Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Translating English Language Arts/Literacy Standards Into College and Career Readiness-Aligned
Instruction
November 2015CCRS Teacher-Leadership Institute
Richmond, VA
2
3
Structure of the Literacy Standards
Four Strands: Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, Language(plus Reading Foundations)
Anchor Standards for Each Strand: 10, 9, 6, and 6 (4)
Standards Listed by Level: A (K-1; Beginning ABE Literacy), B (2-3; Beginning Basic), C (4-5; Low Int. Basic), D (6-8; High Int. Basic), and E (9-12; Low/High ASE)
Strand
Anchor Standard
Level-Specific
Standards
4
CCR Reading Anchor 1 (p. 14)
Activity: Becoming Familiarwith the ELA Anchor Standards
4
5
Three Key Advances Prompted by the CCR Standards in ELA/Literacy
1. Text Complexity: Regular practice with complex text (and
its academic language)
2. Evidence: Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in
evidence from text
3. Building Knowledge: Building knowledge through content-
rich nonfiction
6
Texts worth reading!
Questions worth answering!
Work worth doing!
7
Resource Alignment Tool
Criterion descriptor
Rating each dimension
Dimension descriptors
Summaryfindings
Evidence “look fors”
Suggested high-value actions to fill alignment gaps
8
• Reach a common understanding of each criterion and its
dimensions.
• Understand why each is critical for college and career
readiness (CCR) standards alignment.
• Define how each criterion should impact curricula or lesson
planning.
• Work to:
o Find evidence in the sample lesson.
o Determine the high-value actions needed.
o Determine an overall rating for the resource.
Together, we will…
9
Criterion #1: Text Complexity
10
Rationale for Text Complexity (Dimension 1.1)
• Most work and college success requires the ability to read
at certain levels independently and with comprehension.
• By reading high-quality, complex texts, students increase
their reading proficiency.
• With time precious for many adult students, what they read
must be worth the time devoted to it.
11
What is complex text, exactly?
12
Three Part System for Measuring Text Complexity:
1. Quantitative Scale
2. Qualitative Measures
3. Professional Judgment (of reader and task)
13
Quantitative Analysis Measures
CCR Levels of Learning ATOS
Degrees of Reading Power Flesch-Kincaid
The Lexile Framework
Reading Maturity
B (2nd – 3rd) 2.75 – 5.14 42 – 54 1.98 – 5.34 420 – 820 3.53 – 6.13
C (4th – 5th) 4.97 – 7.03 52 – 60 4.51 – 7.73 740 – 1010 5.42 – 7.92
D (6th – 8th) 7.00 – 9.98 57 – 67 6.51 – 10.34 925 – 1185 7.04 – 9.57
E (9th – 10th) 9.67 – 12.01 62 – 72 8.32 – 12.12 1050 – 1335 8.41 – 10.81
E (11th – CCR) 11.20 – 14.10 67 – 74 10.34 – 14.2 1185 – 1385 9.57 – 12.00
16
Qualitative Analysis Measures
Structure Language
Knowledge Demands
Meaning/Purpose
17
Dimension 1.1: Text Complexity and Quality
Most of the texts included in the resource are at the
appropriate level of complexity as defined by the CCR
standards; all texts are worth reading.
18
• Read a sample set of texts to evaluate their qualities and
determine if they are appropriately complex for the level.
• Apply the evidence for Dimension 1.1 to the resource:
1. Are the texts previously published or of publishable quality?
2. Are the texts content-rich?
3. Do they exhibit exceptional craft and thought, and/or provide
useful information?
• Rate this dimension.
Practice at Your Tables
19
Dimension 1.2: Academic Vocabulary
The resource regularly focuses on understanding words and
phrases, their relationships, and nuances, as well as on
acquiring new vocabulary, particularly general academic
words and phrases.
20
Dimension 1.2: Rationale
• Nearly a century of research identifies vocabulary as crucial
to reading and listening comprehension.
• Vocabulary is the feature of complex text that causes the
greatest difficulty for readers.
• Learning academic vocabulary (Tier 2 words) is key.
o They appear frequently in a wide variety of texts and disciplines,
such as “systematic,” “particular,” “various,” “determine”…
o They relate to other words and offer students more precise ways
of referring to ideas they already know about.
o They are necessary for understanding complex texts.
21
Practice at Your Tables
• Look for evidence in a lesson that attention is being paid to
vocabulary, especially academic vocabulary.
• Scan supporting documents and instructions that
accompany a lesson for Dimension 1.2:
1. Is there any attention on vocabulary?
2. Are any of the words identified academic vocabulary words
(as opposed to words that are domain-specific)?
3. Are questions asked about vocabulary and the author’s word
choice?
22
Criterion #1: High-Value Actions
Ask the publisher of the resource to provide information about the
quantitative and qualitative complexity of the texts.
