High School Preparatory Course Certification (HSPCC ) and College Preparatory Course Certification (CPCC)

1. High School Preparatory Course Certification (HSPCC) and College Preparatory Course Certification (CPCC) December 2013

2. High School Preparatory Course Certification & College Preparatory Course Certification • What is HSPCC/CPCC? • Goals of HSPCC/CPCC • Progress Report Next Level Readiness Metrics • What is a High School/College Preparatory Course? • HSPCC/CPCC Eligibility Requirements • Application Process for New Courses • Qualitative Evaluation • Application Process: Important Information • HSPCC/CPCC Resources

3. What is HSPCC/CPCC? • The HSPCC/CPCC process seeks to recognize middle and high school courses that build readiness skills for the next level and expand the range of courses for which schools can earn credit on the Progress Report’s next level readiness metrics. • To be certified through the HSPCC/CPCC process, a course must meet the expectations of a high school/college ready course. • Schools will receive credit on the middle/high school Progress Report for each student who passes a course certified through the HSPCC/CPCC process. • Schools will receive only one point per student on the Progress Report’s next level readiness metrics, regardless of how many metric criteria that student meets.

4. Goals of HSPCC/CPCC • Recognize and reward courses that build high school/college readiness skills and provide rigorous instruction. • Increase the accuracy of next level readiness metrics by providing all middle and high schools that have invested in rigorous high school/college preparatory courses with the opportunity to earn points on these metrics. • Especially schools with operational challenges (e.g., scheduling, small student population) or an alternative approach to providing standardized accelerated or college preparatory courses (such as accelerated Regents or AP courses). • Encourage constructive conversations and collaboration in schools about the rigor of their coursework to • increase the rigor of existing and new courses • motivate the creation of innovative alternatives to the standard high school/college preparatory courses • promote resource-sharing around Common Core alignment

5. Progress Report Next Level Readiness Metrics • High Schools • College and Career Preparatory Course Index (CCPCI): Up to 3.33 points awarded for students taking advanced, college-preparatory coursework (e.g., Algebra II, Chemistry, Math B, Physics, AP, IB, college credit-bearing courses, and courses ending in an industry-recognized technical assessment), as well as CPCC courses. Students who pass a CPCC course are eligible to be counted toward this metric. • Middle Schools • Accelerated Courses: Up to 1 point awarded for students taking accelerated courses (high school level courses  culminating in a Regents exam or state Language Proficiency Exam or approved high school credit-bearing courses), as well as HSPCC courses. Students who pass an HSPCC course are eligible to be counted toward this metric.

6. What is a High School/College Preparatory Course? • A “high school preparatory” or “college preparatory” course consists of intellectually rigorous coursework that covers sufficient content knowledge and requires students to demonstrate the higher-order thinking skills that will enable them to engage independently in non-remedial college level work.

7. HSPCC/CPCC Eligibility Requirements New New • The course must address content within one of the four content areas (ELA, math, science and social studies) in a way that is rigorous and aligned to the Common Core Learning Standards and NYS Science and Social Studies Standards (as applicable). • The course must be comparably challenging to courses that already count towards the Progress Report’s next level readiness metrics. • However, the course must not already count towards these metrics. It may not culminate in one of the exams that already count toward the next level readiness metrics on the Progress Report, or be a high school/college credit- bearing course. • The course must be taught in the 2013-14school year and at least one prior school year, and there should be plans to continue offering the course in the future. • The course must serve predominately eighth graders (HSPCC) or juniors and seniors (CPCC). • The school must be able to provide a range of instructional artifacts from the course (e.g., student work, curriculum overview, scope and sequence, assignments, and assessments). • If multiple sections of the course are offered, all sections should be horizontally aligned with similar expectations, assignments, and grading policies. • The school must be willing to have a classroom visitation by a trained reviewer to observe the course and student work (not the teacher).

