Implementation of the Common Core State Standards

CARRIE HEATH PHILLIPSSCEPUR Conference

FEBRUARY 9, 2012 | 9:00 - 10:30 A.M.

National Focus on

College- and Career-

Readiness

Aligning the Education System to College- and Career-Readiness

College- and Career-Readiness as the Anchor

Career-readiness and college-readiness levels are very similar

There is a gap between high school expectations for students and what students are expected to do in college/career Among high school graduates, only half

are academically prepared for postsecondary education (Greene & Winters, 2005).

Remediation rates and costs are staggering• As much as 40% of all students entering 4-year colleges need remediation in one or more courses• As much as 63% in 2-year colleges

Degree attainment rates are disappointing•Fewer than 42% of adults aged 25-34 hold college degrees

Source: The College Completion Agenda 2010 Progress Report, The College Board

College Remediation and Graduation Rates

6

Key Learning Skills and Techniques

Problem FormulationResearchInterpretationCommunicationPrecision & Accuracy

Structure of KnowledgeChallenge Level

ValueAttribution

EffortKey Content Knowledge

think: know:

Ownership of LearningLearning Techniques

act:Postsecondary AwarenessPostsecondary CostsMatriculationCareer AwarenessRole and IdentitySelf-advocacy

go:Key

Transition Knowledge

and Skills

Source: Dr. David Conley, Educational Policy Improvement Center

COLLEGE READINESS COMPONENTS

Common Core Background and Process

Common Core State Standards: Overview

State-led and developed Common Core State Standards for K-12 in English Language Arts and Mathematics

Initiative led by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association (NGA)

45 states and D.C. have fully adopted the Common Core State Standards and Minnesota has adopted only the ELA standards.

Common Core State Standards Adoption(as of December 2011)

Why did governors and chiefs do this?Prepare students with the knowledge and skills

they need to succeed in college and work

Ensure consistent expectations regardless of a student’s zip code

Make states more globally competitive

Provide educators, parents, and students with clear, focused guideposts

Offer economies of scale

Features of the standards

Aligned with college and work expectations

Focused and coherent

Include rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order skills

Build upon strengths and lessons of current state standards

Internationally benchmarked

Based on evidence and research

Standards Development Process

College- and career-readiness standards for English/language arts and mathematics developed summer of 2009

Based on the college and career readiness standards, K-12 learning progressions developed

Public comment period with 10,000 responses

Final standards released on June 2, 2010.

ELA Standards

ELA Standards: Design and Organization

Four strands Reading (including Reading Foundational Skills) Writing Speaking and Listening Language

Three appendices

A: Research and evidence; glossary of key terms

B: Reading text exemplars; sample performance tasks

C: Annotated student writing samples

Reading Standard 10: Range and Quality of Texts

Grades 3-5: 50% literature, 50% informational texts

Grades 6-12: More literary non-fiction, particularly texts built on informational text structures rather than narrative literary non-fiction that are structured as stories, such as memoirs and biographies

Grade 12: 30% literature, 70% informational texts

Texts must be worthy of close reading

ELA Standards Key Changes

What you can do now - ELA

Students write about what they’re readingLiteracy in social studies and scienceHelp teachers identify and use text-

dependent questionsBegin evaluating instructional materials

based on their complexity and % of non-fiction texts Kansas Text Complexity Resourceshttp://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Digital_Resources/

The_Common_Core_State_Standards_Supporting_Districts_and_Teachers_with_Text_Complexity.html

Math

Standards

Math Standards: Design and Organization

Standards for Mathematical Practice Carry across all grade levels Describe habits of mind of a mathematically expert student

Standards for Mathematical Content K-8 standards presented by grade level High school standards presented by conceptual theme

Appendix Designing high school math courses based on the Common

Core State Standards

GradePriorities in Support of Rich Instruction and Expectations of Fluency and Conceptual Understanding

K–2Addition and subtraction, measurement using whole number quantities

3–5Multiplication and division of whole numbers and fractions

6Ratios and proportional reasoning; early expressions and equations

7Ratios and proportional reasoning; arithmetic of rational numbers

8 Linear algebra

Priorities in Mathematics

Key Fluencies

Grade Required Fluency

K Add/subtract within 51 Add/subtract within 10

2Add/subtract within 20

Add/subtract within 100 (pencil and paper)

3Multiply/divide within 100

Add/subtract within 10004 Add/subtract within 1,000,0005 Multi-digit multiplication

6Multi-digit division

Multi-digit decimal operations7 Solve px + q = r, p(x + q) = r

8 Solve simple 22 systems by inspection

Math Standards Key Changes

What you can do now - Math

Focus Problem-solving

Illustrative Mathematics Project

http://illustrativemathematics.org/

ELA and Math Implementation Resources

South Carolina Department of Education:

http://ed.sc.gov/agency/pr/standards-and-curriculum/South_Carolina_Common_Core.cfm

Student Achievement Partners:www.AchieveTheCore.org

Assessments

New Common Summative Assessments

Two state-led assessment consortia Partnership for Readiness for College and

Career (PARCC) SMARTER Balanced

Federal Race to the Top (RTTT) grant of $350M

New summative assessments used for accountability purposes in 2014-2015 school year

Confidential and Proprietary. Copyright © 2009 Educational Testing Service.

Washington, DC

Hawaii

SBAC State

PARCC State

Both consortia

Assessment Consortia Memberships

New Common Summative Assessments

Why two assessments instead of one?Competition fuels innovation.States have options.Can see if one works better than the other in the end

END-OF-YEARASSESSMENT

The PARCC Assessment System

Developed by The Center for K–12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS, version 4, July 2011. For detailed information on PARCC, go to http://PARCConline.org.

Comp 3

PERFORMANCEASSESSMENT

• ELA• Math

Timing of formative components is flexible

ELA/Literacy• Speaking• Listening

Comp 5

Flexible timing

Comp 4

Early indicator of knowledge and skills to inform instruction,

supports, PD

Component 1EARLY ASSESSMENT

Mid-Year Performance-Based Assessment

(Potentially summative)

Component 2MID-YEAR ASSESSMENT

FormativeAssessment

Summative assessment for accountability

Summative, but not used for accountability

Optional Interim assessment system — no stakes

Summative assessment for accountability

Last 12 weeks of year*

Scope, sequence, number, and timing of interim assessments locally determined

PERFORMANCETASKS

• Reading• Writing• Math

COMPUTERADAPTIVE

ASSESSMENT

Re-take option

The SBAC Assessment System

* Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.

English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 – 8 and High School

Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks

INTERIM ASSESSMENT

Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks

INTERIM ASSESSMENT

What will the tests look like?

Computer-based, with quicker turn-around for scoring and better test items

Not your grandma’s multiple choice itemsFocus on depth of understanding and higher-order

thinking skillsMore precise, actionable information than current testsMore interactive than current testsMore writing (particularly writing to sources) than current

testsDigital libraries of resources, including released items,

formative assessments, data-management system, and professional development on assessment

Consortia Differences

Computer-based adaptive testing is used in SMARTER Balanced Consortium. PARCC has computer-based, but not adaptive, testing.

Teacher scoring is emphasized in SMARTER Balanced when evaluating performance tasks.

Questions and Discussion

Carrie Heath Phillips

carrieh@ccsso.org

Twitter: @cheathphillips

Program Director, Common Core Implementation

Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)

www.ccsso.org

www.corestandards.org