Academic rigor has been identified in state standards as a cornerstone of effective education. It is seen as an essential part of preparing students for the complexities of higher education and future careers. This is not a new idea in education. In most education “Reform Acts” in the 20th century the reformers recommended increasing academic rigor at all levels. At the school level this usually meant requiring more homework and developing more aggressive curricula.
Beginning in the 1990s, school leaders reached conclusion that something more needed to be done. Increasing rigor seemed to require more than simply about assigning more homework, offering more advanced classes, or writing harder tests. Researchers in the 80s and 90s came to the conclusion that increased academic rigor must challenge students to think critically, apply knowledge to new situations, and develop a deep, lasting understanding of core concepts. They concluded that by fostering an environment of high expectations, escalating work and meaningful engagement, educators can empower students to achieve their full potential and this redefined “increased academic rigor”.
What is Academic Rigor?
Today, educators see escalating academic rigor as the key to the creation of an environment in which each student is expected to learn and think at high levels, is supported in reaching those expectations, and demonstrates learning in intellectually demanding ways. It moves beyond rote memorization to cultivate higher-order thinking skills and more aggressive applications. A rigorous curriculum prompts students to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information, constructing their own understanding rather than passively receiving it. This approach ensures that learning is both challenging and accessible, providing the necessary support to help every student succeed.
The Core Elements of Academic Rigor
current thinking about escalating rhythm identifies components of rigor that can help educators intentionally design more rigorous learning experiences. Key elements include:
- Content difficulty: the content of the curriculum needs to spiral from simple, known concepts to embrace increasingly more remote and abstract concepts.
- Content Complexity: The curriculum should present complex ideas and concepts that require deep cognitive engagement. This involves using rich texts, multifaceted problems, interdisciplinary connections, and increasingly more complex critical and creative thinking strategies.
- Cognitive Challenge: Students should be consistently asked to use higher-order thinking skills. Advanced reasoning and logic, real-world applications, executive processing and deep reading, etc. can escalate from pre-k through graduate school
- High Expectations: all stakeholders must share a belief that all students can achieve at high levels, coupled with clear communication of those expectations. This creates a culture of achievement and perseverance.
- Scaffolding and Support: Rigor is not about leaving students to struggle alone. It involves providing the right level of guidance, tools, formative work, and differentiated support to help all students mastery of core competencies navigate complex tasks and build independence over time.
- Demonstration of Learning: Students must have opportunities to show what they know and can do through meaningful performance tasks, projects, and assessments that require mastery of core competencies (e.g. executive processing, critical thinking, purposeful reading, etc.) and complex concepts.
The advent of high-stakes accountability assessment ads a whole new set of elements to the idea of escalating rigor. State tests are designed to increase the rigor of the test from about grade 3 through grade 12. This involves a number of defining elements of rigor
- test content and language: theoretically state tests are built around a “spiraling” curriculum where the content becomes increasingly more difficult and complex and the structure of the sentences, paragraphs, and texts increase from grade level to grade level.
- test venue: the way students are tested has increased dramatically since state tests started in the early 90s to include paper and pencil and technology enhanced elements. The venue increases in complexity from grades three through grade 12.
- test format: the format of the test also escalates from relatively simple types of questions to increasingly more complex questions that are supposed to match the “thinking age” of the target student group.
- test duration: the amount of time that the questions require students to be “highly engaged” in challenging work also expands. Third grade questions require appropriate high-level time on task that is very different than the requirements of 12th grade questions.
- question language: tests have their own “language”. (See our blogs on the test as a genre that can be included in a purposeful reading strand in every discipline) one element of this language is the concept base which includes more abstract and complex content as the student moves through the grades. Another critical element of the test language is the “operational language” which informs the student what they have to do and how they have to answer the question.
- question complexity: in addition to escalating language the complexity of questions grows from year to year including more operations, more thinking steps, and more complex responses.
- proficiency rubrics: in all state tests each question includes a rubric that defines the expectations for a proficient or correct answer. This rubric becomes more complex as students move through the grades and miss reading the rubric is a common cause for students to miss questions where they understand the content
Strategies to Increase Rigor in Student Work
Enhancing rigor requires a deliberate and strategic approach to planning and processing both how students learn (learning work) and how they demonstrate that learning (performance work).
Increasing Rigor in Student Learning Work
The goal is to deepen the thinking/learning process during daily instruction and activities.
- Use Complex Texts: identify current reading levels in a particular discipline and gradually increase the level of readings provided until students are proficiently reading and processing at their expected level . This supports monitoring student monitoring student growth towards the reading level required on the state tests and just supporting them as they advance through academic processing, close reading, annotation, and text-dependent questions using the escalating texts.
- Focus on Problem-Solving: Present students with real-world, multi-step problems that do not have one just obvious solution. Their work should include prioritizing, problem-solving, decision-making, strategic planning, etc. Encourage them to explore different strategies, collaborate with peers, and justify their reasoning.
