literacy standards for grades 6-12 participants... · literacy standards for grades 6-12:...

LITERACY STANDARDS FOR GRADES 6-12:

HISTORY/SOCIAL STUDIES, SCIENCE, AND TECHNICAL SUBJECTS

College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading

The Grades 6-12 standards on the following pages define what students should understand and be able to do by the

end of each grade span. They correspond to the College and Career Readiness (CCR) anchor standards below by

number. The CCR and grade-specific standards are necessary complements—the former providing broad

standards, the latter providing additional specificity—that together define the skills and understandings that all

students must demonstrate.

Key Ideas and Details

1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific

textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.

2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting

details and ideas.

3. Analyze how and why individuals, events, or ideas develop and interact over the course of a text.

Craft and Structure

4. Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and

figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone.

5. Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text

(e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole.

6. Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.

Integration of Knowledge and Ideas

7. Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse formats and media, including visually and

quantitatively, as well as in words.*

8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as

well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.

9. Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build knowledge or to compare

the approaches the authors take.

Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity

10. Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.

*See College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Writing, “Research to Build and Present Knowledge,”

on page 103 for additional standards relevant to gathering, assessing, and applying information from print and

digital sources.

102

APPENDIX D

College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for

Reading

The College and Career Readiness (CCR) anchor standards below were developed prior to the

development of grade-level standards. The Grades K-12 standards define what students should understand

and be able to do by the end of each grade. The CCR and grade-specific standards are necessary

complements—the former providing broad standards, the latter providing additional specificity—that

together define the skills and understandings that all students must demonstrate. The 2010 Common Core

State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical

Subjects are noted in brackets following Grades K-12 standards. Alabama standards that have been added to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are noted by a state of Alabama symbol ( ).

Key Ideas and Details 1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific

textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text. 2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key

supporting details and ideas. 3. Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text.

Craft and Structure 4. Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and

figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone. 5. Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of

the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole. 6. Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.

Integration of Knowledge and Ideas 7. Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse formats and media, including visually and

quantitatively, as well as in words. (See ―Research to Build and Present Knowledge‖ for the CCR anchor

standards for Writing on page 10 and ―Comprehension and Collaboration‖ for the CCR anchor standards

for Speaking and Listening on page 11 for additional standards relevant to gathering, assessing, and

applying information from print and digital sources.) 8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the

reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence. 9. Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build knowledge or to

compare the approaches the authors take.

Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity 10. Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.

9

Investigating the Importance of Informational Text Task:

Go to Handout from Appendix A, pages 3 & 4.

Find the starred paragraphs.

Read these paragraphs to investigate and note the importance of informational text in the

standards.

Write your “aha’s and questions” on the chart below.

Think about, discuss and jot examples you could use in your classes.

Key Concepts in the Reading

Aha’s or Questions

Informational Text Examples That Could

be Used in Your Classes

Adapted from 2010 Wisconsin Cooperative Educational Service Agencies (CESAs) School Improvement Services

AP

PE

ND

IX A

| 3

K–12 Schooling: Declining Complexity of Texts

and a Lack of Reading of Complex Texts Independently

Despite steady or growing reading demands from various sources, K–12 reading texts have actually trended

downward in difficulty in the last half century. Jeanne Chall and her colleagues (Chall, Conard, & Harris, 1977)

found a thirteen- year decrease from 1963 to 1975 in the difficulty of grade 1, grade 6, and (especially) grade

11 texts. Extending the period to 1991, Hayes, Wolfer, and Wolfe (1996) found precipitous declines (relative to

the period from 1946 to 1962) in average sentence length and vocabulary level in reading textbooks for a

variety of grades. Hayes also found that while science books were more difficult to read than literature books,

only books for Advanced Placement (AP) classes had vocabulary levels equivalent to those of even

newspapers of the time (Hayes & Ward, 1992). Carrying the research closer to the present day, Gary L.

Williamson (2006) found a 350L (Lexile) gap between the difficulty of end-of-high school and college

texts—a gap equivalent to 1.5 standard deviations and more than the Lexile difference between grade 4 and

grade 8 texts on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Although legitimate questions

can be raised about the tools used to measure text complexity (e.g., Mesmer, 2008), what is relevant in

these numbers is the general, steady decline—over time, across grades, and substantiated by several

sources—in the difficulty and likely also the sophistication of content of the texts students have been asked

to read in school since 1962.

There is also evidence that current standards, curriculum, and instructional practice have not done enough to

foster the independent reading of complex texts so crucial for college and career readiness, particularly in

the case of infor mational texts. K–12 students are, in general, given considerable scaffolding—assistance

from teachers, class discussions, and the texts themselves (in such forms as summaries, glossaries, and

other text features)—with reading that is already less complex overall than that typically required of

students prior to 1962.3 What is more, students today are asked to read very little expository text—as little

as 7 and 15 percent of elementary and middle school instructional reading, for example, is expository

(Hoffman, Sabo, Bliss, & Hoy, 1994; Moss & Newton, 2002; Yopp & Yopp, 2006)— yet much research

supports the conclusion that such text is harder for most students to read than is narrative text (Bowen &

Roth, 1999; Bowen, Roth, & McGinn, 1999, 2002; Heller & Greenleaf, 2007; Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008),

that students need sustained exposure to expository text to develop important reading strategies

(Afflerbach, Pear- son, & Paris, 2008; Kintsch, 1998, 2009; McNamara, Graesser, & Louwerse, in press;

Perfetti, Landi, & Oakhill, 2005; van den Broek, Lorch, Linderholm, & Gustafson, 2001; van den Broek,

Risden, & Husebye-Hartmann, 1995), and that expository text makes up the vast majority of the required

reading in college and the workplace (Achieve, Inc., 2007). Worse still, what little expository reading

students are asked to do is too often of the superficial variety that involves skimming and scanning for

particular, discrete pieces of information; such reading is unlikely to prepare students for the cognitive

demand of true understanding of complex text.

