1 / 44

Teaching with Complex Tests GPS Leadership Institute August 2012

Teaching with Complex Tests GPS Leadership Institute August 2012. PART I. Determining Text Complexity August 15, 2012. August 15, 2012 (Part 1) Understand the three part model of text complexity and the final step of placing texts in grade bands. Future Leadership Meeting (Part 2)

emilia
Télécharger la présentation

Teaching with Complex Tests GPS Leadership Institute August 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Teaching with Complex TestsGPS Leadership InstituteAugust 2012

  2. PART I. Determining Text ComplexityAugust 15, 2012

  3. August 15, 2012 (Part 1) Understand the three part model of text complexity and the final step of placing texts in grade bands. Future Leadership Meeting (Part 2) Apply close reading strategies to scaffold complex text. OBJECTIVES

  4. Complexity of texts students are expected to read is way below what is required to achieve college and career readiness: • High school textbooks have declined in all subject areas over several decades • Average length of sentences in K-8 textbooks has declined from 20 to 14 words The “CRISIS” OF Text Complexity Council of Chief State School Officers: Text Complexity

  5. Vocabulary demands have declined, e.g., 8th grade textbooks = former 5th grade texts; 12th grade anthologies = former 7th grade texts • Too many students are reading at too low a level (<50% of graduates can read sufficiently complex texts) Is This really A Crisis? CCSSO Text Complexity

  6. The most important implication of the study: “What students could read, in terms of its complexity, was at least as important as what they could do with what they read.” ACT, Inc., “Reading Between the Lines report” (2006) CCSS Appendix A. p. 2

  7. Building knowledge through content-rich nonfiction and informational texts • Reading and writing grounded in evidence from text • Regular practice and instruction with complex texts and its academic vocabulary CCSS Instructional Shifts

  8. All students must be exposed to grade level text complexity regardless of their reading ability CCSS Instructional Shifts CCSS, Appendix A

  9. Interactive Read - Alouds • Independent Reading (95% accuracy & comprehension) • Shared Reading • Close reading of a passage • Multiple exposures • Reading for different purposes • Reading for extended periods of time across content-areas What does “exposED” To grade level text complexity MEAN ?

  10. Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity Three Ways to Build Background Knowledge: *Choose ONE or More… Jigsaw – Hiebert Article Video with Graphic Organizer to Generate Discussion Jigsaw – Fisher & Frey Article

  11. All – Watch 15 Minute Video (link on Wiki) Distribute Accompanying Discussion Worksheet (11 Discussion Questions in total) All – Summarize Q. 1 in 2-3 sentences Group 1 – Q. 2-3 Group 2 – Q. 4-5 Group 3 – Q. 6-7 Group 4 – Q. 8-9 Group 5 – Q. 10-11 All – Each group can then facilitate a discussion around their questions Activity A:Vimeo: Shift 3- Staircase of Text complexity (engageny.org) Text Complexity Worksheet

  12. All – Introduction (p.1) Group 1 – Text Complexity and the CCSS (p. 2-3) Group 2 – Quantitative Information (p. 3 & 4) Group 3 – Qualitative Measures (p. 4 & 5) Group 4 – Readers and Tasks (p.5) All – How To Use The Three Forms Of Information: The Text Complexity Multi-index (p.5 & 6) All – Conclusions and Recommendations (p.7) Activity B:Hiebert Article Jigsaw CES Handout 1

  13. Count off by “fours” and find your “like” numbers to form a “group”; you can sub-divide if groups still too large! All – Introduction (p. 2 to top of p. 3) Group 1 – Quantitative (p. 3) Group 2 – Qualitative (pgs. 3 – 4) Group 3 – The Reader (pgs. 4 – 7) Group 4 – The Task (pgs. 7 – 8) All – If time, Skim Conclusions and Appendixes (p.11…) In your “Like Number Group” discuss your section and in no more than 2-3 sentences, summarize your section. 1 person will report their summarization to the larger group Fisher & Frey PDF Activity C: Fisher & Frey Article Jigsaw (15 minutes)(distribute)

  14. Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity

  15. Text Complexity Model • Text complexity is defined by: Quantitative measures – readability and other scores of text complexity often best measured by computer software. Kansas Department of Education

  16. Text Complexity Model • Text complexity is defined by: Qualitative measures – levels of meaning, structure, language conventionality and clarity, and knowledge demands often best measured by an attentive human reader. Kansas Department of Education

  17. Text Complexity Model • Text complexity is defined by: Reader and Task considerations – background knowledge of reader, motivation, interests, and complexity generated by tasks assigned often best made by educators employing their professional judgment. Kansas Department of Education

  18. Three-Part Model for Measuring Text Complexity Determining Text Complexity of Salvador, Late or Early -Cisneros, S. (1992). Woman Hollering Creek. New York: Vintage -distribute short text

  19. Distribute Blank Graphic Organizer- Starting with the end in mind… fill in as we go… GOAL: After reflecting upon all three legs of the text complexity model educators can make a final recommendation of placement within a text and begin to document our thinking for future reference. Final Step: Recommended Placement Handout 3

  20. A CLOSER LOOK Quantitative Measures

  21. Sentence and word length • Frequency of unfamiliar words • Word frequency • Number of syllables in words STEP #1: Quantitative measures

