Presentation on theme: "Facilitator: Robyn Madison-Harris, EdD Project Lead: Kathleen Theodore, MA Project Team Member: Ramona Chauvin, PhD November 29, 30, and December 1, 2011."— Presentation transcript:
ELA and Literacy CCSS Organization SECTIONS Standards for ELA and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects K–5 Standards for ELA 6–12 Standards for Literacy in History/SS, Science, and Technical Subjects 6–12 Supplemental Information and Explanations
ELA and Literacy CCSS Organization (Cont.) Appendix A – Research Supporting Key Elements of the Standards; Glossary of Key Terms Appendix B – Text Exemplars and Sample Performance Tasks Appendix C – Samples of Student Writing
Reading the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for English Language Arts/Literacy The CCSS for English Language Arts (ELA)/Literacy are composed of the following: –Standards (what students understand and should be able to do) –College and Career Ready (CCR) Anchor Standards –Strands (ELA K–12: Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language; 6–12 Literacy: Reading and Writing) Source: Content on slides 5–11 from Taking a Look at the English Language Arts and Literacy Common Core Standards: A COI Discussion. Portsmouth, NH: Center on Instruction. Adapted by SEDL with permission from COI.
Standards for ELA and Literacy in History/SS, Science, and Technical Subjects K–5 Strands ReadingWriting Speaking/ Listening Language CCR Anchor Standard Informational Text K-5 Literature K-5 Foundational Skills
Strands Reading Literature & Informational Writing Speaking/ Listening Language CCR Anchor Standard Foundational Skills Key ideas & details Craft & structure Integration of knowledge & ideas Range/level of text complexity Print Concepts Phonological Awareness Phonics & Word Recognition Fluency Text types & purpose Production & distribution of writing Research to build knowledge Range of writing Comprehension & collaboration Presentation of knowledge & ideas Conventions of standards English Knowledge of language Vocabulary acquisition & use K–5 Standards
Standards for ELA 6–12 Strands ReadingWriting Speaking/ Listening Language CCR Anchor Standard Informational Text 6-12 Literature 6-12
6–12 ELA Standards Strands Writing Speaking/ Listening Language CCR Anchor Standard Key ideas & details Craft & structure Integration of knowledge & ideas Range/level of text complexity Text types & purpose Production & distribution of writing Research to build knowledge Range of writing Comprehension & collaboration Presentation of knowledge & ideas Conventions of standards English Knowledge of language Vocabulary acquisition & use Reading (Literature & Informational Text)
Standards for Literacy in History, Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6–12 Strands ReadingWriting CCR Anchor Standard
Strands CCR Anchor Standard Key ideas & details Craft & structure Integration of knowledge & ideas Range/level of text complexity Reading Writing CCR Anchor Standard Text types & purpose Production & distribution of writing Research to build knowledge Range of writing 6–12 Literacy in History, SS, Science, and Technology
Integrated Model of Literacy Close connections between strands –Foundational reading skills equal means to end –Focus on comprehension and meaning –Text complexity and range of reading throughout –High cognitive demand Interdisciplinary/shared approach –Aligned with National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading framework –Applied throughout school, including content areas
CCSS Instructional Shifts in ELA/Literacy Shift 1: PK–5: Balancing Informational and Literary Text Shift 2: 6–12: Knowledge in the Disciplines Shift 3: Staircase of Complexity Shift 4: Text-Based Answers Shift 5: Writing From Sources Shift 6: Academic Vocabulary Source: Content on slides 12–13 from Instructional Shifts for the Common Core, by EngageNY.org, 2011, Albany, NY: New York State Education Department (NYSED). Copyright 2011 by NYSED. Adapted by SEDL with permission from EngageNY. Retrieved from
Focus on Shift 3: Staircase of Complexity To prepare students for the complexity of college and career ready texts, each grade level requires a “step” of growth on the “staircase.” Students read the grade-appropriate text around which instruction is centered. Teachers are patient, create more time and space for close, careful reading. Teachers provide appropriate scaffolding and supports to meet students’ instructional needs and reading levels.
Range of Reading and Level of Complexity Reading Standard 10 “Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.” (p. 10) The Progression of Reading Standard 10 –Grade bands –Text complexity requirements –Scaffolding needs Source: Content on slides 14–20 adapted by SEDL with permission from CCSSI (2010)
Rationale for Text Complexity Goal of this standard: Students must be able to read and comprehend independently and proficiently the kinds of complex texts commonly found in college and in careers. There is a reported decline in high-school level texts (ACT, 2006); while at the same time, there is an increase in the text difficulty of college and career texts (Hayes & Ward, 1992; Milewski, Johnson, Glazer, & Kubota, 2005).
Rationale for Text Complexity (Cont.) Some educators claim that school texts have declined overall: “The clear, alarming picture that emerges from the [extensive body of research]...is that while the reading demands of college, workforce training programs, and citizenship have held steady or risen over the past fifty years or so, K–12 texts have, if anything, become less demanding.” ELA-CCSS, Appendix A, 2010, p. 2 Note: See Appendix A, pp. 2–4, for specific research studies.
CCSS’ Model of Text Complexity A Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity: 1.Qualitative Dimensions 1.Quantitative Dimensions 1.Reader and Task Considerations
Qualitative Dimensions Levels of Meaning Structure Language Conventions and Clarity
Quantitative Dimensions Word length or frequency Sentence length Text length Text cohesion
Reader and Task Considerations Knowledge and Cognitive Demands –Life Experiences –Cultural and Literary Knowledge –Content and Discipline Knowledge Mode(s) of Response –Written –Oral –Graphic Purpose for Reading Degree of Scaffolding
Learning Task 1: Evaluating Texts for CCSS 1.Pair up with someone at your table, preferably someone from your district. You will have 15 minutes for this task. 2.Find the following documents in your handouts: –“Evaluating Texts for Common Core” –The Longitude Prize –“The Standards’ Grade-Specific Text Complexity Demands” 3.Use the “Evaluating Texts for Common Core” handout to evaluate the text complexity of The Longitude Prize. Omit the Quantitative Evaluation since Lexile or ATOS measures are not given for this text excerpt. 4.Use “The Standards’ Grade-Specific Text Complexity Demands” to recommend the grade-level band. 5.Be prepared to share your evaluation, recommended grade-level band, and rationale for your responses.
Learning Task 2: Reflecting on Shift 3 and Text Complexity 1.Pair up with someone at your table, preferably someone from your district, and discuss the following questions. You will have 5 minutes for this task. a.What do the CCSS ask students to know and be able to do? b.What changes, if any, in practice will we have to make to address Shift 3, Reading Standard 10? c.What challenges will we face as we make this shift? d.When was the last time I was challenged by a text, and what did I do to work within that frustration? e.What supports will I need to provide for struggling students?
Learning Task 3: Differentiating Instruction and Scaffolding a Complex Text 1.Pair up with someone at your table, preferably someone from your district. You will have 5 minutes for this task. 2.You will need the following documents from your handouts for this task: –The Longitude Prize –Tic-Tac-Toe Choice Board 3.Choose 3 tasks to complete on the Tic-Tac-Toe Choice Board in such a way that you end up “winning” the game, across, up and down, or diagonally. 4.Be prepared to share one of your responses with the whole group.
References ACT, Inc. (2006). Reading between the lines: What the ACT reveals about college readiness in reading. Iowa City, IA: Author. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from standards/english-language-arts-standardshttp://www.corestandards.org/the- standards/english-language-arts-standards EngageNY (2011). Instructional shifts for the common core. Albany, NY: New York State Education Department (NYSED). Retrieved from content/uploads/2011/08/instructional_shifts.pdfhttp://engageny.org/wp- content/uploads/2011/08/instructional_shifts.pdf Hayes, D. P., & Ward, M. (1992, December). Learning from texts: Effects of similar and dissimilar features of analogies in study guides. Paper presented at the 42 nd Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, San Antonio, TX. Milewski, G. B., Johnson, D., Glazer, N., & Kubota, M. (2005). A survey to evaluate the alignment of the new SAT writing and critical reading sections to curricula and instructional practices (College Board Research Report No /ETS RR-05-07). New York, NY: College Entrance Examination Board.
Resources See the handouts for a list of resources.
For more information, contact Robyn Madison-Harris, EdD Program Associate Southeast Comprehensive Center at SEDL 3501 North Causeway Blvd., Suite 700 Metairie, LA