The Consequences: Too Many Students Reading at Too Low a Level

The impact that low reading achievement has on students’ readiness for college, careers, and life in general is

significant. To put the matter bluntly, a high school graduate who is a poor reader is a postsecondary student

who must struggle mightily to succeed. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (Wirt, Choy,

Rooney, Provasnik, Sen, & Tobin, 2004) reports that although needing to take one or more

remedial/developmental courses of any sort low- ers a student’s chance of eventually earning a degree or

certificate, “the need for remedial reading appears to be the most serious barrier to degree completion” (p.

63). Only 30 percent of 1992 high school seniors who went on to enroll in postsecondary education

between 1992 and 2000 and then took any remedial reading course went on to receive a degree or

certificate, compared to 69 percent of the 1992 seniors who took no postsecondary remedial courses and 57

percent of those who took one remedial course in a subject other than reading or mathematics. Considering

that 11 percent of those high school seniors required at least one remedial reading course, the societal impact

of low reading achievement is as profound as its impact on the aspirations of individual students.

Reading levels among the adult population are also disturbingly low. The 2003 National Assessment of

Adult Literacy (Kutner, Greenberg, Jin, Boyle, Hsu, & Dunleavy, 2007) reported that 14 percent of adults read

prose texts at “below basic” level, meaning they could exhibit “no more than the most simple and concrete

literacy skills”; a similarly small number (13 percent) could read prose texts at the “proficient level,” meaning

they could perform “more complex and

challenging literacy activities” (p. 4). The percent of “proficient” readers had actually declined in a

statistically significant way from 1992 (15 percent). This low and declining achievement rate may be

connected to a general lack of reading. As reported by the National Endowment for the Arts (2004), the

percent of U.S. adults reading literature dropped from 54.0 in 1992 to 46.7 in 2002, while the percent of

adults reading any book also declined by 7 percent

3As also noted in “Key Considerations in Implementing Text Complexity,” below, it is important to recognize that

scaffolding often is entirely appropriate. The expectation that scaffolding will occur with particularly challenging

texts is built into the Standards’ grade-by-grade text complexity expectations, for example. The general movement,

however, should be toward de- creasing scaffolding and increasing independence both within and across the text

complexity bands defined in the Standards.

Adapted from 2010 Wisconsin Cooperative Educational Service Agencies (CESAs) School Improvement Services

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS & LITERACY IN HISTORY/SOCIAL STUDIES, SCIENCE, AND

TECHNICAL

during the same time period. Although the decline occurred in all demographic groups, the steepest

decline by far was among 18-to-24- and 25-to-34-year-olds (28 percent and 23 percent, respectively). In

other words, the problem of lack of reading is not only getting worse but doing so at an accelerating rate.

Although numerous factors likely contribute to the decline in reading, it is reasonable to conclude from the

evidence presented above that the deterioration in overall reading ability, abetted by a decline in K–12 text

complexity and a lack of focus on independent reading of complex texts, is a contributing factor.

Being able to read complex text independently and proficiently is essential for high achievement in college

and the workplace and important in numerous life tasks. Moreover, current trends suggest that if

students cannot read challenging texts with understanding—if they have not developed the skill,

concentration, and stamina to read such texts—they will read less in general. In particular, if students

cannot read complex expository text to gain information, they will likely turn to text-free or text-light

sources, such as video, podcasts, and tweets. These sources, while not without value, cannot capture the

nuance, subtlety, depth, or breadth of ideas developed through complex text. As Adams (2009) puts it,

“There may one day be modes and methods of information delivery that are as efficient

and powerful as text, but for now there is no contest. To grow, our students must read lots, and more

specifically they must read lots of ‘complex’ texts—texts that offer them new language, new knowledge,

and new modes of thought” (p. 182). A turning away from complex texts is likely to lead to a general

impoverishment of knowledge, which, be- cause knowledge is intimately linked with reading

comprehension ability, will accelerate the decline in the ability to comprehend complex texts and the

decline in the richness of text itself. This bodes il l for the ability of Americans to meet the demands placed

upon them by citizenship in a democratic republic and the challenges of a highly competi- tive global

marketplace of goods, services, and ideas.

It should be noted also that the problems with reading achievement are not “equal opportunity” in their

effects: students arriving at school from less-educated families are disproportionately represented in

many of these statistics (Bettinger & Long, 2009). The consequences of insufficiently high text demands

and a lack of accountability for independent reading of complex texts in K–12 schooling are severe for

everyone, but they are disproportionately so for those who are already most isolated from text before

arriving at the schoolhouse door.

The Standards’ Approach to Text Complexity

To help redress the situation described above, the Standards define a three-part model for determining

how easy or difficult a particular text is to read as well as grade-by-grade specifications for increasing

text complexity in suc- cessive years of schooling (Reading standard 10). These are to be used together

with grade-specific standards that require increasing sophistication in students’ reading comprehension

ability (Reading standards 1–9). The Standards thus approach the intertwined issues of what and how

student read.

A Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity

As signaled by the graphic at right, the

Standards’ model of text complexity consists of

three equally important parts.

(1) Qualitative dimensions of text complexity. In

the Stan- dards, qualitative dimensions and

qualitative factors refer to those aspects of text

complexity best measured or only measurable

by an attentive human reader, such as levels of

meaning or purpose; structure; language

conventionality and clarity; and knowledge

demands.

(2) Quantitative dimensions of text complexity.

The terms quantitative dimensions and

quantitative factors refer to those aspects of text

complexity, such as word length or fre- quency,

sentence length, and text cohesion, that are

difficult if not impossible for a human reader to

evaluate efficiently, especially in long texts, and

are thus today typically measured by computer

software.

Key Ideas & Details CCR Anchor Standard 1. "Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical

inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text."

Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9-10 Grade 11-12

CC

SS

6.RI.1. Cite textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

7.RI.1. Cite several pieces of textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

8.RI.1. Cite the textual evidence that most strongly supports an analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

9-10.RI.1. Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

11-12.RI.1. Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain.

CCR Anchor Standard 2. "Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas."


CC

SS

6.RI.2. Determine a central idea of a text and how it is conveyed through particular details; provide a summary of the text distinct from personal opinions or judgments.

7.RI.2. Determine two or more central ideas in a text and analyze their development over the course of the text; provide an objective summary of the text.

8.RI.2. Determine a central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text, including its relationship to supporting ideas; provide an objective summary of the text.

9-10.RI.2. Determine a central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text, including how it emerges and is shaped and refined by specific details; provide an objective summary of the text.

11-12.RI.2. Determine two or more central ideas of a text and analyze their development over the course of the text, including how they interact and build on one another to provide a complex analysis; provide an objective summary of the text.

CCR Anchor Standard 3. "Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text."


CC

SS

6.RI.3. Analyze in detail how a key individual, event, or idea is introduced, illustrated, and elaborated in a text (e.g., through examples or anecdotes).

7.RI.3. Analyze the interactions between individuals, events, and ideas in a text (e.g., how ideas influence individuals or events, or how individuals influence ideas or events).

8.RI.3. Analyze how a text makes connections among and distinctions between individuals, ideas, or events (e.g., through comparisons, analogies, or categories).

9-10.RI.3. Analyze how the author unfolds an analysis or series of ideas or events, including the order in which the points are made, how they are introduced and developed, and the connections that are drawn between them.

11-12.RI.3. Analyze a complex set of ideas or sequence of events and explain how specific individuals, ideas, or events interact and develop over the course of the text.

CCSS READING INFORMATIONAL TEXT STANDARDS 6-12

FROM Oregon Department of Education English

Craft and Structure

CCR Anchor Standard 4. "Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone."


CC

SS

6.RI.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative, connotative, and technical meanings.

7.RI.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative, connotative, and technical meanings; analyze the impact of a specific word choice on meaning and tone.

8.RI.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative, connotative, and technical meanings; analyze the impact of specific word choices on meaning and tone, including analogies or allusions to other texts.

9-10.RI.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative, connotative, and technical meanings; analyze the cumulative impact of specific word choices on meaning and tone (e.g., how the language of a court opinion differs from that of a newspaper).

11-12.RI.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative, connotative, and technical meanings; analyze how an author uses and refines the meaning of a key term or terms over the course of a text (e.g., how Madison defines faction in Federalist No. 10).

CCR Anchor Standard 5. "Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole."


CC

SS

6.RI.5. Analyze how a particular sentence, paragraph, chapter, or section fits into the overall structure of a text and contributes to the development of the ideas.

7.RI.5. Analyze the structure an author uses to organize a text, including how the major sections contribute to the whole and to the development of the ideas.

8.RI.5. Analyze in detail the structure of a specific paragraph in a text, including the role of particular sentences in developing and refining a key concept.

9-10.RI.5. Analyze in detail how an author’s ideas or claims are developed and refined by particular sentences, paragraphs, or larger portions of a text (e.g., a section or chapter).

11-12.RI.5. Analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of the structure an author uses in his or her exposition or argument, including whether the structure makes points clear, convincing, and engaging.

CCR Anchor Standard 6. "Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text."


CC

SS

6.RI.6. Determine an author’s point of view or purpose in a text and explain how it is conveyed in the text.

7.RI.6. Determine an author’s point of view or purpose in a text and analyze how the author distinguishes his or her position from that of others.

8.RI.6. Determine an author’s point of view or purpose in a text and analyze how the author acknowledges and responds to conflicting evidence or viewpoints.

9-10.RI.6. Determine an author’s point of view or purpose in a text and analyze how an author uses rhetoric to advance that point of view or purpose.

11-12.RI.6. Determine an author’s point of view or purpose in a text in which the rhetoric is particularly effective, analyzing how style and content contribute to the power, persuasiveness, or beauty of the text.

English


CCR Anchor Standard 7. "Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse formats and media, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words.*"


CC

SS

6.RI.7. Integrate information presented in different media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively) as well as in words to develop a coherent understanding of a topic or issue.

7.RI.7. Compare and contrast a text to an audio, video, or multimedia version of the text, analyzing each medium’s portrayal of the subject (e.g., how the delivery of a speech affects the impact of the words).

8.RI.7. Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of using different mediums (e.g., print or digital text, video, multimedia) to present a particular topic or idea.

9-10.RI.7. Analyze various accounts of a subject told in different mediums (e.g., a person’s life story in both print and multimedia), determining which details are emphasized in each account.

11-12.RI.7. Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in different media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively) as well as in words in order to address a question or solve a problem.

"*Please see “Research to Build Knowledge” in Writing and “Comprehension and Collaboration” in Speaking and Listening for additional standards relevant to gathering, assessing, and

applying information from print and digital sources."

CCR Anchor Standard 8. "Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence."


CC

SS

6.RI.8. Trace and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not.

7.RI.8. Trace and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is sound and the evidence is relevant and sufficient to support the claims.

8.RI.8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is sound and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; recognize when irrelevant evidence is introduced.

9-10.RI.8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is valid and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; identify false statements and fallacious reasoning.

11-12.RI.8. Delineate and evaluate the reasoning in seminal U.S. texts, including the application of constitutional principles and use of legal reasoning (e.g., in U.S. Supreme Court majority opinions and dissents) and the premises, purposes, and arguments in works of public advocacy (e.g., The Federalist, presidential addresses).

CCR Anchor Standard 9. "Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build knowledge or to compare the approaches the authors take."


CC

SS

6.RI.9. Compare and contrast one author’s presentation of events with that of another (e.g., a memoir written by and a biography on the same person).

7.RI.9. Analyze how two or more authors writing about the same topic shape their presentations of key information by emphasizing different evidence or advancing different interpretations of facts.

8.RI.9. Analyze a case in which two or more texts provide conflicting information on the same topic and identify where the texts disagree on matters of fact or interpretation.

9-10.RI.9. Analyze seminal U.S. documents of historical and literary significance (e.g., Washington’s Farewell Address, the Gettysburg Address, Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms speech, King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”), including how they address related themes and concepts.

11-12.RI.9. Analyze seventeenth-, eighteenth-, and nineteenth-century foundational U.S. documents of historical and literary significance (including The Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address) for their themes, purposes, and rhetorical features.

English


CCR Anchor Standard 10. "Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently."


CC

SS

6.RI.10. By the end of the year, read and comprehend literary nonfiction in the grades 6–8 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.

7.RI.10. By the end of the year, read and comprehend literary nonfiction in the grades 6–8 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.

8.RI.10. By the end of the year, read and comprehend literary nonfiction at the high end of the grades 6–8 text complexity band independently and proficiently.

9-10.RI.10. By the end of grade 9, read and comprehend literary nonfiction in the grades 9–10 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.

By the end of grade 10, read and comprehend literary nonfiction at the high end of the grades 9–10 text complexity band independently and proficiently.

11-12.RI.10. By the end of grade 11, read and comprehend literary nonfiction in the grades 11–CCR text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.

By the end of grade 12, read and comprehend literary nonfiction at the high end of the grades 11-CCR text complexity band independently and proficiently.

English

CCSS READING INFORMATIONAL TEXT STANDARDS for History/Social Studies

From Oregon Department of Education

Key Ideas & Details

CCR Anchor Standard 1. "Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text."

Grades 6 - 8 Grades 9 - 10 Grades 11 - 12

CC

SS

6-8.RH.1. Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.

9-10.RH.1. Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, attending to such features as the date and origin of the information.

11-12.RH.1. Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, connecting insights gained from specific details to an understanding of the text as a whole.

CCR Anchor Standard 2. "Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development;

summarize the key supporting details and ideas." Grades 6 - 8 Grades 9 - 10 Grades 11 - 12

CC

SS

6-8.RH.2. Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary of the source distinct from prior knowledge or opinions.

9-10. RH. 2. Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary of how key events or ideas develop over the course of the text.

11-12.RH. 2. Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary that makes clear the relationships among the key details and ideas.

CCR Anchor Standard 3. "Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over

the course of a text." Grades 6 - 8 Grades 9 - 10 Grades 11 - 12

CC

SS

6-8.RH.3. Identify key steps in a text’s description of a process related to history/social studies (e.g., how a bill becomes law, how interest rates are raised or lowered).

9-10. RH.3. Analyze in detail a series of events described in a text; determine whether earlier events caused later ones or simply preceded them.

11-12.RH.3. Evaluate various explanations for actions or events and determine which explanation best accords with textual evidence, acknowledging where the text leaves matters uncertain.

History/Social Studies

Craft and Structure



CC

SS

6-8.RH.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including vocabulary specific to domains related to history/social studies.

9-10. RH.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including vocabulary describing political, social, or economic aspects of history/social studies.

11-12.RH.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including analyzing how an author uses and refines the meaning of a key term over the course of a text (e.g., how Madison defines faction in Federalist No. 10).

CCR Anchor Standard 5. "Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs,

and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole."


CC

SS

6-8.RH.5. Describe how a text presents information (e.g., sequentially, comparatively, causally).

9-10. RH.5. Analyze how a text uses structure to emphasize key points or advance an explanation or analysis.

11-12.RH.5. Analyze in detail how a complex primary source is structured, including how key sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text contribute to the whole.



CC

SS

6-8.RH.6. Identify aspects of a text that reveal an author’s point of view or purpose (e.g., loaded language, inclusion or avoidance of particular facts).

9-10. RH.6. Compare the point of view of two or more authors for how they treat the same or similar topics, including which details they include and emphasize in their respective accounts.

11-12.RH.6. Evaluate authors’ differing points of view on the same historical event or issue by assessing the authors’ claims, reasoning, and evidence.





CC

SS

6-8.RH.7. Integrate visual information (e.g., in charts, graphs, photographs, videos, or maps) with other information in print and digital texts.

9-10. RH.7. Integrate quantitative or technical analysis (e.g., charts, research data) with qualitative analysis in print or digital text.

11-12.RH.7. Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in diverse formats and media (e.g., visually, quantitatively, as well as in words) in order to address a question or solve a problem.





CC

SS

6-8.RH.8. Distinguish among fact, opinion, and reasoned judgment in a text.

9-10. RH.8. Assess the extent to which the reasoning and evidence in a text support the author’s claims.

11-12.RH.8. Evaluate an author’s premises, claims, and evidence by corroborating or challenging them with other information.



CC

SS

6-8.RH.9. Analyze the relationship between a primary and secondary source on the same topic.

9-10. RH.9. Compare and contrast treatments of the same topic in several primary and secondary sources.

11-12.RH.9. Integrate information from diverse sources, both primary and secondary, into a coherent understanding of an idea or event, noting discrepancies among sources.




CC

SS

6-8.RH.10. By the end of grade 8, read and comprehend history/social studies texts in the grades 6–8 text complexity band independently and proficiently.

9-10. RH. 10. By the end of grade 10, read and comprehend history/social studies texts in the grades 9–10 text complexity band independently and proficiently.

11-12.RH. 10. By the end of grade 12, read and comprehend history/social studies texts in the grades 11-CCR text complexity band independently and proficiently.


CCSS READING INFORMATIONAL TEXT STANDARDS for Science & Technical Subjects

From Oregon Department of Education

Key Ideas and Details

CCR Anchor Standard 1. "Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical

inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn

from the text."


CC

SS

6-8.RST.1. Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts.

9-10. RST.1 Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts, attending to the precise details of explanations or descriptions.

11-12. RST.1. Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts, attending to important distinctions the author makes and to any gaps or inconsistencies in the account.

CCR Anchor Standard 2. "Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development;

summarize the key supporting details and ideas." Grades 6 - 8 Grades 9 - 10 Grades 11 - 12

CC

SS

6-8. RST.2. Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; provide an accurate summary of the text distinct from prior knowledge or opinions.

9-10. RST. 2 Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; trace the text’s explanation or depiction of a complex process, phenomenon, or concept; provide an accurate summary of the text.

11-12. RST. 2. Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; summarize complex concepts, processes, or information presented in a text by paraphrasing them in simpler but still accurate terms.

CCR Anchor Standard 3. "Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over

the course of a text." Grades 6 - 8 Grades 9 - 10 Grades 11 - 12

CC

SS

6-8. RST.3. Follow precisely a multistep procedure when carrying out experiments, taking measurements, or performing technical tasks.

9-10. RST.3. Follow precisely a complex multistep procedure when carrying out experiments, taking measurements, or performing technical tasks, attending to special cases or exceptions defined in the text.

11-12. RST.3. Follow precisely a complex multistep procedure when carrying out experiments, taking measurements, or performing technical tasks; analyze the specific results based on explanations in the text.

Key Ideas & Details

Science and Technical Subjects

Craft and Structure



CC

SS

6-8. RST.4. Determine the meaning of symbols, key terms, and other domain-specific words and phrases as they are used in a specific scientific or technical context relevant to grades 6–8 texts and topics.



CCR Anchor Standard 5. "Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs,

and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole."


CC

SS

6-8. RST.5. Analyze the structure an author uses to organize a text, including how the major sections contribute to the whole and to an understanding of the topic.

9-10. RST.5. Analyze the structure of the relationships among concepts in a text, including relationships among key terms (e.g., force, friction, reaction force, energy).

11-12. RST.5. Analyze how the text structures information or ideas into categories or hierarchies, demonstrating understanding of the information or ideas.



CC

SS

6-8. RST.6. Analyze the author’s purpose in providing an explanation, describing a procedure, or discussing an experiment in a text.

9-10. RST.6. Analyze the author’s purpose in providing an explanation, describing a procedure, or discussing an experiment in a text, defining the question the author seeks to address.

11-12. RST.6. Analyze the author’s purpose in providing an explanation, describing a procedure, or discussing an experiment in a text, identifying important issues that remain unresolved.





CC

SS

6-8. RST.7 Integrate quantitative or technical information expressed in words in a text with a version of that information expressed visually (e.g., in a flowchart, diagram, model, graph, or table).

9-10. RST.7. Translate quantitative or technical information expressed in words in a text into visual form (e.g., a table or chart) and translate information expressed visually or mathematically (e.g., in an equation) into words.

11-12. RST.7. Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in diverse formats and media (e.g., quantitative data, video, multimedia) in order to address a question or solve a problem.





CC

SS

6-8. RST.8. Distinguish among facts, reasoned judgment based on research findings, and speculation in a text.

9-10. RST.8. Assess the extent to which the reasoning and evidence in a text support the author’s claim or a recommendation for solving a scientific or technical problem.

11-12. RST.8. Evaluate the hypotheses, data, analysis, and conclusions in a science or technical text, verifying the data when possible and corroborating or challenging conclusions with other sources of information.



CC

SS

6-8. RST.9. Compare and contrast the information gained from experiments, simulations, video, or multimedia sources with that gained from reading a text on the same topic.

9-10. RST.9. Compare and contrast findings presented in a text to those from other sources (including their own experiments), noting when the findings support or contradict previous explanations or accounts.

11-12. RST.9. Synthesize information from a range of sources (e.g., texts, experiments, simulations) into a coherent understanding of a process, phenomenon, or concept, resolving conflicting information when possible.




CC

SS

6-8. RST.10. By the end of grade 8, read and comprehend science/technical texts in the grades 6–8 text complexity band independently and proficiently.

9-10. RST. 10. By the end of grade 10, read and comprehend science/technical texts in the grades 9–10 text complexity band independently and proficiently.

11-12. RST. 10. By the end of grade 12, read and comprehend science/technical texts in the grades 11-CCR text complexity band independently and proficiently.


Snapshots of Informational Text Instruction

When visiting middle schools/high schools and grade 6–12 subject-area classes, You would see . . .

Teachers explicitly teaching and using generic comprehension strategies. For example, teachers showing students how to interact with texts by monitoring their comprehension, posing questions, drawing on background knowledge, making and confirming predictions, summarizing, and making connections.

Students using generic comprehension strategies when reading. You would see comprehension think sheets or prompt sheets, note-taking organizers, question charts, etc..

Teachers modeling and explicitly teaching discipline-specific comprehension strategies. For example, in sciences, students must fully understand experiments or processes. Close connections exist among prose, graphs, charts, formulas, etc. Students are taught to read back and forth from the text to tables, graphs, etc. Corroboration and transformation are major reading strategies.

Explicit subject-specific vocabulary instruction.

Multiple texts used during a lesson.

Teachers using ―precision partnering (e.g., student partner discussions with a designated first speaker, use of sentence starters, accountable listening, and teacher monitoring).

Task-based accountability built into every lesson task or activity—there is clear accountability with every student doing every task (e.g., students all required to say, write, and/or do something as an evidence check of engagement).

Teachers using engagement to structure discussions (e.g., responding of all students, everyone does everything—no bystanders) versus structuring discussions using traditional hand-raising (i.e., teacher poses a question, and students raise their hands to respond).

Collaboration! Teachers planning and preparing texts and materials with other teachers. Teachers need to collaborate and organize reading comprehension instruction in all subject areas.

Study groups, learning communities, and professional development opportunities for teachers to work together to plan and improve reading comprehension for adolescent learners.

An emphasis on students‘ basic and intermediate literacy skills in the early and middle grades so that literacy in the upper grades can focus on understanding content (i.e., disciplinary literacy).

An emphasis on subject-area reading strategies for students struggling with reading.

You would hear . . .

Teachers and students using language, academic and content vocabulary, questions, and content-specific talk!

Teachers and students using content-specific vocabulary during text-based discussions.

Teachers and students using academic language and use of target vocabulary in a structured context (e.g., using words in sentences).

Academic, content-specific.

Teachers modeling discipline-specific comprehension by thinking out loud.

Teacher and student discussions about how pictures within text differ in their role. For example, some pictures may highlight describing/defining nouns, verbs/processes, relationships, etc. Also, differences exist between technical drawings and other drawings/photos.

High-quality discussions with questions such as ―What is the author trying to say here? ―Does this information agree with the other information?, or ―What did John do to Alex in this story?‖ (Beck, McKeown, Worthy, Sandora, & Kucan, 2006; Goldenberg, 1992/1993; Murphy, Wilkinson, Soter, Hennessey, Alexander, 2009; Soter et al., 2008).

Teachers modeling reasoning by thinking out loud.

Students expressing opinions with explained positions and reasoning.

Teachers acknowledging clear student reasoning.

Teachers/students summarizing a discussion when it closes.

