Lisa BrownZach Fletcher
Palmyra Area School DistrictAugust 3, 2011
Goals
Develop an understanding of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in the area of ELA, including the design/organization of the Standards and the appendices
Develop an understanding of the key advances of the CCSS
Examine and discuss the CCSS and their alignment to PA Standards
Review Pennsylvania transition plans/timeline and resources
Consider the impact of the adoption of the CCSS with regard to your teaching
Common Core State Standards
Anticipation GuideFact or Myth???
Overview of the Initiative
State-led and developed common core standards for K-12 in English/language arts and mathematics
Initiative led by Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and National Governors Association (NGA)
Overview of the Initiative
Focus on learning expectations for students, not how students get there
Why do We Need Common Standards? Why Now?
Disparate standards across states
Global competition
Today’s jobs require different skills
States are ready and able for collective action
Why is This Important for Students, Teachers, and Parents?
Prepares students with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in college and work
Ensures consistent expectations regardless of a student’s zip code
Provides educators, parents, and students with clear, focused guideposts
Offers economies of scale
Features of the Standards
Aligned with college and work expectations
Focused and coherent
Include rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order skills
Build upon strengths and lessons of current state standards
Internationally benchmarked
Based on evidence and research
Standards Development Process
College- and career-readiness standards for English/language arts and mathematics developed summer of 2009
Based on the college and career readiness standards, K-12 learning progressions developed
Multiple rounds of feedback from states, teachers, researchers, higher education, and the general public
Final standards released on June 2, 2010
Pennsylvania Timeline
Adopted by State Board on July 1, 2010Professional development and alignment
work for next three school yearsFull implementation of standards by July 1,
2013
Transition TimelineCOMMON CORE ACTIVITIES
YEAR DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITY PDE RESPONSIBILITY
2010/2011
Curriculum and instruction based on the current PA Academic Standards
Common Core transition teams complete alignment study and develop PA Common Core framework
Spring 2011 PSSA based on current eligible content aligned to PA Standards
Continued development of Keystone Exams based on eligible content and completing comparison to the Common Core Standards
Attendance at IU professional development sessions to begin transition planning
Awareness sessions for staff to introduce Common Core Standards
Statewide train the trainer workshops offered to IUs and PLUS Districts to assist districts in understanding CC and implementing Keystone Exams
SAS populated with CC resources (e.g., CC Standards, standards alignment crosswalks, Anchor and Eligible Content alignment)
11
Transition Timeline
TRANSITIONING TO COMMON COREYEAR DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITY PDE RESPONSIBILITY
2011-2012
Curriculum and instruction based on the current PA Academic Standards Ongoing professional development
provided by IUs and supported by PDE to assist districts in understanding Common Core and its focus on college and career ready
Evaluate curricula in English Language Arts and Mathematics through study of the Common Core Standards
12
Transition Timeline
TRANSITIONING TO COMMON CORE
YEAR DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITY PDE RESPONSIBILITY
2012 - 2013
Continue with curriculum rewrites, with July 1, 2013, target date for utilization of Common Core resources
Ongoing IU/PDE professional development to assist districts in Common Core
13
STANDARDS FORENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS
&LITERACY IN HISTORY/SOCIAL STUDIES,
SCIENCE, AND TECHNICAL SUBJECTS
JUNE 2010
PA Standards Aligned Systemhttp://www.pdesas.org
Clear Standards
FairAssessments
CurriculumFramework
Instruction
Materials & Resources
Interventions
StudentAchievement
www.corestandards.org
Design and Organization
Major design goals Align with best evidence on college and career readiness
expectations Build on the best standards work of the states Maintain focus on what matters most for readiness
Design and Organization
Three main sections K−5 (cross-disciplinary) 6−12 English Language Arts 6−12 Literacy in History/Social Studies,
Science, and Technical SubjectsShared responsibility for students’ literacy development
Three appendices• A: Research and evidence; glossary of key terms• B: Reading text exemplars; sample performance tasks• C: Annotated student writing samples
Design and Organization
Four strands Reading (including Reading Foundational Skills) Writing Speaking and Listening Language
An integrated model of literacy
Media requirements blended throughout
Design and Organization
College and Career Readiness (CCR) anchor standards Broad expectations consistent across grades and content areas Based on evidence
about college and
workforce training
expectations Range and content
Design and Organization
K−12 standardsGrade-specific end-of-
year expectationsDevelopmentally
appropriate, cumulative progression of skills and understandings
One-to-one correspondence with CCR standards
Reading
Comprehension (standards 1−9) Standards for reading literature and informational texts Strong and growing across-the-curriculum emphasis on
