the parcc model content frameworks english language arts/literacy grades 3-11 version 2.0—august...
TRANSCRIPT
The PARCC Model Content FrameworksEnglish Language Arts/Literacy
Grades 3-11
Version 2.0—August 2012
Common Core State Standards for ELA/Literacy
• Introduction• College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards
– Reading– Writing– Speaking and Listening– Language
• Grade-Specific Standards– K-5 ELA/Literacy – 6-12 ELA6-12 History/Social Studies, Science, & Technical Subjects
• Appendices
Key Shifts in ELA/Literacy• Complexity– Regular practice with complex text and its academic
vocabulary
• Evidence– Reading and Writing grounded in evidence from text
• Knowledge– Building knowledge from content-rich nonfiction and
informational texts
CCSS Goal: All Students College and Career
Ready
What capacities should literate college- and career-ready students
exhibit by the time they graduate from high school?
CCSS Goal: All Students College and Career
Ready• Demonstrate independence• Build strong content knowledge• Adjust communication for audience, task, purpose, and
discipline• Comprehend as well as critique• Value evidence• Employ technology and digital media strategically and capably• Understand other perspectives and culturesCCSS, Introduction, p. 7
Changes in Classroom PracticeTeacher-centered
Discrete lessons
Teach isolated texts
Test over the text
Student-centered
Connected lessons for deep learning on a topicUse texts to gain deep understanding Communicate understanding about topics orally and in writing
Purposes for the PARCC Model Content Frameworks
• To serve as a bridge between the Common Core State Standards and the PARCC Assessment System by– Supporting implementation of the Common Core State
Standards • Reflects integrated and iterative nature of the CCSS • Reflects key shifts of the CCSS • Supports shared responsibility for literacy development
– Informing development of item specifications and blueprints for the PARCC assessments
Purposes for the PARCC Model Content Frameworks
• To serve as one model for teachers, curriculum directors, and administrators
– Grades 3-5 ELA/Literacy across all content areas
– Grades 6-11 ELA with foundational ideas for literacy instruction in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects
A Model for Curriculum Developers and Teachers• Illustrates one way of organizing the content of the standards over the
course of the school year• Reflects the key shifts in the standards• Provides insight into the development of the PARCC Assessment System• Presents standards in an integrated and iterative fashion• Weaves standards into modules that progressively develop student
understanding• Focuses on essential knowledge, skills, and understandings that students
must develop for college and career readinessNote: The Frameworks are NOT a complete guide for curriculum.
A Bridge to the PARCC Assessment System CCSS Key Shifts
• Regular practice with complex texts and its academic vocabulary
• Reading and writing grounded in evidence from text
• Building knowledge from content-rich nonfiction and informational texts
PARCC Major Claims
• Read and comprehend a range of sufficiently complex texts independently
• Write effectively when using and/or analyzing sources
• Build and present knowledge through research and the integration, comparison, and synthesis of ideas
An Aligned SystemCommon Core State Standards
Model Content Frameworks
Model Instructional Lessons/Units
PARCC Assessment System
Overview of the PARCC Model Content Frameworks
• Consists of two major sections– Introduction
– Grade-specific frameworks, Grades 3-11
• Available as PDF or searchable electronic version at http://www.parcconline.org/
• Definition of terms available on the electronic version
PARCC Model Content Frameworks
Introduction
Connections to the PARCC Assessment System• Supports PARCC Assessment System through
– Reading complex texts– Writing effectively when using and/or analyzing sources– Conducting and reporting on research– Speaking and listening– Language use for reading, writing, and speaking
• Places emphasis on regular opportunities to– Grapple with close, analytic reading of grade-level complex texts– Construct increasingly sophisticated responses in writing
Structure of Grade-Level FrameworksGrade-Level Frameworks divided into four sections
•Narrative Summary of the ELA Standards•The Model Content Framework Chart•Key Terms and Concepts for the Model Content Framework Chart•Writing and Speaking and Listening Standards Progressions Charts
Model Content Framework Chart • Provides educators flexibility to order the modules and
content within modules to suit purposes and needs• Knowledge and skills embedded across 4 modules
address ALL the standards for each grade level; therefore, order of the 4 modules is not critical
• What changes throughout the modules– Focus and Emphasis on types of texts read and written
• What remains constant throughout the modules – Cultivation of students’ literacy skills in preparation for college
and career readiness and PARCC assessments
