Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
February 8, 2012
Curriculum, Assessment and Instruction
NEWSLETTER A Message from Heidi... Dear Staff, Welcome to part two of our 2011-2012 school year. It is hard to believe that the school year is half over and it is even harder to believe that it is February. I am not at all complaining. I will take spring weather in the middle of winter any day. Please be sure to fully read the Curriculum Update. There is a lot of information and many things continuing to happen. I also want to say “thank you� to all of the teachers in our District that are working on special projects and are committed to their growth along with promoting the growth of their colleagues. I continue to be amazed by our great staff. I am so grateful for all you do for our students, staff and community.
Sincerely,
Some articles inside:
K-12 Math Pilot
2
AMAO Stats
3
Flipped Classroom
3
RTI
4
Community Enrichment
4
Common Core
5 6
Novels for Instruction
Heidi Kast Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Keyboarding More of a Focus in Second Grade Mastery of keyboarding skills has been in the 6th grade for LO students. With all of the latest technology and students having access at a much younger age, keyboarding skills need to be taught earlier. Our second grade teachers have received training for a program called
Type to Learn. This program will be used to teach students keyboarding skills. Media specialists will also support teachers and students with this program throughout elementary.
7
Curriculum, Assessment and Instruction Page 2
K-12 Math Pilot Due to the movement toward common core standards and the ming of the district to review our math programming and ma‐ terials, a group of teachers from the elementary, middle and high school have been mee ng to begin a K‐12 math pilot. At the elementary level, a group of teachers will be pilo ng two math programs. Half of the group will be pilo ng a program called Inves ga ons this winter while the other half will pilot Everyday Math. The groups will switch in the fall to pilot the program they did not pilot in the winter so that all teachers, by the end of fall 2012, will have
piloted both Inves ga ons and Everyday Math.
4. Houghton Mifflin (Saxon, Big Ideas, Holt)
7th: Sarah Roberts (Oakview), Nick Coccia (Waldon)
Teachers were trained on Janu‐ ary 16 in the program they will be pilo ng soon. Please see the chart below for elementary pilot teachers.
5. Carnegie (eliminated due to cost)
8th: Ma Moede (Scripps), Chris e Smith (Oakview)
The pilot teachers met on Janu‐ ary 16 to hear presenta ons from Connected Math and Glen‐ coe’s Impact. A er the presenta‐ ons, teachers decided to pilot Connected Math in the fall and con nue searching for another poten al program to pilot. The teachers involved at the middle level include:
The high school is currently in the reviewing process to determine the programs they will pilot. They met with a few vendors on January 16. The high school is expec ng to begin their pilot in the fall. The teachers that have been organizing the pilot thus far include: Jennifer Ries, Re‐ nae Simpson and Tracy Burlak.
Middle school has reviewed the following: 1. Pearson (Pren ce Hall, Con‐ nected Math, Digits) 2. McGraw‐Hill (Glencoe, Chica‐ go Math)
6th: Jackie Moses (Oakview), Cathy VanCuren (Scripps)
3. Kendall Hunt (Math Innova‐ ons ‐ formerly Key Press)
Kinder
First
Second
Third
Fourth
Fi h
Carpenter
Stacey Nye
Gretchen Hynes
Karen Okonowski
O.O.
Janet Thorpe
Jane Cowan
Teresa West
Norman Wright/
I want to sincerely thank all of the teachers that have volunteered to pilot. Par cipa ng in a pilot study requires addi onal me and dedica‐
Red=Inves ga ons this winter/EDM in the Andrea
Blue=EDM this winter/Inves ga ons in the Paint Creek Pine Tree
Cami Giberson
Krista Adragna Gina Guccini/ Stacy Giles
Joanne Purdon
Francie Robertson
Stadium
Sarah Dabrowski
Carrie Price/ Kris Lavin
Theresa Ratkowiak
Sims
Tracey Well‐ man/Lisa Nordin
Andrea Wayne
Kristen Elsey/Allison Webb
Linda Gobart
Webber
Jennifer Di‐ Maggio
Brandy Lucia
Renee Mucci
Leisa Pulliam
on. It is very important that we have teachers pilo ng different programs to be able to make a recommenda on for this signifi‐ cant decision to be made. I also want to point out that this pilot is very different than any other done in the past. First, it is K‐12. While this is a large under‐ taking, it allows us to ensure alignment in our programming at each level. The communica on
between the District chairs at each level has been absolutely amazing. Jane Cowan, Laura Mar n, Ma Moede, and Tracy Burlak have made it a priority to ensure that each level is aware of what is happening at the other levels. The other significant difference in this pilot is that not only are we looking at new instruc onal resources, but these resources need to foster a different style
of teaching. When you review the Common Core Standards for mathema cal prac ce and the assessment that is being developed by the SMARTER Balanced Consor um, our teaching will need to be differ‐ ent in order to prepare our students accordingly. Please feel free to contact a pilot teacher or myself regard‐ ing any ques ons, comments,
and/or concerns. It is an cipated that at the conclusion of the 2012‐ 2013 school year, we will be recom‐ mending new math programming K‐ 12 to the Board with hopes of begin‐ ning in fall 2013‐2014.
February 8, 2012
Page 3
District AMAO Status for 2010 - 2011 School Year For another year in a row, we have made our 2010‐2011 A.M.A.O.’s with flying colors! (Annual Measurable Achieve‐ ment Objec ves) AMAO 1: 85% of our ELLs (English Language Learners) have shown progress on the English Language Proficiency Assessment (ELPA). This is a statewide standardized test given each Spring. AMAO 2: 60% of our ELLs achieved English language profi‐
ciency based on the student scores on ELPA. This year cut scores were in‐ creased and will be successively higher each year. The cut scores for this year were: AMAO 1: progress 77%
gress (AYP) for Limited English Proficient subgroup. The district must demonstrate that it achieved AYP for the LEP sub‐ group on the MEAP and MME. We have too few LEP students in each building, each grade level to form a subgroup.
AMAO 2: achievement 13% So for AMAO 1 we surpassed the cut score by 8% and AMAO 2 we overachieved by 47%.
CONGRATULATIONS!!!!
AMAO 3: Adequate yearly pro‐
The Flipped Classroom Stanford professor Daphne Koller has these observa ons on the success of Khan Acade‐ my and similar ventures in per‐ sonalized online video instruc‐ on combined with in‐class ac vi es:
Video content engages students, many of whom grew up with YouTube, and the content is easy for instructors to produce. Short, bite‐sized chunks of material are easier for students to digest then long lectures—especially for student with short a en on spans. A bank of short video les‐ sons can be more easily tailored to individual stu‐ dents; students who are behind can work at their level without feeling em‐ barrassed, and more ad‐ vance students can forge ahead or go deeper in the curriculum, avoiding bore‐ dom and disengagement.
Exercises and assessments are a vital part of online lessons; they keep stu‐ dents ac vely engaged, check for mastery, and enhance understanding by promp ng recall and pu ng ideas in context.
Assessments give students instant feedback that is similar to the feedback they get in individual tu‐ toring—at much less cost.
Assessment allow students to move ahead when they have demonstrated profi‐ ciency with a skill or con‐ cept, says Koller, “rather than when they have spent a s pulated amount of me staring at the teacher who is explaining it.”
Of course these student‐ computer transac ons leave plenty of gaps, and it’s essen al for students to be able to ask a human being ques ons about
things that puzzle them. Teachers are spread thin, and Koller suggests that taping other students may be the answer—including online forums and real‐ me discussion groups.
Online forums can allow researchers to look at large numbers of student respons‐ es. “This mass of data is an invaluable resource for un‐ derstanding the learning process and figuring out which strategies really serve students best,” says Koller.
It’s been argued that online lessons can’t teach crea ve problem solving and cri cal thinking. Koller doesn’t disa‐ gree, but she says that when students do online lessons outside the classroom, the basics are taught quickly and efficiently, which frees up classroom me for interac‐ ve instruc onal formats— fostering deeper under‐ standing and crea vity. This is the so called “flipped:
classroom model, which she’s using in some of her classes at Stanford. Although class a endance is voluntary in these courses, a higher per‐ centage of students show up than in conven onal classes. “Online educa on, then, can serve two goals,” Koller concludes. “for students lucky enough to have access to a great teacher, blended learning can mean even be er outcomes at the same or lower cost. And for the millions here and abroad who lack access to good, in person educa on, online learning can open doors that would other‐ wise remain closed. By using tech‐ nology in the service of educa on, we can change the world in our life me.” Check out the website below, it has flipped lessons created for some of the textbooks we use for our math classes. http://www.brightstorm.com
SEE ATTACHMENT #1 FOR THE FLIPPED CLASSROOM MODEL
Curriculum, Assessment and Instruction Page 4
Pearls of RTI Wisdom from: Dr. George M. Batsche…. What do we know about School Reform and RTI?
1. Addi onal me to accelerate perfor‐ mance (assuming high quality instruc on)
Dr. George M. Batsche is Professor and Co‐ Director of the Ins tute for School Reform at the University of South Florida. He is Co‐ Director of the Florida Statewide Problem‐ Solving/Response to Interven on Project for the Florida Department of Educa on. In addi‐ on, Dr. Batsche co‐directs the Student Sup‐ port Services, Shared Services Network and Coordinated Student Health Projects for the Florida Department of Educa on.
