1. Introduction to the Instructional Materials Evaluation Tool (IMET): ELA www.achievethecore.org

2. PAGE 2 Essential Questions What is the Instructional Materials Evaluation Tool (IMET)? How is it structured? How does the IMET enable reviewers to evaluate whether instructional materials are aligned to the major features of the Standards and fulfill the Shifts they require? How could the IMET be useful in a variety of settings to bring the CCSS and Shifts to life for students?

3. PAGE 3 Goals Understand that the IMET is a powerful tool that enables reviewers to evaluate whether instructional materials are aligned to the Common Core State Standards Understand how the IMET structure and levels of alignment illuminate the major features of the standards Consider pertinent uses for the IMET including evaluating new or current curricular materials, developing materials, and professional learning

4. PAGE 4 Agenda Introduction to the IMET Review the Shifts Color the Shifts activity Non-Negotiable 1: Text Complexity Non-Negotiable 2: Text-Dependent Questions Alignment in materials Summarizing

5. PAGE 5 “In general, teachers are much more likely to cover topics presented in the materials selected by their school or district than to cover topics not included; they are likely to follow the sequence of topics in the selected materials; and their pedagogical approach is influenced by the instructional design of the materials. The evidence is clear that instructional interactions between students and teachers are framed by the instructional materials that are provided by their schools and districts.” Chingos & Whitehurst, Choosing Blindly: Instructional Materials, Teacher Effectiveness, and the Common Core

6. PAGE 6 “There is strong evidence that the choice of instructional materials has large effects on student learning – effects that rival in size those that are associated with differences in teacher effectiveness.” Chingos & Whitehurst, Choosing Blindly: Instructional Materials, Teacher Effectiveness, and the Common Core

7. PAGE 7 Achieve Student Achievement Partners Council of Chief State School Officers History of the IMET

8. PAGE 8 Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects Supplement to Appendix A of the Common Core State Standards for ELA/Literacy: New Research on Text Complexity IMET Sources

9. PAGE 9 Purchasing or evaluating new materials Evaluating materials currently in use Developing materials Professional learning When to Use the IMET

10. PAGE 10 Versions for ELA/Literacy: Kindergarten–2nd grade, and 3rd–12th grades – For Math: Kindergarten–8th grade, and High School Comprehensive curricula 3 Levels of Alignment: – Non-Negotiable (NN) Alignment Criteria – Alignment Criteria (AC) – Indicators of Quality www.achievethecore.org/imet The IMET: An Overview

11. PAGE 11 Regular practice with complex texts and their academic language Building knowledge through content-rich non-fiction Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in evidence from text, both literary and informational 3 Shifts in ELA

12. PAGE 12 Regular practice with complex texts and their academic language ✓ HS to College Gap ✓ Complexity predicts college success (ACT study) ✓ High rates of remediation ✓ CCSS staircase of complexity: ES → HS ✓ Engaging with complex language and rich vocabulary Shift 1: Text Complexity

13. PAGE 13 Students who can read literally can read inferentially.

14. PAGE 14 Students who can perform one strategy can perform all strategies.

15. PAGE 15 Ability to read complex text differentiates college-ready readers.

16. PAGE 16 Reading, writing and speaking grounded in evidence from text, both literary and informational ✓ College and workplace writing ✓ Major emphasis of the ELA Standards ✓ Hallmarks of strong readers and writers ✓ Equity Shift 2: Evidence

17. PAGE 17 Building knowledge through content-rich non-fiction ✓ Large research base ✓ Knowledge crucial to comprehension ✓ Very little nonfiction in school ✓ College & workplace focus on nonfiction ✓ Informational text harder Shift 3: Knowledge

18. PAGE 18 Everyone knows knowledge plays a role in comprehension, but how big of a role? “The Baseball Study” Recht & Leslie (1988)

19. PAGE 19 The Baseball Study: Recht & Leslie (1988) Compared reading comprehension for four categories of students: High reading ability, High knowledge of baseball High reading ability, Low knowledge of baseball Low reading ability, High knowledge of baseball Low reading ability, Low knowledge of baseball

