OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Common Core State Standards and Assessment Initiative Informational Webinar October 28, 2010 Presented by: Jessica Vavrus, Asst. Superintendent, Teaching and Learning Michael Middleton, Director of Business and Operations, Assessment and Student Information

| Slide 2 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Our time today… Share overviews of the Common Core State Standards Initiative and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium Share overview and comparison of the English language arts and mathematics standards Opportunities for engagement and input Next steps… OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

Washington States Basic Education Act (RCW 28A revised in 2007) … to provide students with the opportunity to become responsible and respectful global citizens, to contribute to their own economic well-being and that of their families and communities, to explore and understand different perspectives, and to enjoy productive and satisfying lives. - Basic Education Act (Goal)

| Slide 4 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Washington State Student Learning Goals 1. Read with comprehension, write effectively, and communicate successfully in a variety of ways and settings and with a variety of audiences; 2. Know and apply the core concepts and principles of mathematics; social, physical, and life sciences; civics and history, including different cultures and participation in representative government; geography; arts; and health and fitness; 3. Think analytically, logically, and creatively, and to integrate different experiences and knowledge to form reasoned judgments and solve problems; and 4. Understand the importance of work and finance and how performance, effort, and decisions directly affect future career and educational opportunities.

OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION The Common Core State Standards Initiative - Background Beginning in the spring of 2009, Governors and state commissioners of education from 48 states, 2 territories and the District of Columbia committed to developing a common core of state K-12 English-language arts (ELA) and mathematics standards. States agreed to participate in the development process, provide input on drafts, and consider eventual adoption. Signing MOA did not require commitment to adopt. The Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) is a state-led effort coordinated by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) with assistance from Project Achieve, ACT and the College Board (SAT). OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct

| Slide 6 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Current and Future Focus for Common State Standards Current (led by CCSSO and NGA ): K-12 English Language Arts Common Core State Standards K-12 Mathematics Common Core State Standards Future (currently led by various national associations): Next Generation Science Standards(draft by Fall 2011) (Framework currently under development) English Language Development Standards (within 1 year) Social Studies (within 2 years) Arts (development may begin in January 2011) OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Why Common Core State Standards? Preparation: The standards articulate college- and career- readiness. They will help ensure students acquire the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in post-secondary education and training. Competition: The standards are internationally benchmarked. Common standards will help ensure our students are globally competitive. Clarity: The standards are focused, coherent, and clear. Clearer standards help students (and parents and teachers) understand what is expected of them. Adapted from Understanding the Common Core, Achieve, June 2010 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 7 OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 8 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Why Common Core State Standards?, cont. Equity: Expectations are consistent for all – and not dependent on a students state of residence. States have time to consider what state-specific additions to the standards might look like Collaboration: The standards create a foundation to work collaboratively across states and districts, pooling resources and expertise, to create curricular tools including textbooks, professional development, common assessments and other materials. Opportunities for ALIGNED and CONNECTED SYSTEMS: Common standards is a common thread among current and evolving national initiatives and opportunities Standards – Instruction – Assessment OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 9 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Common Core State Standards Design Building on the strength of current standards across many states, the CCSS are designed to be: Focused, coherent, clear and rigorous Internationally benchmarked Anchored in college and career readiness* Evidence and research based *Ready for first-year credit-bearing, postsecondary coursework in mathematics and English without the need for remediation. OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 10 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Intentional Design Limitations What the Standards do NOT define: How teachers should teach All that can or should be taught The nature of advanced work beyond the core The interventions needed for students well below grade level The full range of support for English language learners and students with special needs Everything needed to be college and career ready Citation: OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Nationwide Feedback and Review for ELA and Mathematics Standards External and State Feedback teams included: K-12 teachers Higher ed. faculty State curriculum and assessments experts Researchers National organizations (including, but not limited, to): OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct American Council on Education (ACE) American Federation of Teachers (AFT) Campaign for High School Equity (CHSE) Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences (CBMS) Modern Language Association (MLA) National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) National Writing Project (NWP) National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) National Education Association (NEA) Adapted from Understanding the Common Core, Achieve, June 2010 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 11