Key Terms and Concepts for the Model Content Frameworks Chart
Provides explanation of elements within Framework Chart•Elements play a key role within CCSS•Elements reflect critical emphasis within PARCC Assessment System
NOT intended to limit the types of texts educators may use
Key Terms and Concepts for the Model Content Framework Chart
• Reading complex texts• Writing to texts• Research project• For reading and writing in each module– Cite evidence and analyze content– Understand and apply grammar– Understand and apply vocabulary– Conduct discussions and report findings
• Foundational reading skills (grades 3-5)
Reading Complex Text• Model Content Frameworks highlight close, sustained
analysis of complex text– Includes all students, struggling reader to advanced– Linked to significant gains in reading proficiency
• A key component in college and career readiness• Overlapping in complexity while spiraling to more
complex text, with appropriate scaffolding• Builds content knowledge through comparison and
synthesis of ideas across multiple texts* Apply a text complexity tool to determine complexity
Three Measures of Text Complexity
Websites with Text Complexity Resources• Common Core State Standards
– Appendix A– Supplemental Information for Appendix A
• Student Achievement Partners– Text Complexity Collections(qualitative and grade-band quantitative tools)
• Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development– Text Complexity: Qualitative Measures Rubric
• PARCC Text Complexity Tools – Literary Complexity Analysis Worksheet– Informational Text Analysis Worksheet
Close Reading of Complex Texts• A thorough and methodical examination of meaning
through deliberate reading and rereading
• Close reading and gathering knowledge from specific texts must be at the heart of classroom activities, reflecting on – meanings of individual words and sentences – the order in which sentences unfold– the development of ideas over the course of the text
Close Reading of Complex Texts• Aligned curriculum should explicitly direct students
to re-read challenging portions of the text
• Multiple readings allow students to glean information, gather evidence, and build knowledge
• Full comprehension of individual texts aids in comparison and synthesis of multiple sources
Text-Dependent Questions• High-quality sequences of text-dependent questions
– Cultivate mastery of the specifics of what a text says explicitly– Draw inferences based on evidence in a text and make valid claims– Make comparisons with other texts and synthesize information across
texts to build knowledge about a topic
• Cite specific evidence when offering an oral or written interpretation of a text (arguments, explanations, analyses)
• Do not require information or evidence from outside the text or texts; focus is on the text or comparisons between texts
Writing to Texts• Generates a deeper understanding of a text or topic
• Reflects the emphasis to write effectively and proficiently
• Focuses shifts from narratives in lower grades to analytical writing (arguments, informational)
• Includes a variety of writing– routine writing for comprehension and building writing skills– analytical writing to advance an argument or explain an idea– narrative stories and descriptions
Narrative WritingNarrative Story
• Real or imagined situations• Uses time as its structure• Includes creative fiction,
memoirs, anecdotes, biographies, and autobiographies
Narrative Description• Creates a vivid impression of a
person, phenomenon, event, or procedure
• In history/social studies, might include descriptions about individuals and events
• In sciences, might include descriptions of step-by-step procedures of investigations so others can replicate and test results
Research Project• Build, integrate, and deepen knowledge on a
topic• Connect to texts selected for close reading• Read, compare, and synthesize ideas across
multiple texts• Gather additional information• Present findings in formal and informal contexts
For Reading and Writing in Each ModuleKnowledge and Skills
• Cite evidence and analyze content
• Understand and apply grammar
• Understand and apply vocabulary
• Conduct discussions and report findings
• For grades 3-5, acquire and develop foundational reading skills
Connections to Standards
• Explanation of the knowledge and skills that connect and support the standards related to reading, writing, and research
• Critical to building content knowledge
Writing and Speaking and Listening Progressions Charts
PARCC Model Content Frameworks
Grade-Level Frameworks
Key Changes from Grade to Grade• Rigor of the CCSS Standards• Complexity of texts• Number of short texts read as well as emphasis of text types • Number of analyses and narratives written• Research demands • More specific and detailed evidence to support claims and
topics• Deeper understanding of content• Increased ability to communicate knowledge effectively in
writing and speaking, using academic and domain-specific vocabulary and language
A System ofInstruction and Assessments
Aligned to the Common Core State Standards
