Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts"— Presentation transcript:


2 Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts
Vertical Articulation at a Glance

3 Common Core State Standards Our goals for today…
Participants will… Review their previous experiences with the CCSS Deepen their understanding of the vertical articulation of the standards Deconstruct a standard and begin to evaluate its rigor as defined by Hess’s Cognitive Rigor matrix Consider implications for their work Review resources and coming events

4 (includes Speaking and Listening)
Current WA Standards (GLEs) – Grades K-10 Common Core ELA Standards – Grades K-12 Reading Writing Communication (includes Speaking and Listening) ELA Common Core Standards Speaking and Listening Reading Writing Language Media & Tech We will briefly review— Our current Washington State standards are divided into the three content areas: reading, writing, and communication which includes speaking and listening. The CCSS are divided into Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language for conceptual clarity (in other words, it makes sense for how the book is laid out), however the learning processes are closely intertwined throughout the document. Research and media skills and understandings are embedded throughout the Standards rather than treated in a separate section and encompass all content stands. This allows students to develop mutually reinforcing skills, reading skills that support writing, language skills that support speaking and listening, etc. Later in the presentation we will take a look at some specific examples of integrated standards.

5 The ELA Document Structure
Introduction page 10 K-5 page 11 Reading Foundational Skills Writing Speaking and Listening Language 6-12 page 35 Reading Writing Speaking and Listening Language Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects Appendices A, B, C

6 College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for ELA
College and Career Readiness (CCR) Standards – Overarching standards for each of four ELA strands that are further defined by grade-specific standards Reading - 10 Writing - 10 Speaking and Listening - 6 Language - 6 Discuss the idea of anchor standards, how many there are at each grade level and how they are followed by more specific standards by grade level. All subject areas will be referenced at this time. Have participants read page 10 silently Have participants reread the anchor standards 1-10 highlighting the verbs Participants will locate the verbs within the Bloom’s handout What do you notice when comparing the Bloom’s document and the 10 anchor standards. Highlight the same verbs on document. Briefly what do you notice. Facilitator - The verbs are high on the taxonomy, which indicates a high level of thinking reflected in the standards. Discuss how this document was designed backward. Point out that students need to attain the standard at each grade level in order to be ready for the next, and that each of the grade-levels is linked to the one above and below it through an upward progression of critical thinking skills, knowledge depth, and more refined content. Hand out the vertical alignments & ask participants to trace a standard of their choosing with a partner.

7 What is Vertical Articulation
Vertical alignment asks: How are the content standards/objectives related from one year/grade to the next? Knowledge or skills extend to a wider range of content Deeper understanding of the (cognitive process) for same content New content or skills

8 Example of Grade-Level Progression in Reading
CCSS Reading Standard 3: Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text. A brief illustration of vertical alignment as well as the similarities between literature and informational text standards.

9 Quality of Content Alignment
Content standards are clearly articulated across grades if: Related standards are clearly differentiated. What new knowledge or skill is required? Differences in terminology are explained. One or both standards may not be described in sufficient detail. Terminology Different words for the same skill? The meaning of terms appears to be expanded.

10 Bloom’s Taxonomy Labels the type of thinking (verbs) needed to complete a task; tracing the verbs reveals a deepening of the cognitive processes through a standard from K-12.

11 Task Predicts Performance
This is important because… Task Predicts Performance TEACHER STUDENT CONTENT TASK Elevate the cognitive demand of the task, and you elevate the performance.

12 Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy
Taxonomy of cognitive objectives 1950s- developed by Benjamin Bloom Means of qualitatively expressing different kinds of thinking Adapted for classroom use as a planning tool and continues to be one of the most universally applied models Provides a way to organize thinking skills into six levels, from the most basic to the higher order levels of thinking 1990s- Lorin Anderson (former student of Bloom) revisited the taxonomy, and as a result, a number of changes were made (Pohl, 2000, Learning to Think, Thinking to Learn, pp. 7-8) A brief review of Bloom’s Taxonomy

13 A Comparison Original Revised
Evaluation Synthesis Analysis Application Comprehension Knowledge Creating Evaluating Analyzing Applying Understanding Remembering (Based on Pohl, 2000, Learning to Think, Thinking to Learn, p. 8)

14 Bloom’s Taxonomy Levels
Cognitive process Verbs Associated with Level/Process 1. Remembering: Retrieving, recognizing, and recalling relevant knowledge from long-term memory choose, define describe, find, identify, label, list, locate, match, name, recall, recite, recognize, record, relate, retrieve, say, select, show, sort, tell 2. Understanding: Constructing meaning from oral, written, and graphic messages through interpreting, exemplifying, classifying, summarizing, inferring, comparing, and explaining. categorize, clarify, classify, compare, conclude, construct, contrast, demonstrate, distinguish, explain, illustrate, interpret, match, paraphrase, predict, represent, reorganize, summarize, translate, understand 3. Applying: Carrying out or using a procedure through executing, or implementing. apply, carry out, construct, develop, display, execute, illustrate, implement, model, solve, use 4. Analyzing: Breaking material into constituent parts, determining how the parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose through differentiating, organizing, and attributing. analyze, ascertain, attribute, connect, deconstruct, determine, differentiate, discriminate, dissect, distinguish, divide, examine, experiment, focus, infer, inspect, integrate, investigate, organize, outline, reduce, solve (a problem), test for 5. Evaluating: Making judgments based on criteria and standards through checking and critiquing. appraise, assess, award, check, conclude, convince, coordinate, criticize, critique, defend, detect, discriminate, evaluate, judge, justify, monitor, prioritize, rank, recommend, support, test, value 6. Creating: Putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganizing elements into a new pattern or structure through generating, planning, or producing. adapt, build, compose, construct, create, design, develop, elaborate, extend, formulate, generate, hypothesize, invent, make, modify, plan, produce, originate, refine, transform Bloom’s Taxonomy Levels Works Cited Anderson, L. W., et. al. (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman. Bloom, B.S., et al. (1956). The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I, cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay.