- Promote Inquiry-Based Learning: Shift from providing answers to posing essential questions. Design lessons that allow students to investigate topics, form hypotheses, and draw their own conclusions based on evidence. Cumulative and capstone activities provide ideal vehicles for inquiry-based learning and real world application. This level of activity links learnings in long-term memory and enables long-term retrieval and use.
Increasing Rigor in Student Performance Work
state assessments are designed to measure deep understanding, not just surface-level knowledge. To prepare students classroom formal and informal monitoring strategies need to escalate as students encounter more difficult and complex concepts. The goal is to have all students competent and confident that they can achieve success working at the level of the state assessment.
Building an escalating progress monitoring program as a part of the school data management plan can provide multiple data points on student current status and priority learning/performance needs. Some effective strategies include
- Tiered Questions: Instead of using recall-based questions in classroom formal and informal assessments, develop a tiered structure.
- Tier 1 (Foundational): Questions that check for basic memory, understanding, and key vocabulary (e.g., “Who were the main characters?”).
- Tier 2 (Application & Analysis): Questions that ask students to make connections, compare and contrast, or analyze relationships (e.g., “How did the setting influence the main character’s decisions?”).
- Tier 3 (Evaluation & Synthesis): Questions that challenge students to form opinions, create new solutions, or evaluate outcomes (e.g., “Was the protagonist’s final action justifiable? Support your argument with evidence from the text.”).
- Tiered Assignments: Offer variations of an assignment that address the same core learning standards but provide different levels of complexity and support. For example, when studying a historical event, students could choose from tasks like creating a timeline of key dates (Tier 1), writing a newspaper article from the perspective of someone who lived through it (Tier 2), or developing a policy proposal to prevent a similar event from reoccurring (Tier 3).
- Structural questions: structural questions honor not only the answer but the process of answering. This can include
- identifying the type of question
- identifying key words
- task analysis (recognizing the rubric for proficiency)
- review and revision of responses that were incorrect are not proficient
structural questions provide data points that can inform class and school support programs that are intentional and tightly targeted to priority needs.
- Developmental questions: most teachers don’t realize that one of the best ways to prepare students for a test is to have them develop tests. This can take a number of different forms.
- Creating a divergent collection: given one content area the students develop as many different types of questions as they can using that content. This can lead to including some student developed questions on the class test or having students give their test to another group and then grading their responses
- creating a comprehensive collection: given a unit are semesters work the students identify the learning priorities (concepts and tasks) and develop a unit test that tests the priorities.
- Targeted question development: given one type of question and a body of content the students develop perhaps five questions of that type
current research indicates that teachers can do a good job of teaching content and have students “learn” but fail to perform when they have to use that content. Researchers now emphasize that student work not just teacher work is critical to student success and that part of the teacher work must be escalating student performance by building an escalating teaching/learning environment.
Escalation: how do we determine what is “good enough”
to escalate student engagement in learning work and performing work it is critical that all instructional staff understand the level of rigor in your state’s standards, exit expectations, assessments, and state assessments. This is important because state standards include not only discipline specific goals but also goals that are common to all disciplines (e.g. critical thinking, effective communication, critical reading, etc.). This requires a strategic “unpacking” of state materials relative to the state expectations and assessments.
Determining the Rigor of State Academic Standards
States develop their standardized tests by aligning assessment items with academic standards and curriculum frameworks to ensure that the tests accurately measure the intended knowledge and skills for each grade level. The process typically involves collaboration among educators, subject matter experts, and assessment specialists to create a variety of question formats—such as drag-and-drop activities, hot spot questions, interactive graphing, drop-down menus, and multiple-select items—that reflect real-world applications and appropriate level critical thinking. These tests often include reading passages, mathematical graphing, and science simulations that require students to interact with content in multiple ways. The goal is to produce rigorous assessments that not only evaluate student comprehension but also their ability to apply concepts across subjects, providing a comprehensive measure of learning and readiness for successful transition to the next level.
An analysis of one set of state test specifications yielded the following information. It identified the categories that would appear on the state report, the general genre that would appear on the test, how much of the test would reflect each reporting category, and references to the level of rigor students would have to address. Using one grade 5 language art standard a group of teachers were able to determine that
| Reporting Category | Genre | Percentage of Assessment | Indications of Rigor |
| Key ideas and details | Literature | 15-25% | Reading selections may include grade level selections that include from 300- 800 words Variety of testing formats will be used including electronic formats Readings will be on grade level and will include discipline specific language in test prompts Question values were determined by the rigor and difficulty of the questions |
| Informational | |||
| Craft and structure | Literature | 25-35% | |
| Informational | |||
| Integration of knowledge and ideas | Literature | 20-30% | |
| Informational | |||
| Language and editing: Evaluating correct errors Use grammar rules such as capitalization, punctuation and spelling Language use and conventions | Literature or Informational | 15-25% |
Sometimes states include more information in the materials that they send out to school districts in the state referenced above the following information was included in the state information packet.
