BRUCE D. TAYLOR -- Ematl Aetors' Eqully' American rrutld orMustcal l' Ok/ LEC Prolessinnol Development {or or oil Levels - Ans in Edutn - A reengrueed experl on the Subject nfSlale Language Arts (ELA) Standards, espectally regard lo the arts - Champroa hr the arts to public education and errltaaomg the for a restdenls across all age groups and levels - Experience and expertise to all aspecls ofmuSlC' theatre, opera dance, mustcal tlreatre produotroa A visionary prnressronal dedroated to deepening the capactly or arts organrearrorrs arrd tlre arts educatroaal programs Conceptual thinker an expertise to generatmg comprehenstve programs tlrat address complex rssues and diverse needs - a rerpeered IrAJ--In-(duulinn to me I 501qu (or Tornngo An and An and {or Aihnll Puh Sch-nth 5 Con Genrgl'xcnunly Pnbli stoonls l'uh sure rem lree Aw. England, Turk} and Alulnl nrited \pnku .t toe International ration {or Super-toron .nd rnrnentnm netelopmenr. Senodtr. TV, State Dept. nl cdnealion, Varotilte Sarronls 'nee .\ew \nrk State notes and on Nan eonrortinm. among men, roerr - wronged mu pmduuinnx of toe-ire, one and danee dunng erreer .r . Pmduuinn .ger, Stage Lignting nerrgner, ronr Manager, srage nireemr, Tuhniu| Dlrulnr, and - invited as one one re ng .rtuo {null 2o eonn ronrerenee oerng and in min Von" rn Auguxi. 2m er to plrlitiplle to me finl ere resetting Arl'ni - Originator or me (moon, angino: apero Innqu {or Eduu ll roe Met metronolnan Operan- implemented to otreoonlr lornngoont roe LS and in over a dozen - Author of "re Am Equnvian, ne Am Eonorron, Strand sot-non, Cammn sense Comon [on and Comon senre Am Standardx. late on Allin-m. CAREER HIS mu' Independent Consultant: 2011 to Present [attention Cnnsulnnl (see "Addendum and pmressronal senlusmlm an ENIles on asrng rne am to address State Standards as uell as eore snoreer areas as ELA, Snclal studres and Seenee eonsulranr Menapalrran runlre Sultle and l=rrnee Georges Caunn moire Senools Washington Nalitmnl Open: 2007 to 2011 Direclnr of Ednulion and Responsrole ror roe generanon, marnrenanee, management and ufn dooen drtrerenr programs wtnetr sene eommunnres tn roe greater DC area won a budget ufunz Namrnared rorrne Award (or/ms rn Edumum "thng meet for t-resrdenr ooama's mels: Nergnoornood Imuan rn Arts for Anyone' Bethesda, Princelun' NJ Philadelphia PA Southampton, NY 1996 to 2009 Cannunder Pragmm Director Caneened, developed and managed nrgamuum rnar served asade.eenrralrzed laboran ror ans rn Mutation", roe roe arts to reaen nnusiuflung tne ans Cultural Ema) tne 5 sure Department a Created to.ts programs per yur mantra>>: anml: praenees rmo oroad aeademre eamem. programs reaened 4500 to soon Viudems and rnerr reaeners was" gradesr .n senootsaerossatt saeraeeanomre Im otteen sensor 53$iBRUCE D. TAYLOR brutay@mac.com • Page Two Education at the Met; New York, NY 1980 to 1995 Education Consultant & Stage Director Created initiatives for Education at the Met (then the educational arm of the Metropolitan Opera), a $4-5 million dollar department that reached schools throughout the U.S. and several countries. • Gave lectures and led workshops on several art forms, created study guides, wrote curricula for staff development, trained artists and worked with students/teachers throughout the tri-state area and Europe. Highlights: • Creating Original Opera – Conceived and developed by Mr. Taylor. Recognized by Harvard’s Performance Assessment Collaborative for Education as one of the most effective arts in education programs in the country; program is also cited in the President’s Committee for the Arts and Humanities document Champions of Change. In over 1000 schools worldwide. • Chamber Opera / Growing Up with Opera – Selected, produced and directed operas geared towards family audiences under the supervision of Maestro James Levine, including Gianni Schicchi - a commercially available video. • Profiled on PBS program Young Wonders Live From Lincoln Center broadcast The Pennsylvania Opera Theatre / The Opera Company of Philadelphia; Philadelphia, PA 1978 to 1996 Production Manager/Education Director/Lighting Designer/Stage Director Held the lead role in developing education programs and in carrying out the artistic vision of directors/designers of The Opera Company of Philadelphia and The Pennsylvania Opera Theatre. Developed and managed a $200,000 to $300,000 budget for each production (four to six annually). Supervised a 50-person stage crew and a production staff of six to 10 personnel. • Handled all union negotiations with United Scenic Artists, American Guild of Musical Artists, International Association of Theatrical and Stage Employees (IATSE), and the Musicians Union. • Believed and put into practice the concept of arts in education tied into existing curriculum in broad academic areas. Managed the Education Program’s budget, which increased by 50% per year over a ten-year period. Hired and trained all artists, and wrote all curricular material for two dozen schools in the Philadelphia school system. EDUCATION Graduate, Theater Management – Royal Academy of Dramatic Art – London, England (MFA equivalent) Graduate, Defense Language Institute, Monterey, California, Naval Security Group, Russian Language Alaska Methodist University, Dept. of Music, 3 years ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Education Consultant: New York Philharmonic & Philadelphia Orchestra Production Stage Manager: Seattle Opera Ring Cycle; Pacific Northwest Dance Education Consultant: Seattle Opera, Pacific Northwest Dance, Seattle Symphony, Seattle Repertory Theatre Author: The Arts Equation, Forging a Vital Link between Performing Artists & Educators, Watson-Guptil Publisher (1999) Author: The Arts Equation, Second Edition, Common Sense Arts Standards, Common Sense, Common Core available on Amazon.com Paper: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) Newsletter (2004), Education Week (2011), School Administrator Magazine (2015) Speaker for the International Society for Education Through Art (InSEA), European Congress, Istanbul (July, 2004) Workshop Presenter: Westchester Arts Council (2005); New Jersey School Boards Association (2005); New Jersey Education Association (2004-2006); Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES), Eastern Suffolk County, New York State (2004-2006); New Jersey State Arts Council (1999), Maryland State Education Association (2008, 2009, 2011, 2013), Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (2005/2006/2009/2010/2011/2012/2014), Atlanta Public Schools (2011, 2012, 2013), Chicago Teachers Union, Actor’s Equity, Actor’s Fund, New York City, Illinois Arts Alliance, Tennessee Arts Commission, Springboard – Young Audiences, St. Louis, PARCC Consortium, Maryland Dept. of Ed. Task Force Member for the development of Core Curriculum Content Standards in the Arts: New Jersey Department of Education, 1994 Commissioned playwright: Richard Rodgers Foundation, All Kinds of People, musical Production Manager: Opera Metropolitana, Caracas, Venezuela; Production Manager: O’Neill Theatre Center, Musical Nine, Maury Yeston, Composer Opera Producer/Director: Orchestra of St. Luke’s & Little Orchestra Society, New York City Teacher Training/Professional Development: Royal Opera, London, England (four years), Arts Council of England ADDENDUM A Partial List of Professional Development Clientele with a Focus on Common Core State Standards State Boards of Education Maryland State Department of Education Mississippi Board of Education Pennsylvania Department of Education New York State Board of Cooperative Educational Services (twelve sites throughout the state) New York State Alliance for Arts Education State Arts Councils and Associations Tennessee Arts Council Pennsylvania Arts Council Mississippi Arts Commission Virginia Commission for the Arts New Jersey State Arts Council New York State Art Teachers Association School Administrators Association of New York State New Jersey Education Association Maryland State Education Association Chicago Teachers Union Westchester Arts Council Illinois Arts Alliance Arts Organizations Actor’s Equity Actor’s Fund Young Audiences School Districts Baltimore County Schools, Maryland Allegany County Schools, Maryland Carroll County Schools, Maryland Union City Schools, New Jersey South Plainfield School District, New Jersey Ulster County Schools, New York Duchess County Schools, New York Harford County Schools, Maryland Reading Public Schools, Massachusetts Clarkstown Schools, NY Other Utah State University Chicago School for the Arts PARCC Educator Leadership Cadre University of Chicago Urban Education Institute Illinois Alliance of Administrators of Special Education Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development New York State Arts Teachers Association Atlanta Public Schools, Georgia Giles County Public Schools, Tennessee District 20, Colorado Springs, Colorado Carbondale Schools, Illinois Arlington Heights School District, Illinois Four Rivers Education District, Illinois Southwestern City Schools, Ohio Minooka Schools, Illinois Prince George’s County Public School, Maryland Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools, Tennessee Response Bruce Taylor Thu 4/5/2018 8:03 AM To: Williams, Phil ; ? 3 attachments ?3 MB? Summative Report PGCPS copy.pdf; Bruce Taylor's Resume March2017.pdf; March Report.pdf; Happy to oblige. My association with Dr. Joseph began three years ago when a senior administrative colleague of his at Prince Georges County Public Schools [PGCPS], with whom I worked for a number of years in other contexts, recommended that I give a district wide [facilitated by Discovery Communications] keynote address on an alternative approach to state standards I believe may be beneficial to educators. As a result of that address and educators' positive reactions to it throughout the district, he asked me to do an analysis of whether PGCPS curriculum and instruction aligned adequately with state standards. I have attached my summary report of that analysis and one could easily change "PGCPS" with "MNPS" in terms of its observations and conclusions. Subsequent to his posting at MNPS, he wanted me to implement my approach with principals willing to invest in such a process for schools that are in the bottom 5% of state rankings, given the possibility that the existing pedagogical paradigm may be deficient. As Jim Henson once said, "If you learn too much of what others have done, you may take the same direction as everybody else." Apropos of this, advent Common Core and its descendants [e.g.TNReady], the strategies of Tennessee's highly credentialed experts have so far produced a track record of inadequacy, as I'm sure you are aware [e.g. two out of three not ready for college or reading at grade level throughout the state.] Given an equally concerning trajectory at MNPS ?e.g. Only 11% of high school students considered "college ready" = an almost 90% failure rate?, Dr. Joseph is wisely exploring new ways to change those dynamics. My work is part of that effort and if I don't succeed, then I will have failed! I have found that teachers in this district want to do a good job and their students want to learn, so I will not blame the teachers, and certainly not ascribe any lack of progress on the challenges facing students in these schools. If my approach doesn't work, then all the credentials in the world wouldn't make any difference. Conversely, if it does work, and there is some evidence it does, then "credentials" wouldn't matter either. Nevertheless, I have also attached my resume for your review. As to the framework of my approach, you can obtain a copy of my book Common Sense Common Core on Amazon or I will be happy to mail you one. While perusing my website, I'm sure you also noticed comments made by teachers on the value of what I provided related to this approach. I can easily submit literally hundreds of affirmative surveys filled out by teachers around the country over the past four years. However, as in the case with PGCPS, when one questions the status quo [as I did in my attached summary report], you are perceived as automatically challenging some of those who found success in it and thus end up on the receiving end of energetic pushback from high level decision-makers. As part of oversight of what I do, I am required to submit a monthly report of what I'm doing and why I'm doing it. I have attached last month's report by way of example. If you want similar reports from last August on, I'm happy to supply them. If you want examples of the materials I create for teacher use, don't hesitate to ask. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Cordially, Bruce PGCPS Cracking the Core (C) SUMMATIVE REPORT Bruce D. Taylor June 10, 2016 (This page left intentionally blank) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY P. 4 P. 6 FINDING #1: Pre-Assessment Results Sample Feedback for 5th Grade P. 9 P. 10 Unit Outline Template Teacher Draft Exemplar for 5th Grade P. 14 P. 15 Demonstrations of Understanding 5th Grade Sample P. 16 Findings and Recommendations FINDING #2: Alignment to Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching CONTENTS: P. 18 FINDING #3: Prioritize Curricular and Instructional Materials P. 21 FINDING #4: PARCC Analysis Comparative Analysis of 2014 and 2015 Released Items P. 22 Explanation of "Proto-PARCC" P. 23 FINDING #5: "Five Levels of Why" P. 24 FINDING #6: Relevance of Any Text to PARCC Operative Terms - Proof of Concept P. 26 Simple Assessment - Written Test P. 27 Student Essay from PROTO-PARCC prompt: P. 28 Separate Attachments Available on Request: All 5th Grade level standards abstracted collectively by way of example. 