Creating a Common Core Aligned Instructional Bundle for the Common Core Library

1. Creating a Common Core Aligned Instructional Bundle for the Common Core Library

2. ACADEMIC EVALUATION TEAM The Academic Evaluation Team works to define and socialize what alignment to the CCLS looks like for the DOE at varying levels. We also partner with departments within the DOE and non-DOE vendors/partners to surface instructional resources created by NYC teachers that are aligned to the CCLS. Doug Knecht, Executive Director of Academic Quality Nancy Gannon, Deputy Executive Director of Academic Quality Meghan Cliffel, Director Janna Robin Tracy Fray-Oliver Isabella Robertson

3. INSTRUCTIONAL BUNDLE: KEY COMPONENTS Culminating performance tasks Guidance around use of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles for each task ( this may include instructional supports for ELLs and Students with Disabilities ) Rubrics and/or scoring guides Annotated student work ranging across levels Instructional supports that include unit outlines developed using the Understanding by Design (UBD) framework, aligned to CCLS Standards and additional assessments and learning activities (e.g. initial, formative assessments) Supports for helping students access complex texts 3

4. THE COMMON CORE LIBRARY • Content: • Exemplary instructional materials (performance tasks, rubrics, student work, lesson plans) • Professional learning materials (modules, videos, protocols and other teacher team resources) • Audience: • Educators in NYC: clusters, networks, principals, teachers, librarians • Educators from other districts through GE Foundation partnership http://schools.nyc.gov/Academics/CommonCoreLibrary

5. COMMON CORE LIBRARY – STATISTICS Launched on 3/14/2011 and since then: • 35,518 unique users • 204,431 visits • 575,588 page views • 4:10 is average time on site • See Student Work Page: More than 32,000 downloads in November http://schools.nyc.gov/Academics/SeeStudentWork

6. WHO ARE THE COMMON CORE FELLOWS? The Common Core Fellows (CCFs) are expert teachers, coaches, instructional specialists, and curriculum specialists from across the New York City Department of Education. For this inaugural group of Fellows, we received over 400 resumes and conducted over 130 interviews. The final group consists of 27 Fellows for Literacy and 34 Fellows for Math.

7. INSTRUCTIONAL ARTIFACTS REVIEW PROCESS Our entire review process will be comprised of the following dimensions: • Alignment • Quality of Assessment and Student Evidence • Quality and Utility as an Instructional Resource • Accessibility and Responsiveness • Promotion of CCSS Shifts

8. Orientation to the Alignment Process

9. SAMPLE PERFORMANCE TASK The standalone assessment task is: "Fighting for freedom always comes at a cost.  Sometimes the cost is almost too high.“ Directions: Is the cost of freedom ever too high? Read all three articles provided and develop your point of view.  In a short essay, write a clear argument stating your point of view, and provide reasons for your opinion supported by examples from the texts provided.Texts: 1) Excerpt from George versus George, by Rosalyn Schanzer. 2) www.independencedayfun.com/263/summary-of-the-declaration-of-independence/3) www.independencedayfun.com/230/the-significance-of-the-declaration-of-independence/

10. CIE FOCUS STANDARDS FOR GRADE 5 LITERACY RI.5.1. Quote accurately from a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. RI.5.10. By the end of the year, read and comprehend informational texts, including history/social studies, science, and technical texts, at the high end of the grades 4–5 text complexity band independently and proficiently. W.5.1. Write opinion pieces on topics or texts, supporting a point of view with reasons and information. • Introduce a topic or text clearly, state an opinion, and create an organizational structure in which ideas are logically grouped to support the writer’s purpose. • Provide logically ordered reasons that are supported by facts and details. • Link opinion and reasons using words, phrases, and clauses (e.g., consequently, specifically). • Provide a concluding statement or section related to the opinion presented.

11. WHAT ARE SOME QUESTIONS WE MIGHT CONSIDER WHEN RATING ALIGNMENT?

12. What skills and content is the performance task assessing and are they the same skills and content the standards are asking students to demonstrate proficiency with? • Do we think we will get the intended performance from students based on how the task has been constructed? • Are these texts appropriately complex and challenging for the grade level? • Do these texts contain enough of the right appropriate information for students to answer the task question? • Does the task require students to get their information from these texts?

13. STEPS FOR RATING ALIGNMENT: Step 1. Identify what the task expects students to do. Analyze the literacy task, highlighting and noting the stated performance expectations it presents to students on the Alignment Worksheet. For example, what are some of the literacy content or concepts students will be expected to know? What are some of the literacy skills or performances they will be expected to demonstrate? Step 2. Identify the content and performance expectations of the CCLS. Do a “close reading” of the targeted standard(s), highlighting key words that identify the stated literacy content/concepts and skills/performances in each standard. Step 3. Identify where there are matches and partial matches with the task expectations. Where there are partial matches, underline the parts of the standards that are addressed in the task and highlight those parts that are not.

14. Step 4. Rate the alignment of the task expectations. Use the rating scale below to rate the degree of alignment between the content and performance expectations addressed in the task and each CCLS identified in Step 2.

15. Feedback for Alignment to Standards RI.5.1. We gave a rating of one for alignment to this standard because only one of the three texts (The Costs of War) provided students with the information needed to draw appropriate explicit and inferential evidence for an opinion on the cost of freedom. RI.5.10. We gave a zero alignment to this standard: • While the texts were at the high end and even above the recommended Lexile levels for the grade band (The texts were between 1150-1330, and the common core asks for 955-1155 for grades 6-8), we found that the insufficiency of information in the texts made then inappropriate to the task. • Additionally, we felt like the translation/summary of the Declaration of Independence (by the teacher?) was not an authentic text from which students could draw accurate information. Why would they not read small portions of the actual Declaration and come to their own conclusions about what it says? W.5.1. We gave a zero alignment for this standard because: • This is not a true opinion essay in which students could argue different angles. The texts give no information around the alternative for not fighting for freedom. Was freedom really too high a price for the US? e.g. contemplating an alternative to the American Revolution—is there a country who went through a similar experience and had a different outcome? • A-D is not addressed in the prompt.

16. Stages of Submitting Instructional Materials There are 3 suggested cycles for feedback when creating a bundle from the Fellows and the Academic Evaluation Team: Step 1. Submit the Task Step 2. Submit the Unit Outline Step 3. Submit Annotated Student Work It is important to allow for 2-4 weeks of turnaround time for feedback on each item submitted.

17. CONTACT INFORMATION Mathematics Team Literacy Team Literacy Lead Facilitator: Isabella Robertson LRobertson@schools.nyc.gov Math Lead Facilitator: Tracy Fray-Oliver TFrayOliver@schools.nyc.gov