Evidence-Centered Design in the Classroom• Claims
– inferences about what students should be able to do– aligned to standards
• Evidence– supports claims– drawn from student work– formal and informal– formative and summative– aligned to standards
• Tasks– classroom activities designed to elicit evidence– aligned to standards
*Supports the PARCC Assessment System
Backward Planning Curriculum Tools that Support Evidence-Centered Design
• Literacy Design Collaborative, Grades 4-12– Modules begin with a CCSS-related Performance Task
• Understanding by Design, Grades K-College– Units begin with Transfer Goals, Understandings, & Essential
Questions• PARCC Model Content Frameworks, Grades 3-11
– Modules begin with a Research Project– Covers the full range of standards, recommended in each
module– Supports the iterative nature of the CCSS as well as its key shifts
in learning and PARCC Major Claims
Curriculum Design to Build Content Knowledge• Units/Modules on topics/themes worth learning• Authentic and relevant topics worth researching
• Analyses worth writing
• Questions worth answering
• A range of grade-level texts worth reading
• Assessment opportunities for gathering evidence to determine weaknesses, gaps in learning, and evaluating performance
Role of the Tri-State Rubric in Supporting High-Quality Modules/Units
• Builds capacity of educators in determining quality and alignment to the CCSS
• Uses clear, descriptive criteria in four dimensions to review and evaluates multi-day lessons or modules/units
• Encourages collegial review, by applying a common language for reviewing and evaluating lessons or modules/units
Evidence-Centered Design in the PARCC Summative Assessment• Claims
– Master Claim, Major Claims, Sub-claims– inferences about what students should be able to do– aligned to standards-based evidence statements
• Evidence– supports claims– drawn from writing arguments (opinions-grades 3-5), informative/explanatory
texts, and narratives– aligned to standards-based evidence statements
• Tasks– Literary Analysis Task, Narrative Task, Research Simulation Task– aligned to the standards-based evidence statements
* Also includes a non-summative Speaking & Listening Task.** Non-summative components to be developed (Diagnostic Tool and Mid-year Assessment) ***Supports the CCSS Key shifts in learning
PARCC’s Core Commitments to ELA/Literacy Assessment Quality
Texts Worth Reading: The assessments will use authentic texts worthy of study instead of artificially produced or commissioned passages.
Questions Worth Answering: Sequences of questions that draw students into deeper encounters with texts will be the norm (as in an excellent classroom), rather than sets of random questions of varying quality.
Better Standards Demand Better Questions: Instead of reusing existing items, PARCC will develop custom items to the Standards.
Fidelity to the Standards (now in Teachers’ hands): PARCC evidences are rooted in the language of the Standards so that expectations remain the same in both instructional and assessment settings.
Texts Worth Reading
• Range: Reading across the disciplines and helping to satisfy the split of informational text to literature at each grade band.
• Quality: The passages include content-rich literature and informational texts.
• Complexity: Quantitatively and qualitatively, the passages have been validated and deemed suitable for use at each grade level.
Every Question Requires Supporting EvidenceStudents’ Command of Evidence with Complex Texts is at the
Core of Every Part of the Assessment!
SO. . .Two standards are always in play—whether they be reading or writing items, selected-response or constructed-response items on any one of the four components of PARCC. They are:
Reading Standard One (Use of Evidence)
Reading Standard Ten (Complex Texts)
Three Innovative Item TypesEvidence-Based Selected Response (EBSR)—Combines a traditional selected-response question with a second selected-response question that asks students to show evidence from the text that supports the answer they provided to the first question. Underscores the importance of Reading Anchor Standard 1 for implementation of the CCSS.Technology-Enhanced Constructed Response (TECR)—Uses technology to capture student comprehension of texts in authentic ways that have been difficult to score by machine for large scale assessments (e.g., drag and drop, cut and paste, shade text, move items to show relationships). Range of Prose Constructed Responses (PCR)—Elicits evidence that students have understood a text or texts they have read and can communicate that understanding well both in terms of written expression and knowledge of language and conventions. There are four of these items on each annual performance-based assessment.
PARCC Performance-Based Assessmentwith EBSR, TECR, and PCR Items
The Performance-Based Assessment consists of three types of tasks:
Literary Analysis Task
Narrative Task
Research Simulation Task
Understanding the Literary Analysis Task
• Students carefully consider two literary texts worthy of close study.
