Common Core-aligned Planning & Student Progress Towards Mastery – Developing LF Competency 2

January 9, 2014 - PLI

What’s New with the Common Core? – Recent Headlines & Quotes

• “PARCC Releases Sample Common Core Test Items for All Grade Levels”

• “The Common Core Is Tough on Kids Who Are Still Learning English”

• “New NAEP Results Show DC and Tennessee Made Biggest Gains in Nation”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• “Text complexity, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Simple or dense, fictional or informational, what matters most for comprehension of a particular text is whether the reader has knowledge relevant to the text.” - E.D. Hirsch Jr. and Lisa Hansel

• “The argument for informational texts is not that students should read more information and less literature, but that they should read more of both. Righting the current imbalance will simply require increases in reading of information.” - Timothy Shanahan

• “I hate nonfiction, Mrs. Miller. It’s so boring. It’s all about dead presidents and whales.” - A Texas sixth grader

- Quotes from Marshall Memo

2

Goals – Participants will reflect on and refine plans to:

• Demonstrate a high-level knowledge of the Common Core Standards, and ensure school-wide focus on the standards. (LF Competency 2a)

• Ensure effective processes for Common Core-aligned unit and lesson planning are in place and used school-wide. (LF Competency 2c)

• Use interim assessment data to identify and support interventions for most students, whether or not they are making progress. (LF Competency 2d)

3

Promoting Common Core Mastery: The Importance of Alignment

NPS Unit Outlines

Observing:

Assessing:Planning:

NPS Teacher Framework defines how to help all students reach Common Core mastery.

5

Students sustain focus on a specific objective that moves them toward mastery.

Instructional strategies challenge all students and provide multiple pathways to mastery.

A learning-focused environment of shared high expectations promotes mastery.

Students show evidence of, and teacher monitors, growth.

The teacher demonstrates commitment to excellence and to the professional growth of his/her school and peers.

Today’s Focus Areas in the NPS Teacher Framework

1b. Lesson Components Lesson components move students toward mastery of an objective that is aligned to essential understandings in the standards.

1f. Progression of Instruction: Lesson objectives fit into a larger, coherent sequence that leads to student mastery of the appropriate standards.

2a. Tailored Instruction: Teacher tailors instruction to move all students toward mastery.

2c. Responsiveness: Teacher anticipates and responds to student reactions and misunderstandings by adjusting instructional strategies.

6

NPS Leadership Framework defines how leaders support teachers in helping students reach Common Core mastery.

1. Management and Coaching of Instructional Staff: Effectively develops and manages talent to improve instruction.

2. Curriculum, Assessment and Instruction: Effectively uses curriculum and assessment tools to advance Common Core-aligned instruction.

3. Student and Family Support: Supports students’ academic, social and emotional growth.

4. Transformational Leadership: Maintains relentless focus on improving student outcomes through planning, relationships, and personal responsibility.

5. Organizational Leadership: Implements systems and processes to effectively manage operations.

7

Today’s Focus Areas in the NPS Leadership Framework

2a. Promote Common Core Mastery. Demonstrates a high-level knowledge of the Common Core Standards, and ensures school-wide focus on the standards.

2c. Planning Aligned to Common Core Mastery. Implements building-wide systems to ensure teachers are creating effective unit and lesson plans aligned to each other and to best-in-class resources.

2d. Measures for Common Core Mastery. Ensures high quality, effective tools to assess and monitor student mastery of CCSS.

8

LF 2a – Promoting Common Core Mastery - Modeling Close Reading

LF 2a – Promoting Common Core Mastery - Common Core Pre-Test

IN OUT1. Only some students read complex texts

2. Reading any ol’ text

3. Solely literature

4. Collection of unrelated texts

5. Mostly text-to-self questions

6. Mainly writing without sources

7. Accent on literary terminology

8. Emphasis on pre-reading

9. Reading strategies (as end goal)

10. Reading foundations (peripheral and detached)

1. Daily encounters w/complex texts

2. Texts worthy of close attention

3. Balance of literary and info texts

4. Coherent sequences of texts

5. Mostly text-dependent questions

6. Mainly evidence-based analyses

7. Accent on academic vocabulary

8. Emphasis on reading & re-reading

9. Reading strategies (as means)

10. Reading foundations (central and integrated)

11

• High School Group (Brad’s & Tiffany’s High School Principals): Library

-------------------------------------------Starting at 10:45• Math Case Study Group (1st Round:

Roger’s & Mitch’s Principals): Gathering Room

• Literacy Case Study Group (1st Round: Aqua’s, Peter’s, & Tiffany’s K-8 Principals): Theater

Room Assignments

Agenda for K-8 Principals

• Introductory Presentation - 8:30–9:30 

• Reflection on Interim Assessment Data – 9:40–10:30

• Case Study Analysis, Rotation 1 - 10:45–12:10

• Lunch

• Case Study Analysis, Rotation 2 - 12:55–2:20

• Network Conversations – 2:25 – 3:05• Options: Reflection on Data Cycle, Reflection on

Attendance Data, etc.

