1. “Hands-On” Activity
Please use the materials (pencils, index cards, tape) and whatever else you might find helpful, to get a copy of your fingerprint on to the index card. Be sure to label it with your name, hand and finger.
Now, ask your neighbor if you can get a copy of their fingerprint and label it.
Analysis: Examine and compare both fingerprints. You may want to use your hand lens for a closer look!
Findings: Write down what you observe and any conclusions that you come to – share & discuss with your neighbor!

2. Richard Tudda, Instructional Specialist
New York City Department of Education Cluster 6 Networks 609 – Debra Van Nostrand, Network Leader
WELCOME!
CFN Network 609
Science   
Richard Tudda, Instructional Specialist
Tuesday, November 8th, 2011
CFN 609 2

3. Fingerprint Analysis Template
Name:__________________ Date:_________Time:_________
Name:_________________ Name:___________________
Hand:_________________ Hand:___________________
Finger:________________ Finger:__________________
Observations:_________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________
Findings/Conclusions:_________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________

4. Presenters: Richard Tudda, Instructional Specialist
SCIENCE Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 PS/IS 163K ~ Science Lab 8:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Agenda
Presenters: Richard Tudda, Instructional Specialist
Amanda McBrien & Bob Badders
Breakfast & Fingerprint Activity- 8:00 a.m. – 8:30 a.m.
 Welcome/Introductions /Thank You to: PS/IS 163~Ms. Wasamuth, Ms. McGrath & Ms. Joseph
 Welcome: Amanda McBrien , Asst. Dir. for Instruction DNA Learning Center, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
and Bob Badders, Director of the Cleveland Math and Science Partnership (retired)
 Webb’s Depth Of Knowledge (DOK) in Science
CCLS Writing Standards
 DNA Extraction ~ Amanda McBrien
Writing Rigorous Performance Tasks
[Performance Tasks - Charting and Gallery Walk]
Literacy in Science ~ Bob Badders,~ Introducing Seeds of Science-Root of Reading
Feedback Forms - Thanks
Raffle Drawings ~ Good Luck! 
Thank you for your active participation!

5. Presenters: Richard Tudda, Instructional Specialist & Amanda McBrien
SCIENCE Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 PS/IS 163K ~ Science Lab 12:00 – 2:30 p.m. Agenda
Presenters: Richard Tudda, Instructional Specialist
& Amanda McBrien
Fingerprint Activity
 Welcome/Introductions /Thank You to: PS/IS 163~Ms. Wasamuth, Ms. McGrath & Ms. Joseph
 Welcome: Amanda McBrien , Asst. Dir. for Instruction DNA Learning Center, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
 Webb’s Depth Of Knowledge (DOK) in Science
CCLS Writing Standards
 DNA Extraction ~ Amanda McBrien
Writing Rigorous Performance Tasks
[Performance Tasks - Charting and Gallery Walk]
Literacy in Science ~ Bob Badders,~ Introducing Seeds of Science-Root of Reading
Feedback Forms - Thanks
Raffle Drawings ~ Good Luck! 
Thank you for your active participation!

6. Overview of Depth of Knowledge
What is Depth of Knowledge (DOK)?
Depth of Knowledge (DOK) is a measure of cognitive demand required by a question, assignment, task, assessment, etc.
How is DOK used?
DOK is made up of four levels that help identify the complexity of the cognitive demand of what is being asked of students.
Why should we consider using it?
DOK is based on the research of Norman Webb, University of Wisconsin Center for Education Research and the National Institute for Science Education
Has been widely used to guide assessment development for classroom, school, state, and national assessments (e.g., NAEP)
Can refine our understanding of what we mean by a more “rigorous task” and/or “cognitively demanding” task
DoK also provides a way to examine the cognitive demands of tasks. It has been applied in the creation and evaluation of state and national assessments, and offers a framework to think about the depth with which students need to engage with content. 6 6