5th Grade Proto-PARCC ELA Assessment using PGCPS Content and instructions for students. (Note: All the Cracking the Core generated material contained herein is copyright protected) 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Need: A shift from content to concepts. The Maryland State Board of Education adopted the Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards (MCCRS) unanimously in June of 2010. Six years later, research has shown that, "Only 8% of U.S. high school graduates complete a curriculum that prepares them well for college and the workplace." (Study published by the Education Trust, Education Week 4.6.2016). In addition, the Core-aligned ELA assessments developed by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (PARCC) have published results in line with the Education Trust's conclusions. There are many reasons for such outcomes, but some at least might be traced to a fundamental misunderstanding of the shift in the educational paradigm initiated by these new standards. The primary emphasis of Maryland's College and Career Readiness Standards is not about content coverage, but on developing the skills necessary for a 21st century economy and society: ".....applications of knowledge through higher-order skills, so that all students are prepared for the 21st century." (www.corestandards.org/assets/Criteria.pdf). General Finding: The instructional elements of Prince Georges County Schools (PGCPS) have been thoughtfully devised. However, they could be more closely aligned with Core Standards and with each other. To this end, nine principals in Prince Georges' County chose to have selected teachers participate in this pilot project. Over 700 of their students took part. In a desire to simplify a more cohesive approach to MCCRS, an analysis of the Core Standards reveals that each grade level standard is based on an inherent cognitive concept (i.e. higher order thinking skill) represented by an "operative term." A majority of standards for any grade level (see 5th grade example separately available), as well as most PARCC prompts, are built on approximately two-dozen of these terms (i.e. concepts). They are.... Support Context Summary Develop Main Idea Inference Evidence Identify Setting Structure Describe Theme Narrative Determine Analyze Explicit Subject Key Detail Contrast Compare Meaning Purpose Point of View Pre-assessments reveal that a majority of students, and even a significant number of their teachers, do not understand the Core-aligned meanings of these terms, which can be different from every-day definitions (see Page 9). It should be a revelation of the obvious that if students do not understand the conceptual basis of expectations inherent in the Core Standards across all subject areas, not just ELA, instructional practice is built on a foundation of sand. For example, the average percentages of students' comprehension of subject and main idea are approximately 6% and 9% respectively, most believing these terms are interchangeable. And although the Core divides texts into narrative and informational forms, only 11% of all students could define what a "narrative" is. It is a reasonable assumption that such deficits can be extrapolated district-wide. Why: Historically, many existing curricular frameworks around the country emphasized "content coverage." The required amount of content to be covered, combined with the volume of data generation required of frontline educators diminishes the time that could be devoted to teaching Core Standards at any significant depth. Ironically, one of the primary justifications for adoption of the Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards was to counteract a "mile wide, inch deep" approach to education. 4 By way of contrast, an intentional focus on these "operative terms" can encourage mindful thinking about what is being taught in ways that transfer to unfamiliar contexts. One goal of Cracking the Core is to use prioritized content to teach critical concepts and higher-order thinking skills to avoid an ever-expanding load of curricular content. The latter is often too context-specific; the former facilitates transference and can significantly reduce the amount of materials needed along with a commensurate budgetary savings. Less content allows for more teaching, making possible more exploration and deeper understanding while being more cost effective at the same time. How: The primary goal of Cracking the Core is to simplify and clarify an alternative process for guiding instructional practice. A tool for this is the Core-Aligned Unit Outline Template, examples of which are included in this report (page 14). Inherent in this process is to encourage teachers to determine exactly "why" they use specific content as a means towards developing in their students necessary social skills and to create an emotional purpose for learning (ref. "Emotion May be Key Driver of Learning," Education Week 4.27.2016). This process is also intended to persuade teachers to include more "authentic" content (i.e. drawn from students' own lives) as well as academic texts. Thus, educators can employ differentiated teaching in order to address differentiated learning in their classrooms. Assessment: There are two assessment tools adopted by PGCPS - the summative PARCC assessment for students and the Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching, utilized for teacher evaluation. Parenthetically, there is no defined formative assessment in place at the present time. A theory endorsed by Understanding by Design (UbD), stipulates a need to construct pedagogy by first determining what you want to end up with. The primary end-metric by which PGCPS decision-makers are held accountable is student scores on the PARCC. Thus, the expectations set by the PARCC, which in turn are based on those inherent in the Core Standards, should flow deliberately through all aspects of instructional practice. To facilitate this, is the "Proto-PARCC" (available separately from this report) that not only familiarizes students with the format and style of questions presented in such an assessment, but also uses content that already exists in PGCPS Curriculum Instructional Maps. It provides students strategies with which they can more effectively respond to PARCC prompts. This resource can also be employed as a formative assessment and integrated into the quarterly "Cycle 6" (Cycle 6 is Performance Task/Review of Cycles 1-5) found in each of the four units built into an instructional map. Teachers can then take the opportunity to discover how students process the questions and compose their answers. Concerning the Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching (page 18), a principal's observations focused on "Component Ic: Setting Instructional Outcomes, Component Ie: Designing Curriculum Instruction, and Component If: Designing Student Assessments" can be slightly altered so as to align with Cracking the Core. Further, given some of the elements of the Unit Outline Format (see P. 14), "Component 2a: Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport, Component 2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning" can be enhanced through adoption of Cracking the Core principles. Finally, there is the student "Demonstrations of Understanding" (page 16) for each grade level that allows students to show how well they have mastered the meanings of the operative terms introduced at their grade level in the Core Standards. This constitutes a simple inhouse summative assessment of how effectively students can transition these critical concepts that contribute to life-long learning. Going Forward: This initial pilot was constrained by a truncated time frame, so its primary value can be found in what was revealed by research which provided evidence of the existing balance between district needs and existing resources within the context of Maryland's College and Career Readiness Standards. Recommendations for remediation are outlined on the following pages and, if adopted following submission of this final report, should justify an expansion into more schools with a proportionate number of teachers and students. 5 FINDINGS & SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS - ELA OVERALL FINDING: "Standards based education begins (and ends) with the standards." While each of the structural elements of the district's instructional design is thoughtfully devised and implemented, collectively they are not truly integrated with Core Standards or with each other. If Core Standards constitute the state's pedagogical foundation, then every Curriculum Instructional Map (CIM), Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI), Curricular Framework Process Guide (CFPG), Social Studies and Science texts, formative assessments, and metrics by which teachers determine students' grades should consistently, directly and intentionally address the expectations inherent in the Core Standards and, by extension, PARCC ELA summative assessments. This would constitute a triangulation in which RELA curriculum aligns with Curriculum Instructional Maps and, in turn, MCCRS and related instructional shifts. Furthermore, since all grade-level standards across all subject areas are based on the same limited number of cognitive concepts as represented by "operative terms," the ability to address all grade-level standards in a given school year can be simplified. Some of these recommendations have already been instituted during the pilot and have shown promise helping participating teachers in understanding such a triangulation and integrating it into their work. FINDING #1: There is no consistent understanding of what the Core Standards are from grade to grade, school to school, teacher to teacher, student to student (see Page 9 of this report). Recommendation: Teachers should have professional development at the start of the year to review agreed upon Core-aligned meanings of the "operative terms" that are the basis of each standard introduced at their grade levels. Recommendation: Before any curricular content is addressed at the beginning of the school year, students are taught the meanings of the operative terms at their grade level. (see Page 10 of this report). This can be accomplished during the "Smart Start" period. The existing appellation of "Amazing Words" could be used for these terms. This will provide a scaffold to support students' understanding and engagement with MCCRS and related instructional strategies relative to Core Standards via their operative terms. Recommendation: Conduct regular professional development for teachers on the Cracking the Core paradigm for review and teacher feedback, particularly with respect to writing standards-aligned text dependent questions for their students based on the standards' operative terms as well as the use of standards-specific rubrics to address student needs and inform instruction. Periodically through the school year, teachers can gather together to exchange guidance on how to effectively support student comprehension and analysis. FINDING #2: The evaluative framework for teachers, Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching, is not developmentally integrated with Core Standards as it was devised fourteen years (1996) before the Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards were adopted. 6 Recommendation: Create anchor charts for each operative term at each grade level along with process charts related to PARCC prompts that the principal can refer to during his or her observations (see Page 20 of this report). At each grade level, the anchor charts created during this project could serve as the basis for ensuring that curriculum and related materials thoroughly address grade level standards. Recommendation: More directly align other aspects of PGCPS's pedagogical construct with the aspirations Ms. Danielson expresses in her framework (see Page 18 of this report). FINDING #3: Feedback reveals that a significant number of teachers feel anxiety over the amount of content they have to cover in the Curriculum Instructional Maps (CIM) currently in use and that these Pacing Guides are too prescriptive in application. The more content teachers have to cover, the less teaching they can do with it. Recommendation: Prioritize existing content by asking two questions: "Why is this important and where should it be placed on a list of priorities?" In this way, more attention can be focused on having students engage standards-based thinking about content more robustly. Such prioritization would also ensure that instructional materials thoroughly address grade-level standards and specify where such standards are to be met. Recommendation: Rather than using different texts for each operative term, one text can be utilized to teach several. (see "Relevance of Any Text," P. 26) This would also reduce the expenditure required for instructional materials. Recommendation: Allow teachers, with approval from their appropriate administrator, to determine some curricular content depending upon the skill, experience and judgment of the teachers and the needs of their particular students (i.e. "differentiated teaching and learning"). Teachers should be encouraged to use content from the students' world (i.e. "authentic content") FINDING #4: There is no formal formative assessment in place that relates directly to the Core Standards. Recommendation: Create "Proto-PARCC" assessments (an example of which can be obtained separately from this report) using familiar PGCPS curricular content for each of the tested grade levels that become part of Cycle 6 as a form of review and formative culminating ELA assessment. The "Proto-PARCC" can be used to evaluate evidence of student understanding of developing proficiency on such an assessment. The "Proto-PARCC" would intentionally employ questions and prompts that are text-specific and directly reflect the standards as well as mirroring the range of PARCC item types, formatting, and terminology. Recommendation: Use teacher-devised "Demonstrations of Understanding" (Page 16) as an in-house mini-summative assessment to ensure that students can transfer their understanding of the concepts represented by the operative terms in less academic, more authentic contexts. In doing so, teachers can increase the frequency of standards-aligned questions and writing prompts. This would also facilitate unit/quarter assessments to monitor students' developing fluency with the cognitive processes inherent with Core Standards and align with MCCRS. 