New Jersey DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Standards Review Recommendations January 11, 2016.

New JerseyDEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Standards Review Recommendations

January 11, 2016


Proposal Outline1. Background

2. Community Involvement

3. Committee Work

4. High Level Revisions

5. Proposed Revision to Naming

6. Timelines

1


In May, Governor Christie called on the New Jersey Department of Education to review New Jersey’s Core Curriculum Content Standards in English language arts and mathematics to develop higher standards that reflect the educational needs and goals of our communities.

2


New Jersey StandardsThe New Jersey Department of Education proposes a standards review process led by professional New Jersey educators that results in the best New Jersey standards for students. New Jersey has a strong history of standards and our review process will build upon the rigor and academic success of our standards in the past.

The following principles will guide this local review:

1. Consistency: The standards review will be consistent with the regulatory process of the State Board.

2. Focus on the standards: The review process will focus on the New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards.

3. Improve what exists today rather than start from scratch: The review process will improve the New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards in English language arts and mathematics based on NJ expert review and revisions.

4. Public input: The review process will include opportunities for public comment on each standard.

3


Standards Review• Academic Standards define what a student should

know and be able to do at a specified grade; standards are not curriculum, textbooks, or lesson plans.• New Jersey has a rich history of academic standards• Over the last 6 months, NJDOE has engaged New

Jersey educators in a substantial review of the English language arts and mathematics standards.

4




3. Committee Work



6. Timelines

5


Community Involvement• Standards Surveyo Online survey was available for all stakeholders to

comment standard by standard, grade by grade, and content area by content area

• Listening Tours – 3 regionalo These tours allowed for an open forum for community

members, including parents and members of the business community, to address their concerns about specific standards to inform the work of the committees.

• Community Focus Groups – 3 regionalo These focus groups, made up of parents, business

community members, and higher education leaders, met prior to each regional Listening Tour.

6


Community Involvement (cont.)

• Additional window for written testimony oDue to Back to School Nights, illness, family obligations we

had numerous requests for an opportunity to submit written testimony from those who were unable to attend the listening tour dates.

oWe honored these requests with an additional 2 week window for additional submissions of written testimony.

7




3. Committee Work



6. Timelines

8


Standards Review Committee 26 members Guide process and updatesMake final recommendation to NJSB

SubcommitteesK-2: 22 members3-12 (ELA & Math):28 members each

Standards Committee

K-2 Content Subcommittee

3-12 ELAContent

Subcommittee

3-12 Math Content

Subcommittee

9


Review Process – Phase 1Step Details Date

Public Comment Standards posted on the website for public commentParents, community members, committee members, and educators share their feedback on each individual standard, K-12, ELA and mathematicsConsultants from an independent third party will review public comments and share a report with the committeesListening Tours – Regionally (N,C, S)Parent Focus Groups – Regionally (N,C,S)

•July – Mid-August, 2015 (survey)•September, 2015 (listening tours)

Standards Committee

INITIAL REVIEW

Review public comments Send process recommendations to each content subcommitteeNJDOE staff capture comments and prepare materials

•Mid-August, 2015 – 1 full day meeting

•End August, 2015 – 1 full day joint meeting with each content subcommittee

Content subcommittees

REVIEW AND UPDATES

Review public commentsWork in grade band groups to review standardsNJDOE staff capture recommendations for the Standards Review CommitteeEach subcommittee will provide input on proposed updates

•End August, 2015 – 1 full day joint meeting with Standards Review Committee•Early September, 2015– 1 full day•End September, 2015 – 1 full day•Mid-October, 2015 – 1 full day•End October, 2015 – 1 full day

10


Review Process – Phase 2Step Details Date

Public Comment Update standards and post for public comment •End October, 2015

Standards Committee

FINAL REVIEW

Review public comments , student assessment results, and proposed updates from content subcommitteesCheck for alignment from K-2 and 3-12 subcommitteesFull review of each individual standard and updateDirect subcommittees to review small revisions where required

•Early November, 2015 – 1 full day meeting

Content subcommittees

REVIEW AND UPDATES

Review recommendations based on Standards Committee requestsUpdate proposals

•Mid-November, 2015- 1 full day•End November, 2015 - 1 full day

Standards Committee

FINAL VOTE

The NJDOE prepares final updates based on recommendations from subcommitteesStandards Review Committee reviews final recommendation updates

•Mid-December, 2015 – 1 full day

NJSBE PROPOSAL NJSBOE considers recommended updates to standards •January 6, 2016

11


Committee Meetings

• Standards Review Committee (SRC) – 4 meetingso September, October, November, December

• Sub-Committees – 6 meetingso September (2), October (2), November, December

* Not including work done individually and in small groups.

12




3. Committee Work



6. Timelines

13


Setting the Stage• Committee members reviewed the standards looking for

clarity, coherence, and focus.