20. PAGE 20 Knowledge of the topic had a much bigger impact on comprehension than generalized reading ability did.

21. PAGE 21 Activity: Color the Shifts

22. PAGE 22 ELA Shifts

23. PAGE 23

24. The Non-Negotiable Alignment Criteria

25. PAGE 25 Non-Negotiable 1: Texts are worthy of student time and attention; they have the appropriate level of complexity for the grade, according to both quantitative measures and qualitative analysis of text complexity. Metric 1A: 100% of texts must be accompanied by specific evidence that they have been analyzed with at least one research-based quantitative measure for grade band placement. Metric 1B: 100% of texts must be accompanied by specific evidence that they have been analyzed for their qualitative features indicating a specific grade level placement. Text Complexity IMET p. 4

26. PAGE 26 Text Complexity: What Is It and Why? CCSS.ELA-Literacy.CCRA.R.10 Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently. For example, in 4 th grade: By the end of the year, read and comprehend informational texts, including history/social studies, science, and technical texts in the grades 4-5 complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.

27. PAGE 27 Analyzing Text Quality

28. PAGE 28 Quantitative Text Complexity ✓ Excellent at situating informational texts ✓ Good at offering a starting point for placing narrative fiction ✓ Unable to rate drama and poetry ✓ Not helpful for K-1 texts

29. PAGE 29 Analyzing Text Complexity: Quantitative Verify that each text has been placed within a grade band based on at least one quantitative measure.

30. PAGE 30 Grapes of Wrath: Lexile Score: 680L Grade Band Placement: 2-3? Quantitative Text Complexity

31. PAGE 31 Qualitative Measures Qualitative measures consider: ✓ Text Structures ✓ Language Features ✓ Meaning/Purpose ✓ Knowledge Demands

32. PAGE 32 Tool: Analyzing Text Quality

33. PAGE 33 Finally, there are factors relating to your readers and the task to consider: ✓ Desired Outcomes/Understandings ✓ Complexity of Content ✓ Specific student needs ✓ Reading Skills ✓ Motivation & Engagement ✓ Prior Knowledge Reader and Task Considerations

34. PAGE 34 Activity With your tablemates, take a minute and go back into the IMET criteria you colored earlier. Where is there emphasis on quantitative measures and qualitative text complexity features?

35. PAGE 35 Non-Example

36. PAGE 36 Example.

37. PAGE 37 Non-Negotiable 2: At least 80% of all questions in the submission are high-quality text-dependent and text- specific questions. The overwhelming majority of these questions are text-specific and draw student attention to the text. Metric 2A: At least 80% of all questions and tasks should be text-dependent to reflect the requirements of Reading Standard 1. Metric 2B: Questions and tasks accurately address the analytical thinking required by the Standards at each grade level. Text-Dependent Questions IMET p. 8

38. PAGE 38 Considering Text Dependency Does answering the question require that students have read the passage? Is the question tied to a passage (not stand- alone)? Does the question require students to cite or use evidence from the passage to determine the correct answer? Does the question require students to follow the details of, make inferences from, and/or evaluate what is read?

39. PAGE 39 Example or Non-Example?

40. PAGE 40 Example: Text-Dependent Questions

41. PAGE 41 Practice: Text-Dependent Questions Use the passages (Fossil Fish Found! and Earthquakes) and associated question sets to gather evidence for the NN 2 metrics. Be prepared to share your findings. Text-Dependent Questions

42. PAGE 42 Let’s reach consensus: What evidence did you find where your materials were in alignment with the criterion? What other evidence would you want to collect? Text-Dependent Questions

43. Alignment Criteria

44. PAGE 44

45. PAGE 45 Essential Questions What is the Instructional Materials Evaluation Tool (IMET)? How is it structured? How does the IMET enable reviewers to evaluate whether instructional materials are aligned to the major features of the Standards and fulfill the Shifts they require? How could the IMET be useful in a variety of settings to bring the CCSS and Shifts to life for students?

46. PAGE 46 Use Cases for the IMET Evaluating current materials Purchasing decisions Creation of materials Professional learning Discussion question: How will the IMET be useful to you in your context?

47. PAGE 47 Want to Learn More?