Transcript Model Content Framework Chart

The PARCC Model Content Frameworks
English Language Arts/Literacy
Grades 3-11
Version 2.0—August 2012
Common Core State Standards for
ELA/Literacy
• Introduction
• College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards
–
–
–
–
Reading
Writing
Speaking and Listening
Language
• Grade-Specific Standards
– K-5 ELA/Literacy
– 6-12 ELA6-12 History/Social Studies, Science, & Technical Subjects
• Appendices
Key Shifts in ELA/Literacy
• Complexity
– Regular practice with complex text and its academic
vocabulary
• Evidence
– Reading and Writing grounded in evidence from text
• Knowledge
– Building knowledge from content-rich nonfiction and
informational texts
CCSS Goal:
All Students College and Career Ready
What capacities should literate
college- and career-ready students
exhibit by the time they graduate from
high school?
CCSS Goal:
All Students College and Career Ready
• Demonstrate independence
• Build strong content knowledge
• Adjust communication for audience, task, purpose, and
discipline
• Comprehend as well as critique
• Value evidence
• Employ technology and digital media strategically and capably
• Understand other perspectives and cultures
CCSS, Introduction, p. 7
Changes in Classroom Practice
Teacher-centered
Student-centered
Discrete lessons
Connected lessons for
deep learning on a topic
Use texts to gain deep
understanding
Communicate
understanding about
topics orally and in writing
Teach isolated texts
Test over the text
Purposes for the PARCC Model Content Frameworks
• To serve as a bridge between the Common Core State
Standards and the PARCC Assessment System by
– Supporting implementation of the Common Core State
Standards
• Reflects integrated and iterative nature of the CCSS
• Reflects key shifts of the CCSS
• Supports shared responsibility for literacy development
– Informing development of item specifications and blueprints
for the PARCC assessments
Purposes for the PARCC Model Content Frameworks
• To serve as one model for teachers, curriculum directors,
and administrators
– Grades 3-5 ELA/Literacy across all content areas
– Grades 6-11 ELA with foundational ideas for literacy
instruction in History/Social Studies, Science, and
Technical Subjects
A Model for Curriculum Developers and Teachers
• Illustrates one way of organizing the content of the standards over the
course of the school year
• Reflects the key shifts in the standards
• Provides insight into the development of the PARCC Assessment System
• Presents standards in an integrated and iterative fashion
• Weaves standards into modules that progressively develop student
understanding
• Focuses on essential knowledge, skills, and understandings that students
must develop for college and career readiness
Note: The Frameworks are NOT a complete guide for curriculum.
A Bridge to the PARCC Assessment System
CCSS Key Shifts
PARCC Major Claims
• Regular practice with complex
texts and its academic
vocabulary
• Reading and writing grounded
in evidence from text
• Building knowledge from
content-rich nonfiction and
informational texts
• Read and comprehend a range
of sufficiently complex texts
independently
• Write effectively when using
and/or analyzing sources
• Build and present knowledge
through research and the
integration, comparison, and
synthesis of ideas
An Aligned System
Common Core State Standards
Model Content Frameworks
Model Instructional Lessons/Units
PARCC Assessment System
Overview of the
PARCC Model Content Frameworks
• Consists of two major sections
– Introduction
– Grade-specific frameworks, Grades 3-11
• Available as PDF or searchable electronic version at
http://www.parcconline.org/
• Definition of terms available on the electronic
version
PARCC Model Content Frameworks
Introduction
Connections to the PARCC Assessment System
• Supports PARCC Assessment System through
–
–
–
–
–
Reading complex texts
Writing effectively when using and/or analyzing sources
Conducting and reporting on research
Speaking and listening
Language use for reading, writing, and speaking
• Places emphasis on regular opportunities to
– Grapple with close, analytic reading of grade-level complex texts
– Construct increasingly sophisticated responses in writing
Structure of Grade-Level Frameworks
Grade-Level Frameworks divided into four sections
• Narrative Summary of the ELA Standards
• The Model Content Framework Chart
• Key Terms and Concepts for the Model Content Framework
Chart
• Writing and Speaking and Listening Standards Progressions
Charts
Model Content Framework Chart
• Provides educators flexibility to order the modules and
content within modules to suit purposes and needs
• Knowledge and skills embedded across 4 modules
address ALL the standards for each grade level; therefore,
order of the 4 modules is not critical
• What changes throughout the modules
– Focus and Emphasis on types of texts read and written
• What remains constant throughout the modules
– Cultivation of students’ literacy skills in preparation for college
and career readiness and PARCC assessments
Key Terms and Concepts for the
