About the Benchmarks

Here you can learn more about the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12.

I. The American Diploma Project (ADP) Benchmarks for end of high school and English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12

A. What are the ADP English benchmarks?
B. What is included in the ADP English benchmarks?
C. Why has Achieve "backmapped" the ADP benchmarks?
D. How are the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 organized
E. Why are the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 organized by grade spans?
F. Why do the benchmarks begin at grade 4, not kindergarten?

II. The Content of the ADP English and Communication Benchmarks

A. Why are these called “English and Communication" benchmarks and not “English" benchmarks as in the original ADP benchmarks?
B. What is unique about the English and Communication Benchmarks compared to other standards documents?
C. What content is included in the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12?
D. Why do the grades 4 – 12 benchmarks not include personal and creative writing or more detailed literary text expectations?
E. Is the grade span for grades 11 – 12 the same as the high school exit ADP benchmarks?
F. What other standards and expectations were used in the development of the benchmarks?

III. Text Complexity and Rigor

A. How do expectations for students increase in rigor across the grade levels?
B. How can educators select texts at an appropriate level of complexity for their students?

IV. Implementation and Implications for States and Districts

A. Are the benchmarks the sole responsibility of English teachers?
B. How can states use the benchmarks?
C. How might states include the content of the benchmarks in their course sequences?
D. What are the implications for assessment?

I. The American Diploma Project (ADP) Benchmarks for end of high school and English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12

In partnership with The Education Trust and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, Achieve launched The American Diploma Project (ADP) and worked with postsecondary educators, employers in high-performance workplaces and K – 12 educators to define and refine a set of English benchmarks that describe the English competencies needed for high school graduates to be successful in postsecondary education or in high–performance, high-growth occupations.

B. What is included in the ADP English benchmarks?

The ADP benchmarks describe expectations across eight strands: language, communication, writing, research, logic, informational text, media and literature. To view the ADP English benchmarks, click here.

C. Why has Achieve "backmapped" the ADP benchmarks?

The newly drafted set of benchmarks – the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 – describes a progression of skills and performances from grades 4 – 12 that culminate in those included in the ADP high school exit benchmarks. These grades 4 – 12 "backmapped" benchmarks provide detailed reference points for a student’s progress towards meeting the ADP exit benchmarks by the end of high school, and these reference points in turn can serve to guide curricular choices.

D. How are the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 organized?

Achieve organized the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 by the performances expected of students across the grade levels and are organized into the following strands:

The benchmarks use a different structure from the eight strands of the ADP English benchmarks to show more clearly the connections between the specific strands. Sometimes the alignment between the two strands is obvious, such as that the benchmarks statements for Research Essays come from the expectations in the ADP Research strand. Other times, the alignment may not be immediately obvious, such as that the ADP Logic strand appears both in the Reading and in Argumentative Essay strands in the benchmarks as "backmapped."

E. Why are the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 organized by grade spans?

The English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 are written for grade spans (grades 4 – 5, 6 – 8, 9 – 10, and 11 – 12) for two reasons:

1. English and communication is by nature recursive. English teachers teach the same type, but increasingly complex set, of skills and content from year to year. This movement to increasingly complex tasks and texts happens gradually and often not in a neat linear progression. Grade spans more accurately allow for a description of reasonable increase in rigor over the course of a longer period of time than one academic year.

2. Because of the wide-ranging nature of the ADP benchmarks (which include reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing, media and logic statements), states may decide to emphasize specific aspects of these benchmarks at different grade levels and in different academic disciplines. Drafting the benchmarks in grade spans allows for state and district control in the variety of implementation.

The grade span configuration allows flexibility: States can break down the benchmarks into grade-by-grade benchmarks and check their own standards against the benchmarks for a specific grade span. This flexibility may be particularly important in reading because of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) federal guidelines, which mandate grade-by-grade standards for reading for grades 3 – 8. The grade span benchmarks for reading provide general guidance to states as to what seems appropriate at particular levels yet the benchmarks allow for flexibility in incorporating much of the work which states have already done along these lines. In addition, states may decide that the benchmarks represent too large a set of instructional objectives for a single year. They may decide to focus on certain benchmarks in one year and others in the subsequent year while still seeking to meet the benchmarks for the end of that grade span (such as by emphasizing argument in grade 11 and research in grade 12). The grade span structure allows for this kind of curricular flexibility.