students’ ability to read and comprehend informational texts Aligned with NAEP Reading framework
Range of reading and level of text complexity(standard 10, Appendices A and B) “Staircase” of growing text complexity across grades High-quality literature and informational texts in a range
of genres and subgenres
Reading Foundational Skills
Four categories (standards 1−4) Print concepts (K−1) Phonological awareness (K−1) Phonics and word recognition (K−5) Fluency (K−5)
• Not an end in and of themselves• Differentiated instruction
Writing
Writing types/purposes (standards 1−3) Writing arguments Writing informative/explanatory texts Writing narratives
Strong and growing across-the-curriculum emphasis on students writing arguments and informative/explanatory texts
Aligned with NAEP Writing framework
Writing
Production and distribution of writing (standards 4−6) Developing and strengthening writing Using technology to produce and enhance writing
Research (standards 7−9) Engaging in research and writing about sources
Range of writing (standard 10) Writing routinely over various time frames
Speaking and Listening
Comprehension and collaboration (standards 1−3) Day-to-day, purposeful academic talk in one-on-one,
small-group, and large-group settings
Presentation of knowledge and ideas (standards 4−6) Formal sharing of information and concepts,
including through the use of technology
Language
Conventions of standard EnglishKnowledge of language (standards 1−3) Using standard English in formal writing and speaking Using language effectively and recognizing language varieties
Vocabulary (standards 4−6) Determining word meanings and word nuances Acquiring general academic and domain-specific words and
phrases
ELA Key Advances
Reading Balance of literature and informational texts Text complexity
Writing Emphasis on argument and
informative/explanatory writing Writing about sources
ELA Key AdvancesSpeaking and Listening Inclusion of formal and informal talkLanguage Stress on general academic and domain-specific
vocabularyStandards for reading and writing in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects Complement rather than replace content standards
in those subjects Responsibility of teachers in those subjects
Intentional Design Limitations
What the Standards do NOT define: How teachers should teach All that can or should be taught The nature of advanced work beyond the core The interventions needed for students well
below grade level The full range of support for English language
learners and students with special needs Everything needed to be college- and career-
ready
• Level 1: Recall and Reproduction
• Level 2: Skills & Concepts• Level 3: Strategic Thinking• Level 4: Extended Thinking
Webb’s Four Levels of Cognitive Complexity
Webb’s DOK
DEFINITIONS
1.0 Student recalls facts, information, procedures, or definitions.
2.0 Student uses information, conceptual knowledge, and procedures.
3.0Student uses reasoning and develops a plan or sequence of steps;
process has some complexity.
4.0Student conducts an investigation, needs time to think and process
multiple conditions of problem or task.
32
“Extending the length of an activity alone does not
necessarily create rigor!”
DOK 3- Describe a model that you might use to represent the relationships that exist within the rock cycle. (requires deep understanding of rock cycle and a determination of how best to represent it)
DOK 2- Describe the difference between metamorphic and igneous rocks. (requires cognitive processing to determine the differences in the two rock types)
DOK 1- Describe three characteristics of metamorphic rocks. (simple recall)
Same verb—three DOK levels
DOK Level 1 Task
Identify the main points of the text Penguin Chick.
35
DOK Level 2 Task
Imagine that a friend has asked you what Penguin Chick is about. In four or five sentences, write a summary of the story.
36
DOK Level 3 Task
Compare and contrast the main points of the text Penguin Chick to the main points of the text Penguins On Parade.
37
DOK Level 4 Task
Relate the main points of the text, Penguin Chick, to a real world/current situation.
38
Your Turn - DOK 1, 2, 3, or 4• Identify and summarize the major events, problems, solutions, conflicts in a literary text.
• Locate or recall facts explicitly found in text.
• Explain, generalize or connect ideas, using supporting evidence from a text or source. • List the characters in the story. • Predict a logical outcome based on information in a reading selection. • Gather, analyze, organize, and interpret information from multiple (print and non print sources) to draft a reasoned report.
Common Core Curriculum Maps - ELA
http://commoncore.org/maps/
Common Core’s Curriculum Maps in English Language Arts translate the new Common Core State Standards for Kindergarten through 12th grade into unit maps that teachers can use to plan their year, craft their own more detailed curriculum, and create lesson plans. They were written by public school teachers for public school teachers and are available free of charge to anyone who would like to use them. The maps are flexible and adaptable, yet they address every standard in the CCSS. Any teacher, school, or district that chooses to follow the Common Core maps can be confident that they are adhering to the standards. A 2011 edition of the maps is available for a nominal yearly fee.
40
40
Palmyra Area School District
How do we handle the incorporation of the CCSS?
Initial steps – Elementary Scope & Sequence; 9th & 10th grade English courses
Suggestions for “spreading the word”?