| Slide 12 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION National Process and Timeline K-12 Common Standards: Core writing teams in English Language Arts and Mathematics (See for list of team members) drafted standards External and state feedback teams provided on-going feedback to writing teams throughout the process Draft K-12 standards were released for public comment on March 10, 2010; 9,600 comments received nationwide (~ 900 from WA) Validation Committee of leading experts reviewed standards OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 13 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Common Core Standards Adoption by State Final standards were released June 2, 2010 As of October 18, 2010, 37 states have formally adopted the common core state standards. Green states have formally adopted the Common Core State Standards. Blue states have provisionally approved the standards pending a subsequent and significant decision to formally adopt them.

| Slide 14 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION The Washington Context for Considering Adoption of CCSS Involvement since November 2009 Review and input on drafts of English language arts and mathematics standards Our 2010 legislative directive (E2SSB 6696, Section 601):E2SSB 6696 Provisional adoption by the Superintendent by Aug. 2, 2010 Detailed report due to Legislature in Jan o To include: detailed comparison, timeline and costs, recommendations for possible additions Formal adoption and implementation will begin following 2011 session unless otherwise directed by the Legislature WA participation in SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium… OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 15 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION What about assessment? The Challenge and the Goal How do we get from here......to here? All students leave high school college and career ready Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct and, how does an assessment system contribute to this effort?

| Slide 16 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium -- Background US Department of Education has awarded grants to two multi-state consortia for the Race-to-the-Top Assessment Program SMARTER Balanced (WA is one of 31 states involved) PARCC $160 million 4-year development grant, starting October 1, 2010 $15.8 million supplemental award for implementation Future work… Support for special education students (1% assessment consortium) – assessments to be based on current Common Core State Standards

| Slide 17 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION The Purpose of the Consortium To develop a set of comprehensive and innovative assessments for grades 3-8 and high school in English language arts and mathematics aligned to the Common Core State Standards. The assessments shall be operational across Consortium states in the school year. With the goal….To ensure that all students leave high school prepared for postsecondary success in college or a career through increased student learning and improved teaching. Note: States must have formally adopted the Common Core State Standards by January 2012 in order to remain in the Consortium. OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium -- Member States -- OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 19 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION A 31-State Consortium Fiscal Agent: Washington State 17 Governing States 14 Advisory States CT, HI, ID, KS, ME, MI, MO, MT, NC, NM, NV, OR, UT, VT, WA, WI, WV AL, CO, DE, GA, IA, KY, ND, NH, NJ, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD Total Number of States = 31 OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

20 OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct The SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium A theory of action A model of verifiable accomplishments/milestones, leading to the desired outcome Accomplishments/milestones are inter-dependent The theory of action is closely linked to the validation argument for the assessment system

21 OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action All students leave high school college and career ready Summative adaptive assessments are benchmarked to college & career readiness Technology supports innovative & comprehensive assessments Technology provides increased access to learning State policies and practices support increased expectations Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Clear communication of expectations to stakeholders Professional capacity- building PD and other supports for teachers to instruct on the CCSS Teachers design and score assessment items & tasks Teachers use formative tools and practices to improve instruction Interim/Benchmark assessments are used as progress checks