Model Content Frameworks Chart
Provides explanation of elements within
Framework Chart
• Elements play a key role within CCSS
• Elements reflect critical emphasis within PARCC
Assessment System
NOT intended to limit the types of texts
educators may use
Key Terms and Concepts for the
Model Content Framework Chart
•
•
•
•
Reading complex texts
Writing to texts
Research project
For reading and writing in each module
–
–
–
–
Cite evidence and analyze content
Understand and apply grammar
Understand and apply vocabulary
Conduct discussions and report findings
• Foundational reading skills (grades 3-5)
Reading Complex Text
• Model Content Frameworks highlight close, sustained
analysis of complex text
– Includes all students, struggling reader to advanced
– Linked to significant gains in reading proficiency
• A key component in college and career readiness
• Overlapping in complexity while spiraling to more
complex text, with appropriate scaffolding
• Builds content knowledge through comparison and
synthesis of ideas across multiple texts
* Apply a text complexity tool to determine complexity
Three Measures of Text Complexity
Websites with Text Complexity Resources
• Common Core State Standards
– Appendix A
– Supplemental Information for Appendix A
• Student Achievement Partners
– Text Complexity Collections(qualitative and grade-band quantitative tools)
• Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
– Text Complexity: Qualitative Measures Rubric
• PARCC Text Complexity Tools
– Literary Complexity Analysis Worksheet
– Informational Text Analysis Worksheet
Close Reading of Complex Texts
• A thorough and methodical examination of meaning
through deliberate reading and rereading
• Close reading and gathering knowledge from specific
texts must be at the heart of classroom activities,
reflecting on
– meanings of individual words and sentences
– the order in which sentences unfold
– the development of ideas over the course of the text
Close Reading of Complex Texts
• Aligned curriculum should explicitly direct students
to re-read challenging portions of the text
• Multiple readings allow students to glean
information, gather evidence, and build knowledge
• Full comprehension of individual texts aids in
comparison and synthesis of multiple sources
Text-Dependent Questions
• High-quality sequences of text-dependent questions
– Cultivate mastery of the specifics of what a text says explicitly
– Draw inferences based on evidence in a text and make valid claims
– Make comparisons with other texts and synthesize information across
texts to build knowledge about a topic
• Cite specific evidence when offering an oral or written
interpretation of a text (arguments, explanations, analyses)
• Do not require information or evidence from outside the text
or texts; focus is on the text or comparisons between texts
Writing to Texts
• Generates a deeper understanding of a text or topic
• Reflects the emphasis to write effectively and proficiently
• Focuses shifts from narratives in lower grades to analytical
writing (arguments, informational)
• Includes a variety of writing
– routine writing for comprehension and building writing skills
– analytical writing to advance an argument or explain an idea
– narrative stories and descriptions
Narrative Writing
Narrative Story
• Real or imagined situations
• Uses time as its structure
• Includes creative fiction,
memoirs, anecdotes,
biographies, and
autobiographies
Narrative Description
• Creates a vivid impression of a
person, phenomenon, event,
or procedure
• In history/social studies, might
include descriptions about
individuals and events
• In sciences, might include
descriptions of step-by-step
procedures of investigations so
others can replicate and test
results
Research Project
• Build, integrate, and deepen knowledge on a
topic
• Connect to texts selected for close reading
• Read, compare, and synthesize ideas across
multiple texts
• Gather additional information
• Present findings in formal and informal contexts
For Reading and Writing in Each Module
Knowledge and Skills
• Cite evidence and analyze
content
• Understand and apply
grammar
• Understand and apply
vocabulary
• Conduct discussions and
report findings
• For grades 3-5, acquire and
develop foundational reading
skills
Connections to Standards
• Explanation of the
knowledge and skills that
connect and support the
standards related to
reading, writing, and
research
• Critical to building content
knowledge
Writing and Speaking and Listening Progressions Charts
PARCC Model Content Frameworks
Grade-Level Frameworks
Key Changes from Grade to Grade
•
•
•
•
•
•
Rigor of the CCSS Standards
Complexity of texts
Number of short texts read as well as emphasis of text types
Number of analyses and narratives written
Research demands
More specific and detailed evidence to support claims and
topics
• Deeper understanding of content
• Increased ability to communicate knowledge effectively in
writing and speaking, using academic and domain-specific
vocabulary and language
A System of
Instruction and Assessments
Aligned to the
Common Core State Standards