15 Back-mapping the ELA CCSS
Starting with college and career readiness Standards for each grade level are identified Working backward from grade to 9-10 to 8 etc. Establishes a clear, aligned K-12 pathway, linking elementary, middle, high school, and end-of-high school college and career readiness The high level of cognitive demand, helps to determine the level of cognitive demand at each grade level. (If it looks like this in 12th grade, what would it look like in 11th grade if a student is on track to reach standard?) Since Bloom’s labels the type of thinking (verbs) needed to complete a task, tracing the content additions and the verbs reveals a deepening of the cognitive processes through a standard from K-12. Talk about the reverse order or the back mapping. Ask participants to follow as you model, using Standard 1 in the packet. Trace the vertical articulation in a given standard from Kindergarten through Grade 12, showing how each builds upon the next, highlighting the additions. Explain that this activity provides a foundation for further work in cognitive complexity and depth of knowledge and that it will inform instruction, lesson/unit design and assessment. Ask participants to choose a standard from the packet, and work with a partner to trace the additions from Kindergarten to the CCR.

16 Analyzing the Standards
Handout the packet titled Reading Standards for informational text. Model highlighting additions

17 Your turn… With a partner, choose a standard
Highlight the additions of the grade level standard as it progresses from Kindergarten toward College and Career Ready Anchor Standards (CCRS)

18 When you have finished:
Using the standard you have highlighted. Underline the key concepts important nouns or noun phrases Circle the verbs describing skills required of students Ask participants to perform this task using the standard they have already highlighted.

19 Summary Statement Example:
Anchor standard 1 is about argumentative writing and the components needed in a logical argument. It emphasizes: Writing sound arguments Sufficient supporting evidence Valid reasoning The need to read critically Analysis of substantive topics/text Have participants highlight in groups and present their summary to the other groups. Allow time for reflection and discussions.

20 Cognitive Rigor Matrix by Karin Hess
Combines Bloom’s Taxonomy with Webb’s Depth of Knowledge framework. A tool for: Designing units of study that have a range of cognitive demand. Assessing tasks for the thinking they require of a student

21 The Cognitive Rigor Matrix
Depth + thinking Level 1 Recall & Reproduction Level 2 Skills & Concepts Level 3 Strategic Thinking/ Reasoning Level 4 Extended Thinking Remember - Recall, locate basic facts, details, events Understand - Select appropriate words to use when intended meaning is clearly evident - Specify, explain relationships - summarize – identify main ideas - Explain, generalize, or connect ideas using supporting evidence (quote, example…) - Explain how concepts or ideas specifically relate to other content domains or concepts Apply - Use language structure (pre/suffix) or word relationships (synonym/antonym) to determine meaning – Use context to identify meaning of word - Obtain and interpret information using text features - Use concepts to solve non-routine problems - Devise an approach among many alternatives to research a novel problem Analyze - Identify whether information is contained in a graph, table, etc. – Compare literary elements, terms, facts, events – analyze format, organization, & text structures - Analyze or interpret author’s craft (literary devices, viewpoint, or potential bias) to critique a text – Analyze multiple sources - Analyze complex/abstract themes Evaluate – Cite evidence and develop a logical argument for conjectures - Evaluate relevancy, accuracy, & completeness of information Create - Brainstorm ideas about a topic - Generate conjectures based on observations or prior knowledge - Synthesize information within one source or text - Synthesize information across multiple sources or texts Page 5 of article – examples in article cross different content areas

22 Nature Of Content Alignment
Applying Webb’s Alignment Constructs 1. Categorical Concurrence What content is new? What content is continued? 2. Range of Content Broadening or generalizing knowledge/skills 3. Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Webb DOK ratings are somewhat grade-specific 4. Balance of Representation How does content emphasis vary across grades? 5. Source of Challenge What needs to be clarified about the standards?

23 Implications What kinds of statements can you make regarding the vertical articulation of the standard you analyzed? Use the cognitive rigor matrix to assist you. What are the similarities and differences in your current expectations for students with those of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS)?

24 What instructional shifts do you see?
As a result of your work today, what specific impact will the Common Core State Standards have on your lesson planning, assessment and teaching practices? In what ways will you shift your instruction as an individual, grade level, department, building or district.

25 What we have done today…

26 Standard to Practice Deconstructed Identified the verbs
Highlighted words/phrases defined or interpreted Examined the vertical alignment and identified the context Examined the horizontal alignment and identified the context Determined whether one item/activity can address the entire standard Described something in your curriculum that aligned to the standard

27 Next steps? Optional Activity:
Analyzing the standard to the level of instruction and Depth of Knowledge (DOK). This activity will provide an opportunity for the participant to isolate one standard at their grade level and going deeper. With the framing of “how this impacts their instruction .”

28 Standard to Practice Begin with the Common Core State Standards, then consider what you already have and do. Determine whether you address: all or part of the standards in your curriculum, whether your practice occurs at the same grade level as the standard, and whether you currently have any data to evaluate effectiveness of instruction relative to that practice

29 Resources

30 Grade Level One-Pagers
created by teachers in Washington State See the Resource page for the link to these documents.

31 Resources for Implementation
ELA overview documents (one-pagers) as connected with WA standards: Publisher’s Criteria in ELA and Literacy: Alignments cross-walk documents: Parent Resource Guides:

32 For More Information Common Core Website: Common Core Questions: OR Greta Bornemann, OSPI CCSS Project Director, Hunt Institute Videos (overview) (writing)

33 Thank you. Everybody!

Download ppt "Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google