Transcript Slide 1
Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts Vertical Articulation at a Glance 2 3 Common Core State Standards Our goals for today… Participants will… • • • • • Review their previous experiences with the CCSS Deepen their understanding of the vertical articulation of the standards Deconstruct a standard and begin to evaluate its rigor as defined by Hess’s Cognitive Rigor matrix Consider implications for their work Review resources and coming events 4 Current WA Standards (GLEs) – Grades K-10 Writing Reading Communication (includes Speaking and Listening) Common Core ELA Standards – Grades K-12 Reading Speaking and Listening Writing Language Media & Tech ELA Common Core Standards 5 The ELA Document Structure Introduction page 10 • K-5 page 11 • Reading • Foundational Skills • Writing • Speaking and Listening • Language Appendices A, B, C • 6-12 page 35 • Reading • Writing • Speaking and Listening • Language • Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6 College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for ELA College and Career Readiness (CCR) Standards – Overarching standards for each of four ELA strands that are further defined by grade-specific standards • Reading - 10 • Writing - 10 • Speaking and Listening - 6 • Language - 6 7 What is Vertical Articulation Vertical alignment asks: How are the content standards/objectives related from one year/grade to the next? Knowledge or skills extend to a wider range of content Deeper understanding of the (cognitive process) for same content New content or skills 8 Example of Grade-Level Progression in Reading CCSS Reading Standard 3: Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text. Quality of Content Alignment Content standards are clearly articulated across grades if: Related standards are clearly differentiated. What new knowledge or skill is required? Differences in terminology are explained. One or both standards may not be described in sufficient detail. Terminology Different words for the same skill? The meaning of terms appears to be expanded. 9 10 Bloom’s Taxonomy Labels the type of thinking (verbs) needed to complete a task; tracing the verbs reveals a deepening of the cognitive processes through a standard from K-12. This is important because… Task Predicts Performance CONTENT TASK TEACHER Elevate the cognitive demand of the task, and you elevate the performance. STUDENT Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy Taxonomy of cognitive objectives 1950s- developed by Benjamin Bloom Means of qualitatively expressing different kinds of thinking Adapted for classroom use as a planning tool and continues to be one of the most universally applied models Provides a way to organize thinking skills into six levels, from the most basic to the higher order levels of thinking 1990s- Lorin Anderson (former student of Bloom) revisited the taxonomy, and as a result, a number of changes were made (Pohl, 2000, Learning to Think, Thinking to Learn, pp. 7-8) A Comparison Original Revised Evaluation Creating Synthesis Evaluating Analysis Analyzing Application Applying Comprehension Knowledge Understanding Remembering (Based on Pohl, 2000, Learning to Think, Thinking to Learn, p. 8) 14 Cognitive process Verbs Associated with Level/Process 1. Remembering: Retrieving, recognizing, and recalling relevant knowledge from long-term memory choose, define describe, find, identify, label, list, locate, match, name, recall, recite, recognize, record, relate, retrieve, say, select, show, sort, tell 2. Understanding: Constructing meaning from oral, written, and graphic messages through interpreting, exemplifying, classifying, summarizing, inferring, comparing, and explaining. categorize, clarify, classify, compare, conclude, construct, contrast, demonstrate, distinguish, explain, illustrate, interpret, match, paraphrase, predict, represent, reorganize, summarize, translate, understand 3. Applying: Carrying out or using a procedure through executing, or implementing. apply, carry out, construct, develop, display, execute, illustrate, implement, model, solve, use 4. Analyzing: Breaking material into constituent parts, determining how the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose through differentiating, organizing, and attributing. analyze, ascertain, attribute, connect, deconstruct, determine, differentiate, discriminate, dissect, distinguish, divide, examine, experiment, focus, infer, inspect, integrate, investigate, organize, outline, reduce, solve (a problem), test for 5. Evaluating: Making judgments based appraise, assess, award, check, conclude, on criteria and standards through convince, coordinate, criticize, critique, checking and critiquing. defend, detect, discriminate, evaluate, judge, justify, monitor, prioritize, rank, recommend, support, test, value 6. Creating: Putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganizing elements into a new pattern or structure through generating, planning, or producing. adapt, build, compose, construct, create, design, develop, elaborate, extend, formulate, generate, hypothesize, invent, make, modify, plan, produce, originate, refine, transform Bloom’s Taxonomy Levels 15 Back-mapping the ELA CCSS Starting with college and career readiness Standards Working etc. for each grade level are identified backward from grade 11-12 to 9-10 to 8 Establishes a clear, aligned K-12 pathway, linking elementary, middle, high school, and end-of-high school college and career readiness 16 Analyzing the Standards READING STANDARDS FOR LITERATURE Key Ideas and Details College and Career Ready Anchor Standards #1: Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text. Grade 11-12 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain. Grade 9-10 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text. Grade 8 Cite the textual evidence that most strongly supports an analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text. Grade 7 Cite several pieces of textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text. Grade 6 Cite textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text. Grade 5 Quote accurately from a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. Grade 4 Refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. Grade 3 Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers. Grade 2 Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text. Grade 1 Ask and answer questions about key details in a text. Grade K With prompting and support, ask and answer questions about key details in a text. 17 Your turn… With a partner, choose a standard Highlight the additions of the grade level standard as it progresses from Kindergarten toward College and Career Ready Anchor Standards (CCRS) 18 When you have finished: Using the standard you have highlighted. Underline the key concepts important nouns or noun phrases Circle the verbs describing skills required of students 19 Summary Statement Example: Anchor standard 1 is about argumentative writing and the components needed in a logical argument. It emphasizes: Writing sound arguments Sufficient supporting evidence Valid reasoning The need to read critically Analysis of substantive topics/text Cognitive Rigor Matrix by Karin Hess Combines Bloom’s Taxonomy with Webb’s Depth of Knowledge framework. A tool for: Designing units of study that have a range of cognitive demand. Assessing tasks for the thinking they require of a student The Cognitive Rigor Matrix Depth + thinking Level 1 Recall & Reproduction Remember - Recall, locate basic facts, details, events Understand Level 2 Skills & Concepts Level 3 - Select appropriate words to use when intended meaning is clearly evident - Specify, explain relationships - summarize – identify main ideas - Explain, generalize, or connect ideas using supporting evidence (quote, example…) - Explain how concepts or ideas specifically relate to other content domains or concepts Apply - Use language structure (pre/suffix) or word relationships (synonym/antonym) to determine meaning – Use context to identify meaning of word - Obtain and interpret information using text features - Use concepts to solve non-routine problems - Devise an approach among many alternatives to research a novel problem Analyze - Identify whether information is contained in a graph, table, etc. – Compare literary elements, terms, facts, events – analyze format, organization, & text structures - Analyze or interpret author’s craft (literary devices, viewpoint, or potential bias) to critique a text – Analyze multiple sources - Analyze complex/abstract themes – Cite evidence and develop a logical argument for conjectures - Evaluate relevancy, accuracy, & completeness of information - Synthesize information within one source or text - Synthesize information across multiple sources or texts Evaluate Create - Brainstorm ideas about a topic - Generate conjectures based on observations or prior knowledge Strategic Thinking/ Reasoning Level 4 Extended Thinking 22 Nature Of Content Alignment Applying Webb’s Alignment Constructs 1. Categorical Concurrence What content is new? What content is continued? 2. Range of Content Broadening or generalizing knowledge/skills 3. Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Webb DOK ratings are somewhat grade-specific 4. Balance of Representation How does content emphasis vary across grades? 5. Source of Challenge What needs to be clarified about the standards? 23 Implications What kinds of statements can you make regarding the vertical articulation of the standard you analyzed? Use the cognitive rigor matrix to assist you. What are the similarities and differences in your current expectations for students with those of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS)? 24 What instructional shifts do you see? As a result of your work today, what specific impact will the Common Core State Standards have on your lesson planning, assessment and teaching practices? In what ways will you shift your instruction as an individual, grade level, department, building or district. 25 What we have done today… 26 Standard to Practice Deconstructed Identified the verbs Highlighted words/phrases defined or interpreted Examined the vertical alignment and identified the context Examined the horizontal alignment and identified the context Determined whether one item/activity can address the entire standard Described something in your curriculum that aligned to the standard 27 Next steps? 28 Standard to Practice Begin with the Common Core State Standards, then consider what you already have and do. Determine whether you address: all or part of the standards in your curriculum, whether your practice occurs at the same grade level as the standard, and whether you currently have any data to evaluate effectiveness of instruction relative to that practice Resources 29 30 Grade Level One-Pagers created by teachers in Washington State See the Resource page for the link to these documents. 31 Resources for Implementation ELA overview documents (one-pagers) as connected with WA standards: http://k12.wa.us/CoreStandards/Transition.aspx#ELAGradeLevel Publisher’s Criteria in ELA and Literacy: http://k12.wa.us/CoreStandards/Resources.aspx Alignments cross-walk documents: http://k12.wa.us/CoreStandards/Transition.aspx#Analyses Parent Resource Guides: http://www.pta.org/4446.htm 32 For More Information • • Common Core Website: http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards Common Core Questions: – – • Email: [email protected] OR Greta Bornemann, OSPI CCSS Project Director, E-mail: [email protected] Hunt Institute Videos – – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IGD9oLofks&feat ure=player_detailpage (overview) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jt_2jI010WU&feat ure=related (writing) Thank you. [email protected]