22 OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct The SMARTER Balanced Theory of Action All students leave high school college and career ready Summative adaptive assessments are benchmarked to college & career readiness Technology supports innovative & comprehensive assessments Technology provides increased access to learning State policies and practices support increased expectations Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Clear communication of expectations to stakeholders Professional capacity- building PD and other supports for teachers to instruct on the CCSS Teachers design and score assessment items & tasks Interim/Benchmark assessments are used as progress checks Teachers use formative tools and practices to improve instruction

| Slide 23 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION System Highlights Summative assessments using online computer adaptive technologies Efficiently provide accurate measurement of all students, across the spectrum of knowledge and skills Incorporate adaptive precision into performance tasks and events Will assess full range of CCSS in English language arts and mathematics Describe both current achievement and growth across time, showing progress toward college- and career-readiness Scores can be reliably used for state-to-state comparability, with standards set against research-based benchmarks The option of giving the summative tests twice a year. OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 24 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Optional interim/benchmark and formative assessments Are aligned to and reported on the same scale as the summative assessments Help identify specific needs of each student, so teachers can provide appropriate, targeted instructional assistance Incorporate significant involvement of teachers in item and task design and scoring Are non-secure and fully accessible for use in instruction and professional development activities Provide students and teachers with clear examples of the expected performance on common standards. System Highlights OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 25 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Online, tailored reporting system Supports educator access to information about student progress toward college- and career-readiness Allows for exchange of student performance history across districts and states Uses a Consortium-supported backbone, while individual states retain jurisdiction over access permissions and front-end look of online reports. System Highlights OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 26 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Benefits and efficiencies from economies of scale due to a multi-state consortium Cost savings: SMARTER English language arts/mathematics estimated at ~$21 per student (below current for almost all SBAC states) [Interim/benchmark & formative an additional ~$7 per student] Shared interoperable open source software platforms: Item generation, item banking, and adaptive testing no longer exclusive property of vendors Common, agreed-upon protocols for accommodations for students with disabilities and ELL students. System Highlights OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 27 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION...the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium can be found online at To find out more... OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 28 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Discussion 1: Questions to consider… 1. What are the benefits and challenges these initiatives bring to WA school districts? 2. What key information and/or messages do your districts need regarding these initiatives? When? Common Core State Standards Initiative SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium 3. What other questions do you have? OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Looking at the Common Core State Standards…

| Slide 30 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION What do the Standards look like? Relevant to the real world – prepare students for careers and college Articulate expectations what students should know, be able to do grade by grade preparation for next steps following high school

| Slide 31 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Common Core Standards for English Language Arts College and Career Readiness (CCR) Standards Overarching standards for each strand that are further defined by grade- specific standards Grade-Level Standards in English Language Arts K-8, grade-by-grade 9-10 and grade bands for high school Four strands: Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects Standards are embedded at grades K-5 Content-specific literacy standards are provided for grades 6-8, 9-10, and Media and Technology are integrated throughout the standards. OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

| Slide 32 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Design and Organization Three main sections K5 (cross-disciplinary) 612 English Language Arts 612 Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects (Shared responsibility for students literacy development) Three appendices Appendix A: Research and evidence; glossary of key terms, overview of each strand Appendix B: Reading text exemplars; sample performance tasks Appendix C: Annotated student writing samples OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 33 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Key Highlights Reading Balance of literature and informational texts Text complexity Writing Emphasis on writing argumentative, informative/explanatory, and narrative texts Emphasis on research Speaking and Listening Inclusion of formal and informal talk Language Value of general academic and domain-specific vocabulary Emphasis on the conventions of English and the effective use of language OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 34 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Current WA Standards (GLEs) – Grades K-10 Common Core ELA Standards – Grades K-12 Reading Writing Communication (includes Speaking and Listening) Language Media & Tech OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 35 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION What does it look like? Examples from Reading and Writing Common Core StandardsWashington Standards cc.r.1 (Kindergarten standard) With prompting and support, ask and answer questions about details and events in a text. WA.R.GLE (Kindergarten standard) Ask and answer question before, during, and after read aloud and/or shared reading cc.w.5 (First grade standard) With guidance and support from adults, focus on a topic, respond to questions and suggestions from peers, and add details to strengthen writing as needed WA.W.GLE (First grade standard) WA asks students to demonstrate understanding that writing can be changed through discussion and self- reflection cc.w.4 (Third grade standard) With guidance and support from adults, produce writing in which the development and organization are appropriate to task and purpose. WA.W.GLE (Third grade standard) Demonstrates understanding of different purposes for writing.

| Slide 36 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Common Core Standards for Mathematics Grade-Level Standards K-8 grade-by-grade standards organized by domain 9-12 high school standards organized by conceptual categories (Number & Quantity, Algebra, Functions, Modeling, Geometry, Statistics & Probability) Course progressions included in Appendices Some standards go beyond career and college readiness level (e.g., STEM concepts, denoted by +) are a thread throughout but go beyond what all students will need to know and at high school may lead to a 4 th year of math Standards for Mathematical Practice Describe mathematical habits of mind Standards for mathematical proficiency: reasoning, problem solving, modeling, decision making, and engagement Carry across grade levels and connect with content standards in each grade OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 37 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Design and Organization OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct Grade Level Overviews (Example)

| Slide 38 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION What does it look like? Examples from Mathematics Common Core StandardsWashington Standards 1.OA.5 (first grade standard) Add and subtract within 20. Relate counting to addition and subtraction (e.g., by counting on 2 to add 2). WA.1.2.f (first grade standard) Apply and explain strategies to compute addition facts and related subtraction facts for sums to 10. K.CC.5 (Kindergarten) Count to answer "how many?" questions about as many as 20 things arranged in a line, a rectangular array, or a circle, or as many as 10 things in a scattered configuration; given a number from 1-20, count out that many objects. K.CC.4b Understand that the last number said tells the number of objects counted. The number of objects is the same regardless of their arrangement or the order in which they were counted. WA.K.1.E (Kindergarten) Count objects in a set of up to 20, and count out a specific number of up to 20 objects from a larger set.

OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Common Core State Standards Compared with Washington Standards

| Slide 40 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Common Core Compared with WA Standards Two state-level comparisons External Analysis – Hanover Research (done) o Snapshot of how well WA standards match to the CCS Washington-led Comparison (nearly complete) o Snapshot of how well CCS match to WA standards So that… WA educators can have a clear understanding of CCS in relation to current standards We can consider adding up to 15% to the standards Both available online OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

Common Core and Washington State Standards (K-10) Alignment Breakdown by Number and Percentage CC Subcategory Total CC K-10 ELA Standards Simple and Composite WA Match Partial and Composite partial WA Match Total % of WA GLEs that Align to Some Extent No Match Reading: Literature 9035 (38.9%)38 (42.2%)73 (81.1%)17 (18.9%) Reading: Informational Text 9935 (35.4%)44 (44.4%)79 (79.8%)20 (20.2%) Reading: Foundational Skills 164 (25.0%)10 (62.5%)14 (87.5%)2 (12.5%) Subtotal: All Reading (36.1%)92 (44.9%)166 (81.0%)39 (19.0%) Writing9031 (34.4%)46 (51.1%)77 (85.6%)13 (14.4%) Speaking and Listening 6029 (48.3%)23 (38.3%)52 (86.7%)8 (13.3%) Language5822 (37.9%)33 (56.9%)55 (94.8%)3 (5.2%) Total: All Subcategories (37.8%)194 (47.0%)350 (84.7%)63 (15.3%) Hanover ELA Analysis 41

Hanover Mathematics Analysis - Another look…Of 558 unique PEs, 71 standards that were classified as true non-matches, 87.3% of Washington Performance Expectations can be matched to the Common Core. Only 12.7% of eligible WPEs could not be closely aligned to common core standards. Grade Level Total # of CCSS Simple and Composite WA Match Partial and Partial Composite WA Match Total Percent Matched to Some Extent No Match Percent Late, Partially Late, or Unmatched Percent Early, Partially Early, or On Schedule Kindergarten %044%56% 1 st %129%71% 2 nd %216%84% 3 rd %449%51% 4 th %460%40% 5 th %656%44% K-5 Band %1744%56% 6 th %553%47% 7 th %643%57% 8 th %445%55% 6-8 Band %1548%52% 9-12 STEM %3665%35% 9-12 All %6836%64% 9-12 No STEM %3224%76% TOTAL (No STEM) %6439%61% 42

