Ed DeLaVega Instructional Leadership Corps/Common Core Advocate

Transcription

1 Experiencing the Instructional Shifts Ed DeLaVega Instructional Leadership Corps/Common Core Advocate 1 The 4 C s of the Common Core State Standards Critical Thinking Communication Collaboration Creativity 2 1

2 How Teachers Teach All that Can or Should be Taught Advanced work beyond the Core Subjects Support for English Language Learners & Students with Special Needs Everything needed to be College and Career Ready The Standards provide Opportunities for Professional Capital 3 Differences Between the 1997 Standards and Common Core Standards 1997 Standards Common Core Standards Focused on CONTENT... The WHAT Students will know Students will remember Students will understand Focused on SKILLS The HOW Career and College Readiness Skills Critical thinking skills -Analyze - Compare and Contrast - Show evidence - Synthesize -Create 4 2

3 Cognitive Learning Common Core requires High-Level Cognitive Demand Students Demonstrate Deeper Conceptual Understanding Application of Content Knowledge & Skills to New Situations and Tasks Applies Webb s Depth of Knowledge (DOK) to Bloom s Cognitive Process Dimensions Bloom: What type of thinkingis needed to complete a task? Webb: Howdeeplydo you have to understand the content to successfully interact with it? How complex or abstract is the content? 5 6 3

4 Webb, Webb s Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Levels DOK 1: Recall & Reproduction Recall of a fact, term, principle, concept; perform a routine procedure, locate details DOK 2: Basic Application of Skills/Concepts Use of information, two or more steps with decision points along the way, explain relationships DOK 3: Strategic Thinking Requires reasoning or developing a plan or sequence of steps, requires decision-making or justification DOK 4: Extended Thinking An investigation or application to real world; requires time to research, problem solve, and process multiple conditions; could require synthesis of information across multiple sources and/or disciplines 8 4

5 ELA Cognitive Rigor Matrix SBAC Content Specifications for ELA Bloom s Taxonomy + Webb s Depth-of- Knowledge Levels (Hess, Carlock, Jones, & Walkup, 2009) 9 Math Cognitive Rigor Matrix SBAC Content Specifications for Math Bloom s Taxonomy + Webb s Depth-of- Knowledge Levels Depth of Thinking (Webb) + Type of Thinking (Revised Bloom) Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create DOK Level 1 Recall & Reproduction Recall conversions, terms, facts Evaluate an expression Locate points on a grid or number on number line Solve a one-step problem Represent math relationships in words, pictures, or symbols Follow simple procedures Calculate, measure, apply a rule (e.g., rounding) Apply algorithm or formula Solve linear equations Make conversions Retrieve information from a table or graph to answer a question Identify a pattern/trend Brainstorm ideas, concepts, problems, or perspectives related to a topic or concept DOK Level 2 Basic Skills & Concepts Specify, explain relationships Make basic inferences or logical predictions from data/observations Use models /diagrams to explain concepts Make and explain estimates Select a procedure and perform it Solve routine problem applying multiple concepts or decision points Retrieve information to solve a problem Translate between representations Categorize data, figures Organize, order data Select appropriate graph and organize & display data Interpret data from a simple graph Extend a pattern Generate conjectures or hypotheses based on observations or prior knowledge and experience DOK Level 3 Strategic Thinking & Reasoning Use concepts to solve non-routine problems Use supporting evidence to justify conjectures, generalize, or connect ideas Explain reasoning when more than one response is possible Explain phenomena in terms of concepts Design investigation for a specific purpose or research question Use reasoning, planning, and supporting evidence Translate between problem & symbolic notation when not a direct translation Compare information within or across data sets or texts Analyze and draw conclusions from data, citing evidence Generalize a pattern Interpret data from complex graph Cite evidence and develop a logical argument Compare/ contrast solution methods Verify reasonableness Develop an alternative solution Synthesize information within one data set DOK Level 4 Extended Thinking Relate mathematical concepts to other content areas, other domains Develop generalizations of the results obtained and the strategies used and apply them to new problem situations Initiate, design, and conduct a project that specifies a problem, identifies solution paths, solves the problem, and reports results Analyze multiple sources of evidence or data sets Apply understanding in a novel way, provide argument or justification for the new application Synthesize information across multiple sources or data sets Design a model to inform and solve a practical or abstract situation (Hess, Carlock, Jones, & Walkup, 2009) 10 5

6 * ELA Shifts 1. Informational Text Building knowledge through content-rich non-fiction. Math Shifts 1. Focus Narrow the scope of content and deepen how time and energy is spent. 2. Evidence from Text Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in evidencefrom text, both literary and informational. 3. Text Complexity Regular practice with complex text and its academic language. 2. Coherence Integration across grades & subject areas. 3. Rigor Conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and applicationof skills in problem solving situations. 11 Literate Reading COMMON CORE Sciences in schools of material about, and for, science issues Literate Writing to build and present knowledge as claims backed up by arguments from readings, or personal experience Lots of Reading in many genres, to fully comprehend what others said. Writing routinely for a range of discipline-specific tasks, purposes and audiences. Students become literate, adept at making meaning from, and with, discipline specific texts (all types) NGSS Sciences in schools Intertwining three crucial aspects Disciplinary Core Ideas Cross-Cutting Concepts Science and Engineering Practices Working towards specified Performance Expectations consistent with that vision, for all grade bands, and all sciences. Lots of Exploring of, and with, materials as the source of making reasoned empirical arguments. Constructing deep, discipline-specific specific understandings from empirical arguments, neither cluttered nor frontloaded with highly specific vocabulary bits. Students know science as something they, and scientists do, in order to come to know something new, to know how they know it, and why they trust it. 12 6

