Mississippi Department of Education Common Core State Standards

Mississippi Department of Education Common Core State Standards Mathematics and English/Language Arts Dr. Lynn J. House Deputy State Superintendent Instructional Enhancement/Internal Operations MS Department of Education Mrs. Trecina Green Bureau Director Curriculum & Instruction MS Department of Education

Agenda 1. Overview 2. Common Core State Standards for Mathematics Activities 3. Common Core State Standards for English/Language Arts Activities 4. Implementation 5. Common Core Assessment 6. Roles and Responsibilities Activity 7. Evaluation and Wrap-Up 2

Overview of Folder Documents • • • Power point presentation CCSS for Mathematics CCSS for English Language Arts (ELA) MS Vertical Alignments for Math and ELA Overview of Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) • Quick Facts 3

What is the CCSS Initiative? • An initiative of the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) • A significant and historic opportunity for states to collectively develop and adopt a core set of academic standards in Mathematics and English/Language Arts 4

Why is this initiative important? • • Provides consistency across states Allows for equal access Prepares students to compete globally Allows for more focused professional development • Allows for the development of a common assessment • Provides the opportunity to compare and evaluate policies that affect student achievement across states 5

What are the Common Core State Standards (CCSS)? • Fewer, clearer, and higher • Aligned with college and work expectations • Rigorous content requiring higher-order thinking and application of knowledge • Internationally benchmarked • Evidence-and/or research-based 6

Shift from “What’s Taught” to “What Students Need to Be Able to Do” To succeed in 21 st century college and careers, students need to be able to: 1. Solve problems 2. Manage oneself 3. Adapt to change 4. Analyze / conceptualize 5. Reflect on / improve performance 6. Communicate 7. Work in teams 8. Create / innovate / critique 9. Engage in learning throughout life 7

Design of Internationally-Benchmarked Teaching and Learning Systems • Common Core State Standards/curriculum expectations • Curriculum guidance–lean, but clear with rigor • Exemplars of school-based performance tasks • Focus on classroom formative assessment • Teacher preparation with strong clinical components 8

CCSSO/NGA Process Fall 2009 -Released draft of College/Career Readiness Standards to states and public Jan. 2010 -Released several drafts of K-12 Standards to states Feb. 2010 -Released draft K-12 Standards to the public June 2, 2010 -Released Final K-12 Standards 9

Adoption of the CCSS • A state will have adopted the standards when the State Board of Education has taken formal action to adopt the CCSS. • Alignment of state standards to the Common Core State Standards is not the same as adoption. 10

Additional 15% • States are being asked to adopt the CCSS -“Word for Word” in its entirety OR -“Word for Word” in its entirety with up to an additional 15%. • The 15% is for states that want to go beyond the Common Core. 11

Structure Sample from CCSS - Mathematics 12

Structure Sample from CCSS - ELA Reading Standards for Informational Text K-5 Kindergartners: Grade 1 students: RI Grade 2 students: Key Ideas and Details 1. With prompting and support, ask and answer questions about key details in a text. 1. Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text. 2. With prompting and support, identify the main topic and retell key details of a text 2. Identify the main topic and retell key details of a text. 2. Identify the main topic of a multiparagraph text as well as the focus of specific paragraphs within the text. 3. With prompting and support, describe the connection between two individuals, events, ideas, or pieces of information in a text. 3. Describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text. Describe the connection between two individuals, events, or pieces of information in a text. 13

CCSS Key Terms and Structure Activity (See Activity Sheet #1) • Review the structure and key terms of the MS Curriculum Framework for Math and ELA. • Locate the key terms of the CCSS for Math and ELA. • List the key terms on the sheet provided. • Compare and contrast the MS Curriculum Framework and CCSS key terms. • List similarities and differences. 14

CCSS Key Terms and Structure • Discuss in small group. • Be prepared to share with the larger group. 15

Common Core State Standards for Mathematics Key design considerations: • Individual grade levels in K-8 • Solid foundation for grades K-5 in whole numbers, addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, fractions, and decimals • Solid foundation for grades 6 -8 in geometry, algebra, and probability and statistics 16

Mathematics Alignment Examples CCSS Math 3 rd grade MS Math 4 th grade Page 23, 3. OA, #7 Competency 1 Objective i Fluently multiply and divide within 100. Recall multiplication and division facts. Page 24, 3. NF, #3 a Understand two fractions as equivalent. Competency 1 Objective f Model and identify equivalent fractions. Cont. 17