F. Why do the benchmarks begin at grade 4, not kindergarten?

The expression that students learn to read up to grade 3 and then read to learn after grade 4 holds some truth. In grades K – 3, early reading instruction includes an emphasis on phonemic awareness, phonics, word recognition and fluency. Many state standards, as well as independent efforts, have already described early reading skills well and can be used as references for states updating their standards and expectations for these grade levels.

Because the emphasis on the acquisition of literacy shifts after grade 3 to the acquisition of additional skills and the application of literacy, instruction in the intermediate grades often emphasizes those reading skills critical to comprehending a wide range of genres and content-area texts. Starting the benchmarks at grade 4 allows for an emphasis on the rigorous expectations for skills and performances in English courses and across the content areas in reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing and logic.

II. The Content of the ADP English and Communication Benchmarks

A. Why are these called “English and Communication" benchmarks and not “English" benchmarks as in the original ADP benchmarks?

These benchmarks go beyond what typically occurs in an English class and involve expectations for communication in general. The original ADP English benchmark document also suggests this wider application, and the new title is intended to highlight this broad range of skills.

B. What is unique about the English and Communication Benchmarks compared to other standards documents?

The English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 map backward from the ADP benchmarks and so share many of the same unique qualities. These materials emphasize the expectations of postsecondary education and work to a much greater degree than traditional English standards, providing a focus on logic, work-related text and work teams. Most significantly, specific performances and products anchor the English and Communication Benchmarks. These products, such as the research essay, an argument, a speech or a media production, presented as culminating experiences at each of the grade spans, clearly demonstrate student competence at those grades.

The benchmarks also have a unique format. Many traditional standards present lists of skills and knowledge separated into categories (such as vocabulary, reading and writing). These lists may give the impression that literacy skills are acquired in a linear and piecemeal way, not through a cohesive curricular experience. The benchmarks emphasize students’ capacity to produce coherent oral, written and visual products, as well as their ability to understand increasingly complex aural, visual and written text. Because of this emphasis on results, we have organized the benchmarks into three categories: Ways of acquiring information (reading, listening and viewing); ways of communicating information (writing, speaking and producing digital media productions); and ADP products of communication (informational/explanatory essays, literary analysis essays, argumentative essays, research essays and work-related texts). This format shows the interaction of decoding and encoding skills and abilities that more closely represents an effective instructional approach.

C. What content is included in the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12?

Achieve based the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 on the content prescribed in the ADP high school exit benchmarks, which include expectations in the eight ADP strands: language, communication, writing, research, logic, informational text, media and literature.

The English and Communication Benchmarks provide specificity not provided in the ADP benchmarks, detailing skills and products that lead to mastery of the exit benchmarks, including many specific examples of both texts and tasks. The "backmapped" benchmarks also remain general enough, however, to act as guides for standards development and curricular planning designed to meet the ADP high school exit benchmarks. Achieve references reading lists and uses text examples illustrating the quality and complexity of texts throughout the materials to guide curricular choices, not to constrict them.

Although comprehensive and detailed, the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 stop short of creating an exhaustive list of everything that could be taught or would be desirable in an English literature curriculum, such as personal or creative writing or more detailed literary text expectations. The benchmarks also suggest many areas of study (such as logic, informational text analysis and media interpretation) that should not be relegated only to the English or language arts classrooms but that should inform other content areas as well.

D. Why do the grades 4 – 12 benchmarks not include personal and creative writing or more detailed literary text expectations?

The grades 4 – 12 benchmarks do not provide an exhaustive list of everything that could be taught in an English course. They link to the ADP benchmarks, which intentionally stop short of detailing all expectations for an English course. Instead, the benchmarks reflect the concerns of higher education and business regarding skills and products needed by students after graduation, and thus they reflect a broad spectrum of communication skills applicable to courses across the curriculum.

E. Is the grade span for grades 11 – 12 the same as the high school exit ADP benchmarks?

The grades 11 – 12 benchmarks link closely with the ADP high school exit benchmarks but have been expanded to provide greater detail and examples for specificity and clarity.