Conduct qualitative analyses of passages to differentiate between
texts worth reading and those not worth reading.
If most of the passages you reviewed match a lower level of
learning, recommend the resource be used for that level instead.
Identify high-value academic vocabulary words that should be
addressed in the lesson.
Other:
23
Criterion #1: Group Debrief
• What were some of your key findings?
• What was the general consensus about text quality and
complexity?
• Was academic vocabulary featured in the lessons and
questions?
• How did you rate these dimensions?
• What questions do you still have about the importance of
text complexity and quality?
26
Dimension 1.1: Impact on Curricula
• Texts must be consistently high-quality and worth reading.
• Many should be short enough to read and study carefully.
• They must be (largely) within the recommended range of
complexity for the level.
• They should be content-rich and contain useful information.
27
Dimension 1.2: Impact on Curriculum
Instructional resources should:
• Provide guidance on what words are most crucial for
understanding the text and building vocabulary.
• Regularly and systematically point out and ask questions
about important academic vocabulary words.
• Teach how meanings of words vary with context (e.g., Texas
was admitted to the union; he admitted his errors; admission
was too expensive).
• Include numerous informational texts as they contain more
academic vocabulary words than narratives.
28
Criterion #2: Evidence
29
Dimension 2.1: Growth of Comprehension and Using Evidence From Texts
An overwhelming majority (80%) of all questions reviewed
are high-quality, text-dependent, and text-specific.
30
Dimension 2.1: Rationale
• Surveys of employers and college faculty cite the ability to
read well and draw accurate conclusions using evidence as
key success in college and the workplace.
• The ability to cite evidence differentiates strong from weak
student performance on national assessments.
• The ability to find and use evidence to support claims is a
hallmark of strong readers and writers.
• Relying on evidence levels the playing field for students.
There is no reliance on personal experience or knowledge to
construct appropriate, evidence-based answers.
31
Dimension 2.1: Impact on Curricula
Questions that accompany a text should:
• Require evidence from what has been read.
• Be intentionally sequenced to gradually deepen student
understanding.
• Focus student attention on the text, not away from it.
• Provide students regular opportunities to speak and write
about the text.
32
Text-dependent questions are not…
• Low-level, literal, or recall questions.
•Questions that depend solely on prior knowledge.
• Focused on comprehension strategies.
33
Text-dependent questions...
• Focus on words, sentences, and paragraphs, as well as
larger ideas, themes, or events.
• Focus on difficult portions of text to enhance reading
proficiency.
• Can be answered only with evidence from the text.
• Can be literal (to check for understanding) but must also
involve analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
• Include prompts for writing and discussion.
34
Together, let’s…
• Look for evidence for how well the resource provides
reading, writing, and speaking activities grounded in the
text.
• Scan one lesson to see what kinds of questions are being
asked: (Use Resources Alignment Tool)
1. Do the questions focus students on the text or elsewhere?
2. Do they gradually build understanding?
3. Do they ask about important parts and ideas of the text?
4. Do they address level-specific standards?
(**Next, as a group, evaluate questions using checklist.)
35
Materials to Support Your Work
Checklist for Evaluating Question Quality offers a comprehensive checklist that:
• Provides guidance on developing strong text-dependent questions.
• Acts as a training document as well as a way to check quality.
36
Dimension 2.2: Emphasis on Informative and Argumentative Writing and Speaking
An overwhelming majority (80%) of all writing and speaking
assignments reviewed require argumentative and informative
writing and speaking; they require students to draw on
evidence from texts to present careful analyses and well-
defended claims.
37
Dimension 2.2: Rationale
• Employers and college faculty report this is the kind of
writing and speaking valued in the workplace and higher
education.
• Most college and workplace writing and speaking requires
using evidence.
• CCR standards in writing emphasize writing to a source.
• After working hard to understand a complex text, students
deserve opportunities to display what they have learned,
either orally or in writing.
38
Dimension 2.2: Impact on Curricula
• The resource should include frequent opportunities for
writing connected to the readings.
• The resource should offer frequent opportunities for
students to speak to one another about what they have
read.
• The vast majority of writing prompts should be either
argumentative or informative as opposed to narrative.
• Writing prompts should require using evidence from the text
as a central component of the assignment.
39
Together, let’s…
Look for evidence of the kinds of writing assignments and speaking opportunities offered by a lesson in this resource:
1. Are there opportunities to write argumentative essays?
2. Are there opportunities to write informative pieces?
3. Do those writing assignments require students to provide text-
based evidence?
4. Are there regular invitations to speak about the reading?
5. Do they make up 80% of the writing and speaking assignments
in the selected lessons?