K-12 Teachers: Building Comprehension in the Common Core

http://www.edweek.org/media/24information-haveyouever.pdf

http://www.edweek.org/media/24information-haveyouever.pdf

COURSE: DATE: COS Standard(s): Lesson objectives with daily student outcomes:

Lesson Phases Student Engagement Assess/Evaluate

Before Strategy/Engage ________________________ Activate Prior Knowledge; Build Background Knowledge; Generate Essential Questions; Make Predictions; Discuss Essential Vocabulary; Establish Purpose for Lesson; Other ___________________

Read, Write, Talk, Listen, and Investigate (100%)

During Strategy/Explore, Explain __________________________ Interact with Content; Verify and Formulate Predictions; Self-Monitor Comprehension; Construct Graphic Organizers; Summarize Content; Use Mental Imagery; Integrate New Information with Prior Knowledge; Other __________________


After Strategy/Explain, Extend __________________________ Reflect on Content of Lesson; Evaluate Predictions; Examine Essential Questions; Justify, Deliberate, and Evaluate Conclusions of Self and Others; Retell or Summarize; Demonstrate Proper Use and Understanding of Vocabulary; Other ___________________


Lesson reflection:

1. What were students able to do based on the standards?

2. What evidence do you have?

3. Which students need additional instruction?

4. How will the next lesson be adjusted to meet their needs?

COURSE: 10th Social Studies DATE:

COS Standard(s): 10.3 Trace the chronology of events leading to the American Revolution, including the

signing of the Declaration of Independence. 10.3.3 Summarizing major ideas of the Declaration of Independence,

including theories of John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Lesson objectives with daily student outcomes: Connect the Declaration of Independence with the American Identity

Lesson Phases Student Engagement Assess/Evaluate

Before Strategy/Engage _Break up letter; journal entry Activate Prior Knowledge; Build Background Knowledge; Generate

Essential Questions; Make

Predictions; Discuss Essential Vocabulary; Establish Purpose for

Lesson; Other ___________________

Students listen as teacher

reads break up letter

Students write journal entry

and share with partner-What

do you know about Declaration of Independence?

Read, Write, Talk, Listen, and Investigate (100% of students)

Teachers listen as students share

journal entries and make anecdotal

notes as needed.

During Strategy/Explore, Explain _Mini lecture; graphic

organizer; annotate text Interact with Content; Verify and

Formulate Predictions; Self-Monitor Comprehension;

Construct Graphic Organizers;

Summarize Content; Use Mental Imagery; Integrate New

Information with Prior Knowledge;

Other __________________

Students listen to mini lecture

while looking at timeline Teachers model how to read

document and annotate it in

margins Students read and annotate

text Read, Write, Talk, Listen, and Investigate (100% of students)

Teachers listen as students engage

in conversations as they read, check annotations, and make

clarifications and anecdotal notes where needed.

After Strategy/Explain, Extend __Journal entry__________ Reflect on Content of Lesson;

Evaluate Predictions; Examine Essential Questions; Justify,

Deliberate, and Evaluate Conclusions of Self and Others; Retell or

Summarize; Demonstrate Proper

Use and Understanding of Vocabulary;

Other ___________________

Students write journal entry-How did today’s examination of the

Declaration of Independence establish thoughts of what it

means to be an American?

Read, Write, Talk, Listen, and Investigate (100% of students)

Teachers collect journal entries to check for understanding.

Lesson reflection:

1. What were students able to do based on the standards?

2. What evidence do you have?

3. Which students need additional instruction?

4. How will the next lesson be adjusted to meet their needs?

Alabama Course of Study Standards Relating to the

Declaration of Independence

5.8.1 Describing principles contained in the Declaration of Independence

7.2 Describing the influence of John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Thomas

Paine, Niccolò Machiavelli, Charles de Montesquieu, and Voltaire on the political system of the

United States

9.5.1 Contrasting philosophies of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke and the belief in the divine

right of kings

9.6 Identify significant ideas and achievements of scientists and philosophers of the Scientific

Revolution and the Age of Enlightenment.

10.3 Trace the chronology of events leading to the American Revolution, including the

French and Indian War, passage of the Stamp Act, the Boston Tea Party, the Boston

Massacre, passage of the Intolerable Acts, the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the

publication of Common Sense, and the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

10.3.3 Summarizing major ideas of the Declaration of Independence, including theories of

John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau

12.1 Explain historical and philosophical origins that shaped the government of the United

States, including the Magna Carta, the Petition of Rights, the English Bill of Rights, the

Mayflower Compact, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, and the influence of Thomas Hobbes,

John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and the Great Awakening.

12.2 Summarize the significance of the First and Second Continental Congresses, the Declaration

of Independence, Shays’ Rebellion, and the Articles of Confederation of 1781 on the writing and

ratification of the Constitution of the United States of 1787 and the Bill of Rights of 1791.

***Note: The sample 10th

Grade social studies lesson is based on the 10th

Grade standards in

bold print. The other standards show the exposure students have had and will have to the

Declaration of Independence over the course of their educational experience.

Considerations for a Lesson

1. What standard am I teaching?

2. What are my daily measurable objectives for this

standard?

3. What strategies will help me focus and pace my lesson

appropriately?

4. What strategies will require ALL (100%) of my

students to engage in content through reading, writing,

talking, listening, and investigating?

5. What actions will I take to assess throughout the

lesson?

TAKE IT BACK!

1. Share new learning with teachers at your school.

2. Use the 5 guiding questions to plan and implement a lesson.

3. Bring back an example of one lesson plan you implemented using Reading Informational

text and be ready to share any insights you had based on your use of the new standards.