7 Four Domains for Effective Common Core and Science Instruction and Curriculum Design 13 * 4 Domains Students Content Instruction & Pedagogy s & Assessment Knowing your students and attending to all strengths and needs Strong content knowledge Use of effective instructional strategies and Depths of Knowledge (DOKs) Incorporating the 4 SBAC s and multiple types of formative and summative assessments 14 7

8 15 * #1 Reading Students can read closely and analytically to comprehend a range of increasingly complex literary and informational texts. ELA s #2 #3 Writing Students can produce effective and well-grounded writing for a range of purposes and audiences. Speaking and Listening Students can employ effective speaking and listening skills for a range of purposes and audiences. #4 Research/Inquiry Students can engage in research and inquiry to investigate topics, and to analyze, integrate, and present information. 16 8

9 * Math s #1 #2 #3 #4 Concepts & Procedures Students can explain and apply mathematical concepts and interpret and carry out mathematical procedures with precision and fluency. Problem Solving Students can solve a range of complex well-posed problems in pure andapplied mathematics, making productive use of knowledge and problem solving strategies. Communicating Reasoning Students can clearly and precisely construct viable arguments to support their own reasoning and to critique the reasoning of others. Modeling and Data Analysis Students can analyze complex, real-world scenarios and can construct and use mathematical models to interpret and solve problems. 17 Grade 6 ELA Sample Item: Cell Phones in School Yes or No? Cell phones are convenient and fun to have. However, there are arguments about whether or not they belong in schools. Parents, students, and teachers all have different points of view. Some say that to forbid them completely is to ignore some of the educational advantages of having cell phones in the classroom. On the other hand, cell phones can interrupt classroom activities and some uses are definitely unacceptable. Parents, students, and teachers need to think carefully about the effects of having cell phones in school. 18 9

10 Some of the reasons to supportcell phones in school are as follows: Students can take pictures of class projects to or show to parents. Students can text-message missed assignments to friends that are absent. Many cell phones have calculators or Internet access that could be used for assignments. If students are slow to copy notes from the board, they can take pictures of the missed notes and view them later. During study halls, students can listen to music through their cell phones. Parents can get in touch with their children and know where they are at all times. Students can contact parents in case of emergencies. Some of the reasons to forbidcell phones in school are as follows: Students might send test answers to friends or use the Internet to cheat during an exam. Students might record teachers or other students without their knowledge. No one wants to be recorded without giving consent. Cell phones can interrupt classroom activities. Cell phones can be used to text during class as a way of passing notes and wasting time. Based on what you read in the text, do you think cell phones should be allowed in schools? Using the lists provided in the text, write a paragraph arguing why your position is more reasonable than the opposing position. 19 SBAC Item and Domain Connections Domain ELA Item 1. Students 2. Content 3. Instruction & Pedagogy 4. s& Assessment 20 10

11 SBAC Item Debrief 1. Students: What do students need to know and be able to do to perform well on these items? 2. s & Assessment: How did these items connect with the SBAC s? 3. Instruction & Pedagogy: What sort of instruction do teachers need to provide to support students to be able to perform well? 4. What sort of support may teachers need to teach in ways that will support students appropriately? 21 Grade 6 Math Sample Item 22 11

12 SBAC Item and Domain Connections Domain Math Item 1. Students 2. Content 3. Instruction & Pedagogy 4. s& Assessment 23 SBAC Item Debrief 1. Students: What do students need to know and be able to do to perform well on these items? 2. s & Assessment: How did these items connect with the SBAC s? 3. Instruction & Pedagogy: What sort of instruction do teachers need to provide to support students to be able to perform well? 4. What sort of support may teachers need to teach in ways that will support students appropriately? 24 12

13 CTA Spiral Progressions for ELA Bridging and Scaffolding Student Learning CTA developed spiral progressions of the ELA Common Core State Standards to assist teachers in bridging and scaffolding student learning All the ELA Common Core Standards are aligned K-12 to a Career and College Readiness Anchor Standard Teachers can see the whole picture of how each standards is build upon each other 1. Reading, Writing, Language, and Speaking & Listening Standards -K Reading Standards Foundational Skills - K-5 3. Reading Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies Reading Standards for Literacy in Science and Technical Subjects Writing Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects ELA Spiral Progressions K-12 Example: Reading Standards for Literature (RL) Standard

14 CTA Spiral Progressions See CTA IPD Website: Under Common Core Banner: Common Core Materials and Spirals Can download the whole document Can download by ELA Strands 27 References California Teachers Association, Instruction and Professional Development Website: Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Hess, K. K., Carlock, D., Jones, B. S., & Walkup, J. R. (2009). What exactly do fewer, clearer, and higher standards really look like in the classroom? Using a cognitive rigor matrix to analyze curriculum, plan lessons, and implement assessments. National Center for Assessment: Dover, NH. SBAC General Item Specifications: litemspecifications.pdf SBAC Appendix B, Grade Level Tables for All s and Assessment Targets and Item Types: