Secondary English Language Arts Cohort 1.0 Training Review

1. Secondary English Language Arts Cohort 1.0 Training Review September 24, 2014 Educational Service Center North

2. Objectives • Review key ideas from last spring’s Cohort 1.0 training • Identify explicit teacher and student behaviors that reflect what was learned in Cohort 1.0 • Reflect on current classroom practices and determine next steps for Common Core implementation

3. Cohort 1.0 Day 1 Building a Common Understanding

4. Cohort 1.0 Day 1

5. Instructional Shifts Complex Text Careful analysis of qualitative and quantitative measures Tri-state Rubric resource Teacher Look-For: • Select appropriate complex text, using both qualitative and quantitative measures, as well as considering the reader and rigor level of the task within the standard(s) Student Look-For: • Read high quality, grade appropriate complex text individually, with partners, or with teacher to persist in efforts to comprehend the text

6. Instructional Shifts Close Reading Rereading for multiple purposes and products Teacher Look-For: • Choose grade level appropriate text(s) that promotes instructional goals and supports a standards-based curriculum Student Look-Fors: • Read and reread actively • Annotate text, using pen/pencil, sticky notes, graphic organizers, Thinking Maps, Reader/Writer Notebooks

7. Instructional Shifts Text Dependent Questions • Guide students to the big ideas and key understandings • Lead to culminating task • At all levels of rigor and depth • Explicit and inferential • Leveled according to the Fisher/Frey article

8. Instructional Shifts Text Dependent Questions Teacher Look-Fors: • Design questions to guide students to the big ideas and key understandings, and to scaffold text for SWDs and ELs • Use varied questions, both explicit and inferential, with consideration given to the skills and content of the standards being taught Student Look-Fors: • Talk about the text, wrestle with TDQs in pairs or groups, and speak about their understanding of the text • Use evidence to write and speak about the text

9. What’s Happening? Are you seeing evidence of these instructional shifts at your school site?

10. Cohort 1.0 Day 2 Instructional Planning

11. Cohort 1.0 Day 2

12. What is Cognitive Rigor? There are different models to describe cognitive rigor. Each addresses something different. • Bloom—What type of thinking (verbs) is needed to complete a task? • Webb—How deeply do you have to understand the content to successfully interact with it? How complex is the task? Adapted from What Does Rigor Look Like? Powerpoint

13. Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s Depth of Knowledge Bloom’s Taxonomy Keep in mind that… • Verbs often appear at more than one level in the taxonomy. • Verbs alone are not enough to determine the cognitive demand required to understand content. Webb’s DOK Therefore… • What comes after the verb matters. Complexity of content and task required are used to determine DOK levels. • 4 DOK Levels: • Recall and Reproduction • Skills and Concepts • Strategic Thinking and Reasoning • Extended Thinking Hess, Carlock, Jones, and Walkup (2009)

14. DOK is about complexity—not difficulty! • Level 1 requires students to use simple skills or abilities. • Level 2 includes the engagement of some mental processing beyond recalling. • Level 3 requires some higher level mental processing like reasoning, planning, and using evidence. • Level 4 requires complex reasoning, planning developing, and thinking, using multiple sources, over an extended period of time. Adapted from What Does Rigor Look Like? Powerpoint

15. In the classroom… Level 1—Recall (teacher dependent) • Students locate facts from the text. Level 2—Skill/Concept (teacher dependent) • Students use the facts from the text to summarize the main idea. Level 3—Strategic Thinking (learner dependent) • Students connect facts and inferences to identify a central idea or theme. They support their thinking using evidence from the text. Level 4—Extended Thinking (learner dependent) • Students compare multiple works by the same author or time period to identify an overarching theme and support their thinking using evidence from the text.

16. In the classroom… Teacher Look-Fors: Observable evidence that teachers have… • Talked about and analyzed the standards • Determined the standards’ level of rigor • Asked, “What does proficiency look like?” and “How will I know when students have reached proficiency?” • Clearly identified what students should know and be able to do Student Look-Fors: • Students are generating their own questions about a text or topic • Using evidence to support their opinions • Talking about the text, wrestling with TDQ’s in pair or groups, and speaking about their understanding of the text. • Writing everyday, and working with teachers and peers to plan, revise and edit work.

17. Anthology Alignment Project • Provides Common Core-aligned lessons for our current anthologies, that have been authored, edited, and reviewed by an AAP team • Can be used immediately in the classroom and for professional development • Incorporates a template for teachers to design their own lesson

18. The AAP Process

19. Cohort 1.0 Day 3 Feedback and Calibration

20. Cohort 1.0 Day 3

21. Moving Forward • What evidence of the “classroom look-fors” are you seeing? • Where do you need to go from here? • How do you get there?