Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

RETHINKING INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT Developing and Assessing Teaching for the Common Core.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "RETHINKING INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT Developing and Assessing Teaching for the Common Core."— Presentation transcript:

1 RETHINKING INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT Developing and Assessing Teaching for the Common Core

2 Changes in Societies are Creating Pressures for School Change

3 Routine Cognitive Non-routine Manual Percentile Change from 1960 Source: Murnane & Levy Routine Manual Expert Thinking Complex Communications DEMAND FOR SKILLS IS CHANGING The dilemma of schools: The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the ones that are easiest to digitize, automate, and outsource

4 Teamwork Problem Solving Interpersonal Skills Computational Skills Reading Skills Organizational Effectiveness Goal Setting/Motivation Listening Skills Personal Career Development Creative Thinking Leadership Oral Communications Writing Teamwork Problem Solving Interpersonal Skills Computational Skills Reading Skills Organizational Effectiveness Goal Setting/Motivation Listening Skills Personal Career Development Creative Thinking Leadership Oral Communications FORTUNE 500 MOST VALUED SKILLS

5 THINK critically & solve complex problems COMMUNICATE effectively WORK collaboratively LEARN how to learn… …through mastery of rigorous academic content DEEPER LEARNING

6 Measuring College- and Career- Readiness Students are not entering a multiple choice world. Genuine readiness for college and 21 st century careers require abilities: To find, evaluate, synthesize and use knowledge To frame and solve non-routine problems To design and produce new products To communicate in many ways

7 20 th Century Teaching will not Meet 21 st Century Demands x

8 US Outcomes in International Perspective Reading Korea Finland Singapore Canada New Zealand Japan Australia US is #14 Mathematics Singapore Korea Finland Lichtenstein Switzerland Japan Canada US is #27 Science Finland Singapore Japan Korea New Zealand Canada Estonia US is #21

9 What are the Highest-Achieving Nations Doing? Universal health care, housing, preschool for children Equitable & adequate resources for schools Equitable access to a thinking curriculum supported by rich performance assessments Substantial investments in initial teacher education and ongoing support A well-paid and well-supported profession Schools designed to support teacher and student learning

10 What are these Nations Not Doing? Cutting funds to schools Privatizing education Ranking and labeling schools and teachers Allocating rewards or sanctions based on test scores De-professionalizing teaching

11 Changes Pending in California Adoption of Common Core State Standards and Next Generation Science Standards Changes in the Assessment System -- Shift to Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium -- Elimination of other CSTs -- Reconceptualization of Assessment System

12 A New Concept of Accountability Changes in the API -- Less Emphasis on Standardized Tests -- More Emphasis on Graduation, College and Career Readiness, and Healthy School Functioning Commitment to Multiple Measures Investment in Improvement, Not Punishment Development of Stronger Professional Accountability

13 Goal of Common Core State Standards Fewer Higher Deeper

14 Key Aspects of the CCSS Reading increasingly complex texts closely Communicating effectively in multiple media and across content areas Using evidence; interpreting with justification Engaging in inquiry and research Engaging in mathematical practices that use mathematical reasoning in application Using mathematical skills across content areas and contexts Applying literacy and numeracy across content areas

15 Depth of Knowledge

16 MATH ENGLISH/ LANGUAGE ARTS DOK3DOK4DOK3DOK4 Current state assessments <2%0%20%2% New state tests under development (SBAC) 49%21%43%25% DOK = Depth of Knowledge Source: Yuan & Le (2012); Herman & Linn (2013) PERCENTAGE OF DEEPER LEARNING TEST ITEMS / TARGETS IN STATE TESTS

17 Depth of Knowledge in Action

18 How Must Schools Change to Develop these Abilities?

19 Common Core Standards - Math Students should be able “understand,” “describe,” “explain,” “justify,” “prove,” “derive,” “assess,” “illustrate,” and “analyze.” They also need to be able to “model,” “construct,” “compare,” “investigate,” “build,” “interpret,” “estimate,” “summarize,” “represent,” “evaluate,” “extend,” and “apply” their learning to a wide range of real world problems – including uses in science, engineering, and technology problems

20 CST Math Item Testing Standard 25.1

21 Math Depth of Knowledge Level 1 (Grade 7) Roberto paid $43.08 for three CDs. All three were the same price. How much did each CD cost? A. $11.36 B. $14.36 C. $40.08 D. $46.08 Math Depth of Knowledge Level 4 (Grade 7) Max bought two items that were on sale. One item was 10% off One item was 20% off Max says he saved 15% all together. A. Could Max be right? B. Could Max be wrong? Justify your answers. TESTING DEEPER LEARNING

22 Sample High School Task: Speeding Tickets Across States Stimulus/Information Source for Task Massachusetts (http://www.sudbury.ma.us/services/individual_faq.asp?id= 69)http://www.sudbury.ma.us/services/individual_faq.asp?id= 69 The initial 10MPH over the speed limit is assessed a $50 fine. In other words, there is a flat fee for the first 10MPH. Each MPH above the initial 10MPH is then calculated at $10 per MPH thereafter. In addition to the fines established relative to the speed traveled, there is a $50 assessment applied to the fine schedule which goes to a Head Injury Fund established by the state. Example: 46MPH in a 30MPH zone = 16MPH over the speed limit Fine = $50 Head Injury Fund assessment + $50 (first 10MPH over the speed limit) + $60 (next 6MPH) = $160

23 Sample Task Stimulus (cont.) Tasks that ask students to determine which information is relevant to problem solving and which is extraneous support the goals of Claim 4.

