1. CALLI: Opportunity Meets Possibility and Need P. David Pearson UC Berkeley

2. Goals for today Situate the Common Core Initiative within the CALLI setting Briefly review the logic and goals of the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Point to their potential – New possibilities: The high road on curriculum, text, and cognitive challenge The good stuff for ALL learners not just the privleged learners Talk about what we can all do to monitor, support, and critique their implementation – Apply the lens of (W)HOLE theory Pot holes, sink holes, and black holes – That’s what we can all learn from you as you implement them.

3. Survey Elementary? Secondary? College? What’s the difference

4. Elementary Teachers Love Their kids

5. Secondary Teachers Love Their subjects

6. College Teachers Love Themselves

7. More on the topic Most of what I know and believe about how to implement CCSS with English learners is captured in a review I did with George Bunch and Aida Walqui – Bunch, G. C., Walqui, A., & Pearson, P. D. (2014). Complex text and new common standards in the United States: Pedagogical implications for English learners. TESOL Quarterly, 48(3), 533-559.

8. Cutting to the Core of the Core

9. So why are we talking about standards? We have had standards driving our school programs since the early 1990s We have had national standards (supported by federal funds and professional organization), state standards and district standards. We use them to shape curriculum, assessment, and hold our schools, teachers, and students accountable? So why the commotion about these standards? What makes them different?

10. What is different about these standards? Not federal, sort of national, and built by two organizations (NGA and CCSSO) that represent states. These organizations funded their development and made them available. States could opt in or opt out – Several states opted out But their standards look a lot like CCSS – Several have left SBAC or PARCC for other vendors… But their tests look a lot like SBAC and PARCC These are NOT completely new… – We started this march toward high and rigorous standards for all in the early 1990s in math, literacy, and science – 10 year hiatus from 2000 to 2010 in NCLB – Best viewed as a return to our roots and goals from the mid 1990s.

11. The CCSS Requires Three Shifts in ELA/Literacy* 1. Building knowledge through content-rich text (mostly non- fiction) situated with the disciplines of Science, History, and Literature. 2. Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in evidence from text, both literary and informational – Lots of emphasis on text-based arguments and explanations – A big big push for close reading 3. Regular practice with complex text and the academic language that comes with it. 11 *From the creators of the standards

12. What else is different about these standards?* More focus on writing than in previous standards, particularly argumentation and explanation. Sea Change from the logic and feel of NCLB and its enchantment with the basics. – After all, they are standards to prepare students for colleges and careers. Focus more on the big picture outcomes (comprehension and composition) and not so much on the enabling skills of decoding and mechanics) – In principle, at least, much less directive, more opportunity for teachers to exercise professional judgment in helping students meet the performance standards. *From PDP’s reading of the standards

13. So……. In 2010, I signed on the dotted line to say these standards are worthy of our professional support and implementation Ready to go on the road and seek converts. The road to paradise has been a little bumpy… But good things are happening in some places, in consortia like CALLI

14. Fundamental Question: Global or Local Prerogative Which is worse? or better? One of the things that keeps me in the standards movement: Hobson’s Choice: Every virtue is its own vice 1000 local orthodoxies – Do we really want quality and opportunity to be an accident of zip code? A single national orthodoxy that we can – monitor, nurture, and, maybe even, … get right. My version is that what we want is variations on a common theme—a single goal with a lot of implementations that share a “strong family resemblance”. – Why I like what I see in CALLI

15. Their virtues… The comprehension standards are consistent with our best, research-based knowledge about the comprehension process. They recognize that reading and writing and speaking, while sharing much in common, are enacted differently in each discipline. They invite all teachers to support the acquisition of literacy in their disciplines. – They promote the integration of knowledge acquisition and language/literacy development – Shared responsibility for enactment

16. More virtues Focus on the larger goals of curriculum and teaching, – leaving prerogative at the local level.

17. Vices… Implementation! Implementation? Go to www.scienceandliteracy.orgwww.scienceandliteracy.org

18. VICES: What to watch out for…the “holes”: pot, sink, or black… Will we really be able to promote literacy, especially CCSS literacy, within disciplinary settings? Or will literacy be left to the elementary and the secondary English and reading teachers – Leaving science, social studies, and math without benefit of the tools of reading, writing, and language.

19. What we need to do in CALLI We have a wonderful confluence of forces to guide us in our efforts: 1.A curriculum driven by noble goals—the ELA-CCSS version we have in CA 2.A highly supportive, highly aligned set of of ELD standards informed by research and experience 3.Readiness in Science (in particular) and Social Studies to exploit literacy and language as tools for learning 4.Professional Development Resources that hearken back to the heyday of full funding for the California Subject Matter projects in the late 1990s 5.Partners with whom to think, plan, implement, reflect, and improve.

20. Just imagine what we can accomplish… If all of our students, but especially our English learners, can use the tools of reading and writing and language to support – What and how they learn in science, social studies, and mathematics (as well as literature) – What they can learn on their own. Literacy gives you options and independence Keeping our promise of College and Career Ready…

21. Accountability Accountability follows responsibility Based upon multiple indicators (both external and internal), e.g., External assessments (both state and standardized) Internal assessments (benchmark: progress in our curriculum) Activity indicators (attendance, pass rates, library use) Client satisfaction Accountability should lead to assistance to build capacity Accountability should be reciprocal: – Teachers take responsibility for learning – Government for resources to support learning – Society for resources that lead to healthy lives 21 IF TIME

22. Kids are who they are

23. They know what they know

24. They bring what they bring