• Students are asked to answer a few EBSR and TECR questions about each text to demonstrate their ability to do close analytic reading and to compare and synthesize ideas.
• Students write a literary analysis about the two texts.
Understanding the Narrative Writing Task
• Students read one brief text and answer a few questions to help clarify their understanding of the text.
• Students then write either a narrative story or a narrative description (e.g., writing a historical account of important figures; detailing a scientific process; describing an account of events, scenes, or objects).
Understanding the Research Simulation TaskSession 1: Students will• Read an anchor text that introduces the topic and answer EBSR and
TECR items to gather key details and to support their understanding.• Write a summary or short analysis of the piece.
Session 2: Students will• Read two additional sources (one may include a multimedia text)
and answer a EBSR and TECR questions to show their reading comprehension.
• Mirror the research process by synthesizing their understandings into an analytic essay, using textual evidence the sources.
Understanding the End-of-Year Assessment• Students will be given several passages to read closely.• EBSR and TECR questions will be sequenced in a way that they
– will draw students into deeper encounters with the texts and – will result in thorough comprehension of the concepts to provide
models for the regular course of instruction.
• Questions will draw on higher order skills such as – critical reading and analysis, – the comparison and synthesis of ideas within and across texts, and – determining the meaning of words and phrases in context.
Big Changes• Content Knowledge Needed for Some Teachers• Pedagogical Practices of Teachers• Administrators’ Expectations of Teachers • Teacher Education Programs• Professional Development• Policy Changes
Achieving Connected LearningThe PARCC Model Content Frameworks support
connected learning aligned to the CCSS by•Being an integral part of an aligned system of curriculum, instruction, and assessment•Helping educators gain a deeper understanding of the CCSS and PARCC Assessment System•Encouraging collaboration across the content areas•Ensuring that the full range of CCSS are included when developing curriculum and instruction
ResourcesVideo recording of the presentation by writers of the PARCC Model Content Frameworks and AchieveAugust 2012•http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaKeiJNRQiw
Model Content Frameworks •http://parcconline.org/parcc-model-content-frameworks
Item Prototypes•http://parcconline.org/samples/item-task-prototypes
ResourcesArkansas’s Big Shifts •http://ccssarkansas.pbworks.com/w/page/41448809/ADE-Common-Core-State-Standards-(CCSS)-Wiki-Homepage
Resources for Text ComplexityQualitative Dimensions of Text Complexity CCSS, Appendix A, pg. 6•http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_A.pdf
Supplemental Information for Appendix AText Complexity Measures (pg. 4)Qualitative Dimensions Tool (pg. 6)•http://www.corestandards.org/assets/E0813_Appendix_A_New_Research_on_Text_Complexity.pdf
Resources for Text ComplexityText Complexity CollectionsQuantitative Tools (including links)Qualitative Tools (including grade-band tools)•http://www.achievethecore.org/steal-these-tools/text-complexity
Text Complexity: Qualitative Measures RubricInformational TextsLiterary Texts•http://groups.ascd.org/resource/documents/122463-CCSS_Text_Complexity_webinar_handout_3.pdf
Resources for Text ComplexityPARCC Text Complexity Tools Literary Complexity Analysis WorksheetInformational Text Analysis Worksheet
•Final documents coming Spring 2013 to http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-assessment
•Currently, drafts can be accessed through http://www.parcconline.org/Procurement, Solicitations: RFP Try-out. Then follow the link to http://www.in.gov/idoa/proc/bids/RFP-13-29/, and download Appendix A.
ADE Professional Development for ELA/Literacy
Disciplinary Literacy OverviewClose Reading of Complex TextTri-State Quality Review Rubric for ELA/Literacy•http://ideas.aetn.org/commoncore/english-language-arts
Contact Information• Dr. Tracy Tucker, Director, Curriculum & Instruction
– [email protected]– 501-682-7442
• Melody Morgan, Director, Student Assessment– [email protected]– 501-682-4558
• Dana Breitweiser, ELA, Student Assessment & Curriculum– [email protected]– 501-683-0914
• Sherri Thorne, ELA, Curriculum & Instruction– [email protected]– 501-683-6285