Implementing the Common Core State Standards 1 EMILIE

Implementing the Common Core State Standards 1 EMILIE AMUNDSON DPI, ELA CONSULTANT SPRING, 2011

Background Information 2

History of Standards-Led Education 3 1994: Reauthorization of ESEA “Improving America’s Schools Act” (required states to adopt, adapt, or create standards and assessments) 1998: Wisconsin adopted Model Academic Standards (18 subject areas) 2001: NCLB brought accountability for standards-based education to the forefront 2007: Wisconsin begins a deep look at standards revision with partners ADP and P 21 2009: Wisconsin joins the Common Core Initiative 2010: Wisconsin adopts Common Core State Standards

Impetus for the Common Core State Standards 4 Currently, every state has its own set of academic standards, meaning public educated students are learning different content at different rates All students must be prepared to compete with not only their American peers in the next state, but with students around the world This initiative will potentially affect 43. 5 million students which is about 87% of the student population

Development of Common Core State Standards 5 Joint initiative of: Supported by: -Achieve -College Board -ACT -48 States and 3 Territories

What are the Common Core State Standards? 6 “Common Core Standards define the knowledge and skills students should have within their K-12 education careers so that they will graduate high school able to succeed in entry-level, creditbearing academic college courses and in workforce training programs. ” (NGA & CCSSO, 2010) http: //www. corestandards. org/

What’s the Big Deal? 7 The CCSS initiative is a “sea change” in education for teaching and learning! The CCSS mandates the student learning outcomes for every grade level. The CCSS force a common language. Your staff will begin using this language. Students will be tested and instructional effectiveness will be measured based on CCSS. Federal funding is tied to CCSS adoption, implementation, and accountability. English Language Arts and Mathematics CCSS are just the beginning. . . more subject area standards are being developed.

Impact on Stakeholders 8 STUDENTS PARENTS EDUCATORS DISTRICTS STATES

Positive Aspects of Common Core State Standards 9 Equity. Provides equal access to a high quality education Clarity. Explains exactly what students need to know and be able to do Mobility. Helps with transitions between states

Positive Aspects of Common Core State Standards 10 Global. Allows states to align curricula to internationally benchmarked standards Deep. Informs the development of a curriculum that promotes deep understanding for all students Consistent expectations and not dependent on zip code

Positive Aspects of Common Core State Standards 11 Valid Assessments. Assures that what is taught is aligned with assessments including formative, summative, and benchmarking Policies. Provides the opportunity to compare and evaluate policies that artifact students achievement across states and districts

Implementing the Common Core 12 A STATE-WIDE EFFORT!

A Vision for Implementation 13

14

Partnerships for Implementation 15 DPI CESAs Professional Organizations Partnerships Business ECB Administrator Groups Content Groups Multistate IHEs LEAs

Wisconsin’s Vision for Rt. I 16

Opportunities for Collaboration 17 ü Communication ü Professional learning ü Resource development ü Curriculum development ü Formative and benchmark assessments ü Additional resources

Assessing the Common Core 18 17 SMARTER BALANCED ASSESSMENT CONSORTIUM

Assessing the Common Core 19 As a portion of the Race to the Top grant program, USED is funding consortia of states that have committed to developing innovative assessments aligned to the Common Core State Standards.

20 The purpose of the assessment grant is to develop a system that uses technological innovation to provide student achievement data on the Common Core throughout the school year, including the ability to report student achievement above/below grade level. Capable of providing data to measure progress and proficiency throughout the year (i. e. growth and status) May include multiple components (i. e. formative and benchmark)

Assessing the Common Core 21 Wisconsin is a governing state of the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC). DPI staff actively worked on the application for the competitive funding, and will continue to work on all aspects of system planning. WI is one of seven states elected to SBAC Executive Committee. Washington State is the fiscal agent and hosts a SMARTER webpage: http: //www. k 12. wa. us/SMARTER/default. aspx

Assessing the Common Core 22 The SMARTER Assessment System will include Summative test (grades 3 -8 and once in high school) May be taken multiple times during the last three months of the school year Student’s best score is used for accountability Adaptive test platform More precise indication of performance, stronger indicators of growth Address needs of ALL students except for 1%

Assessing the Common Core 23 Balance of item types aligned to the Common Core State Standards Adaptive multiple choice items Technology-enhanced constructed response Extended constructed- response items Performance tasks

24 Formative and Benchmark Assessments An online clearinghouse of formative strategies, resources, and model units of instruction to inform instruction An online adaptive benchmark assessment to track progress throughout the year, before the summative assessment

Content of the Common Core 25 COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS AND LITERACY IN HISTORY/SOCIAL STUDIES, SCIENCE, AND TECHNICAL SUBJECTS

Overview to English Language Arts Standards 26 College and Career Readiness (CCR) Anchor Standards for four strands: Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, Language ▪ Overarching targets (parallel for each grade/ grade band)

Four Strands of English Language Arts Standards and Key Features of Each Strand 27 Reading: Text complexity and growth of comprehension Grades K-5: Literature and Informational Text Grades K-5: Reading Foundational Skills Grades 6 -12: Literature and Informational Text

Four Strands of English Language Arts Standards and Key Features of Each Strand 28 Writing: Text types, responding to reading, and research Speaking and Listening: Flexible communication and collaboration Language: Conventions and vocabulary

Reading Strand 29 Key ideas and details ● Craft and structure ● Integration of knowledge and ideas ● Range of Reading and level of text complexity ●

Example: Key Ideas and Details, Grade 2 30 3. Describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text.