Mathematics Alignment Examples CCSS Math 4 th grade MS Math 5 th grade Page 31, 4. MD, #3 Competency 4 Objective c Apply the area formula for rectangles in real world and mathematical problems. Use formula to estimate and calculate the area of a rectangle. 18

Mathematics Alignment Activity (See Activity Sheet #2) • Each table is assigned two grade levels and at least two math topics. • Locate and list objectives in the MS Math Framework that address the topic. • Locate and list the CCSS that align with the objectives. • Use the sheet provided to record information. 19

Mathematics Alignment Activity (See Activity Sheet #2) Mississippi Framework Common Core • Grade Level • Strand • Domain (letter on right side) • Competency # • Standard # • Objective (letter) • Sub-Standard Letter (if applicable) 20

Mathematics Alignment Activity • Discuss in small group. • List key findings on chart paper. • Be prepared to share with the larger group. 21

Alignment of CCSS for Math and MS Math Framework • Initial alignment study done “in-house” and additional study done by SEDL • Overall alignment is not good -Many specifics in the CCSS are addressed in the MS Math Framework but at a lower grade level(s) -Several of the MS Math Framework objectives are not mentioned in the Common Core • CCSS for Math are more rigorous than the MS Math Framework 22

Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects Key design considerations: Sections divided by Strands for K-5 and 6 -12 – Reading – Writing – Speaking and Listening – Language 23

ELA Alignment Examples CCSS ELA 3 rd grade Page 14, RI, #1 Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, explicitly using the text as the basis for the answers. MS ELA 3 rd grade Competency 2 Objective b, b 1, b 6 Analyze texts in order to identify, understand, infer, o synthesize information. -answer and generate questions -identify cause and effect as stated in text Cont. 24

ELA Alignment Examples CCSS ELA 3 rd grade MS ELA 3 rd grade Page 21, W, #5 Competency 3 Objective a With guidance and support from peers and adults, strengthen writing as needed by revising and editing. Use an appropriate composing process (e. g. , planning, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing/sharing) to compose or edit. 25

ELA Alignment Activity (See Activity Sheet #3) • Each table is assigned two grade levels and a competency from the MS Language Arts Framework. • Locate and list the CCSS that address at least three objectives under the MS Competency. • Use the sheet provided to record information. 26

ELA Alignment Activity (See Activity Sheet #3) Mississippi Framework Common Core Grade Level Competency # Domain (letter on right side) Objective (letter) Standard # Sub-Objective# Sub-Standard Letter (if applicable) 27

ELA Alignment Activity • Discuss in small group. • List key findings on chart paper. • Be prepared to share with the larger group. 28

Alignment of CCSS English Language Arts (ELA) and MS ELA • Initial alignment study done “in-house” and additional study done by SEDL • Overall alignment is good -Few specifics in the CCSS are not addressed in the MS ELA Framework or not addressed at the same grade level -Many of the MS ELA Framework objectives and sub-objectives are not mentioned in the Common Core • Rigor is comparable 29

Common Core State Standards High School

Common Core High School Mathematics • Grade 8 standards may be used as an Algebra I course or to transition students effectively into a full Algebra I course. • High school standards require students to practice applying mathematical ways of thinking to real world situations. 31

Common Core High School Mathematics (Pages 57 -83) High school standards are listed in conceptual categories : -number and quantity -algebra -functions -modeling -geometry -statistics and probability 32

Common Core High School ELA (Pages 34 -58) • Individual grade levels for grades 6 -8 • Two-year grade band for grades 9 -10 • Two-year grade band for grades 11 -12 33

Common Core State Standards English Language Arts (Pages 59 -66) Section for grades 6 -12: Literacy standards in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects 34

MDE Timeline for Review and Adoption March: Conducted alignment study of draft Common Core State Standards and MS frameworks June: Received SBE approval to begin APA Process Aug. : Received SBE approval (completed APA Process) June-Oct. : Conducted alignment study of final Common Core State Standards and MS frameworks Nov-Feb. : Determining implementation and training options for 2011 -12 and beyond 35

Status on Implementation • Working with the RESAs to provide sessions on CCSS for leadership teams followed by training • Participating in training sessions offered by national organizations • Identifying available resources to assist districts/schools • Continuing relationship with PARCC Consortium and CCSSO to allow MS to benefit from collaboration with other states • Participating in all PARCC meetings to ensure 36 assessments are viable for MS

