculum for specific grades or courses, or it may indicate that teachers
need support in knowing how to teach that content. Similarly, if all or nearly all students demonstrate
specific knowledge, it is an indication that both the curriculum and the instruction are strong. Policy
makers can make use of large-scale assessment data in a variety of ways: Are there great differences in
student achievement based on Ohio geography? Are there great differences between the achievement
of Ohio students and other students in the United States? Does achievement vary greatly between
routine and more complex tasks? Answers to these questions may have significant implications for
resource allocation.
The OMSC is skeptical about the use of student-growth measures from large scale assessments to make
judgments about the effectiveness of teachers. Ohio currently uses student-growth measures in teacher
evaluation; specifically a Value-Added Model (VAM) of determining student-achievement growth based
1 Mathematical Intimidation: Driven by the Data, John Ewing, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, May 2011, Volume
58, Issue 5
2 ASA Statement of Using Valued-Added Models for Educational Assessment, American Statistical Association, (2014) retrieved
from: https://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement.pdf
on large-scale assessments accounts for 50% of the evaluation of some Ohio teachers. In a highly
regarded journal article, John Ewing1 argues that the research base is currently insufficient to support
the use of VAM for high-stakes decisions. Likewise the American Statistical Association2 provides a
number of cautions: “VAMs typically measure correlation, not causation…. Research on VAMs has been
fairly consistent that aspects of educational effectiveness that are measurable and within teacher control
represent a small part of the total variation in student test scores or growth;…The VAM scores
themselves have large standard errors, even when calculated using several years of data. These large
standard errors make rankings unstable, even under the best scenarios for modeling.”
The practice of using results from a single large-scale assessment (even when multiple opportunities to
take the assessment are provided) as the primary part of high-stakes decisions about students (e.g.,
promotion or graduation) is not sound educational practice. Teachers, who use a variety of data sources
and who work closely with students, are in a much better position to make such high-stakes decisions.
Ohio has wisely chosen to phase out the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT). By 2018 the OGT will be replaced
by end-of-course exams. As policy and practice around these examinations evolve, care must be taken
to ensure that the results of these tests are used thoughtfully and carefully in conjunction with other
information about student learning to assess student success.
Therefore, the Ohio Mathematics and Science Coalition advocates for a state assessment system that
provides a variety of ways for students to demonstrate understanding and mastery of important
mathematical and scientific content,
provides information to teachers and administrators that will be helpful in making
programmatic decisions that serve the needs of all students,
supports districts in the development of a comprehensive assessment system rather than being
an add-on to local assessments,
is valid at the state level and is reliably implemented across districts, and
does not use the results of large-scale assessments as the major component of high-stakes
decisions about individuals, either students or teachers.
The Ohio Mathematics and Science Coalition is a respected organization of leaders from education,
business, and the public sector that draws on research and best professional practice to advocate for
excellence in mathematics and science education for all Ohio students.
Since 1995 OMSC has facilitated collaboration among Ohio stakeholders to create a shared statewide
vision for continuous, systemic and sustainable improvement.
The OMSC supports assessment as an important part of teaching and learning and of accountability
systems. Both large-scale and classroom assessments are appropriate and necessary for a high-quality
educational system. The uses of assessments should be dictated by the purposes for which they were
designed. There are a variety of valid ways to delineate the “purposes” of assessment. The OMSC
believes that assessments, including tests, can appropriately be used to (1) monitor student progress, (2)
make instructional decisions, (3) provide data to better communicate with parents and the public about
individual and group progress, (4) evaluate programs and (5) ensure accountability of the system. Some
of these purposes are served by classroom assessments--tests or tasks or observations developed or
adapted by the classroom teacher (purposes 1, 2, and 3)--and some of these purposes are addressed by
large-scale assessments developed by states, groups of states or assessment companies (purposes 3, 4,
and 5).
All assessments should be developed with careful attention to the objectives being measured. The
OMSC supports Ohio’s New Learning Standards; such standards are necessary to ensure equitable
access to high quality learning opportunities for all students, regardless of economic status, geographic
location or other local conditions. Assessments should be carefully evaluated in order to ensure that
they are both valid (assess what they purport to assess) and reliable (accurate) for their intended uses.
OMSC supports state initiated large-scale assessments based on standards, to the extent that they
provide valid and reliable information regarding student progress and for program evaluation and
accountability relative to the standards.
Large-scale assessments are important and useful tools--for educators and for policy makers. When
data show that large numbers of students have not learned specific content, this may indicate
weaknesses or gaps in the curriculum for specific grades or courses, or it may indicate that teachers
need support in knowing how to teach that content. Similarly, if all or nearly all students demonstrate
specific knowledge, it is an indication that both the curriculum and the instruction are strong. Policy
makers can make use of large-scale assessment data in a variety of ways: Are there great differences in
student achievement based on Ohio geography? Are there great differences between the achievement
of Ohio students and other students in the United States? Does achievement vary greatly between
routine and more complex tasks? Answers to these questions may have significant implications for
resource allocation.
The OMSC is skeptical about the use of student-growth measures from large scale assessments to make
judgments about the effectiveness of teachers. Ohio currently uses student-growth measures in teacher
evaluation; specifically a Value-Added Model (VAM) of determining student-achievement growth based
1 Mathematical Intimidation: Driven by the Data, John Ewing, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, May 2011, Volume
58, Issue 5
2 ASA Statement of Using Valued-Added Models for Educational Assessment, American Statistical Association, (2014) retrieved
from: https://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement.pdf
on large-scale assessments accounts for 50% of the evaluation of some Ohio teachers. In a highly
regarded journal article, John Ewing1 argues that the research base is currently insufficient to support
the use of VAM for high-stakes decisions. Likewise the American Statistical Association2 provides a
number of cautions: “VAMs typically measure correlation, not causation…. Research on VAMs has been
fairly consistent that aspects of educational effectiveness that are measurable and within teacher control
represent a small part of the total variation in student test scores or growth;…The VAM scores
themselves have large standard errors, even when calculated using several years of data. These large
standard errors make rankings unstable, even under the best scenarios for modeling.”
The practice of using results from a single large-scale assessment (even when multiple opportunities to
take the assessment are provided) as the primary part of high-stakes decisions about students (e.g.,
promotion or graduation) is not sound educational practice. Teachers, who use a variety of data sources
and who work closely with students, are in a much better position to make such high-stakes decisions.
Ohio has wisely chosen to phase out the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT). By 2018 the OGT will be replaced
by end-of-course exams. As policy and practice around these examinations evolve, care must be taken
to ensure that the results of these tests are used thoughtfully and carefully in conjunction with other
information about student learning to assess student success.
Therefore, the Ohio Mathematics and Science Coalition advocates for a state assessment system that
provides a variety of ways for students to demonstrate understanding and mastery of important
mathematical and scientific content,
provides information to teachers and administrators that will be helpful in making
programmatic decisions that serve the needs of all students,
supports districts in the development of a comprehensive assessment system rather than being
an add-on to local assessments,
is valid at the state level and is reliably implemented across districts, and
does not use the results of large-scale assessments as the major component of high-stakes
decisions about individuals, either students or teachers.