Created by NWRESD Data Quality Project

CCSS Stewardship Committee2013

Created by NWRESD Data Quality Project

EQuip NetworkCommon Core Stewardship Committee

Purpose: To assure that lessons & units are aligned to Common Core State Standards and focused on depth of instruction using common criteria to determine quality.

Objectives:Review lessons/units using the Quality Review RubricProvide rating, suggestions and comments for lesson developer

Common Core Stewardship Committee Common Core Stewardship Committee Professional Development Plan-OregonProfessional Development Plan-OregonContent Knowledge Instruction AssessmentUnderstand the coherence of the CCSS standards and how the concepts and skills progress, build, and connect with one another

Design units and lessons that support every student in meeting the math & ELA content and practice standards

Create and use formative assessments to examine student learning and monitor progress in order to meet individual needs of students and to challenge students exceeding benchmark

Understand the student learning requirements and be able to describe the expectations in terms of student actions-what does it look like when a student demonstrates the knowledge and skills stated in the standards?

Implement evidence-based instructional strategies that scaffold learning to ensure students meet the rigor of the CCSS, and differentiate instruction to support the growth of each student

Design tasks and experiences at the appropriate level of rigor that will enable students to demonstrate proficiency through a variety of responses

Common Core Stewardship Committee Common Core Stewardship Committee Professional Development PlanProfessional Development PlanContent Knowledge Instruction AssessmentDevelop an understanding of the major shifts between Oregon Standards and the CCSS (Building leaders)

Provide dedicated and consistent teaming time to design units, select research-based instructional strategies, and assess learning (Building leaders)

Use assessment data to determine instructional gaps and to conduct program evaluation at the building & district level (Building & District)

Create, monitor and support focused opportunities for teachers to collaborate across grade levels to discuss student learning progress (Building leaders)

Provide professional development to ensure staff acquires the knowledge and skills needed to design and implement assessments to monitor student progress and inform instruction (District)

Conduct professional development to help teachers develop the knowledge and skills needed to design instruction and assessments that meet the rigor of the CCSS (District)

Ensure that district instructional materials are coherent, consistent, comprehensive and support shifts in CCSS (District)

Equip Network

History of the History of the Development of the Development of the

Quality Review Quality Review RubricRubric

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTSENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS

Quality Review Rubric

Four Dimensions of the Four Dimensions of the Quality Review RubricQuality Review Rubric

I. Alignment to the Depth

II. Key Shifts in the CCSS

III. Instructional and Supports

IV. Assessment

Quality Review Steps for Quality Review Steps for Individuals or GroupsIndividuals or Groups

Step 1-Review MaterialsStep 2-Apply criteria in Dimension I:

AlignmentNote- Dimension I is non-negotiable. In

order for the review to continue, a rating of 2 or 3 is required.

Step 3-Apply criteria in Dimensions II-IVStep 4-Apply overall Rating and

Summary CommentsStep 5-Compare Overall Ratings &

Determine Next Steps

Quality Review ProcessQuality Review Process for Individuals and Groupsfor Individuals and Groups

1. Common Core: Before beginning a review, all members of a review team are familiar with the Common Core Standards.

2. Inquiry: Review processes emphasize inquiry rather than advocacy and are organized in steps around a set of guiding questions.

3. Respect & Commitment: Each member of a review team is respected as a valued colleague and contributor who makes a commitment to the EQuIP

process. 4. Criteria & Evidence: All observations, judgments, discussions, and

recommendations are criterion- and evidence-based. 5. Constructive: Lessons/units to be reviewed are seen as “works in progress.”

Reviewers are respectful of contributors’ work and make constructive observations and suggestions based on evidence

from the work.6. Individual to Collective: Each member of a review team independently records his/her

observations prior to discussion. Discussions focus on understanding all reviewers’ interpretations of the criteria and the evidence they have found.

7. Understanding & Agreement: The goal of the process is to compare and eventually calibrate our judgments so that we move toward agreement

about CCSS Quality.

Quality Review Principles & AgreementsQuality Review Principles & Agreements

Targets standardsText complexity

Integration

VocabularyVocabularyText structuresText structuresLevels of meaning

Levels of meaningQualitative characteristics

Qualitative characteristics

Step 1 - Review MaterialsStep 1 - Review Materials• Record the grade and title of the lesson/unit on the

recording form: scan to see what the lesson/unit contains and how it is organized

• Read key materials related to instruction, assessment and teacher guidance

• Study and measure the text(s) that serve as a centerpiece for the lesson/unit analyzing text complexity, quality, scope, and relationship to instruction

• Identify the grade level CCSS that the lesson/unit targets

• Closely examine the materials through the “lens” of each criterion

• Individually check each criterion for which clear and substantial evidence is found

Step 2 - Apply CriteriaStep 2 - Apply Criteria

• Identify and record input on specific improvements that might be made to meet criteria of strengthen alignment

• Optional* Enter your rating 0-3 for Dimension I alignment

Note: Note: Dimension I is non-negotiable and a rating of 2 or 3 is required for the review to continue. If the review is discontinued, consider giving general feedback to developers/teachers regarding next steps

Step 2 - Apply CriteriaStep 2 - Apply Criteria

Check criteria for which clear evidence is found

Make observations and suggestions in relation to criteria and evidence.