  22. Proposed Common Core Scale Bands

  23. Proposed Text Complexity Correlation Chart for Common GPS scales

  24. LET’S TRY IT OUT!!! Consider: • Sentence and word length • Frequency of unfamiliar wordsD • Word frequency • Number of syllables in words Salvador, Late or Early(S. Cisneros) • Sentence length and vocabulary/word frequency • Reread Paragraph 1; consider sentence length! • Vocabulary/Word Frequency • Name of main character appears frequently • Challenging vocabulary words…identify… • vague • nub • Scuttles • Lexile= 960 • F & P = Z Step #1: Quantitative measures • Discuss In Your Groups/Share

  25. General Rule: Use any one of the quantitative analyzer tools to place text into a complexity band level. For decisions about whether to place a text at the upper, lower, or middle of a band, use qualitative analysis. (For drama and poetry, use qualitative measures.) In which of the text complexity bands would Salvador, Late or Early fall? Step #1: Implications for Educators

  26. Step #1: Common Core Scale Bands For Salvador, Late or Early

  27. Remember, however, that the quantitative measures is only the first of three “legs” of the text complexity triangle. Our final recommendation may be validated, influenced, or even over-ruled by our examination of qualitative measures and the reader and task considerations. Fill out the QUATITATIVE MEASURE portion of the “Placemat”- Handout #3. Step 1: quantitative measures Kansas State Department of Education

  28. A CLOSER LOOK Qualitative Measures

  29. Levels of meaning or purpose • Structure • Language conventionality and clarity • Knowledge demands Step #2: Qualitative measures • Elfrieda H. Hiebert – The Common Core State Standards and Text Complexity

  30. The Qualitative Measures Rubrics for Literary and Informational Text The rubric for literary text and the rubric for informational text allow educators to evaluate the important elements of text that are often missed by computer software that tends to focus on more easily measured factors. Step 2: qualitative measures Handouts 4 & 5 Kansas State Department of Education

  31. Because factors for literary texts are different from information texts, these two rubrics contain different content. However, the formatting of each document is exactly the same. Since these factors represent continua rather than discrete stages or levels, numeric values are not associated with these rubrics. Instead, four points along each continuum are identified: high, middle high, middle low, and low. Pull out LITERARY rubric – Handout #5 Step 2: qualitative measures Kansas State Department of Education

  32. So…LET’S TRY IT OUT! How is the rubric used? How would Salvadore, Late or Early fair when analyzed through the lens of the Literary Text Rubric? Read the descriptive “factors”. – DISCUSS and MARK the rubric accordingly. Step 2: qualitative measures

  33. x x x x x x x x

  34. Step 2: qualitative measures Salvadore, Late or Early (S. Cisneros) Lexile Text Measure: 960L But after reflecting upon the qualitative measures, we believed:

  35. PROCESS: Our initial placement of Salvador, Late or Early into a text complexity band changed (between 4-5 and 6-8) when we examined the qualitative measures ( to the grade 6-8 band). Remember, however, we have completed only the first two legs of the text complexity triangle. The reader and task considerations still remain. Complete the QUALITATIVE MEASURES section of the text complexity “PLACEMAT” Step 2: qualitative measures

  36. A CLOSER LOOK Reader and task considerations

  37. Considerations such as: • Motivation Knowledge and experience • Purpose for reading • Complexity of task assigned regarding text • Complexity of questions asked regarding text Step #3: Reader and task

  38. Questions for Professional Reflection on Reader and Task Considerations: The questions provided in this resource are meant to spur teacher thought and reflection upon the text, students, and any tasks associated with the text. Distribute Reader & Task Consideration Handout Step #3: reader and task Handout 6

  39. The questions included here are largely open-ended questions without single, correct answers, but help educators to think through the implications of using a particular text in the classroom. Step 3: reader and task

  40. Review Salvador, Late or Early; discuss the guiding questions on HANDOUT #6 in your group. Complete the Considerations for READER and TASK section of the placemat. Based upon our examination of the Reader and Task Considerations, we have completed the third leg of the text complexity model and are now ready to recommend a final placement within a text complexity band. Step 3: Reader and Task

  41. After reflecting upon all three legs of the text complexity model we can make a final recommendation of placement within a text and begin to document our thinking for future reference. Complete the “Recommended Placement” section of the Placemat. Final Step: Recommended Placement Handout 3

  42. Next steps • In grade-level teams, develop a pool of annotated texts that exemplify and help benchmark the process of evaluating text complexity, using both quantitative and qualitative measures and the professional judgment of teachers -- complex text playlists! • The texts and the annotations accompanying them will provide educators with a deeper, more multidimensional picture of text complexity that they can use to help them select materials.

  43. Based on levels of complexity, current instructional materials will need to be supplemented, enhanced or moved to a different grade. Some of this work will be represented in the curriculum (units of study- suggested materials), some can be done within our schools at grade-level planning meetings. Implications for teaching and learning

  44. Connecticut State Department of Education: http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/site/default.asp Council of Chief State School Officers: http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Digital_Resources/Common_Core_Implementation_Video_Series.html Kansas State Department of Education: http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=4778#TextRes LexileAnalyzer: www.lexile.com/findabook Maine Department of Education: http://www.maine.gov/education/lres/commoncore/ National PTA: http://www.pta.org/common_core_state_standards.asp The Hunt Institute (video series): http://www.youtube.com/user/TheHuntInstitute#g/u Useful websites

More Related