7. Bloom – 1956 to 2001
1956
2001
Knowledge -- Define, duplicate, label, list, name, order, recognize, relate, recall
Remember -- Retrieve knowledge from long-term memory, recognize, recall, locate, identify
Comprehension -- Classify, describe, discuss, explain, express, identify, indicate, locate, recognize, report, review, select, translate
Understand -- Construct meaning, clarify, paraphrase, represent, translate, illustrate, give examples, classify, categorize, summarize, generalize, predict…
Application -- Apply, choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, practice, write
Apply -- Carry out or use a procedure in a given situation; carry out or use /apply to an unfamiliar task
Analysis -- Analyze, appraise, explain calculate, categorize, compare, criticize, discriminate, examine
Analyze -- Break into constituent parts, determine how parts relate
Synthesis -- Rearrange, assemble, collect, compose, create, design, develop, formulate, manage, write
Evaluate -- Make judgments based on criteria, check, detect inconsistencies/fallacies, critique
Evaluation -- Appraise, argue, assess, choose, compare, defend, estimate, explain, judge, predict, rate, core, select, support, value
Create -- Put elements together to form a coherent whole, reorganize elements into new patterns/ structures
Currently, Bloom’s taxonomy is commonly used to determine the cognitive demands of tasks. Note that it was revised in 2001 and contains some substantive revisions – the most notable of which is the addition of “create”. It still provides an important framework for thinking about the demands of tasks. 7

8. Webb’s Depth-of-Knowledge Levels
DOK-1 – Recall & Reproduction - Recall of a fact, term, principle, concept, or perform a routine procedure
DOK-2 - Basic Application of Skills/Concepts - Use of information, conceptual knowledge, select appropriate procedures for a task, two or more steps with decision points along the way, routine problems, organize/display data, interpret/use simple graphs
DOK-3 - Strategic Thinking - Requires reasoning, developing a plan or sequence of steps to approach problem; requires some decision making and justification; abstract, complex, or non-routine; often more than one possible answer
DOK- 4 - Extended Thinking - An investigation or application to real world; requires time to research, problem solve, and process multiple conditions of the problem or task; non-routine manipulations, across disciplines/content areas/multiple sources
DoK also provides a way to examine the cognitive demands of tasks. It has been applied in the creation and evaluation of state and national assessments, and offers a framework to think about the depth with which students need to engage with content. 8 8

9. Depth of Knowledge: Science
Level 1 — Identify the tree.
Level 2 — Explain the function of the leaves.
Level 3 — Explain how a drought might affect the growth of the tree.
Level 4 — Design an investigation of seedling growth to determine the best fertilizer for this type of tree. 9

10. Science Depth of Knowledge Levels
Interpreting and assigning depth-of-knowledge levels to objectives both within standards and assessment items is an essential requirement of alignment analysis.
Four levels of depth of knowledge are used for this analysis. Because the highest (fourth) DOK level is rare or even absent in most standardized assessments, reviewers usually will be making distinctions among DOK levels 1, 2 and 3.
Please note that in science, “knowledge” can refer both to content knowledge and knowledge of science processes.
- Norman L. Webb March 28, 2002

11. Examples of Increasing Cognitive Complexity
VERB
LEVEL 1
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 4
List
List three properties that can be used to classify objects.
List three groups in which a wooden object could be classified.
List three unique objects and the physical properties that would prevent each of the objects from sharing a category with any of the others.
List the design steps (including the controlled variables) you would take to investigate the best material for a specific purpose. Provide evidence from your investigation to support your conclusions.
Describe
Describe characteristics of metamorphic rocks.
Describe the differences between metamorphic and igneous rocks.
Describe a model that you might use to represent the relationships that exist within the rock cycle.
Describe the approach you would take to ensure that the rock samples you collect are truly representative of the geologic diversity of Kentucky.
Again, we see that DoK is not verb dependent. It considers not only the type of thinking, but also the depth of engagement.