ACT Report on CCSS • ACT was instrumental in assisting with the development of the CCSS. • As a result of this involvement, ACT looked at how their College and Career Readiness standards compared with the CCSS. • From the initial study, they reviewed states with large numbers of students taking the ACT. • MS was one of those states. 37

ACT Report on CCSS & MS Student Performance • A First Look at the Common Core and College and Career Readiness – Mississippi • Critical question: What is the best estimate of current MS student performance on the Common Core State Standards? • Analysis intended not to focus on student performance on CURRENT state standards, but to shed light on student achievement levels relative to the CCSS. 38

ACT Report on CCSS & MS Student Performance PURPOSE of the Study: Project the % of students who meet or exceed the performance level of college/career ready students on test items associated with the Common Core Clusters RESULTS of the Study: Clearly shows that MS students need more rigorous, focused work to meet the challenges of the Common Core Assessments ELA-Focus on specific aspects of language, content reading, and understanding complex text Math-Focus on foundations of mathematics in the early grades, interventions for students who are behind, greater understanding of mathematical processes and practices 39

Implementation Scenario #1 (See Feedback Sheet) 2011 -2012 -2013 -2014 Development and Training Grades K-2 Grades 3 -5 Math Grades 3 -5 ELA Grades 6 -12 Math Grades 6 -12 ELA 2014 – 2015 “LIVE” ASSESSMENT 40

Implementation Scenario #1 (See Feedback Sheet) • List and discuss Pros of scenario #1. • List and discuss Cons of scenario #1. • Be prepared to share with the large group. 41

Implementation Scenario #2 (See Feedback Sheet) 2011 -2012 -2013 -2014 Development and Training Grades K-2 Grades 3 -8 Math Grades 3 -8 ELA Grades 9 -12 Math Grades 9 -12 ELA 2014 – 2015 “LIVE” ASSESSMENT 42

Implementation Scenario #2 (See Feedback Sheet) • List and discuss Pros of scenario #2. • List and discuss Cons of scenario #2. • Be prepared to share with the large group. 43

Implementation Scenario #3 (See Feedback Sheet) 2011 -2012 -2013 -2014 Development and Training Grades K-2 All TESTED grades and courses for ELA and Math All NON-TESTED courses for ELA and Math 2014 – 2015 “LIVE” ASSESSMENT 44

Implementation Scenario #3 (See Feedback Sheet) • List and discuss Pros of scenario #3. • List and discuss Cons of scenario #3. • Be prepared to share with the large group. 45

Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) • Received Race to the Top funds to help support states’ efforts to transition to the CCSS and assessments • Formed the Assessment Design and Development Committee • Established timeline • Met in Dec. 2010 to begin work on test specifications • Met in Feb. 2011 with content specialists and postsecondary reps 46

Rtt. T Assessment Proposals The Process: • Proposals were due from multi-state consortia on June 23, 2010 • Awards were made in September, 2010 • New Consortia tests to replace current state NCLB tests in 2014 -2015 Two Comprehensive Assessment Proposals Funded: Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) 26 states, 31 million students K-12 SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) 31 states, 21 million students K-12 Note: 12 states currently in both and 6 states in neither Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 47

RTTT Assessment Program Requirements • Build upon shared standards for college/career readiness; • Measure individual growth as well as proficiency; • Measure the extent each student is on track, at each grade level tested, toward college/career readiness by high school completion, and provide information that is useful in informing: – Teaching, learning, and program improvement; – Determinations of school effectiveness; – Determinations of educator effectiveness for use in evaluations and provision of support to teachers/principals; – Determinations of individual student college/career readiness, through high school exit decisions, college course placement into credit-bearing classes, and/or college entrance. Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 48

PARCC – Two Types of Summative Assessments FOCUSED ASSESSMENTS END OF YEAR COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT • One to three tasks that assess a few “keystone” standards/topics • Taken on computer, with mixed item types • Given at three points during the school year, near the end of quarters • Scored entirely by computer for fast results • Results within 2 weeks to inform instruction and intervention Scores from both focused & end-of-yr. assessments will be combined for annual accountability score. Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 49

PARCC: Focused Assessments 1 and 2 25% 50% Focused ASSESSMENT 1 • ELA • Math Focused ASSESSMENT 2 • ELA • Math In a single session/class period, students in grades 3 - 11 will: • ELA: Read texts, draw evidence to form conclusions, and prepare a written analysis • Math: For each of 1 or 2 essential topics (standards or clusters of standards), complete 1 to 3 constructed response tasks Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 50