Evidence-Centered Design in the Classroom
• Claims
– inferences about what students should be able to do
– aligned to standards
• Evidence
–
–
–
–
–
supports claims
drawn from student work
formal and informal
formative and summative
aligned to standards
• Tasks
– classroom activities designed to elicit evidence
– aligned to standards
*Supports the PARCC Assessment System
Backward Planning Curriculum Tools that Support
Evidence-Centered Design
• Literacy Design Collaborative, Grades 4-12
– Modules begin with a CCSS-related Performance Task
• Understanding by Design, Grades K-College
– Units begin with Transfer Goals, Understandings, & Essential
Questions
• PARCC Model Content Frameworks, Grades 3-11
– Modules begin with a Research Project
– Covers the full range of standards, recommended in each
module
– Supports the iterative nature of the CCSS as well as its key shifts
in learning and PARCC Major Claims
Curriculum Design to Build Content Knowledge
• Units/Modules on topics/themes worth learning
• Authentic and relevant topics worth researching
• Analyses worth writing
• Questions worth answering
• A range of grade-level texts worth reading
• Assessment opportunities for gathering evidence to
determine weaknesses, gaps in learning, and evaluating
performance
Role of the Tri-State Rubric in Supporting
High-Quality Modules/Units
• Builds capacity of educators in determining
quality and alignment to the CCSS
• Uses clear, descriptive criteria in four dimensions
to review and evaluates multi-day lessons or
modules/units
• Encourages collegial review, by applying a
common language for reviewing and evaluating
lessons or modules/units
Evidence-Centered Design in the PARCC Summative Assessment
• Claims
– Master Claim, Major Claims, Sub-claims
– inferences about what students should be able to do
– aligned to standards-based evidence statements
• Evidence
– supports claims
– drawn from writing arguments (opinions-grades 3-5), informative/explanatory
texts, and narratives
– aligned to standards-based evidence statements
• Tasks
– Literary Analysis Task, Narrative Task, Research Simulation Task
– aligned to the standards-based evidence statements
* Also includes a non-summative Speaking & Listening Task.
** Non-summative components to be developed (Diagnostic Tool and Mid-year Assessment)
***Supports the CCSS Key shifts in learning
PARCC’s Core Commitments to
ELA/Literacy Assessment Quality
Texts Worth Reading: The assessments will use authentic texts worthy of
study instead of artificially produced or commissioned passages.
Questions Worth Answering: Sequences of questions that draw students
into deeper encounters with texts will be the norm (as in an excellent
classroom), rather than sets of random questions of varying quality.
Better Standards Demand Better Questions: Instead of reusing existing
items, PARCC will develop custom items to the Standards.
Fidelity to the Standards (now in Teachers’ hands): PARCC evidences are
rooted in the language of the Standards so that expectations remain the
same in both instructional and assessment settings.
Texts Worth Reading
• Range: Reading across the disciplines and helping to satisfy
the split of informational text to literature at each grade band.
• Quality: The passages include content-rich literature and
informational texts.
• Complexity: Quantitatively and qualitatively, the passages
have been validated and deemed suitable for use at each
grade level.
Every Question Requires Supporting Evidence
Students’ Command of Evidence with Complex Texts is at the
Core of Every Part of the Assessment!
SO. . .
Two standards are always in play—whether they be reading or
writing items, selected-response or constructed-response items
on any one of the four components of PARCC. They are:
 Reading Standard One (Use of Evidence)
 Reading Standard Ten (Complex Texts)
Three Innovative Item Types
Evidence-Based Selected Response (EBSR)—Combines a traditional selectedresponse question with a second selected-response question that asks
students to show evidence from the text that supports the answer they
provided to the first question. Underscores the importance of Reading Anchor
Standard 1 for implementation of the CCSS.
Technology-Enhanced Constructed Response (TECR)—Uses technology to
capture student comprehension of texts in authentic ways that have been
difficult to score by machine for large scale assessments (e.g., drag and drop,
cut and paste, shade text, move items to show relationships).
Range of Prose Constructed Responses (PCR)—Elicits evidence that students
have understood a text or texts they have read and can communicate that
understanding well both in terms of written expression and knowledge of
language and conventions. There are four of these items on each annual
performance-based assessment.
PARCC Performance-Based Assessment
with EBSR, TECR, and PCR Items
The Performance-Based Assessment consists of three
types of tasks:
Literary Analysis Task
Narrative Task
Research Simulation Task
Understanding the Literary Analysis Task
• Students carefully consider two literary texts worthy of
close study.