| Slide 43 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION What does adding to the standards mean? Up to states to define: Is there key content that is present in existing state standards that does not exist in the Common Core? o Is the missing content required by state laws/regulations to include in the standards? Are there other compelling reasons to add content? What are the implications of adding content? How will this affect assessment? How much will this affect commonality with other states? Does it dilute the standards? Impact on the classroom? Common-sense guideline to meet specific state needs Key factor in CCS development: clear and focused standards Literal interpretation by states would undermine the purpose of the initiative OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Implications and Next Steps for Washington…

| Slide 45 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION What does this mean for Washingtons existing Learning Standards? Washingtons current Learning Standards in all subjects should continue to be implemented in classrooms. Current state assessments will align with these standards through the school year. If the Common Core State English language arts and mathematics standards are formally adopted in WA, They would be phased in over 2 years to replace WAs current reading, writing, and mathematics standards by the year. OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 46 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Washingtons Timeline & Next Steps July 2010 Provisional adoption announced July 19 th August – December 2010 Complete and share comparisons between WA standards and Common Core External educator and stakeholder input / involvement Complete legislative report (due January 2011) Formation of SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium workplans, workgroups, identify points of engagement for states OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 47 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Washingtons Timeline, cont. January – April Legislative Session underway Formal adoption and implementation will begin following 2011 session unless otherwise directed by the Legislature Continue collaboration within SMARTER Balanced Assessment consortium April 2011 – and beyond (assuming formal adoption) Develop Resources, Train Staff, Phase-in and Implement Common Core Standards Develop comprehensive assessment system with full implementation in school year. OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

48 Summer 2010 Summer 2011 School Year School Year School Year School Year Phase 1 Adopt, Align & Plan 1. Provisional adoption (E2SSB 6696) 2. Gather input on strategy for implementation Phase 2 Build Capacity: Communicate, Develop Process, Resources for Transition & Implementation Phase 3 Transition to Common Core Standards Phase 4 Implementation 1. Spring 2014pilot the assessment system 2. September 2014-June 2015full implementation with state-wide assessment system. Draft Implementation Timeline Summer 2010 to the School Year This is the time to consider and plan for transitioning, while continuing to implement our current standards. It is not the time to stop strong, standards-based instruction…

| Slide 49 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 1. In your role, what would you need during each Phase to support the transition to the common core standards? o Support / Communication materials o Professional Development (resources, materials, structures…) o What are some specific examples of costs for school districts? o Other? 2. What delivery structure/approach would best support your district in transitioning to the common core standards? 3. What other questions do you have? Discussion #2: Questions to consider…

| Slide 50 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION How can I learn more and/or provide input? Complete the online survey about whether or not WA should add to the Common Core Standards Link to survey available at through NOVEMBER 10 th View WEBINARS: Today Sept. 28 th webinar is currently recorded and available at: 5 Public Forums Held (Yakima, Spokane, Tacoma, Vancouver, Shoreline) NOTE: OSPI will compile all input and include with recommendations in the report to the Legislature due in January OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Oct. 2010

| Slide 51 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Resources Washington States Core Standards Informational Web Site: CCSSO/NGA Common Core Standards Initiative Web Site: Achieve resources: OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

| Slide 52 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Final Notes… The promise of the Common Core State Standards These Standards are not intended to be new names for old ways of doing business. They are a call to take the next step. It is time for states to work together to build on lessons learned from two decades of standards based reforms. It is time to recognize that standards are not just promises to our children, but promises we intend to keep. Citation: OSPI Common Core Information Sessions Sept. & Oct. 2010

Thank you.