PARCC: Focused Assessment 3 75% Over several sessions/class periods, students will complete a project-like task that draws on a range of skills. Examples: • ELA: Locate digital information, evaluate and select sources, and compose an essay or research paper • Math: Perform a multi-step performance task that requires application of mathematical skills and reasoning and may require technological tools • Speaking/Listening task: Conducted in classroom, not used for accountability, scored by teacher. Focused ASSESSMENT 3 • ELA • Math Focused ASSESSMENT 4 • Speaking • Listening Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 51

PARCC: End-of-Year Assessment 90% • Composed of 40 to 65 questions of a range of item types including innovative technologyenhanced items to sample the full year of standards END OF YEAR COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT • Scored by computer • Will make major investment in enhanced item types Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 52

PARCC: Resources, Tools, Supports PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model curriculum frameworks, curriculum resources, student and educator tutorials and practice tests, scoring training modules, and professional development materials Partnership Resource Center: • • Interactive Data Tool for accessing data and creating customized reports Exemplar lesson plans Formative assessment items and tasks Professional development materials regarding test administration, scoring, and use of data Online practice tests Item development portal Tools and resources developed by Partner states Optional “ready-to-use” performance tasks for K-2 Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 53

The PARCC System English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 - 11 25% 50% 75% 90% PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model curriculum frameworks, curriculum resources, student and educator tutorials and practice tests, scoring training modules, and professional development materials Focused ASSESSMENT 1 • ELA • Math Summative assessment for accountability Focused ASSESSMENT 2 • ELA • Math Required, but not used tor accountability Focused ASSESSMEN T 3 • ELA • Math END OF YEAR COMPREHENSIV E ASSESSMENT Focused ASSESSMENT 4 • Speaking • Listening Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 54

Basic PARCC Timeline 2010 -2011 Development/approval of common policies/procedures 2011 -2012 Initial item and task development, piloting of components 2011 -2012 Development of PD resources & online platform 2012 -2013 Field testing 2013 -2014 Field testing 2014 -2015 New summative assessments in use Summer 2015 Setting of common achievement standards Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 55

Roles and Responsibilities (See Feedback Sheet) • How would you like to see training offered for 2011 -2012? • Do you have other suggestions for implementation? • What are the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder groups involved? • What instructional resources do you need from the MDE immediately? 56

Next Steps for MDE • Continue to meet with stakeholder groups (K-12 and IHL) to - review findings of the alignment study - develop a crosswalk - determine 9 -12 courses - make resources known to stakeholders • Conduct regional awareness sessions & webinars through RESAs • Plan work with the regional laboratories, technical assistance providers, and other groups • Format the CCSS to reflect the structure of the MS Curriculum Frameworks • Revise/develop instructional materials (suggested teaching strategies, resources, & assessment aids) and offer training • Determine which policies/procedures need adjustment • Plan transition to new assessments • Continue working with PARCC to implement assessments 57

Challenges for Mississippi We lack Financial Resources to: - Build Instructional Units and Related Materials - Develop Capacity in Personnel - Hire Curriculum/Common Core Specialists - Foster Innovation in Teaching/Learning through Technology *************************** NOTE: Maryland is investing much of its $250 Million Rtt. T funds to develop internationally-modeled curriculum units, individual lessons, and materials. They are also launching a 3 year plan for PD to develop Master Teachers in every school and to invest in technology for delivery of high quality online resources by Year 4 of their grant. 58

What to expect from NGA and CCSSO • Developing an implementation guide • Meeting with textbook publishers • Developing example tasks, suggested texts, & student samples (timeline. TBD) • Planning to do work around birth to 5 year olds to have a seamless set of standards • Working on Science and Social Studies 59

Common Core Website List of Resources 1. Reaching Higher: the Common Core State Standards Validation Committee 2. Summary of Public Feedback for K-12 Standards 3. Summary of Public Feedback for College and Career Readiness Standards 4. Common Core State Standards Webinar (Power. Point presentation) June 30, 2010 5. Power. Point-March 2010 6. Common Core State Standards Criteria Cont. 60

Common Core Website List of Resources 7. Common Core State Standards Considerations 8. Joint International Benchmarking Report 9. Key Points of the English Language Arts Standards 10. Key Points of the Math Standards 11. Frequently Asked Questions 12. Myths vs. Facts 61

Common Core Website http: //www. corestandards. org/ Contact Information Trecina Green Bureau Director Curriculum and Instruction Mississippi Department of Education commoncore@mde. k 12. ms. us 601 -359 -2586 tgreen@mde. k 12. ms. us