7 FINDING #5: There seems to be no integrated social-development element with unit or lesson plans that embeds having students also consider moral or character issues through the study of assigned texts. However, it is through the choice of such texts that we transmit cultural and community values. The utilization of the Unit Outline, contained herein, can provide a more simplified model that guides the sequence of texts and tasks. Recommendation: Encourage teachers to consider why the content they are teaching is important beyond "it's in the curriculum." A helpful exercise is the "Five Levels of Why" (see P. 24) that requires a person to probe deeply in why something is done. Recommendation: Have students go through the same "Five Levels of Why" when considering the actions and behavior of fictional characters, historical figures, or themselves. FINDING #6: Teachers are generally left to their own devices on how to determine the grades that show up on their students' report cards. Because teachers are not provided with specific guidelines, more often than not, the metrics they devise do not directly relate to Core Standards and a significant portion of grade determination is based on subjective judgments such as observations of student participation and behavior. Recommendation: Use the "Proto-PARCC" for each unit's Cycle 6 (review) not only as a check for understanding of covered material and understanding of the conceptual basis of each operative term, but as a major component of grade determination. Recommendation: Use the "Relevance to Any Text" as a metric for determining students' ability to identify and employ the cognitive processes as represented by the "operative terms" in assigned texts, followed up by a written test (see Page 27). Implementation of these methods would 1) Provide an appropriate balance of opportunities for writing as well in depth analysis of selected texts and, 2) Reduce dependence on teacher modeling in a way that demonstrates students' understanding of foundational concepts inherent in Core standards. CONCLUSION Because it is the Project Director's belief that Core Standards are clear, simple, and comprehensive in their nature, adjustments to the PGCPS pedagogical structure need not be radical. Through relatively modest effort, they could form a matrix into which most of the instructional elements can be combined in such a way that they reinforce each other. Because the Core Standards paradigm is focused on having educators teach children to think, the skills students develop will enable them to successfully confront the increasingly diverse and unfamiliar content and contexts of their adult lives. It is generally predicted that our students will find themselves in a dozen different venues of employment in their working lives, therefore we need to develop their abilities to reason more than simply remember, think about more than just know about, and be able to adapt rather than cling to the status quo. Finally, there is an assumption held by some in our society that children who populate our inner-cities and Title I schools are unable to think, so students are put through assembly line methods of instruction which are anathema to those who developed the original Common Core States Standards back in 2010. The goal of an expansion of this pilot is to validate "Core" aspirations inherent in the Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards and those of the many educators who work for PGCPS. 8 FINDING #1: BASELINE RESULTS FROM PRE-ASSESSMENTS OF OPERATIVE TERMS % indicates the percentage of students who understood the Core meanings of these terms SCHOOL: Est. # of students (ave. %): Paca 4th Gr C. H. 5th Gr 120 Thomas Inter. 5th Gr 9th Gr 18 25 Suitland Suitland Suitland Fuolois Foulois Foulois R.H. Felegy 5th Gr 4th Gr 3rd Gr 3rd Gr 4th Gr 5th Gr 4/5th Gr. 5th Gr. 80 35 44 19 45 26 51 29 T. J. 6th Gr. 25 B.H. 4th Gr. 54 75 SUPPORT (7%) 3% 11% 0% 11% 1% 19% 10% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 38% 7% SUPPORT DEVELOP (4%) 3% 0% 22% 2% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 26% 1% 0% DEVELOP EVIDENCE (35%) 16% 50% 32% 47% 14% 0% 30% 34% 24% 38% 77% 44% 59% EVIDENCE STRUCTURE (6%) 0% 5% 30% 9% 0% 9% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 30% 0% 8% STRUCTURE NARRATIVE (11%) 3% 5% 22% 7% 0% 24% 1% 28% 11% 2% 2% 22% 11% 21% NARRATIVE EXPLICIT (4%) 3% 0% 11% 2% 0% 9% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 11% 9% 0% EXPLICIT CONTRAST (41%) 16% 72% 27% 35% 86% 26% 33% 3% 62% 38% 37% 55% 47% CONTRAST COMPARE (39% 22% 60% 22% 27% 53% 76% 15% 39% 19% 60% 45% 22% 50% 37% COMPARE CONTEXT (1%) 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% CONTEXT FIGURATIVE LANG. (1%) 0% 5% 1% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 1% 0% FIG. LANG. MAIN IDEA (13%) 9% 5% 51% 9% 0% 14% 1% 0% 0% 10% 1% * 2% 12% MAIN IDEA IDENTIFY (2%) 1% 11% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% 0% 1% 7% IDENTIFY DESCRIBE (15%) 9% 16% 18% 9% 0% 3% 1% 26% 41% 20% 23% DESCRIBE DETERMINE (6%) 1% 16% 0% 0% 22% 0% 2% 1% 1% 4% 16% 0% DETERMINE SUBJECT (6%) 6% 16% 4% 12% 0% 0% 1% 19% 3% 1% 1% SUBJECT MEANING (1%) 0% 5% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% MEANING PURPOSE (18%) 6% 28% 11% 11% 24% 1% 24% 30% 3% 34% 40% 11% PURPOSE SUMMARY (4%) 0% 5% 4% 0% 0% 1% 10% 3% 11% 0% 5% SUMMARY INFER (13%) 0% 16% 18% 12% 24% 23% 2% 3% 41% 1% 5% INFERENCE SETTING (10%) 0% 16% 0% 33% 0% 2% 2% 2% 39% SETTING THEME (9%) 1% 27% 11% 1% 1% 0% 1% 14% 11% 35% 3% THEME POINT OF VIEW (15%) 16% 18% 14% 17% 11% 15% P.O.V. ANALYZE (2%) 5% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% ANALYZE KEY DETAIL 4% KEY DETAIL CONCLUSION 11% CONCLUSION DEMONSTRATE 25% DEMONSTRATE CLAIM 4% CLAIM 9 REPRESENTATIVE FEEDBACK FROM AN OPERATIVE TERMS PRE-ASSESSMENT Sample 5th grade results from one of the participating schools The results and analysis below provide a baseline of students' conceptual understanding of the "operative terms" that form the basis of the Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards and PARCC assessments in ELA. Students' responses will inform how their cognitive deficits, as revealed by these data, can be remediated. Then teachers can determine the best way to teach students more than just the definitions of these terms, but also for students to gain a deeper understanding of them. This is especially important when it comes to the PARCC assessments as those questions are based on such understandings (see "subject" and "main idea" below by way of example.) The intent is to subordinate covering content to a focus on understanding concepts thereby deepening students' comprehension. The fundamental underlying principle of Cracking the Core is that students comprehend what these terms essentially mean within the framework of the Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards in any subject area, more than simply knowing more common dictionary definitions. To "know" is to remember a definition and the shelf life of such memorization, unless it is reinforced, degrades rapidly. To "understand" a meaning enables the student to use it and demonstrate understanding. It is also a goal, while focusing on the meaning within the Core context, that students can also apply these meanings outside the academic environment, as many of these terms are representative of critical life skills. Also, because each teacher graded his or her students' response per operative term, it is apparent that teachers must attend to precision as to the exact meaning of each term as found on the answer sheet that was provided. There was considerable disparity between the teacher's "scores" and the project developer's; an explanation of how this could be is revealed in the comments next to each term and its percentage. Keep in mind; we want students to demonstrate their understanding of these terms as they are used within Core Standards and not to confuse meaning with examples, strategies, a synonym, or a variation of the word itself. SUPPORT: 0% students (Justify, back up) Dictionary definitions most commonly found are "to agree," "help" or "hold up." Indeed, these were the meanings most of the students provided. "To give confidence to something or someone," is on the right track. "To give details with a main idea or anything," is close also, but both miss the mark. DEVELOP: 0% (Expand upon and/or add key details) No one could provide the Core-related meaning of this term. Again, dictionary definitions would include "grow" but not applicable within the Core. Or, as a couple of students put it, "Get better," or "learn" which are reasons to "expand upon and add detail." Further, within the contexts of the Core and PARCC this particular concept refers to expanding a main idea (informational) or theme (narrative). EVIDENCE: 25% (That which proves or disproves; facts.) The key words here are facts and proves. Referring to "clues" is inadequate as evidence has to be explicit (another operative term) and factual. 10 STRUCTURE: 0% (Pieces that fit together to create a whole) "The component parts that when put together create a whole." Thus, this very sentence has a structure, as does a poem, a newspaper article, a painting, a novel, short story, a piece of music, practically anything. "The way something is built," refers to a process, not what constitutes a structure. NARRATIVE: 3 students (A story, a sequence of events.) The Core divides texts into narrative and informational texts. In common with other groups of students, many students confused this term with narratOR: as one student wrote, "Someone who tells story to children." You don't have to always have a narrator to tell a narrative. The Core uses narrative as a synonym for story (i.e. a series of events - if nothing happens, you don't have a story). Narrative is story; story is narrative - end of story. When students are asked to create a "personal narrative" they are introduced to this form of writing without really understanding what a narrative is. EXPLICIT: 2 students (Clear, exact, no room for interpretation; it is what it is.) In an ELA context, "explicit" means you are citing the exact text of what's been excerpted. Explicit is exactly what the text says, nothing more or less. It is related to "evidence" in that it is factual. Interestingly, only a few of the students thought of "explicit" in the context of "explicit lyrics" relating to violent or sexual content. "Explicit is something that is big, vivid or very open," reveals this student doesn't have a clue as to the meaning of this term. When you ask someone, "Can you be more explicit?" you are asking for that person to clarify what's been said with specific information. CONTRAST: 62% (Notice differences) Two thirds of the students understand this term. Within the PARCC format, it will be important to teach students what to look for in order to cite the differences between texts. Too often, we don't separate these two semantic siblings and we introduce them as one word - compareandcontrast. Thus, many students confuse the two. COMPARE: 60% (Notice similarities) See contrast above. Some put, "Alike or the same" which is fine. One student put, "To make the thing the same," which really means "to copy." CONTEXT: 0% (Elements or circumstances that influence behavior or meaning) For an expanded comprehension of this term, beyond its common affiliation with surrounding text that contributes to the definition of a word, "context" can also refer to a social context, historical context, or cultural context. Just relating this term to text is inadequate. A broader understanding of context will be important as they move up into higher-grade levels and college. "Using clues," is a strategy, but does not demonstrate understanding of the term. "The details in a story," is close, but relates more to summary. FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE: 0% (Not literal. A manner of saying one thing while meaning another using figures of speech, i.e. words) A lot of students figured this meant an entirely different language such as German or American Sign Language rather than a use of language, as with figurative words. Figurative language is non-literal, which means students have to understand what literal means (adherence to the strict meaning of) to begin with before they are introduced to figures of speech ("figurative") such as metaphor, analogy, irony, personification, etc. in the 5th grade. "To have meaning behind your words," is getting there. SUBJECT: 19% (What the text is about) See main idea below. Some students took it to mean the class they were in (by subject). Subject in the Core is what text is about. "What you focus on," is close enough. Although it is picky, "topic" and "subject" are really two different entities - You can have a subject that addresses several topics, but not a topic that addresses several subjects. Identifying the subject in a sentence is too narrow an understanding. 11 MAIN IDEA: 10% (What the author wants you to know about the subject) While this may appear to be a surprising result, students, even some teachers, routinely confuse subject (what a passage is about) and main idea (which is what the author wants you to know or understand about the subject of the passage.) "Main part/detail/point of the text," is not enough. In relation to the PARCC, students need to be able to distinguish between purpose, main idea, theme, topic and subject. By the way, "main idea" is most often connected to informational texts (as opposed to narrative) in both the Core and PARCC. "Theme" in narrative can be considered the equivalent of "main idea" in informational texts. The PARCC is very specific with the use and meaning of main idea. IDENTIFY: 3 students (Note individual features) "To establish as particular by noting individual features or characteristics." In other words, what makes it,....it, as opposed to something else. This term is slightly different from "describe" below. "To find details in the text," is not adequate, nor is "Look for more detail." "To look at something and figure out what it is," is on the right track." DESCRIBE: 21% (Point out facts or details)" To show or tell with written or spoken words; point out facts or details." The key to understanding here is the use of words. If not using words, you are illustrating or demonstrating understanding in ways that don't involve the use of words. Two students confused this term with "sensory," as in "To talk about an object person looks, feels, or taste like." Another confused this term with "paraphrase," - "Explain something in your own words." Quite of few thought this term meant to "explain." DETERMINE: 2% (Decide through reasoning or observation) Most often confused with determined, as in, will not give up. An important aspect of this concept is, "A decision arrived at through reasoning or observation." In other words, one has to think about something first in order to determine a course of action or answer. "To guess or discover what something is," is close, as is "To figure out." "To decide what to do..." is correct because it implies the need to think about what one will decide about something. MEANING: 0% (The significance of something) For the purposes of this pilot, there is a difference between definition (which is how almost all of the students responded by the use of this synonym) and meaning. While a word can have a definition for its meaning, a poem or a fable's meaning is not its definition. Repeatedly in the PARCC, questions refer to the meaning in a whole passage, not just individual words. PURPOSE: 30% (Intended or desired result; why someone does or creates something) The Core-related understanding of this term is "why or what