12

Promoting Common Core Mastery: The Importance of Alignment

NPS Unit Outlines

Observing:

Assessing:Planning:

Reflecting on Interim Assessment Data –What –> So What -> Now What

2d. Measures for Common Core Mastery. Ensures high quality, effective tools to assess and monitor student mastery of CCSS.

What? - Anet Interim Assessment #1: OverviewInterim Assessment #1 (A1) provided baseline data.

15

Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 80%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

49%

41%

35%

44%

34%

47%42%

64% 63%

46%49% 51%

41%36%

ELAMath

Average Percentage Correct in ELA and Math by Grade

ANet Math: How did students perform?

• Multiplication and Division Facts within 100

• Contextual Positive and Negative Rational Numbers

• Multiply Rational Numbers

• Add and Subtract Whole Numbers

• Place Value

• Square Root and Cube Root Problems

HIGHEST (70%)

HIGHEST (70%)

LOWEST (31%)

HIGHEST (66%)

LOWEST (28%)

LOWEST (33%)

3rd Grade

6th Grade

7th Grade

4th Grade

4th Grade

8th Grade

ANet Language Arts: How did students perform?

• Literature: Cite text explicitly when analyzing and inferencing

• Informational: Refer to explicit/inferential details in the text

• Informational: Quote text accurately to explain explicit and inferential ideas

• Informational: Cite several pieces of textual evidence when analyzing and inferencing

• Literature: Ask and answer questions using key details from the text

LOWEST (27%)

LOWEST (31%)

HIGHEST (66%)

HIGHEST (61%)

HIGHEST (36%)

6th Grade

4th Grade

5th Grade

7th Grade

3rd Grade

Data Slides

• Find out what grade level of ANet data your table was assigned to analyze.

• Analyze ANet data for assigned grade level and discuss:> What trends do you see? > Where are students struggling?> What are three things you are doing to address

these areas where students are struggling?

• Listen to short presentation on district patterns.

18

ANet: 3rd Grade Assessed Standards

19

ELA Standard# of

questions

NPS averag

e

RI.3.1 Ask and answer questions using key details from the text 6 35%

RI.3.2 Determine main idea; identify details that support the main idea 2 29%

RI.3.3  Describe relationships in informational texts using signal words 3 42%

RL.3.1 Ask and answer questions using key details from the text 1 36%

RL.3.2 Recount & determine the lessons of culturally diverse texts using key details 2 47%RL.3.3 Describe characters & explain impact 2 62%

RI.3.4 Determine academic vocabulary & domain-specific word meanings 3 41%RI.3.5 Use features to efficiently read a text 1 43%

RI.3.6 Distinguish student's point of view from author's point of view 3 40%

RL.3.4 Determine the meaning of words (literal vs. nonliteral) 1 48%

RL.3.5 Refer to text parts using literary terms; describe progression 1 24%

L.3.5 Understand figurative language, word relationships & word nuances 2 54%

Math Standards

# of Question

s

NPS Averag

e

3.OA.1 Interpret Products of Whole Numbers 3 59%

3.OA.3 Multiplication and Division Fact Word Problems 3 60%

3.OA.7 Multiplication & Division Facts within 100 3 70%

3.NBT.1 Rounding Whole Numbers 3 59%

3.NBT.2 Add and Subtract Whole Numbers 6 66%

ANet: ELA Key Ideas and Details standards

203rd Grade 4th Grade 5th Grade 6th Grade 7th Grade 8th Grade

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

RL1 AverageRI 1 Average

• RL.1 (Reading Literature) and RI.1 (Reading Informational Text) are foundational standards

21

ANet: ELA Craft and Structure standards• Craft and structure standards include interpretation, structural

analysis, and point of view.

Note: The 4th grade assessment only tested one of the RL Craft and Structure standards.

3rd Grade 4th Grade 5th Grade 6th Grade 7th Grade 8th Grade0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

RLRI

22

Note: To ensure these data are useful in informing instruction, teachers should consider the extent to which each standard was taught to mastery and the number of items assessing it on the A1 interim

Grade Standard Reassessed in A2?

# of items on A1 interim

Average % correct

3 3.OA.7: Multiplication & Division Facts within 100

Yes 3 70%

4 4.NBT.4: Add and Subtract Whole Numbers

Yes 3 66%

5 5.NBT.5: Multiply Whole Numbers Yes 6 53%

6 6.NS.5: Contextual Positive and Negative Rational Numbers

No 3 70%

7 7.NS.3: Solve Real-World and Mathematical Problems with Rational Numbers

No 3 49%

8 8.EE.4: Scientific Notation Operations Yes 3 63%

ANet: Highest Performance by Common Core Math Standards

Grade Standard Reassessed in A2?

# of items on A1 interim

Average % correct

3 3.OA.1: Interpret Products of Whole Numbers

Yes 3 59%

4 4.NBT.1: Place Value Yes 3 28%

5 5.NBT.2: Products of Powers of Ten: Patterns in Zeroes and Decimal Points

Yes 3 36%

6 6.NS.7c: Absolute Value Yes 3 33%

7 7.NS.2a: Multiply Rational Numbers Yes 3 31%

8 8.EE.2: Square Root and Cube Root Problems

Yes 3 33%

Note: To ensure these data are useful in informing instruction, teachers should consider the extent to which each standard was taught to mastery and the number of items assessing it on the A1 interim

23

ANet: Lowest Performance by Common Core Math Standards

• NPS students generally struggle on these rigorous, Common Core-aligned assessments, particularly in literacy but there are some positive signs.

• For Reading Key Ideas and Details, students perform much better on informational text items than on literature items.

• Students do relatively well on questions about specific vocabulary and sentences within a text but struggle more with literacy items that require students to show understanding of the entire text.

• The highest performing standards in math were across major CCSS clusters in Math.

• Numbers and Operations in Base Ten was the lowest performing math standard in lower grades.• Within Numbers and Operations in Base Ten, fourth graders had the

single lowest performance (on Place Value). However, they also showed strength in other Numbers and Operations in Base Ten standards, especially Whole Numbers and Addition/Subtraction. Students seemed to struggle with the format of this item.

24

Observations & Conclusions – So What?

Now What?

Case Studies – A Week in the Life of a Common Core Classroom

2c. Planning Aligned to Common Core Mastery. Implements building-wide systems to ensure teachers are creating effective unit and lesson plans aligned to each other and to best-in-class resources.

Case Studies: A Week in the Life of a Student in a Common Core Classroom

• 2nd Grade Math Classroom: How is Ms. D. helping Caden use bar models to solve addition and subtraction problems?

• 5th Grade Literacy Classroom: How is Ms. Dootheblock helping Tee Struggle cite evidence from literature when writing an expository essay?

26

Today’s Focus Areas in the NPS Teacher Framework

• TF Competency 1b (Lesson Components) & 1f (Progression of Instruction) – Planning

• TF Competency 2a – Tailored Instruction

• TF Competency 2c – Responsiveness

27

Supports Beyond Today’s PLI Session

• January 29th Staff Development Day

• Common Core Math: Developing Model Classrooms

• Common Core Literacy: Supporting Wave 1 & Wave 2 Schools

• Network Trainings

• Teacher Leadership Initiative, Phase 2!

28

29

• High School Group (Brad’s & Tiffany’s Principals): Library

-------------------------------------------Starting at 10:45• Math Case Study Group (1st Round:

Roger’s & Mitch’s Principals): Gathering Room

• Literacy Case Study Group (1st Round: Aqua’s, Peter’s, & Tiffany’s K-8 Principals): Theater

Room Assignments

Case Study Analysis• Listen to the opening presentation on the case.

• Read the case documents.

• In groups of 2 or 3:• Write down evidence from the case that addresses the

questions.• Review the takeaways/look fors from the case.• Star the evidence that matches the takeaways/look

fors. • Discuss the differences between your evidence and the

takeaways.• Discuss ways this teacher could make her practice

even more effective with respect to this indicator.

30

Takeaways for Planning - 1b & 1f - Math• Ms. D plans with the end in mind by creating a daily plan from the

unit planner (see page 3,5, and 6 of planning documents).

• She uses the chapter pre-test to identify concepts that students still need to learn and to plan small group instruction (see page 5 of planning documents).

• Ms. D plans specific questions before teaching the overall lesson (see page 9 and 10 of planning documents).

• Prior to the lesson, the teacher reviews data such as pre-tests, chapter assessments, warm up activities, and checklists to plan whole group instruction. For example, her review of the data indicates that students are not fluent in mental math and thus, she chooses the “School Day Count” focus in Everyday Counts Calendar Math as her introductory activity to build this fluency and to supplement the Math in Focus lesson (see page 14 of implementation of case study).

31

Takeaways for Tailored Instruction - 2a - Math• Ms. D tiers the guided practice problems by

strategically grouping students. In this lesson, she groups them homogeneously by their pre-test results (see page 5 and 10 of implementation of case study).

• Ms. D tailors pre-planned questions for specific learners and groups of learners (see page 5 and 10 of implementation of case study).

• She tailors instruction by having some students spend more time on particular stages of learning, i.e., concrete, pictorial, or abstract (see page 13 of implementation of case study).

32

Takeaways for Responsiveness - 2c - Math• Ms. D plans interventions to address student

misconceptions. Specifically, she has Caden use manipulatives to assist with the concrete stage of subtraction because he is having trouble with regrouping (see page 4 and 9 of implementation of case study).

• Ms. D asks students to show and explain their thinking to surface misunderstandings (throughout the implementation of case study).

• Ms. D regularly redirects students to ensure they use the correct mathematical terminology (see pages 6 and 11 of implementation of case study).

33

Takeaways for Planning - 1b & 1f - Literacy• Pre-Reading of Entire Module & Texts: Ms. Dootheblock’s lesson components

and progression of instruction were effective in moving students towards Common Core mastery, in part, because she read the entire module and trade book before teaching the lesson. Thus, she planned her daily lessons with an understanding of the larger plan for the semester and year. For example, since she was unclear how writing would be addressed in the curriculum, she searched through module 1 and created a reminder sheet (blue document) indicating where writing was explicitly addressed.

• Grouping by Assessment Data: The whole group EL curriculum is aligned to the ANet assessment cycle and builds toward standards mastery for the year. Ms. Dootheblock uses EL materials (yellow documents) to generate small group and workstation activities to stay on schedule with the pacing guide (see Weekly Lesson Plan template in yellow and Pacing Guide in blue).

• Targeting Vocabulary in Small Groups: Knowing that her students will struggle with particular vocabulary terms that they will encounter in this week’s reading tasks, Ms. Dootheblok identifies said terms at the Vocabulary/Language workstation and directs students to complete the contextual redefinition worksheet for the identified terms (see yellow sheets). By doing this she knows that she will not have to take valuable whole group class time to cover these terms.

34

Takeaways for Tailored Instruction - 2a - Literacy• Workstations to Address Weaknesses: Ms. Dootheblock used data from SRI,

ANet, Entrance and Exit tickets, and anecdotal notes collected from daily observations of her classroom to guide the tailored work to be completed in small group and the workstations. She utilized the small group/workstation/independent reading components of the block to address individual student weaknesses.

• Scaffolding: To help Tee Struggle complete the assigned class task, Ms. Dootheblok scaffolded the process he used to reach the same product as his classmates. First she worked on his fluency and comprehension by having him read along with a recorded version of the text (previous night’s homework – see Tuesday green sheet). Next he read with a partner during whole group and again read along with a recording of the text as he gathered evidence. After he completed this task he then used a Venn diagram to prepare to write his final paragraph. But before he completed the paragraph he reviewed the reading pages and his completed diagram with Ms. Dootheblok in group C during small group.

• Tailored Exit Tickets: Finally after meeting with Ms. Dootheblok group C moved to the workstation where they could complete the whole group assignment.  Tee submitted his exit ticket at the end of class.

35

Takeaways for Responsiveness - 2c - Literacy• Pre-Reading of Module Helped Anticipate Struggles: In carefully

reading the entire module and trade book before teaching it, Ms. Dootheblock identified areas where students will struggle and planned accordingly. In addition, she utilized the small group/workstation/independent reading components of the block to extend the learning from the whole group portion and address individual student weaknesses. Each component of the block worked in concert to strengthen student understanding and achievement.

• Understanding the Writing for Understanding Approach: By recognizing that students needed to comprehend what they were reading in order to write about what the text taught them, Ms. Dootheblock modified the route each student took to achieve the same outcome through crafting coherent activities for each portion of the block (see documents in yellow).

36

Agenda for K-8 Principals

• Introductory Presentation - 8:30–9:30 

• Reflection on Interim Assessment Data – 9:40–10:30

• Case Study Analysis, Rotation 1 - 10:45–12:10

• Lunch

• Case Study Analysis, Rotation 2 - 12:55–2:20

• Network Conversations – 2:25 – 3:05• Options: Reflection on Data Cycle, Reflection on

Attendance Data, etc.

37

38

• High School Group (Brad’s & Tiffany’s High School Principals): Library

-------------------------------------------Starting at 10:25• Math Case Study Group (1st Round:

Roger’s & Mitch’s Principals): Gathering Room

• Literacy Case Study Group (1st Round: Aqua’s, Peter’s, & Tiffany’s K-8 Principals): Theater

Room Assignments