Reading Standards: Foundational Skills (K-5) 31 Print concepts (Grades K – 1) Phonological awareness (Grades K – 1) Phonics and word recognition (Grades K – 5) Fluency (Grades K – 5)

Example: Phonics and Word Recognition, Kindergarten 32 3. Know and apply grade-level phonics and word analysis skills in decoding words. a. Demonstrate basic knowledge of one-to-one letter-sound correspondences by producing the primary or many of the most frequent sound for each consonant. (additional elaboration 3. b - d. )

Writing Strand 33 Text types and purposes Production and distribution of writing Research to build and present knowledge Range of writing

Example: Production and Distribution of Writing, Grade 8 34 6. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing and present the relationships between information and ideas efficiently as well as to interact and collaborate with others.

Speaking and Listening Strand 35 Comprehension and collaboration Presentation of knowledge and ideas

Example: Comprehension and Collaboration, Grade 3 36 1. Engage effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-0 n-one, in groups, and teacher- led) with diverse partners on grade 3 topics and texts, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly. (additional elaboration 1. a. – d. )

Language Strand 37 Conventions of Standard English Knowledge of language Vocabulary acquisition and use

Example: Knowledge of Language, Grades 11 -12 38 3. Apply knowledge of language to understand how language functions in different contexts, to make effective choices for meaning or style, and to comprehend more fully when reading or listening. (additional elaboration 3. a. )

Literacy Standards 39 Common Core Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects Grades 6 -12: Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, & Technical Subjects ▪ Based on CCR Anchor Standards for Reading ▪ Based on CCR Anchor Standards for Writing

40 ▪ Presented as grade bands: 6 -8, 9 -10, 11 -12 ▪ Technical subjects: defined as engineering, technology, business, design, and other workforcerelated subjects; technical aspects of wider fields of study such as art and music

Example: Literacy in History/Social Studies, Integration of Knowledge and Ideas, Grades 9 - 10 41 7. Integrate quantitative or technical analysis (e. g. , charts, research data) with qualitative analysis in print or digital text.

Old to New – English Language Arts “Reading Informational Text” 42 37 1998 to June 2010 (Model June 2010 and Beyond Academic Standard) (Common Core State Standard) 6 th Grade None 8. Trace and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. 8 th Grade Evaluate themes and main ideas of a work considering its audience and purpose 2. Determine a central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text, including its relationship to supporting ideas; provide an objective summary of the text. Has many interpretations More Specific

Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity 43 n Text complexity is defined by: n n n Qualitative dimensions Quantitative dimensions Reader and task considerations

Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity 44 Qualitative dimensions of text complexity Levels of meaning or purpose Structure Language conventionality and clarity Knowledge demands Only measureable by an attentive human reader

Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity 45 Quantitative dimensions of text complexity Word length or frequency Sentence length Text cohesion Typically measured by computer software

Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity 46 Reader and task considerations Variables specific to particular readers (such as motivation, knowledge, and experiences) Variables specific to particular tasks (such as purpose and the complexity of the task assigned and the questions posed) Measured by teachers employing their professional judgment, experience, and knowledge of their students and the subject

Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity 47 Measured by: Attentive human reader Computer software Teacher judgment, experience, and knowledge of their students and the subject

48 Reading standards include exemplar texts (stories and literature, poetry, and informational texts) that illustrate level of complexity by grade and includes sample performance tasks based on specific standards

Common Core State Standards 49 Reading – Fourth Grade Example Students compare and contrast a firsthand account of African American ballplayers in the Negro Leagues to a secondhand account of their treatment found in books such as Kadir Nelson’s We Are the Ship: The Story of Negro League Baseball, attending to the focus of each account and the information provided by each. [RI. 4. 6]

Common Core State Standards 50 Reading – Eighth Grade Example Students analyze Walt Whitman’s “O Captain! My Captain!” to uncover the poem’s analogies and allusions. They analyze the impact of specific word choices by Whitman, such as rack and grim, and determine how they contribute to the overall meaning and tone of the poem. [RL. 8. 4]

Common Core State Standards 51 Reading – Tenth Grade Example Students analyze how Abraham Lincoln in his “Second Inaugural Address” unfolds his examination of the ideas that led to the Civil War, paying particular attention to the order in which the points are made, how Lincoln introduces and develops his points, and the connections that are drawn between them. [RI. 9– 10. 3]

Writing: Samples of Student Writing 52 Annotated to illustrate the criteria required to meet the CCSS in types of writing: Argument (Opinion through grade 5) Informative/explanatory Narrative Illustrates range of accomplishment by grade Illustrates range of writing conditions (homework, on demand, research projects)

And Writing – 4 th Grade 53

And Writing – 8 th Grade 54

And Writing – 10 th Grade 55

Portrait of Students Who Meet ELA Standards 56 Students: Demonstrate independence Build strong content knowledge Respond to the varying demands of audience, task, purpose, and discipline Comprehend as well as critique Value evidence Use technology and digital media strategically and capably Come to understand other perspectives and cultures

Further Information 57 DPI website: http: //www. dpi. wi. gov/standards/index. html http: //www. dpi. wi. gov/oea/sbac. html Common Core State Standards Initiative: http: //corestandards. org/ Foundations Kit http: //www. cesa 7. org/schoolimprove/documents/CESA 7 Fou ndations. Kit. All. pdf

58 Thank You