motivated the author to write this?" Reason or why can suffice as a correct response in this pre-assessment. "Such as to persuade or inform," are examples of purpose, not the meaning of it. "To do something bad and mean it," made me smile. SUMMARY: 4 students (A listing of key details in chronological order) Most responses were "a paragraph." A summary may take the form of a paragraph, but a summary is actually a listing of the key details (one of the operative terms) of a text in chronological order, which is how summary is posed on a PARCC ELA assessment. Several students equated summary with story which may indicate they don't understand what a story is either. In order to construct a summary, students must distinguish main idea and key details from other details that are irrelevant for a summary. Students have a tendency to list everything or simply paraphrase the text. 12 INFERENCE: 2% (To figure out from evidence; answer to the question "Why?") I'm not sure that "Background knowledge" alone reveals an adequate understanding. "Text clues" are not inferences either. You draw an inference from clues. An inference is the result of figuring something out from the evidence or through a reasoned process of what you are reading. A simple technique is to ask, "Why did the author put that in?" Your answer is the inference. In this way, making a prediction based on the evidence in the text can be an inference, not just making a prediction alone. An inference can also by thought of as an "assumption" based on text. SETTING: 2 students (Place AND time.) Time of day, season, year, period in history - all can affect a story and influence characters' behavior. If you have a place without time, you don't have a complete understanding of setting. THEME: 0% (The most significant idea on a subject that is embedded throughout a work. A concluding moral or message based upon the author's opinions about the subject. A universal "big idea" that can relate to varied contexts and/or life). Missing in most students' definitions of "theme" is its unifying aspect. Theme weaves its way through the whole of the work, not only a final message or moral. In this way, it is similar to a theme in music, which is manipulated throughout the whole of the piece. In order to determine a theme, you generally have to finish what you are reading because the theme is embedded throughout and you base your determination on a cumulative understanding of the story. POINT OF VIEW: 14% (Through whose "eyes" the story is told) Citing first, second, and third person, or noting when the pronoun changes are strategies and do not adequately demonstrate an understanding of this term's conceptual basis. It is not to be confused with "perspective" either. "Perspective" is the background of a person's life that informs how they look upon (i.e. have a point of view about) something or an event; perspective is broad, point of view is narrow. ANALYZE: 1 student (Breakdown into constituent parts and see how they fit together) This concept also indicates a need to determine the structure of what one is analyzing. Although some dictionaries refer to the "analysis of meaning," I believe a better approach is to determine the meaning of something. A lot of students equated this term with variations of "to examine" or "look closely." "To go out and collect data or information," would be a precursor to analyze. You would subsequently analyze what that data revealed. The fundamental aspect of this approach to the Core and the PARCC is a common-sense conclusion drawn from assessments like this. If students are not taught the meanings of these key terms and thus do not understand the concepts these terms represent, teachers are building instructional practice on a foundation of sand. Keep in mind, all this is just a baseline: To understand what students understand. Given these results, the most appropriate methods of remediation can be devised in order to enhance students' abilities to meet the expectations set by the PARCC and the Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards. **** On the following two pages are examples of a one-page "Unit Outline Template" which incorporates key Core objectives and embeds a social development aspect (Part I, Contextual Framework, WHY) as an integral part of the instructional process. The first example is the basic template and a participating 5th grade teacher filled in the second example. 13 2 1 Unit Outline Core-Aligned Template SIMPLIFIED PART I ("What" & "WHY") CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK activites WHY do you feel that the specific content you've chosen is important or meaningful to your students? What do you want them to learn or understand? Not just "know," but comprehend the purpose, meaning, or importance of what they've been taught. Can they transfer their resultant knowledge, understanding or ability into other contexts? What is the "out the door" value once they leave your classroom? Is there a research element? Given all of today's technology, probably. What background knowledge do they need? Is there a familiar frame of reference with which they can approach the content? Standards based education begins with a standard and every standard is, in turn, based on its "operative terms" (i.e. verbs and nouns) GRADE LEVEL STANDARDS (Based on Those Terms) Choose the grade level standards that include the same operative terms. CONTENT TO BE USED Be specific - a particular novel, poem scene in a play, magazine article, You Tube clip, set of song lyrics, work of visual art, etc., preferably drawn from the students' cultural or social context. Part II ("How") OPERATIVE TERMS (i.e. "Thinking Skills") Work Session For Part II Students Brief description of the activity in which the students will be engaged: Students will initially demonstrate their understanding of the operative term(s) on which the standard is based. ACTIVITY What will the students actually do? What activities will they be involved in? Will they use technology? See "research" in Part I. What is the level of student input and/or cognitive contribution? Who is doing most of the talking, most of the thinking, and most of the work? What will be produced (output) at the conclusion of the activity? What artifacts will be produced that shows what they did? Teacher T What are the specific tasks the teacher is responsible for during the activity? Make sure the students, at the outset, understand the meaning of the operative terms (i.e. thinking skill/cognitive process required) in an authentic context before students are introduced the content. Ensure that the goals are specific, doable, and allows for informal assessments within the time allotted. ASSESSMENT How the will students demonstrate their understanding of what they learned, not just tell you what you told them, in relation to the "Why" in Part I: 14 2 1 Sample format filled in by a 5th grade teacher using existing PGCPS curricular content PART I ("What" & "WHY") OPERATIVE TERMS (i.e. "Thinking Skills") WHY did you choose this particular content? Text covers such "big ideas" issues as racism, bullying, being different and value of true friends. Students need discussion on these topics in a learning context. Can they transfer their resultant knowledge, understanding or ability into other contexts? Yes, students should be able to transfer their understanding into future experiences, particularly Middle School and beyond. Is there a research element? Yes, in order to explore experts' views on the issues noted above. GRADE LEVEL STANDARDS (Based on Above Terms) RL.5.1 Quote accurately from a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. RL.5.3 Compare and contrast two or more characters, settings, or events in the novel. W.5.9 Draw evidence from literary texts to support analysis, reflection and research RL5.5 Explain how a series of chapters or scenes fit together to provide the overall structure of Maniac McGee CONTENT TO BE USED What will the students actually DO? Create a journal on the issues examined. Analyze the characters' social contexts and relationships. Examine how setting influences character behavior and interaction. Compare (notice similarities) Contrast (notice differences) Analyze (break down structure into its component parts Infer (derive by reasoning; answer the question, "Why is that there?") Structure (the component parts of something that make up a whole) What background knowledge do they need? There own experiences and perspectives regarding these issues. What do you want them to learn or understand? The above concepts are a few of the realities of life and students must develop their own sense of morality and perspectives concerning them. Part II ("How") Maniac McGee By Jerry Spinelli (a novel) Work Session For Part II Students Brief description of the activity in which the students will be engaged: Students will initially demonstrate their understanding of the operative term(s) on which the standards are based. See activities in Part II. As weeks progress and we move through the novel, there will be more detailed activities with specific chapter correlation and to increase vocabulary acquisition. Will they use technology? Yes, pertaining to research on the novel's "big ideas." What is the level of student input and/or cognitive contribution? 60% student / 40% teacher. What will be produced (output) at the conclusion of the activity? Novel journal, compare and contrast charts, demonstration of figurative language, summary writing, demonstrate use of theme in their own narrative writing, book review. Teacher T What are the specific tasks the teacher is responsible for during the activity? Make sure the students, at the outset, understand the meaning of the operative terms (i.e. thinking skill/cognitive process required) before you introduce the content. Teacher will model all tasks. Teacher will monitor progress on all tasks Teacher will be responsible for ensuring reading comprehension of text ASSESSMENT How will the students demonstrate their understanding of what they learned? Students will compose essays that juxtapose their real life experiences in confronting the issues explored in the novel. Students will be asked to predict how they will or should deal with the issues noted in Part I; concerning their own behavior and that of others - particularly their friends and peers. 15 DEMONSTRATIONS OF UNDERSTANDING 5th Grade (i.e. THE ABILITY OF STUDENTS TO USE WHAT THEY KNOW) OVERALL GOAL: Once students comprehend the meanings of operative terms, they should be able to apply their understanding in unfamiliar contexts such as the ones they will face throughout their adult lives in an era of ever-changing content and workplaces. Secondly, if a student can demonstrate their understanding of operative terms they can, by definition, demonstrate understanding of any grade level standard in which those terms are embedded. PREMISE: Choice of "operative term" and the concept it represents relates to a particular standard that incorporates it, to the specific content chosen with which to teach to the standard, combined with a purposeful "why" that content was chosen which ends up with the student's demonstration of what he or she understood in a context other than the one in which the concept was taught. CONCLUSIONS: o o o o The teaching of any content must flow directly from a given standard of which both the teacher and students have a mutual understanding. Critical to student capability is to comprehend the meaning of the standard's underlying concept. Selected content is used to teach the concept, not use the concept to teach ever more content ("mile wide, inch deep"). That students should be able to demonstrate their understanding of a given concept in an authentic learning context after the teacher has taught it with selected content in an academic one. CONCEPTS THAT FORM THE BASIS OF THE PARCC ELA ASSESSMENTS, 5th GRADE: Resolved: Students should be able to demonstrate their understanding of the following concepts without scaffolding or "priming." These are the concepts on which all the Grade 5 ELA PARCC assessment questions are based: COMPARE THEME POINT OF VIEW NARRATIVE SUBJECT CONTRAST MAIN IDEA 16 SUGGESTED DEMONSTRATIONS: (Teachers provide some sort of written summary of whatever their students come up with.) Compare (point out what two things have in common, are similar, or alike) Ask students to compare any two objects in the classroom and to list at least four (4) commonalities between them. Ask students to list at least four (4) similarities between two objects in their home without identifying the objects by name and discover if other students can tell what the two objects are by such commonalities. Contrast: (point out what is different about two things) Same as "compare" above, except to point out the differences between two objects, either in the classroom or from home. OR.... Have students contrast two narrative characters in terms of appearance, personality, and behavior. Narrative: (A story. A sequence of events involving characters in a setting) Have students select one possibility from each of the following structural elements and create a narrative: Character (e.g. kid their age, friend, adult) - Describe your chosen character; what are they like? Setting - place (e.g. classroom, home, building) - Describe the classroom, home, or building. Setting - time (e.g. lunchtime, winter, holiday) - If a holiday, which one? Emotion (e.g. someone is nervous, afraid, happy) - "Why" is your character nervous, afraid, or happy? Once the student(s) have made their choices, simply ask, "Make up a narrative of what happens to your character and what they will do next." Subject: (what the narrative or information is about) Lay out a number of texts or visual images, both informational and narrative, and ask the students to determine the subject of each one. Main Idea: (What the author wants you to know or think about the subject) After the student(s) have determined the subject of each of the informational texts above, ask what is the main idea about each subject. Theme: (the most significant idea on a subject that is embedded throughout a work. A concluding moral or message based upon the author's opinions about the subject.) Have students identify a visual theme in their classroom manifested through the use of color, style, methods of presentation, or arrangement of elements. OR...ask the students to determine the theme of any of the narrative texts chosen above. Have students select a set of lyrics from their choice in popular music. Ask students to distinguish the subject of the lyrics and identify the work's theme. Point of View: (through whose eyes the story or information is conveyed to the reader, depending on their perspective) Select an event that is described in a newspaper or magazine article. Identify two people (characters) who were involved in or witnessed the event. Create a hypothetical background for each person inspired by the information in the article. This will constitute each person's perspective. Then, in first person narrative, relate that person's point of view about what happened, using at least six key ideas about what their feelings are, what they think about what they have witnessed what they look like, how they react to the event and include some sensory or figurative language. 