FIVE QUIDING QUESTIONS

1. What standard am I teaching?

2. What are my daily measurable objectives for this standard?

3. What strategies will help me focus and pace my lesson appropriately?

4. What strategies will require ALL (100%) of my students to engage in content through

reading, writing, talking, listening, and investigating?

5. What actions will I take to assess throughout the lesson?

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

http://www.fcrr.org/studentactivities/kg.htm

http://www.isbe.net/common_core/pdf/ela-teach-strat-6-12.pdf

http://futureofchildren.org/futureofchildren/publications/docs/22_02_06.pdf

“The Art of Close Reading – Part 1”



http://www.readwritethink.org/files/resources/lesson_images/lesson1132/EJ0964Have.pdf

http://www.fcrr.org/studentactivities/kg.htm

http://www.isbe.net/common_core/pdf/ela-teach-strat-6-12.pdf

http://futureofchildren.org/futureofchildren/publications/docs/22_02_06.pdf

http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/critical-thinking-the-art-of-close-reading-part-one/509

http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-art-of-close-reading-part-two/510

http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-art-of-close-reading-part-three/511

http://www.readwritethink.org/files/resources/lesson_images/lesson1132/EJ0964Have.pdf

Timeline for Implementation (Based on the College- and Career-Ready Self-Assessment)

Fall 2012 You should be working right now in the Awareness Phase

(Based on the College- and Career-Ready Implementation Self-Assessment)

CCRS for ELA CCRS Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science,

and Technical Subjects Awareness Awareness ELA teachers are aware that CCRS will

be fully implemented during 2013-2014 school year.

Content teachers are aware that literacy standards will be fully implemented during the 2013-2014 school year.

ELA teachers are aware that they are responsible for instruction in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language.

Content area teachers are aware that they share the responsibility for instruction in reading and writing.

ELA teachers are aware of the literacy standards for History, Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects and how they will impact instruction.

Content teachers are aware of the literacy standards for History, Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects and how they will impact instruction.

ELA teachers are familiar with the key shifts required by the ELA Course of Study.

Teachers are familiar with Alabama’s new assessment plan.

Teachers are familiar with Alabama’s new assessment plan.

End of January 2013 You should plan to be finished with the Awareness Phase and

beginning the Initiation Phase

Initiation Initiation Your system has selected ELA

teachers to be on the CCRS Implementation Team.

Your system has selected content teachers to be on the CCRS Implementation Team.

Your teachers have received information/PD (webinars, MEGA, regional sessions…).

Your teachers have received information/PD (webinars, MEGA, regional sessions…).

Teachers are familiar with the Insight Tool as a resource.

Teachers are familiar with the Insight Tool as a resource.

ELA teachers are familiar with the cumulative progression of the CCRS for each grade level.

Content area teachers are familiar with the cumulative progression of the CCRS for each grade level.

Summer 2013 You should be finished with the Initiation Phase and

beginning the Implementation Phase

(Support will be provided at Summer Academies to be announced soon)

Implementation Implementation

Work has been done on pacing. Work has been done on pacing. Lesson plan templates support

implementation of CCRS. Lesson plan templates support implementation of CCRS.

Instructional planning includes multi-standard tasks.

Instructional planning includes multi-standard tasks.

Learning outcomes reflect critical thinking and inquiry based learning.

Learning outcomes reflect critical thinking and inquiry based learning.

All assessments are aligned with CCRS.

All assessments are aligned with CCRS.

2013-2014

School Year

You should be working in the Implementation Phase and

also beginning to work in the Sustained Practice Phase

Multi-disciplinary tasks are prevalent in instructional planning.

Multi-disciplinary tasks are prevalent in instructional planning.

Reading and writing are embedded in student work.

Reading and writing are embedded in student work.

Instruction includes the appropriate balance of literary and informational texts in ELA classrooms.

Instruction includes the appropriate amount of informational texts in content area classrooms.

The appropriate balance of writing to persuade, explain, and convey experience is evident in ELA classrooms.

The appropriate balance of writing to persuade, explain, and convey experience is evident in content area classrooms.

There is ample opportunity for students to read widely and deeply in increasingly complex texts.

There is ample opportunity for students to read widely and deeply in increasingly complex texts.

Rubrics are used to assess level of learning.

Rubrics are used to assess level of learning.

Assessments provide time to reflect, revise, and revisit student work.

Assessments provide time to reflect, revise, and revisit student work.

Instructional coaching is provided to improve practice.

Instructional coaching is provided to improve practice.

Job-embedded professional learning is common practice.

Job-embedded professional learning is common practice.

Collaborative time is provided to unpack the CCRS and plan standards based lessons.

Collaborative time is provided to unpack the CCRS and plan standards based lessons.

ELA/Literacy Standards Reflection

Questions What did I learn today? What do I still need?

How will I become comfortable with these

standards in order to provide support to my

content area colleagues?

How will I ensure my content area colleagues

understand how to implement the standards?

What will I share about my content needs regarding CCRS implementation in the team planning session?

literacy standards for grades 6-12 participants... · literacy standards for grades 6-12:...

Documents