1. ELA- Module B Juley Harper, ELA Education Associate
Comparison of the DE ELA Prioritized Curriculum and ELA Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
ELA- Module B
Juley Harper, ELA Education Associate
Welcome to Module B- a Comparison of the DE ELA Prioritized Curriculum and the ELA Common Core State Standards. In this module we will compare the structure and formatting of the newly released ELA Common Core State Standards with the current DE ELA Prioritized Curriculum. Please download a copy of each before you begin this session.
DE ELA Prioritized Curriculum
Common Core State Standards

2. ELA CCSS Document http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards
Introduction- pg. 3
Let’s begin by looking at the ELA Common Core State Standards. The document begins with an introduction on page 3 that captures the motivation behind the standards and focus on building a common vision for understanding the many facets of English Language Arts. The research behind the CCCSS can be found Appendix A.
At the end of the introduction on pg. 8 is a guide entitled, “How To Read This Document.” Please turn to page 8 in the Common Core State Standards document as we compare the structure of the two documents.

3. ELA Common Core State Standards
They are divided into 3 main sections:
1 comprehensive K-5 section
1 content area-specific section for 6-12 ELA
1 content area-specific section for 6-12 history/social studies, science and technical studies
3 Appendices accompany the main document
A-Research supporting key elements in the standards and a Glossary of Terms
B-Text Exemplars and Sample Performance Tasks
C-Samples of Student Writing
The CCSS is comprised of 3 main sections: a comprehensive K-5 section and two content area-specific sections for grades 6-12, one for ELA and one for history/social studies, science and technical studies. Three appendices accompany the main document.
A- Research supporting key elements in the standards and a Glossary of Terms
B- Text Exemplars and Sample Performance Tasks
C- Samples of Student Writing

4. Organization of the ELA CCSS
K-5 Strands
Reading (Literary and Informational)
Writing
Speaking and Listening
Language
6-12 Strands
Reading (Literary and Informational)
Reading in history/social studies
Reading in science and technical studies
Writing for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6–12
Speaking and Listening
Language
Each section is divided into strands. K-5 and 6-12 ELA have Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language strands; the 6-12 history/social studies, science, and technical studies section focuses on Reading and Writing. Each strand is headed by a strand-specific set of College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards that is identical across all grades and content areas.

5. Strands= Standards (in DE)
Each ELA Strand is headed by a strand-specific set of CCR Anchor Standards
Strands= Standards (in DE)
Each ELA strand is headed by a strand-specific set of College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards that is identical across all grades and content areas. A strand is the same thing as our Standards.

6. This number corresponds to the CCR anchor standard.
Standards= Performance Indicators (in DE)
Standards (which we refer to as Performance Indicators in DE) for each grade within K-8 and for grades 9-10 and follow these CCR College and Career Readiness anchor standards in each strand. Each grade-specific standard (as these standards are collectively referred to) corresponds to the same-numbered CCR anchor standard. Put another way, each CCR anchor standard has an accompanying grade-specific standard translating the broader CCR statement into grade-appropriate and end-of-year expectations.

7. CCSS Topics
Within each strand, the standards are organized under topics- Examples of the topics in Reading are circled in Red above.
Reading: Key Ideas and Details, Craft and Structure, Integration of Knowledge and Ideas, and Range and level of Text Complexity
Reading: Foundational Skills: Print Concepts, Phonological Awareness, Phonics and Word Recognition, and Fluency
Writing: Text Types and Purposes, Production and Distribution of Writing, Research to Build Knowledge, and Range of Writing
Speaking and Listening: Comprehension and Collaboration and Presentation of Knowledge and Ideas
Language: Conventions in Writing and Speaking and Vocabulary Acquisition and Use

8. Delaware ELA Prioritized Content Standards:
Students in Delaware public schools, using the processes of effective readers, writers, listeners, viewers, and speakers, will be able to: 
Standard 1: Use written and oral English appropriate for various purposes and audiences.
Standard 2: Construct, examine, and extend the meaning of literary, informative, and technical texts through listening, reading, and viewing.
Standard 3: Access, organize, and evaluate information gained through listening, reading, and viewing.
Standard 4: Use literary knowledge accessed through print and visual media to connect self to society and culture. 
Now, let’s take a look at the DE ELA Prioritized Content Standards and begin to compare them to the CCSS. The current DE ELA Prioritized Standards consists of four content standards, Standard 1-Writing, Speaking and Listening, Standard 2- Reading (with a focus on informational texts), Standard 3- Research, and Standard 4 Reading (with a focus on literary texts). These standards have not changed since 2008, but they have been prioritized to identify which standards are Essential, Important and Compact.