17 FINDING #2: ALIGNMENT WITH ENHANCING PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE: A FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING It is important to state at the outset of this section that the project director found that all participating educators were committed, professional, competent and willing to take risks. Further, in all the classes that were observed the students were respectful, well mannered, and attentive. There were few, if any, disruptions or disciplinary issues. This is in contrast to the project director's classroom observations in other inner-city venues such as Chicago, Newark, New York City, Philadelphia, and Camden where class management challenges often overwhelmed classroom teachers. Below are selected quotes from Ms. Danielson's Enhancing Professional Practice - A Framework for Teaching that highlight some of her philosophical underpinnings that conform to the findings cited in Cracking the Core's approach shown in parenthesis. This reveals that it can be a relatively simple process to closely align this existing teacher evaluation framework to Core principles. P.2 "Teaching is a thinking person's job, it is not simply a matter of following a script...." (Finding #3) P.5 "Every profession establishes a language of practice, one that captures the important concepts (emphasis added) and understandings..." (Finding #1) P. 15 "The traditional view of learning focused on knowledge and procedures of low cognitive challenge and regurgitation of superficial understandings, does not meet the demands of the present and the future. But deep, conceptual understanding - knowledge that lasts longer than the time it takes for a student to pass a test - is also needed." (Finding #3) P. 15 "High-level learning by students requires high level instruction by their teachers." (Finding #1) P. 16 "The teacher needs to engage students in developing their own understanding." (Unit Outline, Part I, P. 14) P. 17 "Students require more time to explore a concept (emphasis added) than simply to be told about it. Therefore, (teachers) must determine which topics and concepts in the curriculum are critical for students to understand, which ones warrant the time needed to develop understanding." (Finding #3 of this report) P. 17 "So, although fewer topics may be covered, more is actually learned." (Finding #3) P. 17 "It is assumed that the primary goal of education is for students to understand important concepts (emphasis added and to develop important cognitive skills." (Finding #1) P. 18 "What instructional purpose is being served? Is this instructional purpose worthwhile? In the framework for teaching, purpose is central." (Finding #3) 18 P. 20 "(One) broadly accepted goal of public schools - such as developing social maturity - don't lend themselves to assessment by any type of test at all." (Unit Outline "WHY" P. 14) P. 22 "The framework for teaching captures those aspects of teaching that are common across contexts (emphasis added)." (Finding #4) P. 24 "(Allowing for) choices and decisions represent the heart of professionalism." (Finding #5) P. 25 "Which method a teacher selects depends on both the content to be learned and the students' age and preferred approach." (Findings #3 & #5) P. 27 "All elements of instructional design - learning activities, materials, and strategies (+ assessments) - must be appropriate to both content and the students and aligned with larger instructional goals. ("Overall Finding") P. 29 "Teachers prepare plans that are grounded in deep understanding of the content, aligned with state standards (emphasis added), and designed to engage students in important work." ("Overall Finding"). P. 34 "The research literature is filled with examples of student misconceptions of certain ideas." (Finding #1 and data P. 9) This framework was created over a decade prior the adoption of The Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards. It stands to reason that it could not have been devised in accordance with the conceptual foundation of Core Standards. However, Ms. Danielson's basic precepts, some of which have been noted above, foreshadowed the very "high-level thinking skills" inherent in the Core Standards. Since teachers are required to "teach to the standards," an evaluation of their effectiveness through Danielson's framework should also be directly and intentionally integrated with the Core. In addition, the basis of a principal's classroom observations should be a flow-through as well. So should metrics that measure how on track students are in actually mastering the standards. Per a recommendation from one of the teachers in this pilot project, each classroom could have charts that outline the critical features of each operative term for each grade level, suggestions for teaching them, and how to address a PARCC prompt that uses them. Two such "anchor charts" could look like the following: 19 What you can use to compose "Compare" a narrative essay o What is the meaning of this For PARCC word? ? Who is your character? Describe him or her. o How would you compare two ? Include his or her perspective. pairs of shoes? ? What is the setting (time and place)? ? What is your character's point of o Compare any two objects in this view? room. ? What does your character believe or feel? ? Does your character have a o How would you compare two relationship with another one? settings? ? What will your character do and why? ? Is your essay at least 250 words? ? Can you include sensory or o How would you compare two figurative language? characters? In contrast to traditional anchor charts, which stipulate what students should remember, a Cracking the Core anchor chart requires students to think about what to do with each concept. The "operative term" type anchor charts are used in tandem with PARCC-focused anchor charts, as only a limited number of such concepts constitute the basis of a grade level ELA PARCC assessment. These charts can be referred to when teachers address the Cycle 6 "Proto-PARCC" review section. There are only four formats in which PARCC questions and prompts are framed. The impetus for this component comes from the realization that teachers were not discussing with their students the meaning of standards they were putting on the board nor the "operative terms" on which they were based. If "standards based education starts with a standard, " then each standard begins with an understanding of its operative term(s). 20 FINDING #3: PRIORITIZE CURRICUAR AND INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS It should be stated at the outset that for decades educators have been inculcated with the mindset that "content is all" and "more is better." However, the equation has changed. The Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards are intended to shift educators' focus from one on content to one on having students think about content. Thus, any content, in any subject area, can be selected. In addition, PARCC assessments intentionally use texts that are, by design, unfamiliar to students - content they have never seen and will never see again. Because of this lack of specificity, given "chunks" of content can be used to directly address multiple standards and, thus, the amount of content can be significantly reduced, along with its attendant expenditure. This can be especially true if the same text is used to address several related Core concepts (see example on page 26), rather than a separate example for each grade level standard. Participating teachers feel that the district-generated "Pacing Guide" (i.e. Curriculum Instructional Map) contains a great deal of valuable curricular material, just too much of it which creates a level of anxiety to "cover the content" at the expense of exploring content more deeply. "So, although fewer topics may be covered, more is actually learned." (Framework for Teaching, P. 17) "(Allowing for) choices and decisions represent the heart of professionalism." (ibid. P. 24) "Teaching is a thinking person's job, it is not simply a matter of following a script...." (ibid. P. 2) For example, there are a total of twenty-nine separate texts to be covered in four units cited in the Grade Five Instructional Map for Reading for the school year. Each unit, in turn, is broken down into six cycles, each cycle into a "lesson seed" per day. However, there are also over 30 separate teaching tasks to be completed in a 105-minute RELA block. This amounts to a mere 3 minutes to accomplish each task, depriving teachers of flexibility and limits any opportunity to delve more deeply into the material. Furthermore, the content selections cited in the Curriculum Instructional Maps do not flow directly from given standards; the standards are rather "appliqued" to them or listed at the top of a page. The emphasis seems to reflect a need to cover as many genres as possible, rather than focusing on what all forms of writing have in common and concentrate on that. When you focus on teaching concepts, you don't need as much content to do it with and that can lead to greater cognitive development. The amount of material could be considerably reduced through prioritization thereby allowing for the inclusion of open sourced curricular material chosen by frontline educators that is enriched with more authentic content, resonant with students' lives and as well as having available a greater variety of contexts relevant to specific standards. 21 FINDING #4: THE NEED FOR FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT At present, there are no mandated formative assessments. The closest thing to one is Cycle 6 per unit of instruction. However, teachers routinely ignore this cycle in order to cover all the content in cycles 1-5. Since the district is judged by the PARCC summative assessment, why not incorporate aspects of the PARCC, such as item types, formatting and style of questions and prompts? COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RELEASED ITEMS FROM 2014 & 2015 PARCC 5th GRADE ELA ASSESSMENTS In General: From a close reading and analysis of both sets of questions, a "formula" can be determined. It is unlikely that this formula will change significantly from year to year. The number of questions will be 22 to 26 There will be 3 narrative passages and up to 3 informational passages There will be 2 or 3 writing samples (i.e. essay prompts) for which students are expected to respond to with between 250 to 400 words. There will be 4 to 6 questions related to vocabulary In keeping with the Cracking the Core approach, almost every PARCC question or prompt for the 5th grade is based on one or more "operative terms" (in italics). 4 to 5 questions will be related to point of view. 4 to 5 questions will be related to compare or contrast aspects of text 2 to 4 questions will be related to main idea At least 1 question will deal with theme and 1 will be related to summary Taken together, these prompts based on "operative terms," combined with the vocabulary questions and the two or three essays total between a minimum of 18 and a maximum of 28 questions or prompts. There were a couple of "outlier" questions from the 2015 released items that did not appear on the set from 2014. These questions were based on - purpose, figurative language, and inference. Conclusions: It should be a revelation of the obvious that if students do not understand the conceptual basis of each of the operative terms on which both these questions and the Core Standards from which they come are constructed, students will be at a disadvantage come testing time. 22 It is also apparent that the PARCC folks must rely on such a formula for cost and scaling considerations. Specific passages will change each year, but developers will not have the time, resources, or financing to significantly change the assessment format or the conceptual basis of the prompts. Because the content PARCC uses is intended to be completely unfamiliar to test-takers, any form of content, in any subject area, can be used in preparing students - such as the content that currently exists in PGCPS curricula. To help students develop an understanding of the PARCC formula, Bruce Taylor, project developer, has been working with selected teachers in nine PGCPS schools, who, in turn, teach approximately 700 students total. Educators have been encouraged to begin with the half-dozen concepts on which a given grade level PARCC assessment is based, e.g. 5th grade: point of view, main idea, compare, contrast, theme, and summary. Pre-assessment results have shown conclusively that most students, and even some their teachers, are not adequately conversant with the Core-related meanings of the cognitive concepts inherent in these terms. By way of preparation, a sample 5th grade "Proto-PARCC" assessment was constructed using existing PGCPS content as found in the Pacing Guide for the narrative and informational passages. Students in three participating schools were able to become familiar with this preparatory tool. Finally, each of the other grade level PARCC assessments will more than likely have its respective formula based on the operative terms that are introduced for each grade level in the Core Standards and replicated in the PARCC ELA assessments. Those other grade level formulas will be determined at a later date. PROTO-PARCC (Refer to separate attachment) The impetus for creating this preparatory tool for students came from a desire to clarify and simplify the PARCC ELA assessment in addition to doing the same for Core Standards. Additionally, since the PARCC is the sole determinate by which PGCPS is judged, the design of the Proto-PARCC can be applied to all text-based subject areas (e.g. Science, Social-Studies, and aspects of the Arts). The signal advantages for a tool such as this one is the fact that teachers can explore with their students how they process PARCC-type questions and subsequently understand how they arrive at their responses; opportunities that are forbidden when students take a "real" PARCC. Once PARCC's formula had been determined, Bruce Taylor, the pilot project developer, and five PGCPS veteran educators explored ways in which students can be guided to more effectively address the questions and prompts presented to them. The strategies they devised enabled adults to correctly answer more than a majority of the questions without even referring to the associated passages of text! Whether or not the task will be easier for students when they can actually refer to the texts remains to be seen, but we should have some evidence with this year's PARCC scores are published later this year. Teachers who introduced the "Proto-PARCC to their students found that over two thirds of them found it to be beneficial. Students were introduced to strategies that were inspired by research published in the book Thinking Fast and Slow by Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman. Particularly vexing to teachers and their students is the "If A, then B" format that constitutes 70% of the questions found on the PARCC ELA assessment. The strategies created may go a long way to relieving anxiety over this particular way of presenting the questions. 