8. Application Process for New Courses New • There are twosimultaneous components to the evaluation. • Quantitative Evaluation: Schools will be asked to submit course codes for a quantitative evaluation. The quantitative evaluation employs a statistical analysis to evaluate the relationship between passing the course and success at the next level (early high school for HSPCC and early college for CPCC). • Qualitative Evaluation: Schools will be asked to submit information about the course (e.g., curriculum, syllabus, scope and sequence) and instructional artifacts (e.g., samples of student work). The qualitative evaluation employs a rubric aligned to the Common Core Learning Standards. • Courses that pass both the quantitative and qualitative evaluations will be certified. Certified courses will receive either a one-year certification or a three-year certification, depending on the strength of the application.

9. Application Process: Important Information New • The application will be online. Principals will be provided with instructions for accessing the online application through Principals’ Weekly. • Schools may nominate up to two courses per year for certification, subject to certain exceptions. • Courses certified through the HSPCC/CPCC process will receive either a one- or a three-year certification, depending on the strength of the application. Courses that are granted a 1-year provisional certification may be resubmitted the following year through the recertification process. • Schools with courses that do not receive certification are invited to resubmit those courses in subsequent years. • DOE staff may conduct reviews of courses selected at random to ensure that the offered course is comparable to the submitted course.

10. Special Application Processes New New

11. Who should adopt courses? • Schools that can invest the time to develop lesson plans and additional materials to adapt a course to meet the needs of their students, and in response to current citywide instructional expectations and reviewer feedback. • Schools that have chosen not to offer AP/IB courses • Schools that may need additional support in increasing rigor in pre-existing courses (e.g. Pre-Calculus or non-AP Calculus). • Networks that want to increase collaboration between schools

12. Courses Available for Adoption • HSPCC • Computer Math • CPCC • Pre-Calculus • Calculus • Epidemiology • Materials available on ARIS: • https://www.arisnyc.org/connect/node/1686567/community

13. Timeline

14. Overview of Evaluation Process • The DOE trains and norms groups of reviewers to evaluate each qualitative application. • Rubrics allow reviewers to make an overall determination about the course’s college-readiness based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative components. • The qualitative evaluation component of the HSPCC/CPCC process involves a review of instructional artifact submissions and short answer questions.

15. Qualitative Evaluation:Rubric and Information Reviewed • The qualitative evaluation employs a rubric to review the breadth and depth of the course content, the intellectual rigor and demand of assessments, the level of independence asked of students, and the expectations of students to develop and use higher order thinking and reasoning skills throughout the course. The rubric is designed primarily to evaluate the content and rigor of the course through the lens of the Common Core Learning Standards. • The information that will be reviewed during the qualitative evaluation includes: • Written responses to short answer questions • Graded student work at various levels • Assessments • Course syllabi, curriculum map, scope and sequence, or equivalent • Lists of key texts • Grading policy and prerequisites • Rubric content and criteria are available at: http://schools.nyc.gov/Accountability/tools/report/default.htm.

16. Overview of Short Answer Questions • 1.Please describe the course goals and objectives.   • 2.Please describe the sequence and diversity of assessments used in the course. How does each of the submitted assessments represent this sequence and diversity? • 3. How much independent work is expected of students both in and out of class? Please identify within the supporting documents you have submitted with this application an example of scaffolded assignments that lead to an independently completed culminating task. • 4. If multiple sections of the course are offered, are they horizontally aligned? What variations exist between sections? How do you ensure that the content and rigor of all sections remain relatively equivalent? • 5. Please identify specific differentiation strategies used in the classroom that make it possible for a wide range of students to complete the culminating task for the course successfully, e.g., English language learners and students with disabilities.

17. Qualitative Evaluation • Step 1: Rubrics are used score the Content and Academic Rigor of the nominated course. • Step 2: Results of rubric evaluation are used to make an overall determination about the course’s college-readiness.

18. Criteria for Content & Rigor

19. Step 1 of the Qualitative Evaluation: Course Worksheets Used to Apply Rubrics

20. Step 2 of the Qualitative Evaluation: Rating Content

21. Step 3 of the Qualitative Evaluation: Certification Tenure

22. Turn and Talk: Evaluating Sample Assessments • In pairs or trios, examine each assessment sample. • Determine which assessment was determined to be college ready. Use language from the worksheets to support your decision. • According to the worksheets, what were students given (or not given) the opportunity to do/demonstrate?