9. The Organization of the Delaware ELA Prioritized Content Standards
The numbers indicate the standard and performance indicator for identified grades.
This is the Enduring Understanding that corresponds to the Performance Indicator
Words that are found in the Glossary are bolded within the GLEs.
This is the Essential Question that corresponds to the Performance Indicator
This screen shot of the DE ELA Content Standards points out the ELA content Standard (4-Reading Literary) and the performance indicator number 2.a. The numbers in the parentheses emphasize the grade in which the reader will see Grade-level expectations below the performance indicator. The content standard is a broad-holistic description of student proficiency in ELA. The standard and corresponding performance indicator spans all grade levels and precedes the Grade level Expectations (GLEs).
There are no Enduring Understandings or Essential Questions in the Common Core State Standards.
There IS a Glossary in the CCSS but the words you will find in the glossary are not bolded within the document.
The Organization of the Delaware ELA Prioritized Content Standards

10. The GLEs in the Delaware ELA Prioritized Content Standards
Identifies specific grade level
GLEs
Content bullets within the existing DE ELA Prioritized Content Standards document are called Grade-level Expectations or GLEs.
These Grade-Level Expectations describe behaviors typical at the specified grade level. They represent behaviors students generally exhibit as they move from novice to expert in their ability to take control of language processes. It is important to remember, however, that literacy learning may not be sequential and each child has a unique developmental pattern.
The GLEs in the Delaware ELA Prioritized Content Standards

11. The DE ELA Prioritized Standards
Topic or Cluster
This GLE is Essential
This GLE is Important
The red letters at the end of each GLE describes the priority of the GLE.
The GLEs were labeled through the Prioritizing the Curriculum Process in which Delaware educators worked with Learning-Focused school consultants in 2009 to prioritize the Delaware Standards and GLEs. Prioritizing the Curriculum Process focuses instruction on standards and GLEs that lead to the greatest student achievement. The statewide Prioritizing the Curriculum process materials were then used to identify important GLEs Essential, Important, and Compact. The red letters at the end of each GLE correspond with the priority-level. E for Essential, I for Important, and C for Compact.
Working Definitions of Essential, Important, and Compact
Essential refers to the most important ideas or concepts for all students to understand at a greater depth. This learning supports a big idea or enduring understanding. Learning that is essential is necessary for all students to know, understand, and be able to do.
Important refers to the key knowledge and skills that support student understanding of the essential knowledge. This includes learning that students have experienced before at earlier grades and may require review and/or explicit connections to the new concepts of the grade.
Compact refers to the knowledge, understanding, and skills that most students have already developed fully at previous grade levels or that are not critical to the essential ideas and concepts at that grade level. These may be items that require only reminders rather than explicit instruction.
*Note: In the upper grades, COMPACT may refer to a review of content. In lower grades, COMPACT may refer to content that is new and is being introduced to students for the first time.

12. CCSS-Language Progressive Skills, by Grade

13. CCSS- Illustrative Texts to Demonstrate Text Complexity
Why Text Complexity Matters
In 2006, ACT, Inc., released a report called Reading Between the Lines that showed which skills differentiated those
students who equaled or exceeded the benchmark score (21 out of 36) in the reading section of the ACT college admissions
test from those who did not. Prior ACT research had shown that students achieving the benchmark score or
better in reading—which only about half (51 percent) of the roughly half million test takers in the 2004–2005 academic
year had done—had a high probability (75 percent chance) of earning a C or better in an introductory, credit-bearing
course in U.S. history or psychology (two common reading-intensive courses taken by first-year college students)
and a 50 percent chance of earning a B or better in such a course.1
Surprisingly, what chiefly distinguished the performance of those students who had earned the benchmark score or
better from those who had not was not their relative ability in making inferences while reading or answering questions
related to particular cognitive processes, such as determining main ideas or determining the meaning of words and
phrases in context. Instead, the clearest differentiator was students’ ability to answer questions associated with complex
texts. Students scoring below benchmark performed no better than chance (25 percent correct) on four-option
multiple-choice questions pertaining to passages rated as “complex” on a three-point qualitative rubric described in
the report. These findings held for male and female students, students from all racial/ethnic groups, and students from
families with widely varying incomes. The most important implication of this study was that a pedagogy focused only
on “higher-order” or “critical” thinking was insufficient to ensure that students were ready for college and careers:
what students could read, in terms of its complexity, was at least as important as what they could do with what they
read.
The ACT report is one part of an extensive body of research attesting to the importance of text complexity in reading
achievement. The clear, alarming picture that emerges from the evidence, briefly summarized below2, is that while the
reading demands of college, workforce training programs, and citizenship have held steady or risen over the past fifty
years or so, K–12 texts have, if anything, become less demanding. This finding is the impetus behind the Standards’
strong emphasis on increasing text complexity as a key requirement in reading.

