Presentation on theme: "Northern Humboldt Union High School District October 14, 2013 Common Core Activity."— Presentation transcript:
Northern Humboldt Union High School District October 14, 2013 Common Core Activity
Common Core Standard Video http://vimeo.com/51933492 http://vimeo.com/51933492
Susan Pimentel, Co-Lead Author of Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Matt Copeland, Kris Shaw, and Jackie Lakin, Kansas Department of Education Whitney Whealdon, Louisiana Department of Education Adapted from: The Common Core State Standards: Adapted from: The Common Core State Standards: Supporting Districts and Teachers with Text Complexity
If you remember one thing from this PPT. Text Complexity DOES NOT mean a textbook. In fact, there are limited CCSS and NGSS aligned textbooks available at this time. But vendors are dying to sell us Common Core curricular materials.
The Crisis of Text Complexity Complexity of texts students are expected to read is below what is required to achieve college and career readiness: High school textbooks have declined in all subject areas over several decades Average length of sentences in K-8 textbooks has declined from 20 to 14 words Vocabulary demands have declined, e.g., 8 th grade textbooks = former 5 th grade texts; 12 th grade anthologies = former 7 th grade texts Complexity of college and careers texts has remained steady or increased, resulting in a huge gap (350L = 350 Lexile points)
What is a Lexile???? It’s a unit of measure of reading complexity. A Lexile measure is defined as "the numeric representation of an individual’s reading ability or a text’s readability (or difficulty), followed by an “L” (Lexile).”
Lexile Scale by Grade Range Band Level Text Difficulty Ranges of Current School Texts and Readings Gr. 2-3420-820 Gr. 4-5740-1010 Gr. 6-8925-1185 Gr. 9-101050-1335 Gr. 11-Career, College Ready1185-1385
600 800 1000 1400 1600 1200 Text Lexile Measure (L) High School Literature College Literature High School Textbooks College Textbooks Military Personal Use Entry-Level Occupations SAT 1, ACT, AP* * Source of National Test Data: MetaMetrics Interquartile Ranges Shown (25% - 75%) OUR MISSION
Should we worry about this gap? <50% of HS graduates can read sufficiently complex texts So why does that matter? According to the ACT study (and subsequent follow-up studies) students who reached the benchmark score (21 out of 36 or better) in the reading section of the ACT test had: a 75% chance of earning a C or better in an introductory U.S. history or psychology course (two common reading-intensive courses taken by first-year college students) and, a 50% chance of earning a B or better in such a course.
Why does this matter? The complexity of what students can read is greatest predictor of success in college (ACT study)
A challenge for us as teachers High School vs. College Teaching Practices High School: teachers scaffold and support students. Teachers typically assess what has been taught—not just assigned to read. College and University: students read complex texts with substantially greater independence (i.e., much less scaffolding) than in typical K–12 classes. College instructors assign readings, not necessarily explicated in class, for which students might be held accountable
But what do we need to do in our classes? According to the ACT study the clearest differentiator between success and failure in college was students’ ability to answer questions associated with complex texts. Two surprises: pedagogy focused only on “higher-order” or “critical” thinking was insufficient to ensure that students were ready for college and careers Question level (higher order vs. lower order; literal vs. inferential) is NOT the chief differentiator either
If you remember a 2 nd thing from this PPT! “What students could read, in terms of its complexity, was at least as important as what they could do with what they read.” From the CCSS Appendix A
But what do we need to do in our classes? Have your kids read complex texts. Often.
Measures of Text Complexity Quantitative measures: Word difficulty (frequency, length) Sentence length and syntax Some newer measures also measure text cohesion and other features of vocabulary Qualitative measures: Purpose Language conventionality and clarity Text structures Knowledge demands
Lexile???? How do we measure reading Lexile levels? Go to: www.lexile.com FYI: There are six valid measuring tools--but we’re focusing on Lexile.com What can’t the six measuring tools accurately measure? No measure can yet rate drama and poetry.
Activity: Sorting Texts by Reading Level Please glance at the four texts on your table: That’s One Impressive Moth-er Faker Are marijuana gardens destroying history? David Freese adds to postseason heroics as Cardinals top Pirates in Game 5 U.S. Fringe Festival Please sort them from highest to lowest Lexile level.
Title and SourceLexile MeasureWord Count U.S. Fringe Festival NY Times, October 8, 2013 1500 L876 Europe and England in the Sixteenth Century Textbook 1380LN/A Are marijuana gardens destroying history? Times-Standard, October 10, 2013 1290 L817 David Freese adds to postseason heroics as Cardinals top Pirates in Game 5 Sports Illustrated, October 9, 2013 1190 L686 Grapes of Wrath, Ch. 19 excerpt1130 L940 That’s One Impressive Moth-er Faker Slate, October 9, 2013 1060 L627
Text Complexity Model Text complexity is defined by: Qualitative 2.Qualitative measures – levels of meaning, structure, language conventionality and clarity, and knowledge demands often best measured by an attentive human reader. Quantitative 1.Quantitative measures – readability and other scores of text complexity often best measured by computer software. Reader and Task 3.Reader and Task considerations – background knowledge of reader, motivation, interests, and complexity generated by tasks assigned often best made by educators employing their professional judgment.
Implications for Educators General Rule: For decisions about whether to place a text at the upper, lower, or middle of a band, use qualitative analysis. i.e. www.lexile.com For drama and poetry, use qualitative measures.
Professional Development - $60,400 CCSS funds will be used to support the professional development for teachers, administrators, and other paraprofessional educators involved in the direct instruction of pupils that is aligned to the academic content standards. Funds will be allocated to each respective school site based on 2013 Student Population data as reported in the district CBED report. A per student amount will be determined and allocated to sites accordingly. Sites are encouraged to formalize request for professional development activities by using School Site Council as method for review and approval. All activities must be directly related to implementation of CCSS and will encompass activities for both 2013-14 and 2014-15 school years.
Instructional Materials- $120,800 Funds may be used to purchase instructional materials aligned to the academic content standards, including but not limited to, supplemental instructional materials. All activities must be directly related to implementation of CCSS and will encompass activities for both 2013-14 and 2014-15 school years. Will also support integration of CTE and anchor standards via appropriate CTE curriculum and materials. Funds will be allocated to each respective school site based on 2013 Student Population data as reported in the district CBED report.
Technology, Equipment, and Infrastructure - $120,800 Funds may be used for the integration of the CCSS academic content standards through technology-based instruction for purposes of improving the academic performance of pupils, including but not necessarily limited to, expenditures necessary to support the administration of computer-based assessments and provide high-speed high-band with internet connectivity for the purpose of administration of computer-based assessments. Year 1(2013-14): $42,000 Purchase total of four computer labs with 35 computers in each. Two of the labs will be for permanent use at Arcata High and McKinleyville High School respectively. The other two labs will be housed in the library and available as portable check-out. Year 2 (2014-15): $78,800 Based on effectiveness of devices purchased in Year 1, additional devices will be purchased for full implementation of instructional and testing support.