(First, use the resources alignment tool. Then, use resource
#4/D)
40
Criterion #2: Group Debrief
• What was the general consensus about the quality and
text-based focus of the questions and assignments?
• Were there writing prompts that allowed students to
demonstrate what they had learned from their reading?
• Were there discussion questions that allowed students to
demonstrate what they had learned from the text?
• What questions do you still have about the role of evidence
in a resource aligned to CCR standards?
41
Criterion #2: High-Value Actions
Replace non-text-dependent questions with valuable text-
dependent questions that target level-specific standards.
Add a variety of text-based writing assignments, including
short and long writing assignments developed from the
central ideas of the text.
Add a culminating writing assignment developed from the
central understanding of the text.
Other:
42
Criterion #3: Knowledge
43
Criterion #3 and Its Dimensions
3.1 The resource accentuates comprehending quality
informational texts independently across disciplines.
3.2 Most passages reviewed are organized around a topic or
line of inquiry; the resource includes regular research
assignments.
44
Dimensions 3.1 and 3.2: Rationale
• Prior knowledge is a strong predictor of students’ ability to
comprehend complex texts.
• To cultivate their knowledge, students must read and write
regularly about content-rich, complex texts.
• Writing about what they read improves students’
comprehension of the text (and their writing skills).
• A reading deficit is integrally bound to a knowledge deficit.
45
Dimensions 3.1 and 3.2: Impact on Curricula
The resource should:
•Provide coherent selections of content-rich, strategically
sequenced texts so students can build knowledge about a topic.
•Demand evidence in students’ writing.
•Provide well-crafted writing prompts as a summative learning
activity—not only to improve writing, but also to strengthen
reading comprehension.
•Ask students to regularly conduct short, focused research
projects and defend their point of view to create a useful and
lasting knowledge base.
46
Together, let’s…
• Look for opportunities for students to build knowledge and
engage in a volume of reading through this resource.
• Scan the list of topics and text titles.
1. How well does the resource build knowledge on a single topic?
2. How does the resource promote independent reading?
47
Criterion #3: High-Value Actions
Create a list of supplemental texts on the same topic to
promote volume of reading and build knowledge.
Develop brief research projects for students on the same
topic.
Other:
48
Criterion #3: Group Debrief
• How well did the resource build knowledge on a single
topic?
• Were most of the texts content-rich informational texts that
promoted learning?
• Were there opportunities for students to extend their
learning through research?
• What questions do you still have about the importance of
building knowledge and independent reading?
49
Practice at Your Table
Work at your table and read several texts you have not yet read.
• For each text, determine:
1. Is the text complex? (Run it through the reading maturity tool to
determine reading level and run it through the academic word finder to
determine key vocabulary.)
2. Are there questions to support the text? If so, are 80% of the
questions high quality and text-dependent.? Do 80% of the writing
prompts emphasize argumentative and informative writing? Are there
opportunities for speaking and listening? If no, how could this be
corrected?
3. Determine which text(s) your group will use to create/revise a lesson
tomorrow.
• Use handout to support this activity.
50
Putting It All Together:Finding and Evaluating Supplemental Texts
51
CCRS Institute: Day 2
52
53
5 Core Actions
1. Curriculum content matches CCRS demands.
2. Questions & tasks are text-specific and cognitively
demanding.
3. Lessons engage learners while focusing on CCRS.
4. Lesson is sequenced to build students’ skills and
knowledge.
5. Instructor assesses learner understanding and
adjusts instruction accordingly.
53
54
Using the Observation Tool: Video Lesson #1
Man's Search for Meaning - Level E (Grade 10)
• As you observe the lesson, individually make notes and
assign ratings for Core Actions 1 and 2.
• After watching the lesson, discuss your findings, and
evidence to back up your findings, at your table.
55
ELA Lesson Development
56
#1-2: Learning Goals and CCRS
• Briefly set context: what level class is this
lesson for? how much time does the lesson
cover?
• What are the learning goals?
• What 4-8 level-specific standards does the
lesson target?
57
#3-4: Text Complexity
• How complex are these texts? What qualitative
features will challenge students?
• What academic vocabulary can you target in
this lesson?
58
#5-6: Evidence
• Does the lesson already include high quality
questions? Which ones will you use?
• What additional questions do you need to plan
to ask?
• Will those questions engage students, include
the standards, and treat the text as the “expert
in the room”?
• What is the writing task for this lesson?
59
#7: Knowledge
• How does this lesson build students’
knowledge?
• What extension activities are available for this
lesson?
60
#8: Instructor Notes & Review
• What tips or suggestions do you have for
instructors who will be teaching this lesson?
• What scaffolds and supports will learners need,
including individuals with LD and English
langauge learners?
• Does the lesson address the target standards
initially identified? How do students
demonstrate their knowledge? How will the
instructor assess mastery?
61
