1. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Raising Standards: Showing our Students How to Align Curriculum Standards With Their Instructional Units Pamela Luft Kent State University

2. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Using Standards for Instruction?! n The Need: –Schools are under increasing pressure to raise student outcomes and use state standards for teaching. n The Problem: –Content standards often are vague and difficult to use for teaching (Popham, 2001). –Concrete and definitive lessons about a specific task are unlikely to address the nature or scope of these standards.

3. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Using Standards for Instruction?! n Conflicting Expectations: –Special and Deaf Education use behavioral objectives to ensure measurable outcomes. –This provides a foundation for accountability, yet: n State standards are much broader than even a series of related lessons and by nature, are vague and not easily quantified. n A linear task analysis of standards can result in a nearly-overwhelming array of steps and sub-steps to achieve for any one standard. –Examples: n 10 th grade: Vocabulary Acquisition –Infer the literal and figurative meaning of words and phrases and discuss the function of figurative language, including metaphors, similes, idioms and puns.

4. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Using Standards?! n The Result: –Schools and teachers need guidance in integrating: n Vague and broad content standards with; n Measurable, observable, and accountability-focused behavioral objectives that are based on task analyses; n To result in a series of unified lessons that lead to achievement of these standards. n Higher Education’s Responsibility: –University programs are expected to prepare their graduates appropriately and appropriately. –Prevent graduation of teachers unable to effectively incorporate standards into their teaching

5. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Unsuccessful Integration n Concrete and definitive lessons with measurable outcomes— –but that poorly address the standards. n Lessons that address clear and specific aspects of standards— –but result in fragmentation that doesn’t address broader knowledge and skill learnings n Lessons that address breadth of standards— –but lead to little depth of learning, or –become unwieldy and ineffective

6. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Promoting Good Teaching That Incorporates State Standards n Aim for depth, rather than superficial breadth (TIMMS report) –Develop lessons based on unit themes n Broad themes can address the comprehensive nature of standards n Unit themes support redundancy of learning –increasing depth of understanding –allowing expansion and extension of related skills and knowledge—the standards n Unit themes link individual tasks and activities to reduce fragmentation and build these broader knowledge and skill learnings.

7. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Using What We Know About Good Instructional Practice n Exemplary instruction should: –Be based on high standards; –Incorporate depth of understanding within reasonable breadth; and therefore –Accommodate and reflect standards-based and outcomes-driven learning. n Poor instruction can occur despite: –Standards-based and outcomes-driven learning.

8. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training New Resources on Using Standards –Linking IEPs to State Learning Standards by Miller & Hoffman (2002). n Importance of standards and IDEA n Identifying standards that meet student needs –Connecting Standards and Assessments Through Literacy by Conley (2005). n Purposes and requirements of standards and assessments n Integrating test-taking skills with instruction –Aligning transition and standards-based education: issues and strategies by Kochhar-Bryant & Bassett (2002) n Importance of using standards with transition n General tips for usage

9. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Exemplary Instruction n Is more than clear links and observable outcomes n Should provide: –Inquiry and problem-solving focus –Depth of understanding –Clear relationships and interrelationships among broad and life-long concepts n Redundancy of key concepts across diverse content

10. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Conceptually Focused Teaching Units that Incorporate Standards n Understanding by Design (Wiggins and McTighe, 1998) –Provides a process for incorporating standards with Stage 1 of unit design –Based upon research on learning and teaching (http://www.ubdexchange.org/resources.html). http://www.ubdexchange.org/resources.html

11. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Unit Design Process n Stage One: –Incorporate external standards: –“Unpack” them into meaningful and teachable chunks. n Review the standard for those elements that are –(a) worth being familiar with, –(b) what is important to know and understand, and –(c) what is authentic and relevant and of life-long value to the student.

12. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Unit Design cont. n Stage One: –Standards often incorporate elements across all three aspects n Those at the heart, “c” are often most helpful in focusing unit and lesson planning. –Review these “core” standards to identify overarching and enduring understandings –Develop unit questions based on these standards and understandings to focus and link the unit assessments and teaching activities to focus and link the unit assessments and teaching activities

13. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Unit Design n Stage Two –Plan a variety of assessments that demonstrate achievement of standards –Use the Six Facets of Understanding –Examine evidence that demonstrates these overarching and enduring understandings n Stage Three –Plan lessons and activities that prepare students for the assessments that demonstrate their understanding

14. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Development Summary n Use Stage One’s: –overarching and enduring understandings, –which incorporate and unpack external standards, n To plan Stage Two’s: –assessments to collect evidence of these understandings, –across the Six Facets, n Which are supported by Stage Three’s: –learning experiences and instructional activities n that ensure that students have the necessary skills and knowledge n to fully and effectively demonstrate these understandings n across each of the Six Facets.

15. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training External Validation n A growing number of university programs and colleges of education utilize this design process and its frameworks –It provides a valuable tool for addressing some of these instructional challenges. n Current programs using UbD: –Teachers College at Columbia University, –Penn State Univ., –Old Dominion Univ., –Vanderbilt Univ., and the Univ. of Maryland,

16. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Strategies: S tage One n Identify student needs through state standards and IEP/transition outcomes n Develop a web or outline of the different content areas –List the core standards for each content area –Incorporate student needs where appropriate n Expand and “explode” standards into components –Brainstorm all possible standard components and then revise or prioritize into their key components –Contact content area specialists for their input for delineating standards into their key components, and for facet and activity ideas –Use internet teaching resources and lists to initially expand standard-related activities

17. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Strategies: S tage One cont. n Examine unit web and synthesize content areas into several comprehensive, inquiry-based questions –Evaluate and choose a unit question that most effectively: n Utilizes the standards to achieve key learning outcomes and “core” content n Utilizes authentic and relevant, age-appropriate activities n Develop 1-3 overarching goals and outcomes –Develop goals that link content areas and student needs –Review goals, outcomes, and questions to ensure match and linkage n Use unit theme to expand content and unit cohesiveness: –List possible activities that fully develop core components of the standards –Address key student needs and interests

18. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Strategies: Stage Two n Develop assessment activities for the six facets across each of the unit goals/outcomes –Use the facets for comprehensive and thorough evaluation n ensure that each unit goal is adequately represented n utilize culminating activities that can incorporate multiple goals and facets when possible n List unit goals that can be addressed in each facet –Combine into culminating projects or activities –Review the web outline of content areas to ensure coverage of each standard n Utilize facets to develop a rubric with scoring –Note specific standards addressed by each facet –Develop measurable outcomes and unit criteria for each facet

19. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training UbD FacetFacet Description Facet 1: ExplanationSophisticated explanations and theories Facet 2: InterpretationInterpretations, narratives, and translations Facet 3: ApplicationUse knowledge in new situations and contexts Facet 4: PerspectiveCritical and insightful points of view Facet 5: EmpathyAbility to get inside another person's feelings Facet 6: Self-knowledgeTo know one's ignorance, prejudice, and understanding

20. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Strategies: Stage Three n Utilize facets to develop a listing of needed lessons and instructional activities n Review unit web of content standards to check for coverage n Ensure that activities are of sufficient quantity and quality –Students must be able to develop the skills that will lead to success across all six facets n Review activities for relevance and link to overall unit goals and overarching unit questions. n Use the activities listing to begin lesson plan development.

21. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Supporting Standards- Based Instruction n Unit design process reviews links to standards and student needs at each stage n Stages 1 & 2 provide design comprehensiveness n Stage 3 provides instructional specificity

22. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Unit Teaching Barriers: Real or Imagined? n Teachers in self-contained classrooms are assigned limited content responsibilities –Develop collaborative units between related classes –Use block scheduling and teaming n Resource room and itinerant teaching are fragmented –Incorporate classroom-based unit teaching for skill and remediation to retain conceptual links –Combine content areas into units that emphasize relevance and authenticity

23. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training Ensuring Good Teaching n Good teaching should predominate over scheduling or assignment concerns –Good teachers “find a way” n Unit-based teaching is supported by research and leads to successful and meaningful integration of standards n More information on utilization of unit design rubric—see Teaching Units: http://www.educ.kent.edu/fundedproje cts/TSPT/grant.htm http://www.educ.kent.edu/fundedproje cts/TSPT/grant.htm http://www.educ.kent.edu/fundedproje cts/TSPT/grant.htm

24. February 2005Transition Services Preparation & Training References n Conley, M. W. (2005). Connecting standards and assessment through literacy. Boston: Pearson. n Kochhar-Bryant, C. & Bassett, D. S. (2002) Aligning transition and standards-based education: issues and strategies. Arlington, Va. : Council for Exceptional Children. n Miller, L., & Hoffman, L. (2002). Linking IEPs to state learning standards: A step-by-step guide. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. n Popham, W. J. (2001). The truth about testing: An educator’s call to action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. n Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.