• Major themes that arose were as follows:‒ Focus on multiple approaches to learning to read‒ Clarification of standards through examples‒ Coherence across grade levels

14


Major Revisions K – 12 English language arts

• Move Standard RF.2.3.d from grade 2 to grade 1‒ RF.2.3.d: Distinguish long and short vowels when reading

regularly spelled one-syllable words.

15


Major Revisions K – 12 English language arts

• Addition of “self reflection” in K-2 Writing Standards. ‒ W.K.5: With guidance and support from adults, strengthen

writing through response and self reflection utilizing questions and suggestions from peers.

‒ W.1.5: With guidance and support from adults, focus on a topic, respond to questions and suggestions from peers and self reflection, and add details to strengthen writing and ideas as needed.

‒ W.2.5: With guidance and support from adults and peers, focus on a topic and strengthen writing as needed through self reflection, revising and editing.

16


Major Revisions K-12 English language arts

• A major revision to the standards is also reflected in ELA Anchor Standard 1, with the addition of the phrase “and relevant connections.”

‒ CCRA.R1 Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences and relevant connections from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.

17



• The SRC agreed to incorporate language from the American Association of School Librarians into Grade 3-12 ELA standards.oAn example of this is the addition of the phrase “and reflect

on” to the College and Career Ready (CCR) Anchor 9 across all grade levels.

oThe revision was also incorporated into Reading Literature standards 1 and 9 through the phrase “and reflect on (e.g., practical knowledge, historical/cultural context, and background knowledge) central message/theme, lesson and/or moral.”

18



• All grade levels added “with scaffolding as needed” to the CCR Anchor Standard 10 to encourage districts to consider reader and task, qualitative and quantitative measures in text selection for classroom instruction.

‒ CCRA.R10: Read and comprehend complex literary and informational text independently and proficiently with scaffolding as needed.

19



• There was a re-assignment of standards. Reading Literature Standards 4.9 and 5.9 were switched.

20

Current Revised

RL.4.9. Compare and contrast the treatment of similar themes and topics (e.g., opposition of good and evil) and patterns of events (e.g., the quest) in stories, myths, and traditional literature from different cultures.

RL.5.9. Compare, contrast and reflect on (e.g. practical knowledge, historical/cultural context, and background knowledge) stories in the same genre (e.g., mysteries and adventure stories) on their approaches to similar themes and topics.



• Reading Literature Standard 1, grades 9-10, was revised to include the statement “including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain.”

21

Current Revised

RL.9-10.1 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

RL.9-10.1 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence and make relevant connections to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferentially, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain.



• College and Career Ready Anchor Writing Standard 7 was revised as recommended across grade levels. Influenced by the recommendations of the Association of School Librarians, the sub-committee added “an inquiry-based research process.”

‒ CCRA.W7: Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects, utilizing an inquiry-based research process, based on focused questions, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation.

22


Major Revisions K-2 mathematics

• The sub-committee members made appropriate changes to the standards. Revisions to the K-2 mathematics standards focused mostly on examples and word choices. The revisions serve to clarify standards and to provide examples more in line with developmentally appropriate instruction.

23


Major Revisions 3-12 mathematics

• The sub-committee members made appropriate changes to the standards. Revisions to the mathematics standards focused mostly on specific formulae, examples, and word choices. The revisions serve to clarify standards and to provide examples more in line with classroom instruction.

24




3. Committee Work



6. Timelines

25


Current Standard Structure

• New Jersey Core Curriculum Content StandardsoCCSS, NGSS, Social Studies/History, Visual/Performing

Arts, Comprehensive Health and Physical Education, World Languages, 21st Century Life and Careers, and Technology

• Curriculum vs. Standards Confusion

26


Proposed Renaming

• New Jersey Student Learning Standardso English language artsoMathematicso Scienceo Social Studies/HistoryoVisual/Performing ArtsoComprehensive Health and Physical EducationoWorld Languageso 21st Century Life and Careerso Technology

27




3. Committee Work



6. Timelines

28


Implementation Timeline

• Anticipated Adoption May 2016

• District Curriculum Realignment – Fall 2017‒ NJDOE will provide guidance documents,

materials, resources, and training

29


Assessment Timeline• The revised standards adoption will not impact PARCC

for Spring 2016 and the 2016-2017 school year.

• Once the revised standards are adopted, we will be doing a routine assessment audit to ensure alignment.

• These standards revisions are unlikely to significantly impact PARCC moving forward.

30


Approval Process

• January 11, 2016: First Discussion Level Resolution

• February-March 2016: 3 Public Hearings‒ North, Central, and South

• April 2016: Second Discussion Level

• May 2016: Anticipated Adoption Level Resolution

31

Date post:	08-Jan-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	tamsyn-jacobs
View:	215 times
Download:	1 times

New Jersey DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Standards Review Recommendations January 11, 2016.

Documents