23. Assessment Sample from Course Awarded CPCC:Constitutional Law • You’ve read the majority and dissenting opinions as well as the lawyer’s briefs, heard oral arguments and debated the case with fellow “judges.” What do you think should have been the outcome in the case of Goldman v. Weinberger? Based on the conference today, you will know whether you are writing for the majority or dissent of the Urban Academy Supreme Court. Write a 2-3 page typed opinion (approx. 900 words) in which you: • Clearly and thoroughly explain the legal reasoning behind your decision. • Explain and specifically address the best arguments made by the other side– both in the written briefs we read and in oral argument. You may also explicitly address arguments made by judges in the class with whom you disagree. • Discuss how you have applied the three precedent cases of Yoder v Wisc., Parker v Levy and Brown v. Glinesto this case. • Make it clear what factors were decisive for you in making your decision so it’s clear how future cases should be decided. What criteria or standards are you setting for future cases in which an individual claims s/he can’t practice their religion unless the military makes an accommodation or exception to one of its regulations? Remember, your opinion should act as a guide for deciding future similar cases! • You may use portions of the writing you did for the “leanings” homework (the HW due last week) as long as you incorporate it into a well-organized and decisive opinion for either the majority or the dissent.

24. In a college-ready course, students have an opportunity to: • Content & Skills • integrate information from diverse sources, both primary and secondary, into a coherent understanding of an idea or event, noting discrepancies among sources; and • construct written arguments on substantive topics that introduce precise claims and use valid reasoning and cite specific textual evidence from primary and secondary sources to support the claims. • Academic Rigor • interpret, evaluate, and analyze primary and secondary documents; and • draw evidence from informational texts to support analysis.

25. Assessment Sample from Course NOT Awarded CPCC: Forensic Science Power Point of a Serial Killer • Name of group members (2 max), date and name of serial killer • Brief information about yourselves and experiences you incurred while doing the project (Hobbies and future endeavors) • Information on the Serial Killer’s pedigree? (parents, grandparents, childhood….) • How did the killer see life? (teenage years, abuse?, interests?) • When or at what age did first crime take place? (planned? Spontaneous? Gratification? Time until next crime?) • Did the killer leave calling cards? What state or Method of Operations did he/she use? • What type of evidence led law enforcement to seek out the killer? What are some examples of evidence? Class or individual evidence? Was law enforcement up to date with technology, etc. • How did the killer react when law enforcement was on to him/her? Did the crimes stop or get more violent? Was there any dormancy? • How did the case against the killer get constructed? Was there enough evidence in prosecuting, etc.? Was Law Enforcement able to collect all bodies? Did killer agree to additional victims, etc. • What was the verdict? What about any interview the killer conducted before or after verdict? Any therapy or rehab given? • Any research that came out of the case? Was this your typical killer or was this a special case and why do you think so? Any information on how killer thought or if there was evidence that linked to killer’s childhood , abuse, etc?

26. In a course that is not college-ready, students do not have an opportunity to: • Content & Skills • understand and can apply the scientific method accurately designing and conducting scientific investigations during which they formulate and test hypotheses; • evaluate an author’s claim and evidence by corroborating or challenging the claim with other information; • construct written arguments on substantive topics that introduce precise claims and use valid reasoning and cite specific textual evidence/data from primary and secondary sources to support the claims; or • understand the KEY concepts or big ideas of the subject. • Academic Rigor • complete tasks that require them to think at the higher domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy; or • engage in course work that involves an investigation or accurate application of scientific concepts to real world problems.

27. Next Steps in Your Networks • Whom should you encourage to apply? • Whom can you coach for next year? For whom is this a planning year? • How can you facilitate sharing of best practices?

28. HSPCC/CPCC Resources • Please visit the Progress Report Website for additional information and resources, including: • Memo explaining the HSPCC/CPCC process • Instructions for submitting applications • Rubrics • To learn more, contact your • Cluster Performance Point; • or email • CPCertification@schools.nyc.gov • with questions.