• Students are asked to answer a few EBSR and TECR
questions about each text to demonstrate their ability
to do close analytic reading and to compare and
synthesize ideas.
• Students write a literary analysis about the two texts.
Understanding the Narrative Writing Task
• Students read one brief text and answer a few
questions to help clarify their understanding of the text.
• Students then write either a narrative story or a
narrative description (e.g., writing a historical account
of important figures; detailing a scientific process;
describing an account of events, scenes, or objects).
Understanding the Research Simulation Task
Session 1: Students will
• Read an anchor text that introduces the topic and answer EBSR and
TECR items to gather key details and to support their understanding.
• Write a summary or short analysis of the piece.
Session 2: Students will
• Read two additional sources (one may include a multimedia text)
and answer a EBSR and TECR questions to show their reading
comprehension.
• Mirror the research process by synthesizing their understandings
into an analytic essay, using textual evidence the sources.
Understanding the End-of-Year Assessment
• Students will be given several passages to read closely.
• EBSR and TECR questions will be sequenced in a way that they
– will draw students into deeper encounters with the texts and
– will result in thorough comprehension of the concepts to provide
models for the regular course of instruction.
• Questions will draw on higher order skills such as
– critical reading and analysis,
– the comparison and synthesis of ideas within and across texts, and
– determining the meaning of words and phrases in context.
Big Changes
•
•
•
•
•
•
Content Knowledge Needed for Some Teachers
Pedagogical Practices of Teachers
Administrators’ Expectations of Teachers
Teacher Education Programs
Professional Development
Policy Changes
Achieving Connected Learning
•
•
•
•
The PARCC Model Content Frameworks support
connected learning aligned to the CCSS by
Being an integral part of an aligned system of
curriculum, instruction, and assessment
Helping educators gain a deeper understanding of the
CCSS and PARCC Assessment System
Encouraging collaboration across the content areas
Ensuring that the full range of CCSS are included when
developing curriculum and instruction
Resources
Video recording of the presentation by writers of the PARCC
Model Content Frameworks and Achieve
August 2012
•http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaKeiJNRQiw
Model Content Frameworks
•http://parcconline.org/parcc-model-content-frameworks
Item Prototypes
•http://parcconline.org/samples/item-task-prototypes
Resources
Arkansas’s Big Shifts
•http://ccssarkansas.pbworks.com/w/page/414
48809/ADE-Common-Core-State-Standards(CCSS)-Wiki-Homepage
Resources for Text Complexity
Qualitative Dimensions of Text Complexity
CCSS, Appendix A, pg. 6
•http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_A.pdf
Supplemental Information for Appendix A
Text Complexity Measures (pg. 4)
Qualitative Dimensions Tool (pg. 6)
•http://www.corestandards.org/assets/E0813_Appendix_A_New_Rese
arch_on_Text_Complexity.pdf
Resources for Text Complexity
Text Complexity Collections
Quantitative Tools (including links)
Qualitative Tools (including grade-band tools)
•http://www.achievethecore.org/steal-these-tools/text-complexity
Text Complexity: Qualitative Measures Rubric
Informational Texts
Literary Texts
•http://groups.ascd.org/resource/documents/122463CCSS_Text_Complexity_webinar_handout_3.pdf
Resources for Text Complexity
PARCC Text Complexity Tools
Literary Complexity Analysis Worksheet
Informational Text Analysis Worksheet
•Final documents coming Spring 2013 to
http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-assessment
•Currently, drafts can be accessed through
http://www.parcconline.org/Procurement, Solicitations: RFP
Try-out. Then follow the link to
http://www.in.gov/idoa/proc/bids/RFP-13-29/, and download
Appendix A.
ADE Professional Development for ELA/Literacy
Disciplinary Literacy Overview
Close Reading of Complex Text
Tri-State Quality Review Rubric for ELA/Literacy
•http://ideas.aetn.org/commoncore/englishlanguage-arts
Contact Information
•
Dr. Tracy Tucker, Director, Curriculum & Instruction
– [email protected]
– 501-682-7442
•
Melody Morgan, Director, Student Assessment
– [email protected]
– 501-682-4558
•
Dana Breitweiser, ELA, Student Assessment & Curriculum
– [email protected]
– 501-683-0914
•
Sherri Thorne, ELA, Curriculum & Instruction
– [email protected]
– 501-683-6285