23 The advantages of the Proto-PARCC are: One - it provides an in depth familiarity with this summative assessment and, two - it can function as a more integrated formative assessment as well as a form of review for each unit's Cycle 6. Since the specific content found on each of the grade level PGCPS Curriculum Instructional Maps does not change from year to year, once the Proto-PARCCs are developed for each of the six units in each grade, they can be reused from year to year. Furthermore, since any existing content can be used for the Proto-PARCC, specific curricular material can be prioritized and the total amount significantly reduced along with its attendant expense. FINDING #5 Developing the social and inter-personal skills of students is an important function of education. Indeed, the majority of classroom behavioral issues can be traced to the lack of them in children. As with the need for all instructional content to be integrated with the Core Standards, so should they have a social development purpose as well. At present, a guidance counselor routinely handles this aspect of children's maturation in one session per week. However, monitoring and improving students' behavior is a full day responsibility for every adult working with children in the building. Thus, it might be useful to incorporate a social/inter-personal element into the teaching of academic texts. The genesis of this comes from the "Five Levels of Why" exercise included in the IDEO Method Cards that can be purchased online. This concept has been inserted in Part I of the Unit Outline: 24 Two examples of the "Five Whys" process: Shiloh - "Five Whys" this book could be chosen as curricular content with regard to social/inter-personal development. #1: Why have students read Shiloh? An examination of the contrast between the protagonist, Marty, with his antagonist, Judd, can deal with ethical issues and the natures of compassion and understanding. #2: Why are these issues important? Sometimes one must balance good intentions with how to go about acting on them as in the case of Marty. Also, while acknowledging that Judd is a negative character, the author encourages the reader to consider him with some degree of compassion by reflecting on his past and by giving him a degree of humanity near the end. #3: Why is that important? I want kids to think past their initial reactions to characters' behaviors and action. #4: Why is that important? Marty is approximately my students' age and he does something at much personal expense to himself. At nine or ten, students often react reflexively without thinking. By considering the nature of a character and what makes a character do what they do I think will help them understand people more in general. #5: Why is that important? Students often hurt the feelings of others out of ignorance or lack of empathy. I want to use this book as a platform for developing empathy. Of Mice and Men - "Five Whys" this book could be chosen as curricular content with regard to social/inter-personal development. #1: Why have kids read "Of Mice and Men?" Because it deals with themes relevant to 21st century society. #2: Why is that important? Because the central issue in the novella is the relationship between George and Lenny and this has resonance today. #3: Why does it have resonance today? Because the author uses his characters to explore issues of the heart. #4: Why are these "issues of the heart" important? Because these lessons can teach kids what it means to be a human being with compassion for others and having a social conscience. #5: Why is that important? Because bullying is a significant issue in our school and we hope that by exploring such themes students can develop greater empathy and deeper understanding for others. 25 FINDING #6 RELEVANCE OF ANY GIVEN TEXT TO PARCC-ALIGNED 5TH GRADE ELA STANDARDS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE METRICS WITH WHICH TO DETERMINE STUDENT GRADES The process described below addresses all of the PARCC-related grade level standards for the 5th grade. After a text/novel is selected, focus the teaching of it in the following manner: READING THE TEXT Determine the structure of the text/novel, identify the characters, setting, theme and author's purpose. If an informational text, determine the main idea. Identify the key details in the novel or informational text and how they support either the main idea or provide evidence of the theme. Compare and/or contrast two characters, OR compare and/or contrast characters, settings, structure or themes from a previously read book with the current one of the same genre. Determine the meanings of unfamiliar words (e.g. figurative or domain specific) found in text. Describe how a narrator or character's point of view influences how events are described or experienced. Summarize the story or text or summarize the points a speaker makes and explain how each claim is supported by evidence, such as key details, in what the speaker says. DISCUSSING THE TEXT Explain how the author uses evidence to support certain points in an informational text. Write an opinion piece about the novel or text, supporting your own point of view about what you read. Draw evidence to support your analysis of the text. Analyze how visual and multi-media elements contribute to your or the author's meaning. Analyze multiple versions of the same events, noting similarities (compare) and differences (contrast) in the point of view. CREATING A PRESENTATION Introduce your topic and create an organizational structure in which your ideas and point of view are logically grouped to support your purpose. Include multi-media components and visual displays to enhance the development of main ideas or themes. 26 CORE STANDARDS-RELATED WRITTEN TEST (At the conclusion of studying texts in a given curricular unit, students should then demonstrate their understanding of the PARCC related analysis by taking this written test. It can provide their teachers with a basis for determining student grades.) Choose one narrative text from the list provided by your teacher. Choose one informational text from the list provided by your teacher. With the narrative text you chose: Identify the subject. Describe the setting by noting at least four key details. Describe the protagonist of the story by noting at least five key details about him or her. Contrast the protagonist with the antagonist in at least four ways. What is your point of view concerning this narrative? Determine the theme of the narrative and what evidence can you provide to support your answer? What do you think was the author's purpose in writing this book and why do you think that? Summarize the story. With informational text you chose: Identify the subject. What is the main idea about the subject? What key details did the author use to support the main idea? What is the structure of the informational text? What do you think was the author's purpose in writing about the subject? Summarize the information in the text. ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS ARE TEXT DEPENDENT! 27 Below is a typed version of a student's essay in response to a PROTO-PARCC essay prompt which required her to take the point of view of one of five characters in the short narrative from on the subject of slavery. This essay was written in class after a session in which students were walked through the difference between perspective and point of view. *** ROUGH DRAFT ESSAY Emily's Point of View Half of me is gone. They took it. They took my twin brother. A planter from Virginia bought my 13 year old brother from my momma and left. It was June 9, 1821 and it was for me and Randall's 13th birthday. It was also our auction day. On that gloomy morning the sun hadn't even so much as peeked over the horizon. Master came into our crowded, steamy hut and short whipping us with a leather whip to wake us up. I heard so much toiled screams as I was lashed on the back with a leather strop. Then once we were all awake, Master told us to get to work. Once I got up I heard Randall being taken away. I slipped through the narrow rows of cotton. They pricked my skin as I ran. When I got into a clearing I saw mama climbing into a trailer. I also saw Randall. They looked very confused. I jumped into the trailer just before the carriage took off. The sudden jolt whipped my head back. The cool summer breeze was in my long, curly hair. Mama saw me jump on. She looked at me very worried. When I asked her what was wrong, she didn't answer. Just looked away. When we pulled up to where we were supposed to be, I thought to my self, "Oh-no. This is just like when my daddy was sold." My father was sold to Louisiana three years ago on our tenth birthday. Before he went he told us to stick together. I loved my father. Randall and I jumped out to help Mama. Now Mama looked sick. Just then a voice called out, "Hey boy." Me and Randall whipped around to see who it was. We saw a chunky white man in a raggedy suit. He had on a neat up fedora and some scuffy shoes. The man said, "Yeah, you!" "What's your name?" He demanded loudly. "R-Randall sir," said Randall "Okay Randall, jump four times." Randall obeyed. "now run ten laps." Randall ran ten laps and came back out of breath. "I want this one, twenty dollars I'll bet you." "No!" Mama screamed at the top of her lungs. "You can't buy Randall unless you buy me and Emily!" The man yelled at Mama. He said he did not have enough money to buy all three of them. But also he did not care. The auctioneer turned to Mama and told her to shut up or he would give her a hundred lashes. I couldn't bear the sight of Mama's back if she got a hundred lashes. I was so sad because my brother was gone. Before he left, Randall said, "Don't worry Mama, I'll be good, I'll listen." But Mama broke down crying. Master told her to shut up and get on the trailer. Mama obeyed. Just like she hoped her son would do. 28 REPORT March, 2018 FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS IN STATE ELA STANDARDS PILOT PROJECT WEEK OF FEB. 19th Work with Maryland schools WEEK OF FEB. 26th Developed NEECAP #3 and developed analysis of NEECAP #1 results MARCH VISIT, WEEK OF MARCH 5TH AGENDA MONDAY, MARCH 5TH. & Tuesday, March 6th. STRATFORD LOWER SCHOOL & GRAMAR PREP MEET WITH ELA TEACHERS 5-8 ? Went through NEECAP #1 results and discussed what they might indicate. While not definitive, teachers found that the results revealed which aspects they should direct their attention to. For instance, there was consistent misapplication of commas, which is easy to review and "fix." Results also indicated a need to reinforce what "key details" are by having students identify important information in context. This has been a persistent finding. ? Reviewed the remediation strategy of: "Review what the students did," "Identify what they need to improve," and then "Show them how to improve" feedback loop with students. During focus groups, students repeatedly asked that they be shown how to improve, not just be told what was wrong and wanted to get results back on a timelier basis. ? Discussed the content of NEECAP #3 and necessary revisions more in the context of TCAP's expectations on writing tasks concerning argumentative texts. This iteration of the NEECAP is designed to be more difficult in order to acquaint students with the stamina required when taking the TCAP and to surface other areas of weakness with regard to the analysis of argumentative texts. ? Went through in detail what to do during the "Writing Blitz" period. Since the TCAP will be given in two, two-hour blocks, we reviewed how to structure the practice sessions during this period and the sequence of steps students should follow when confronting a TCAP writing task. ? How do teachers use texts as teaching tools and how are students subsequently held accountable? The directive teachers have regarding student accountability is that 10% is factored from homework and 90% from formative and summative assessments of the teachers' own devising. Given this degree of flexibility, we can work collaboratively in composing consistent formative assessments across the four grade levels that even more directly target TCAP and its prioritized standards. ? How can MAP-R or TCAP results inform instructional practice and serve learning? See my comments in the "General Takeaways" section further down in this report. ? Discussed the need to develop efforts that might reduce "summer melt" after the TCAP is completed in May. One idea is to create a NEECAP #4 using texts from the fourth quarter scope and sequence as content. Give this before students leave for the summer and repeat the exact same NEECAP when they return in August in order to refresh critical cognitive processes, strengthen overall linear coherence and reinforce fundamental concepts that must be applied within the context of TNReady Standards so that there is less fade from the summer break. ? Discuss ideas and input for my April visit. Presented the "Baseball Quest" game that uses content and concepts in a competitive context that reinforces critical thinking skills required by the TCAP and state ELA standards. AGENDA WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 14 GRAMAR MIDDLE PREP Focus Groups with Students, Grades 5-8 ? Asked students to determine the meanings of "critical academic vocabulary" (CAVs) within the contexts of state standards RI.KID.1 & W.TTP.1 