F. What other standards and expectations were used in the development of the benchmarks?

As an essential part of the development process for the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12, the writing team reviewed the following national content standards and guidelines for the language and content used to describe the progression of skills and performance for grades 4 – 12:

• College Board Standards for College Success: English Language Arts (College Board, 2006);
• Standards for the English Language Arts (National Council of Teachers of English and International Reading Association, 1996);
• New Standards (National Center on Education and the Economy and the University of Pittsburgh, 1997);
• The K–12 Speaking, Listening, and Media Literacy Standards and Competency Statements, 1998);
• Standards for Middle and High School Literacy Coaches (International Reading Association, 2006);
• National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) Reading and Writing Frameworks (ACT, pre-publication versions);
• ACT College Readiness Standards for Reading (ACT);
• Sequence (Core Knowledge);
• The District of Columbia Reading/English Language Arts Pre-K through Grade 12 Standards (District of Columbia);
• The Indiana Reading List (Indiana Department of Education, 2006);
• The Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks / Appendix A: Suggested Authors, Illustrators, and Works Reflecting Our Common Literary and Cultural Heritage and Appendix B: Suggested Authors and Illustrators of Contemporary American Literature and World Literature (Massachusetts Department of Education, 2001/2004)

III. Text Complexity and Rigor

A. How do expectations for students increase in rigor across the grade levels?

As students progress across the grade levels, they are expected to perform at increasingly sophisticated levels and to comprehend texts and media that are increasingly complex. This intersection of increasingly challenging expectations for students’ performances and the increasingly complex nature of texts and media that students are expected to comprehend mark the progression of rigor across the grade spans in English, as well as in other courses.

To illustrate the progression in rigor from grade span to grade span, the benchmarks include references to the quality and expected complexity level of texts that students should read. In addition, the English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 include Text Complexity scales for informational, persuasive and literary texts. To read this discussion on the quality and expected complexity of texts, click here.

B. How can educators select texts at an appropriate level of complexity for their students?

As students progress through the grade levels, they should engage with increasingly complex texts that represent important cultural, historical, and societal themes and ideas. Students must be exposed to the greatest works of literature in English and other literature in translation to understand not only our common literary heritage but also to gain an appreciation for the rich literary traditions of many cultures. Educators can evaluate the difficulty and importance of texts by considering ways in which students’ assigned readings meet expectations for complexity, rigor and exposure to important fundamental works in American and world literature.

Several considerations can guide text selection.

1. Select Important Texts: Use well-recognized reading lists to select challenging and important texts that enhance the theme or content of instruction. According to employers and postsecondary faculty, students need to be able to analyze a variety of rigorous texts to be prepared to meet the demands that face them after high school. For this reason, the ADP English benchmarks may be used in close coordination with the Indiana and Massachusetts reading lists. Indiana and Massachusetts, two American Diploma Project (ADP) Network states, have done an effective job of compiling core lists of essential authors and/or literature and informational texts that not only define the quality and complexity of reading but also suggest a common level of "cultural literacy" expected of all high school students. Educators should refer to these authors or titles when designing curricula to help students achieve mastery of the ADP benchmarks. Click here to access the grades K – 12 Indiana Reading List and click here for the pre–kindergarten to grade 12 Massachusetts Reading List.

2. Consider the Text’s Complexity: Examine multiple factors to determine the challenge or complexity of the text. The challenge of a text depends upon the complexity of many factors: connections between and among ideas, development of ideas, organizational structures, style, vocabulary, familiarity with a setting or context, and purpose. The nexus of these factors, not any one factor, determines complexity. A work could be extremely complex in development of ideas and in its structure, but utilize simple syntax and vocabulary. Progressions that describe text difficulty for informational, persuasive and literary texts are provided in the Text Complexity benchmarks.

3. Consider the Reading Level of the Text: Reading levels are determined generally by vocabulary and by syntax. While semantic and syntactic considerations alone do not determine complexity, they may provide a rough measure of a text’s language demands. Lexile® measures are one way of evaluating complexity. The Lexile scale is a developmental scale for reading that ranges from below 200L for beginning-reader material to above 1700L for advanced texts. Lexile measures are based on two well-established predictors of how difficult a text is to comprehend: semantic difficulty (word frequency) and syntactic complexity (sentence length). Go to www.lexile.com for more information and to check Lexile measures of many texts.