| Number of Test Items | Types of Test Items |
| 20 | Selectable Hot Text – 2 |
| Evidence-Based Selected Response [EBSR] – 4 | |
| Graphic Response Display (GRID) – 3 | |
| Multiple-Choice – 3 | |
| Multiple Select – 1 | |
| Open Response – 1 | |
| Drag-and-Drop Hot Text – 1 | |
| Editing Task Choice – 3 | |
| Editing Task – 1 |
This information identifies “power questions” that will appear multiple times on the state test. This enables districts and classrooms to begin structuring district and classroom tests to include all forms of questions that a student might experience on the state test. The goal is to use shaping experiences to build student competence and confidence before they take the test.
Another source of information about the material on the tests that is valuable to district leaders and classroom teachers is the standard expectations list and accompanying curriculum suggestions that is supposed to drive both the content and the level of testing. Working again from the state materials referenced above unpacking the materials surrounding fifth grade reading standard yielded the following test relevant information.
In this case the “unpacking” activity identified a standard, introduced the critical vocabulary that students might have to understand on the test, the tasks that will be embedded in the reading questions, the proficiency levels that students are expected to develop by the time of the test and transition to the next year, and the thinking skills that might be embedded within the reading questions
| Standard | Critical vocabulary | Tasks |
| LA 3.5 | Explicit Meaning Literal Meaning Inference Conclusion Text Phrases Sentences Main Idea Key Idea Central Idea Theme Supporting Details Relevant Details Language Choice Audience Purpose Character Emphatic/ Expressive Language | Identify the main idea Identify supporting details Show how supporting details impact the main idea identify reading strategies included in a text selection Recognize and show how language is used to support the authors purpose Draw an inference or conclusion from reading and support it with references are quotes identify the type of genre represented in a text selection utilize “close” reading or executive processing in real-world and discipline specific selections |
| Elementary grades – Proficiency core competencies | Reading mastered reading basics developed appropriate attitudes and perceptions recognizes impact of word choice/usage independently unlocks initial comprehension independently recognizes subsequent comprehension independently executive processes uses text structures to enhance meaning links text and graphic elements and roles independently engages in recreational reading is proficient in reading to learn is proficient in reading to critique is proficient in reading to perform a task is proficient in linking reading to critical thinking is proficient in editing and revising | Embedded Thinking executive processing recognizing cause-and-effect revising to proficiency task analysis tactical and strategic planning structural editing editing idea development linking visuals and text identifying task and question rubrics |
using a framework that measures cognitive demand, such as Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK) or Bloom’s Taxonomy or more recent work by Shanahan and Marciano. Schools can then map the level of the operational verbs used in the standards. Are students being asked to “identify” and “describe” (lower rigor), or are they expected to “analyze,” “evaluate,” “critique,” and “synthesize” (higher rigor)? This analysis identifies the extent deep learning and helps identify areas of curriculum redone to increase cognitive demand.
This also makes it possible to conduct an academic “audit” that can be used to determine the appropriateness of existing classroom materials and technologies, lesson planning models, unit planning models and assessment development. It can be the link connecting all of the curricula found in the classroom – i.e. the expected curriculum (state standards), the school curriculum, the taught curriculum, the learned curriculum, and the successfully used curriculum.
Monitoring Student Progress
successfully escalating rigor requires rethinking student work and effective, targeted data management. Intentional and Responsive teaching demands that both teachers and students know where students are in their learning journey. To monitor their progress as learner and performer as their work escalates, teachers need to utilize a variety of monitoring strategies
- Diagnostic assessments: utilize questioning strategies to determine the point of break down and the cause of breakdown of work that is deemed not proficient. It is the beginning of establishing a culture of revision to proficiency.
- In formal assessments: Use regular, low-stakes assessments like exit tickets, think-pair-share discussions, and quick-writes to gauge understanding in real-time. The insights gained allow you to adjust instruction and provide targeted support immediately.
- Formative Assessments: use quiz and test strategies to determine student progress in limited curriculum areas. They provide information about student strengths and weaknesses a formative experience for students especially when linked to a revised to proficiency activity
- Performance Task Rubrics: provide clear rubrics for quizzes, tests, larger projects, and performance tasks. A well-designed rubric articulates the criteria for success at multiple performance levels, making expectations transparent for students and providing a consistent tool for evaluation and revision to proficiency.
- Data Analysis: Regularly review assessment data with colleagues to identify trends, patterns, and areas where students are struggling. This collaborative analysis can inform instructional planning, professional development needs, and school-wide improvement strategies.
By thoughtfully defining, implementing, and monitoring academic rigor, educators can transform classrooms into dynamic environments that foster intellectual curiosity and equip every student for lifelong success.
About Post Author