14. Text Complexity-CCSS

15. Text Complexity-DE Content Standards
Definitions
Concrete – Tangible and distinct ideas or concepts
Abstract – Intangible and theoretical constructs
Simple (or Basic) – Limited in breadth, which can refer to number of factors and/or depth, with specific or concrete concepts
Complex – Multifaceted in breadth, which can refer to multiple factors and/or depth, with more abstract concepts
Familiar – Easily understood; similar to what kids see/experience everyday in their environment. Immediate identification with situation. “Familiar” texts have “reliable” narrators and predictable text structure (even a “surprise ending” is “familiar”); simple lessons (morals); conflicts are generally external.
Recognizable – Familiar because of exposure to TV, etc. Not “in our neighborhood,” but easily understood. May be culturally different, but basic values are similar—easy to relate to. Multiple characters begin to set up recognized plots (hero/anti-hero, etc.); introduce internal conflicts
Unfamiliar – Represent “new” information for most readers; may reflect cultures that are different in fundamental ways; not easily recognizable layered conflicts; the roles of narrators become increasingly more complex (inner monologue, reliable, and unreliable narrators);
Distant – Likely to seem strange to reader; unlikely that kids would identify with situation easily; complex linguistic structures (e.g., unconventional language); complex narrative (e.g., stream of conscious, allegory); complex relationships (e.g., unclear themes, resolutions, etc.)

16. Text Complexity-ELA Common Core State Standards
You will notice that the Text Complexity Charts that appear at the end of each grade level section and in the CCSS Research mirror many of the components included in the DE Text Complexity Chart. The research for both is based on NAEP the 2006 ACT report. ACT, Inc., released a report called Reading Between the Lines that showed which skills differentiated those
students who equaled or exceeded the benchmark score (21 out of 36) in the reading section of the ACT college admissions
test from those who did not.The tools for measuring text complexity are at once useful and imperfect. Each of the qualitative and quantitative
tools described above has its limitations, and none is completely accurate. The development of new and improved
text complexity tools should follow the release of the Standards as quickly as possible. In the meantime, the Standards
recommend that multiple quantitative measures be used whenever possible and that their results be confirmed
or overruled by a qualitative analysis of the text in question.

17. 6-12 Common Core State Standards
The 6-12 CC State Standards begin on Page 34
The ELA Standards for Grades 6-12 begin on page 34 of the common core document and are organized in the same way in which the K-5 ELA standards are organized.
There are NO Foundations (like those in the K-5 standards) in the 6-12 Standards.

18. 6-12 Common Core State Standards in Content-area Literacy
The Content-area Literacy Standards begin on Page 59
There are a few differences in categories in the 6-12 standards:
Reading Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies in grades 6-12
Reading Standards for Literacy in Science and Technical Studies in grades 6-12
Writing Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Studies in grades 6-12
The standards in the 3 above categories are clustered by grade-levels 6-8, 9-10, and 11-12
There are NO Foundations in the 6-12 Standards.

19. Compare the DE ELA Prioritized Curriculum to the
Current DE Content Standards
Common Core State Standards
1. Uses the term GLEs to describe content bullets
1. Uses the term Standards to describe content bullets
1. Organizes the Content Standards by grade-level
Major components of both documents have similar goals yet approach these goals using a different structure and format.
Take a few minutes to discuss and review the similarities and differences between the current DE ELA Prioritized Content Standards and the E:A Common Core State Standards format.
In the next module we will take a look at how content alignment of the Common Core State Standards will affect assessment over time.
ON YOUR OWN
Compare the DE ELA Prioritized Curriculum to the
ELA Common Core State Standards