Determine a dimension rating based on checked criteria and observations.

Determine Alignment rating and continuation of review

Note: For Integrated Intervention Team purposes, you may decide to continue the review in cases of weak alignment.

Dimension I: Alignment Dimension I: Alignment to Depth of CCSSto Depth of CCSS

Compare Observations, Feedback, Compare Observations, Feedback, and Ratingsand Ratings

• What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have checked?

• Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?

• Does our feedback include suggested improvement(s)?

Dimension II: Key Shifts Dimension II: Key Shifts in CCSSin CCSS

The lesson/unit addresses the key shifts in the CCSS:Reading Text Closely: Makes reading text(s) closely, examining textual evidence, and discerning deep meaning a central focus of instruction.

Text-Based Evidence: Facilitates rich and rigorous evidence-based discussions and writing about common texts through a sequence of specific, thought-provoking, and text-dependent questions (including, when applicable, questions about illustrations, charts, diagrams, audio/video, and media).

Writing from Sources: Routinely expects that students draw evidence from texts to produce clear and coherent writing that informs, explains, or makes an argument in various written forms (notes, summaries, short responses, or formal essays).

Academic Vocabulary: Focuses on building students’ academic vocabulary in context throughout instruction.

Dimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSSDimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSS

Units of StudyUnits of Study

• Apply criterion in Dimensions II-IVII. Key Shifts in the CCSSIII. Instructional SupportsIV. Assessment

Closely examine the criterion through the “lens” of each criterion

Record comments on criteria met, improvements needed and then rate 0-3

Step 3 - Continue Step 3 - Continue Application of CriteriaApplication of Criteria

Research- based

EngagementEngagement

Instructional expectationsInstructional expectations

Engage with textEngage with text

Productive StruggleProductive Struggle

Appropriate SupportsAppropriate Supports

ExtensionsExtensions

Check criteria for which clear evidence is found

Make observations suggestions in relation to criteria and evidence

Determine a dimension rating based on checked criteria and observations

Dimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSSDimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSS

Check criteria for which clear evidence is found

Make observations and suggestions in relation to criteria and evidence

Determine a dimension rating based on checked criteria and observations

Dimension III: Instructional Supports Dimension III: Instructional Supports

Assessments:Assessments:

Pre-post Pre-post

FormativeFormative

Summative Summative

Self-assessmentsSelf-assessments

Observable evidence of learningProficiency

Aligned rubrics & scoring guides

Check criteria for which clear evidence is found

Make observations and suggestions in relation to criteria and evidence

Determine a dimension rating based on checked criteria and observations

Dimension IV: AssessmentDimension IV: Assessment

• Review ratings for Dimensions I-IV adding/clarifying comments as needed

• Write summary comments for your overall rating on your recording sheet

• Total dimension ratings and record overall ratingsEE=ExemplarE/IE/I=Exemplar if improvedRR=Revision neededNN=Not ready to review

Step 4 - Overall RatingStep 4 - Overall Rating

Note:Note:1.Evidence cited to arrive at final rating

2.Summary comments

3.Similarities & differences among raters

Step 5 - SummaryStep 5 - Summary

Then:Then:

• Recommend next steps for the lesson/unit

• Provide recommendations for improvement and/or ratings to developers/teachers

Step 5 - Next StepsStep 5 - Next Steps

Overall Rating:Overall Rating:

What does the creator of the lesson/unit need to know to improve the design?

Which number on the rating scale best describes the current analysis of the lesson/unit?

32

How is this rubric being used in Oregon?How is this rubric being used in Oregon?

Teacher lesson and unit review

Teacher lesson and unit development

Data team and professional learning community collaboration

District instructional materials review and selection

State instructional materials review and adoption process

Extensions: Extensions: Using the Quality Review RubricUsing the Quality Review Rubric

• Curriculum materials selection process criteria

• PLC/Data team data collection

• Guide for lesson/unit development

• Review of newly created materials

• Review of existing materials

• Screening materials to post on websites

• Quality control/quality assurance of vendor-developed materials

• Training educators

Educators Evaluating Quality Instructional Products (EQuIP) Network, facilitated by Achieve

Oregon Department of Education (ODE)

ELA and Literacy Criteria Development Committee

ODE Educational Improvement and Innovation Steering Committee

Clackamas Education Service District

Northwest Regional Education Service District

Salem-Keizer School District

Student Achievement Partners

Oregon CCSS Stewardship Committee

Tri-state Collaborative - Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New York Departments of Education

Special Thanks: Special Thanks: Oregon Data ProjectOregon Data Project

“Children are made readers on the laps of their parents.”

Emilie Buchwald