As with the previous set of focus groups, some understanding, but still struggling, so an increased focus on the concepts embodied in these standards should be productive. ? Asked students to identify the expectations inherent in a writing prompt for their particular grade level. Same as last set of focus groups - students find it very challenging when asked to process prompts. So we will continue to focus on guiding students on how to prepare an essay from a given prompt. "Suggested Breakdown of Time" and "Formative Rubric for a Writing Prompt" are materials provided that address this issue. ? Asked students to tell me how often they guessed their answers to questions on the TCAP last spring. Focus groups of students in all grade levels guessed from 30 to 50% of answers. This indicates the need for students to practice how to process a prompt/question and take their time in choosing and think about their answers. ? Asked students how much feedback do their teachers give them after they have submitted an essay or other student-generated outputs? As with the previous set of focus groups, they want more feedback and to be told how they can do better, not just be told what was "wrong." ? I asked them how do they respond to an essay prompt. Do they just start writing or do they plan out what they are going to write? Do they care about doing well on the TCAP? Most students immediately reread the passage and started writing. This indicates a slight problem in effective use of time: Students should read the prompt first, then examine the text for key details; not read the text, look at the prompt and then have to go back and reread the text again....this burns up too much time. The remaining students just immediately started writing. Only one student said she thought in advance what she was going to write about. In general, most students said they care about doing well on the TCAP. This is a most encouraging finding. However, several students said they found the prompts "confusing" and didn't really know what to do. It is clear that both students and teachers need to practice deconstructing TCAP-type writing prompts. Teachers asked me to provide several examples of how to break down a writing prompt for students as referenced in the "Writing Blitz Breakout" suggestion page. I had already introduced an exercise addressing this issue during my previous visit with GraMar teachers and cited it in my February report, page 4: "Went through a demonstration on how to process a writing prompt. Each teacher then did the same with a typical writing prompt for their grade level." However, teachers state that more modeling will be helpful. FRIDAY, MARCH 9TH. STRATFORD LOWER SCHOOL Classroom Demonstrations of Deconstructing Standards and Related Prompts I began each of these classroom sessions by demonstrating my belief that students should be persistently reminded, encouraged, and motivated as to why they are in school. Across the board, these students want to go to college, but they need reinforcement of why they are in the classroom in the first place. Otherwise, some debilitating degree of detachment may result. Signs of student apathy (sleeping, side conversations, drawing pictures in journals, inappropriate outbursts, grooming, etc.) are indicators of a lack of student engagement. When students are consistently given reasons to "keep their eyes on the prize," we need to reveal the "prize" as something that matters to them. By asking students in Stratford Lower School, grades 6, 7, & 8 (too many teachers were absent to present to 5th grade classes) to break down the standards and prompts noted below, it was apparent that a significant number of students had no idea of the majority of meanings of the critical academic vocabulary within TNReady contexts, below highlighted in italics. This is consistent with what I have found before in venues that have not focused on these fundamental concepts. I continue to maintain that without a foundational understanding of these key indicators within the contexts of state standards and related prompts, students will be left intellectually adrift. Students did not generally understand the italicized terms below within context of the following standards: RI.KID.1 Analyze what a text says explicitly and draw logical inferences; cite textual evidence to support conclusions. RI.KID.2 Determine a central idea of a text and how it is conveyed through (key) details; provide an objective summary. W.TTP.1 Write arguments to support claims with clear reasons and relevant evidence. W.TTP.2 Write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas, concepts, and information through the selection, organization, and analysis of relevant content. Students who participated in my demonstrations were also unable to identify more than one requirement in each of two typical TCAP prompts. I believe that by showing them how to break down a prompt's requirements, as detailed below, students can find clarity. TCAP Prompt: "If you could study a new skill, would you study with a violinist or a scientist? Write an essay in which you give your opinion and explain your reasons. Your essay must be based on ideas and information that can be found in both passages of text. Support your ideas with evidence from both passages. Follow the conventions of standard written English." Requirements: 1. Choose the violinist or scientist. 2. Give an opinion as to why. 3. Explain your reasoning behind your opinion. 4. Base what you write on ideas and information from both texts. 5. Support some of your own ideas with evidence from both passages. 6. Follow conventions of Standard English (not one student knew what they were) TCAP Prompt: "You have just read two passages about sports injuries in young people. Write an informational essay explaining the strategies parents and children can use to prevent sports injuries among young athletes." Requirements: 1. Informational essay, no opinions allowed. 2. List and explain more than one strategy ("strategies") to prevent sport injuries. 3. From both passages. 3. In young athletes, not athletes in general. 4. Include strategies for parents. 5. For children. Parenthetically, according to common dictionary definitions, "claim" and "opinion" are essentially the same. Claim: To state or assert that something is true. In TCAP writing prompts, "Be sure to include a claim, use evidence from both passages." Opinion: A belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. Yet, in TCAP writing prompts, "Use facts and details from both texts to support your opinion." It seems that within the TCAP context "evidence" and "facts" are equivalent to each other and can apply to both terms. While "claim" is defined in TNReady Standards, "opinion" is not. Because of such a close affiliation between the two terms within the context of typical prompts, students will need a more precise understanding when teachers explain the difference between opinion and claim to their students, other than a recognition strategy of not using the pronoun "I" when stating a claim in a writing task related to W.TTP.1. GENERAL TAKEAWAYS It is my understanding that a consultant's primary function in most domains such as industry, government, medicine, etc. is to identify challenges and suggest ways to address them in order to make a positive contribution to the prevailing dynamic. It is in this spirit that I offer the following observations and suggestions for change from what I have learned thus far this school year - a diagnostic process that has taken significantly longer than I anticipated. 1.) I have observed an overriding emphasis on recognition strategies used by teachers more than ones that promote understanding. For example, several teachers have posted one annotation strategy is to, "Underline the main idea." While this is applicable to a standalone paragraph (related to its topic sentence), it is not really possible with an entire passage because you have to figure out what the main idea is from the whole text- the author will rarely state it explicitly. The conceptual basis of main idea is, "what the author wants you to know or understand about the subject." Thus, determining the main idea of the whole passage is a cognitive process of drawing inference, not a sentence search. Since "What is the central idea?" will always appear on a state assessment, teachers need to be more definitive as to what a "main" or "central idea" is within the context of a TCAP assessment. 2.) Concerning formative and summative assessments, Rick Stiggins, Director of Test Development at ACT, states, "Assessment is the process of gathering evidence of student achievement to inform educational decisions" (my emphasis added). So, I asked teachers if they were able to use MAP-R and TCAP data to improve their teaching. Their general response was, "no" as they are at a loss for how to use the data in other than a most general sense such as student grouping derived from the MAP-R scores. However, there are some very specific data resources for teachers such as the Standards Analysis Report, Class Roster Report, Sub Score Rating Summary and MAP's Achievement and Growth Report, along with its Learning Continuum. Given the fact that there are only three weeks left until TCAP starts, there is probably not enough time to use such data productively for this go-round. Nevertheless, we can explore efficient ways to utilize what these data reveal during the next school year to obtain maximum benefit as part of strengthening a linear coherence of curriculum to standards and TCAP. Last spring's TCAP results should also be cause for close coordination between teachers in the next grade level with the teachers of students who were in the grade level of the past spring, to say nothing of trying to pin down specific deficits for students based on such results. If this year's teachers in GraMar and Stratford remain into next school year, this will certainly be possible. Apropos of this topic, Jay McTigue in his article "3 Key Questions on Measuring Learning," (Educational Leadership, February 2018, Vol. 75 No. 5, P.14) suggested that one needs to determine: What really matters? How to assess what matters? How does assessment enhance learning, not just measure it? Further along in this line of inquiry.... The primary purpose of something like the NEECAP, and similar in-house formative assessments, is to mirror and align with, as much as possible, the state's conceptual contexts in order to build upon the outcomes of the investigation noted at the top of this page. In this way the NEECAP functions not just as an assessment (i.e. measurement) and teaching tool ("Here's why"), but also as a diagnostic tool (i.e. an analysis of the cause or nature of a problem) used to determine where students are having difficulty that may impact their level of success on the TCAP and ability to meet the expectations of prioritized TNReady Standards. As I have maintained from the beginning of my tenure with MNPS, teaching to the test is teaching to the standards and vice versa because they both require the very same critical thinking skills inherent in a specific selection of terms. Previously, I designated these words "operative terms," an appellation I have been using for the past five years, along with very specific meanings appropriate to the contexts of various state standards and assessments. However, I found that a more precise and relevant designation to be critical academic vocabulary. 3.) As far as choosing appropriate texts to serve as content, their selection should meet three requirements: Why is the chosen text meaningful to students? "An extremely widespread research finding is that internal motivations (interest, intrinsic motivation) are positively correlated with reading achievement, and external motivations (pressure, requirements, rules) are not correlated with reading achievement." Teacher Practices That Impact Student Motivation, by Angela McRae & John T. Guthrie. How does the chosen text contribute to student learning? "Does the student have sufficient background knowledge or experience with which to engage the text?" Ten Steps to Closer Student Reading, by Nancy Boyles What specific TNReady standards does the text address? I maintain that it is important initially to teach critical concepts inherent in TNReady's contexts with content that is resonant with students, matters to them, moves them, or affects them in some way. Only then should we concern ourselves about presenting students with totally unfamiliar content that might be irrelevant to who they are or texts that are "good" for them in a desire to increase "rigor" and load them up with "more." 4.) It should be self-evident that when there is more and more content to cover, there is less and less time available to actually teach the content covered. The logical end point of such a mindset is to think that "rigor" means an increase in amount and difficulty. However, "rigor" and "knowledge" are two different things. "Rigor," I submit, is the ability for students to accomplish more and go deeper with their existing knowledge base, not to be defined as adding increasingly difficult, unfamiliar concepts and content. Or, as Brian Sztabnick puts it in his article on Edutopia, A New Definition of Rigor, "Rigor doesn't mean simply giving students more or harder work. Instead, it's the result of work that challenges students' thinking in new and interesting ways." Indeed. 5.) When teachers focus on vocabulary development, given these students' vocabulary deficits, the primary focus should be on teaching Tier II vocabulary (e.g. critical academic vocabulary) which students will need in order to transition to domain specific, Tier III, vocabulary. An example would be teaching what a "stanza" is (Tier III domain specific) in poetry without a corresponding understanding of "structure" (Tier II, transferable across a variety of contexts and domains). 