12. Cognitive Rigor Matrix
Depth + thinking
Level 1
Recall & Reproduction
Level 2
Skills & Concepts/Basic Reasoning
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 idea
Explain, generalize, or connect ideas using supporting evidence (quote, example)
Explain how concepts or ideas specifically related to other domains or concepts
Apply
Use language structure (pre/suffix) or word relationships (syn/ant) 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 alternative 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
The Cognitive Rigor Matrix (a combination of Bloom and Webb developed by Hess et al.) allows us to look at 2 dimensions simultaneously so that we can consider not only what students are asked to do with content, but also the depth with which they need to engage with content to complete an assessment task. A good rule of thumb for determining the DoK level is that 1 & 2 will typically have a right answer; Level 3 is the highest level that state assessments can measure; Level 4 cannot be accomplished within a class period.

13. Writing Performance Tasks Using the CCSS and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge
Webb’s Depth of Knowledge can be used along with the CCLS to raise the level of complexity and rigor of performance tasks.
DOK is also highly useful in the design of rigorous, standards-based assessments that measure cognitive complexity.
Tasks and instruction at the appropriate DOL Levels enable students to truly capture cognitive complexity and become comfortable with the demand for thinking at a higher level.
Differentiated instruction!

14. It’s Your Turn To Try……
Introducing Ananda McBrien who will take us through a DNA extraction…. As we experience this investigation, kindly think about how you would formulate a DOK Level 4 Performance Task for your students and how their writing must meet/exceed the CCLS Writing standard for their grade. Please Note: Teachers of Grades K-2 can choose to write a Performance Task based on the Fingerprint Activity.

15. It’s Your Turn To Try……(distrib. chart paper)
Using Webb’s Depth of Knowledge and Cognitive Rigor Matrix, based on both the DNA Extraction and the Fingerprint Activity, work with a partner on the following:
Develop two Performance Tasks that will the meet or exceed high-level cognitive demands of a DOK Level 4 – and- the CCLS in Writing for a grade level of your choice.
Your Performance Task…..
DOK- 4 - Extended Thinking - An investigation or application to real world; requires time to research, problem solve, and process multiple conditions of the problem or task; non-routine manipulations, across disciplines/content areas/multiple sources

16. Performance Task Writing
&
Gallery Walk
B – DOK LEVEL: C-DOK LEVEL: D-DOK LEVEL : E-DOK LEVEL:

17. Introducing…..all the way from Cleveland…
Bob Badders, Director of the Cleveland Math and Science Partnership (retired) Introducing Seeds of Science-Roots of Reading (Grades 2-5)

18. Thank your for your participation! RAFFLE DRAWING ~ GOOD LUCK!

19. Resources: Webb’s Depth of Knowledge, Norman L. Webb March 28, 2002
New York City Department of Education, Cluster Six ~ Children’s First Network Institute, February 2011
Richard Tudda, Network Support Specialist, Cluster 6 ~ Network 604/609
Webb’s Depth of Knowledge, Norman L. Webb March 28, 2002

20. Middle School: Adding Rigor To Journal & Lab Report Writing
Writing Standard for Literacy in History/SS, Science and Technical Subjects: Standard #2 Grades (6-8); page 65
Hands-On Investigation: Based on the DNA Extraction investigation conducted by Amanda McBrien, illustrate the strand(s) of DNA. Label your diagram.
Look at the following bullets from Writing Standard # 2 for Grades (6-8); page 65 and be prepared to share out your noticings.   
Writing Task: Based on the criteria as delineated in the CCLS, write a draft Lab Report or Science Journal entry which would meet or exceed the standard.
Ask Yourself: What can we do in our practice to add RIGOR to our students’ lab reports and journal entries to substantiate that they are using precise language, domain specific vocabulary and using concluding statement related to the information or explanation presented?
College and Career Readiness Strand: “Text Types and Purposes” 
College and Career Readiness Standard 2: Write informative/explanatory texts including the narration of historical events, scientific procedures/experiments, or technical processes.
d. Use precise language and domain specific vocabulary to inform about or explain the topic 
e. Establish and maintain a formal style objective tone. 
f. Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the information or explanation presented.