4. Assess Students’ Skill, Prior Knowledge, and Interests: Complexity of a text for a specific reader is determined by the text itself, by the task for which it will be used and by the reader. Students with extensive background knowledge on a topic may well be able to handle texts that may otherwise be above their reading level. If a reader brings a sophisticated knowledge of vocabulary, an ability to use varied reading strategies effectively and deep background knowledge on the topic, what might appear complex for another student could be relatively easy for this student. The subject matter of a text, as well, may make it more appropriate for older students; for example, the complexity of the text’s language in Animal Farm, Raisin in the Sun or I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings may not be as challenging as the mature themes that these works address.

In a similar manner, reader interest may compensate for comprehending a challenging text at a particular grade level; witness, for example, the numbers of elementary students who read the Harry Potter novels. For boys, whose reading scores on NAEP on average are one grade level below girls’ in grade 12, selecting high-interest texts may be particularly important. Great adventures (such as Treasure Island, Captains Courageous or Kidnapped), inspiring biographies (such as the autobiographies of Frederick Douglass or Booker T. Washington), fantasies (such as Mary Poppins, Cricket in Times Square or Phantom Tollbooth), science fiction (such as works by Ray Bradbury or Isaac Asimov), humor (such as “The Cremation of Sam McGee or “Casey at the Bat”), or exciting classics (such as Frankenstein) will help to bring reluctant or slow readers along.

5. Consider How Texts Will Be Used: Consider the task when choosing texts and evaluate how the students’ use of the text impacts the text’s challenge. The same text may be used at different grades for different purposes. Uncomplicated materials can be used to teach complex concepts while works that are more complex in terms of their reading challenge may be content appropriate for students at lower grades. For example, All Quiet on the Western Front could be used with grade 12 students to show how the style of different passages varies according to the content or for awareness that the structure is complex and supports complex themes. The same novel could be taught in grade 9 to show how different characters develop over the course of the novel or for how the setting influences the action.

6. Plan How Students’ Will Read the Text: Materials that are read aloud to students may be significantly more challenging when read independently. Texts used in a Guided Reading lesson may include a text at grade level and another that is easier in order to teach a strategy or skill. Independent reading may include a wide range of topics and reading levels.

It's important to remember that the linked reading lists and discussion of complexity do not preclude teachers from selecting texts which are more challenging at earlier grade levels; nor do they preclude selection of texts which are less complicated at higher grade levels. Texts of varied levels of difficulty may be included within a single grade level in order to develop specific reading skills or target certain content or themes.

IV. Implementation and Implications for States and Districts

A. Are the benchmarks the sole responsibility of English teachers?

No. The English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 have implications for courses across the curriculum, in addition to more traditional English literature courses. The English and Communication Benchmarks take a necessarily expansive view of college and workplace readiness, emphasizing logic skills; reading informational, persuasive and literary texts; writing academic essays, workplace texts, arguments and research essays; and listening, viewing and speaking. As a result, these benchmarks may not all be included and/or met within an English literature classroom. Rather, school districts and states need to provide student learning opportunities for reaching these benchmarks across a range of courses implemented in a variety of ways.

The grades 4 – 12 benchmarks are relevant for English, reading and writing courses, as well as for courses across the curriculum. The specific literacy skills students need for success, however, vary by discipline. This document does not detail the specifics of what a history or science teacher would have to teach in order for students to be successful communicators within their disciplines, yet it does detail those literacy skills that are required across disciplines: vocabulary knowledge, comprehension strategies and the skills of effective discourse. One way for a state to incorporate these benchmarks would be to implement informational texts into social science and science courses and have teachers share responsibility for teaching the skills and performances associated with informational texts throughout the logic, reading, writing and speaking benchmarks. This model requires cooperation and discussion across the curriculum for middle and high school teachers, and involvement of more staff, but there are many collateral benefits to such discussions.