24 CCSS – ELA Reading Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.

25 CST ELA Item Testing Standard 9RC2.8

26 CCSS-ELA Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience.

27 Common Core Standards - ELA Conduct short and sustained research projects to answer a question (including a self-generated question) or solve a problem; synthesize multiple sources on the subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation. Present information, findings, and supporting evidence such that listeners can follow the line of reasoning, alternative or opposing perspectives are addressed, and the organization, development, substance, and style are appropriate to purpose and audience.

28 Research Task: Nuclear Power You are chief-of-staff for your local congresswoman in the U.S. House of Representatives. She has called you into her office to outline an urgent project. “I have received advance warning,” she says as you sit down, “that a power company is proposing to build a nuclear plant in the southeastern corner of our state. The plan will be announced to the public tomorrow morning, and citizens and journalists will want to know what my position is on this controversial issue. To be honest, I am not sure how I feel about it. We currently don’t have any nuclear power plants in this state, so I haven’t taken time to consider the issue deeply. “I need you,” she continues, “to conduct a brief survey of the pros and cons of nuclear power. Summarize what you have learned and report back to me this afternoon.” Back in your office, you enter “nuclear power pros and cons” into a Google search engine, and it returns what looks like a promising mix of articles, videos, and data charts. You must review and evaluate these sources and summarize their arguments—both pro and con—before reporting back to the congresswoman.

29 Organize Arguments From the sources you have reviewed, summarize 3 major arguments that support, and 3 major arguments that oppose, the use of nuclear power for generating electricity. For each of the arguments, cite at least one source that supports this fact or point of view. Argument / Fact in Favor of Nuclear Power Source Supporting this Argument Argument / Fact in Opposition to Nuclear Power Source Supporting This Argument

30 Evaluate Sources Evaluate the credibility of the arguments and evidence presented by these sources. Which of the sources are more trustworthy and why? Which of the sources warrant some skepticism because of bias or insufficient evidence?

31 Write and Revise an Evidence-Based Essay Back in the congresswoman’s office, you start to hand her your notes on the pros and cons of nuclear energy, but she waves away your papers. “Some emergency meetings have come up and I don’t have time to review your research notes,” she says. “Instead, go ahead and make a recommendation for our position on this nuclear power plant. Should we support the building of this nuclear plant in our state, or should we oppose the power company’s plan? Be sure that your recommendation acknowledges both sides of the issue so that people know that we have considered the issue carefully. I’ll review your memo tonight and use it for the press conference tomorrow morning.” Write an argumentative essay that recommends the position that your congresswoman should take on the plan to build a nuclear power plant in your state. Support your claim with evidence from the Internet sources you have read and viewed. You do not need to use all the sources, only the ones that most effectively and credibly support your position and your consideration of the opposing point of view.

32 How Can We Develop This New Teaching?,

33 Professional Learning Opportunities that Impact Practice: Focused on specific curriculum content Organized around real problems of practice Linked to analysis of teaching and student learning Intensive, sustained and continuous over time Supported by coaching, modeling, observation, and feedback Connected to teachers’ collaborative work in professional learning communities Integrated into school and classroom planning around curriculum, instruction, and assessment

34 Standards-Based Teacher Evaluation Combine Evidence of Practice and Outcomes in an Integrated Evaluation System that looks at  21 st Century teaching practice in relation to standards, curriculum goals, and student needs  Contributions to colleagues and the school,  Student learning in relation to teaching practices, curriculum goals, and student needs, and  Accomplishment of individual and group goals

35 Approach Test-Based Evaluation with Caution VAM estimates of teacher effectiveness … should not used to make operational decisions because such estimates are far too unstable to be considered fair or reliable. –National Research Council Board on Testing and Assessment, 2009

36 Many teachers indicated as effective or ineffective in one year are not for others Value-added estimates are highly unstable. Consider classification of teachers into 5 categories (A-F) in two consecutive years. 36 Grade in first year: A F Grade in second year: FDCBA FDCBA Grades A-F correspond to quintiles 1-5. Source: Tim Sass (2008).

37 A Teacher’s Measured “Effectiveness” Can Vary Widely Same high school Same course (English I) Not a beginning teacher Model controls for:  Prior achievement  Demographics  School fixed effects 1 10 YEAR 1YEAR 2

38 Recent findings from TX, LA, NY, CA, FL  The same teachers receive lower value-added ratings when: -- they have large numbers of new English Learners -- they have larger numbers of special education students -- they have larger numbers of highly at-risk students (with poor attendance, sickly, abused, homeless) -- they are teaching high-achieving students who have already reached the highest score levels on the tests 38

39 Create an Integrated System Link the implementation of common core standards to educator support and evaluation Train and assess prospective and current principals for teacher evaluation and support Link professional development policies to the assessment standards and practices Involve senior teachers, mentors, principals as assessors and policy advisors Use every opportunity to enable sharing of expertise Equalize access to high-quality curriculum & teaching

40 21 st Century Learning for All “What the best and wisest parent wants for his or her child, that must the community want for all of its children. Any other goal is narrow and unlovely. Acted upon, it destroys our democracy.” -- John Dewey


Download ppt "RETHINKING INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT Developing and Assessing Teaching for the Common Core."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google