6.) During my sessions with the teachers I suggested that every time they asked their students a question concerning text they always follow up with "why?" after a student gives them his or her answer. This simple inquiry conforms with the "If A, then B" formulation of what will likely be 30% of the questions on the TCAP. In this way, the teacher can combat students' simply guessing the right answer. Then students are required to support their answers with evidence or justification. Consistently asking "why" in any case compels students to think, not just respond. In sum, I strongly advocate teaching more with less content, drill down into the foundational TNReady critical thinking skills via clear, demonstrable understanding of the meanings of the critical academic vocabulary (i.e. my "operative terms") that represent them, and develop formative assessments that inform and improve instructional practice while mirroring as closely as possible the only academic metric by which MNPS is held accountable by the state and the public. To back up these claims and assert the practicality of them, I suggest simple addition: Add up the number of state standards plus sub-headings (e.g. 6.L.CSE.1, a-d = four standards, not one) in ELA (70), Math (39), Social Studies (115), and Science (24) for a single grade level, say 6th grade. How did it come to be that educators have to teach 248 standards in only 180 days? One justification for the progenitor of the current standards framework in ELA back in 2010 was to reduce the number of standards! Obviously, directing teachers to check off a list of all these domain standards as they teach is impractical. Instead, have them teach students to develop the critical thinking skills inherent in several standards at once and prioritize those standards that are, again, critical. Of course a certain amount of factual information will always be indispensible, but if everything is essential, nothing is. It is equally futile to develop formative assessments such as rubrics for every one of these 248 state standards. For schools like GraMar and Stratford, which rank in the lowest percentiles of schools in the state, every effort must be made to devote time and effort to addressing what must be fundamental learning for their students. For without a strong foundation of the critical thinking skills required by the current pedagogical paradigm, student capability will degrade over time, not only in school, but also as preparation for life. Without exception, all of the teachers I have worked with so far want to do a good job and their students express a desire to learn. These students have also shown me that they do not lack for imagination or intellectual capability. In view of this, I strive to evaluate how well my materials and strategies contribute to high quality classroom instruction. At the same time, I will not lay any lack of success on teachers' shoulders, much less ascribe it to students' shortcomings, but will attribute it to me alone. If teachers cannot effectively use what I provide, then I have failed, not them. This is the basis for MNPS to hold me accountable, as it should be for anyone tasked with similar responsibility for the education of children. MATERIALS PROVIDED GRAMAR: NEECAP #3 NEECAP #3 Protocol "Literacy Stretch" "Strategies for W.TTP.1" NEECAP #1 Analysis "Writing Blitz" Breakout Suggestions "Checklists for Deconstructing Writing Prompts," by grade STRATFORD: NEECAP #3 NEECAP #3 Protocol "Literacy Stretch" "Strategies for W.TTP.1" NEECAP #1 Analysis "Writing Blitz" Breakout Suggestions "Checklists for Deconstructing Writing Prompts," by grade INTERNET CORRESPONDENCE/COACHING LOG GraMar Date Topic 2.23.18 2.23.18 2.26.18 2.26.18 2.26.18 2.27.18 2.27.18 3.1.18 3.1.18 3.1.18 3.2.18 3.5.18 NEECAP #1 NEECAP #1 analysis NEECAP #1 results Essay writing "Literacy Stretch" schedule NEECAP #1 results and analysis Bell ringer suggestions NEECAP #3 ideas Importance of feedback MAP-R results Meeting times for visit MAP-R results Stratlm'd Tuplc 2.21.13 NEECAP resulls 2.23.13 NEECAP resulls 2.26.13 NEECAP ldeas 2.27.13 Eel] Ringer ideas 2.27.13 Schedule for Visit 2.27.13 "Luemcy Stretch" schedule 2.23.13 NEECAP resulls 3.1.13 Schedule for Visit 3.5.13 wming Respeclfully submitted, Bruce D. Taylor ACT Specific Bruce Taylor Thu 4/5/2018 10:33 AM Inbox To: Williams, Phil ; ? 2 attachments ?245 KB? COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ACT.pdf; ACT Notes.pdf; Greetings Again: Since you specifically mentioned the ACT, I have attached a couple of documents I generated on the subject for high school teachers. The one entitled "Comparative Analysis of ACT Released Items" was created specifically for MNPS which showed the alignment between the ACT and TNReady Standards. Do you disagree with its content in any way? The challenge for students is that there is little they can do to study on their own in preparation for both the TCAP and the ACT, but requires practice under the guidance of their teachers - a process that should be consistent from 3rd grade on, both in terms of vertical and linear coherence. When you and I were in school we prepared for tests by memorizing facts and information. That is less effective today for reading and writing as there has been a paradigm shift in what is being assessed. Cordially, Bruce COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF A.C.T. ASSESSMENT RELEASED ITEMS An overall examination of more than 250 sample questions and strategies found on the ACT website (act.com) and a preparatory guide, ACT 36 in JUST 7 STEPS, reveals the following: That ACT's strategies and questions are developed from the very same "operative terms" identified in the state's ELA standards. In general, the majority of the questions on the ACT Reading questions require the student to think about the passages, not to find an answer in the text, but from the text. In other words, the student has to figure out what the texts mean, not just "say." That said, the operative term most often employed in the ACT Reading questions is presented by the prompt's opening phrase, "It can be reasonably inferred....." To succeed on the ACT, a student must develop the skill of drawing inferences. [Tennessee College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading 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.] [Grades 9-10 Reading Standards for Literature Key Ideas and Details 1. Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.] The next most frequently used operative term in the prompts is purpose, most often referring to author's purpose for the overall text, paragraph, or specific statement. Closely related to this term are its siblings, point of view and perspective. [Tennessee College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading Craft and Structure 6. Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.] Closely followed in frequency is requiring a familiarity with figurative language. [Grades 9-10 Reading Standards for Literature 4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in the text, including figurative and connotative meanings; analyze the cumulative impact of specific word choices on meaning and tone.] In sum, the operative terms on which the remaining prompts are constructed on the ACT Reading are: context, tone, describe, key details, compare, and structure. Interestingly, theme is rarely cited. For the writing section, the same prompt is used in all instances (operative terms in bold): "Clearly state your own perspective on the issue and analyze the relationship between your perspective and least one other perspective. Develop and support with reasoning and examples." [Grades 9-10 Speaking and Listening Standards Comprehension and Collaboration d. Respond thoughtfully to diverse perspectives, summarize points of agreement and disagreement.] [College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading Key Ideas and Details 2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas.] Thus, a pre-assessment to determine the degree of student understanding of these fundamental concepts, as represented by their "operative terms," would include, in order of priority: Subject Main Idea Key Details Infer Point of View Perspective Purpose Figurative Language Context Analyze Develop Support Summarize Let's find out how many students have a working comprehension of these concepts/terms by asking them to simply define each one in their own words. An understanding of the meanings of these terms is critical not only for success on the ACT Reading and Writing Sections, but also form the very foundation of the Tennessee State English Language Arts Standards. By: Bruce D. Taylor October, 2016 A.C.T. ANALYSIS NOTES Questions on READING focus on: (Critical vocabulary in bold) Typical passage = 750 words (how long does it take the student to read 750 words?) Ten questions per passage. Point of view Inference (a lot!) and implication Compare two things, beliefs, points of view, etc. Make a distinction between what you believe, or have been told, and what is being expressed in the passage. Text that supports a proposition Use of connotative language Select answers that are not correct Author's main point(s), know the difference between purpose and main idea Author's tone = reveals author's attitude. Context Evaluate - make a judgment Topic/Subject and scope Kids have to justify their answers by citing text Summarize - both to do and to recognize Distinguish Determine a supporting example of a statement Paraphrase Requires a close reading of text Look for evidence in a text Complete a thought contained in text Specific (key) details Analogy Summarize passage, paragraph by paragraph, highlighting topic, scope, purpose, ideas, and tone references Make predictions ala inference Answer questions in your own words before choosing answers from which to choose Understand argument Use of analogy Comparison Comparison and analogy questions often depend on an understanding of metaphor which implies something especially in Social Science and Science questions When reading prose fiction, keep this in mind - "Who is doing what to whom and how does it make everyone, including the narrator, feel?" Passage will be about 750 words - plot is not an issue, but "reading between the lines" is. Note how author uses language to convey state of mind and events Questions on WRITING focus on..... Support the contentions in a passage or contrast with a perspective of your own. Requires the writer to take a position and defend it. Use specific reasons and examples / develop points to be made, not just list them. Writer needs to structure/organize essay and end with a conclusion(s) supported by the content of the essay, perhaps introduced by the word "therefore." Logical sequencing of thoughts. Word choice and tone (e.g. formal = no contractions) Key Terms to include on the priority list (in bold): Inference Main idea Analogy Metaphor Tone Scope Purpose Convey Point of view Evaluate Assess Interpret Imply Connotative Determine Theme Narrative Paraphrase Juxtaposition Suggest Assumption (as in, "hidden assumptions") Figurative Typical direction for a written essay: "Write a unified, coherent essay. In your essay, be sure to: Clearly state your own perspective on the issue and analyze the relationship between your perspective and at least one other perspective. Develop and support your ideas with reasoning and examples (i.e. evidence)." Dominant operative terms from sample ACT questions on reading from the ACT website: Point of view 4% Inference and imply 36% Key Details 8% Main idea 12% Author's purpose 4% Summary 8% Compare 4% Contrast 4% Other 20% In the pre-assessments for middle and high schools, put the operative terms in order of priority, beginning with the most important. Secondly, cite the relevant standard to those terms as they are important to the ACT. On the answer sheet, put in a predication as to what students will put down for each term. NOTES FROM ACT 36 - in Just 7 Steps: "Big-picture questions on the ACT test how well you can recognize the main idea of a passage." "Some ACT English questions ask you to add substance to a paragraph by choosing the most appropriate (key) detail to include." "....rule out details that are irrelevant..." "....(there are) four 750 word passages..." "Reading does NOT test the following: Recall of facts Mastery of long vocabulary lists "....it tests you only on vocabulary in context." Make a mental note of each (key) detail)..." "...read quickly through the passage so you can answer all the "big idea" (i.e. main idea) questions...." "The ACT is written to test...your ability to infer the answer..." "As tools for analyzing literature, inference requires that you draw a conclusion based on evidence in the text. SKILLS TESTED: Interpret significant events Determine the main idea Determine meanings Make comparisons Analyze Each question on the Reading section falls into one of eight categories: Details Main Idea Sequence Cause and Effect Context Comparison Point of View Inference Prose Fiction: "...this subsection of the test asks you to analyze characters." "When you jot down the main idea of the passage... "....write down one or two keywords that describe (with key details) the main character." Social Sciences: "This passage is more likely to be accompanied by detail-oriented questions...Point of view questions....ask you to analyze ....whether or not the author supports the views being presented." "Many questions will relate to a summary of the main idea of the passage." Natural Sciences: "This passage is likely to have a predominance of detail, main idea, comparison, and sequence (as in summary) questions." "Point of view questions may ask you.." For main idea questions, focus on where the facts presented seem to be pointing." Humanities: "This subsection will contain more inference, point of view, and contextual questions. Comparison questions are likely to concern figurative language..." For point of view questions, focus on ...." "Some questions will relate to a sequence or summary (key details in chronological order)..." Solutions to the practice problem set of ten questions for Reading (p. 184-186) were based on the following concepts/operative terms: Interference, Key Details, Point of View, Main Idea, Context, Compare 45% of the questions in the Science section of the ACT deal with research summaries. Many of those questions focus on similarities (i.e. compare) and differences (contrast) 17% of the questions deal with conflicting viewpoints (i.e. point of view) Essays: To score 4 or 5, it is expected that the student will fill 2-3 pages. To score a six, 3-4 pages. Evaluators spend only three or four minutes per essay. First impressions (opening paragraph) are extremely important. Student has only 30 minutes to complete a 3 or 4 page essay. Structure of an Essay: Five paragraphs: Introduction, 3 body paragraphs, concluding paragraph Introductory paragraph has a two sentence lead, one linking sentence to the thesis statement including at least 3 "provable" points, i.e. that can be supported with evidence in the paragraphs below. Each of the three body paragraphs has a topic sentence, three key detail sentences around one of the "provable points," and a concluding sentence. Concluding paragraph contains a summary statement of the "provable points" and a restatement of the thesis.