B. How can states use the benchmarks?

The English and Communication Benchmarks, Grades 4 – 12 provide guidance for state policy makers about the essential skills and performances that should be expected of students. The benchmarks also are intended to support states’ efforts in developing standards and curricular materials for grades 4 – 12. The grades 4 – 12 benchmarks may also provide general guidance to educators planning instruction. They will be of use to the following audiences for the following purposes:

State policy makers can use the grades 4 – 12 benchmarks to:

1. Evaluate the content and rigor of existing state standards to determine whether the skills and products necessary for college and workplace preparation are expected of students in grades 4 – 12.
2. Update and revise state standards to ensure that the skills and products necessary for college and workplace preparation are expected of students in grades 4 – 12.
3. Consider and revise state assessment plans to ensure that the skills and products necessary for college and workplace preparation are adequately assessed with students in grades 4 – 12.
4. Work with districts to consider course sequences, and whether current course sequences allow for instruction in the skills and performances essential to postsecondary college and workplace success.

State and district English/Language Arts specialists can use the grades 4 – 12 benchmarks to:

1. Evaluate the content and rigor of existing state and district curricular documents to determine whether the skills and products necessary for college and workplace preparation are emphasized for students in grades 4 – 12.
2. Update and revise state and district curricular documents to ensure that the skills and products necessary for college and workplace preparation are emphasized for students in grades 4 – 12.
3. Consider course sequences and whether current course sequences allow for instruction in the skills and performances essential to postsecondary college and workplace success.
4. Initiate dialogue about and implement cross-disciplinary approaches to curriculum.
5. Consider curricular and instructional guidelines, and whether these articulate as clearly as the grades 4 – 12 benchmarks do the specific criteria for effectiveness of various products.

Teachers of English/Language Arts and other content areas will use the grades 4 – 12 benchmarks to:

1. Evaluate the content and rigor of instructional plans and reading assignments to determine whether the tasks and texts emphasize the necessary skills and are of sufficient rigor to prepare grades 4 – 12 students for college and work.
2. Develop plans with other teachers for cross-disciplinary approaches to instruction to ensure that the benchmarks are met.
3. Develop rubrics to evaluate student performances using clear and specific criteria for effectiveness.

C. How might states include the content of the benchmarks in their course sequences?

Because of the wide-ranging nature of the ADP benchmarks (which include reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing, media and logic statements), states may decide to emphasize specific aspects of these benchmarks at different grade levels and in different academic disciplines. The specifics of implementation can vary as long as students are expected to meet the stated benchmarks at the end of each grade span. The benchmarks as "backmapped" identify the ways knowledge and skills change over time, as students progress through the grades. The specific standards for each grade level should be determined by states and school districts.

For example, these benchmarks could all be implemented in an English/Communication sequence of courses. However, to do so might mean that the traditional English class would need to be re-designed to allow for time to teach such topics and skills as logic, informational text and work-related texts. Certain aspects of teaching writing and speaking and literature would, in this model, possibly receive less curricular attention. Alternatively, various communication courses could be added to the traditional sequence of English courses, and the emphasis on literature could in that way be retained in the English course.

It's also possible to creatively implement the benchmarks within the teaching of literature. For example, a 12th grade teacher of Hamlet could teach reading argument through the analysis of Hamlet’s "To be or not to be" soliloquy, or the writing of argument through an assignment to support an insanity defense for Hamlet’s murder of Polonious and by using instructional activities like these that cover many of the logic benchmarks. Work-related texts could be assigned in the form of creative memos from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to the king, regarding what they have observed regarding Hamlet, or an imaginary resume from Polonious in a mock job application to be an "attendant lord.”

D. What are the implications for assessment?

States interested in incorporating these grades 4 – 12 benchmarks into their standards will face varied challenges regarding the degree to which they will have to adjust their state assessments. First, any change in standards means a change in assessment, and the degree to which standards change will affect the degree of change necessary in assessments.

Second, the English and Communication Benchmarks include specific performances and products (See “What is unique about the English and Communication Benchmarks compared to other standards documents?”). To fully assess these benchmarks, these specific performances and products would need to be assessed, perhaps through classroom assessment or through other types of evaluations, such as portfolio assessment, projects scored using rubrics commonly agreed upon by teachers in multiple content areas, or presentations of work. Other aspects of the benchmarks can be assessed more easily through an on-demand, statewide standardized assessment.