2. More intense instruc on
Words of Wisdom from Dr. Batsche: Reading Problems and Dropout: A student who can’t read on grade level by 3rd grade is 4 mes less likely to graduate by age 19 than a child who reads proficiently by that me. Add poverty to the mix, and a student is 13 mes less likely to graduate on me.
At‐risks students benefit from : Pre‐ teach/Review/Re‐teach (collaborate with core instruc on) Key: Don’t let kids get behind (two years behind is the kiss of death) Data‐Based Decision Making (when dis‐ cussing student achievement) “In God we Trust…everyone else brings data” Number one way to ensure student achievement: Academic Engagement (the amount of me students are engaged in quality instruc on) Dr. Batsche Message: Integrate Tiers COLLABORATE
Instructors should adjust the focus of the day to center around Reading. To accelerate student performance, we must provide students with:
Community Enrichment Expands Academic Offerings The LOCS Community Enrichment Department has been extremely busy crea ng many new programs and classes for the upcoming New Year. Accordingly, the majority of new programs being offered will be educa onally based. There are s ll the regular staple courses like pain ng, dance, sports, exercise, etc. offered in the de‐ partment’s bi‐annual brochures. However, the newest enrichment offerings focus some of the key LOCS curricular areas for elementary stu‐ dents such as: Writer’s Workshop, Summer Math Boost, Summer Reading Boost, and Sum‐ mer Wri ng Boost. Likewise, other new courses that will complement the curricular based cours‐ es include: A er School Spanish, Kids With Cam‐ eras, LEGO engineering, and Drawing/art classes. In terms of secondary and adult educa on, Ger‐
man and Spanish classes along with MS Office Computer Classes make up some of the newest programs being offered to the public. All in all, the benefits of Community Enrich‐ ment are endless. You can have fun while staying healthy, keeping ac ve, learning new skills, playing, socializing, and mee ng any of your other physical and intellectual needs. To learn more about your LOCS Community Enrichment offerings visit the department’s website at h p://rp.lakeorion.k12.mi.us/ or contact Ben Gerdeman, Enrichment Supervisor, at bgerdeman@lakeorion.k12.mi.us
February 8, 2012
Page 5
Common Core State Standards Update We have teams of teachers from each level for ELA and Math that have been working with the dis‐ tricts throughout the county regarding Common Core. Below is a meline for unit development for Math and ELA.
DOMINO EFFECT Year 1 One unit of study per grade (K‐12) for both ELA and Math
Year 2 Four additional units of study per grade (K‐ 12) for both ELA and Math
Year 3 Full K‐12 curriculum for both ELA and Math aligned to CCSS
WHAT CAN YOU DO TO PREPARE STUDENTS FOR THE COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS FOR MATH?
SEE ATTACHMENT #2 FOR THE 8 STANDARDS OF MATHAMATICAL PRACTICE THAT SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO YOUR INSTRUCTION.
Proposed process for development of K‐12 curriculum aligned to Common Core State Standards for both ELA and Mathematics
K-12 Unit Development • 2010-2011 – One unit per grade level developed in Mathematics and ELA
• 2011-2012 – Professional development to support district leadership development and classroom implementation of one unit – Four units developed in both content areas
• 2012-2013 – Professional development to support district leadership development and classroom implementation of four units – Three units developed in both content areas
• 2013-2014 – Professional development to support district leadership development and classroom implementation of three units
Full Implementation in 2013-2014 !
Curriculum, Assessment and Instruction Page 6
Looking for DRA Clarifictions? We get lots of ques ons on what DRA levels kids in grades K‐5 should be at this year, next, quarterly etc. We also get many ques ons regarding what needs to be entered into Inform. The a ached document will provide clarifica on. A reminder that this document is always posted on the website under ELA curricu‐ lum. ATTACHMENT #3
The following information was shared at a meeting at Oakland Schools regarding the new assessment for Math…..
Assessing the Common Core What we think we know…
What we don’t know yet…
The SMARTER Balanced will produce a constellation of assessments for grades 3-11 including: a) Adaptive comprehensive summative assessment that includes:
Distribution of item types may vary on the actual assessment. Still, the current draft specification document indicates a major shift toward constructed response and performance8 based items.
• • • •
22% selected-response 41% technology-enhanced constructed-response 14% traditional constructed response 23% performance
b) Adaptive interim/benchmarks based on learning progressions and or CCSS content clusters that calls for performance event bank and non-secure pool of items c) Formative assessment tools, processes and practices that call for a variety of lesson embedded tools for different purposes.
Assessing the Common Core What we think we know…
The SMARTER Balanced Content Specification drafts list four claims upon which students’ proficiency will be based: 1. Concepts & Procedures “Students can explain and apply mathematical concepts and interpret and carry out mathematical procedures with precision and fluency.” (Approx. 40% of the overall score) 2.Problem Solving “Students can solve a range of complex well-posed problems in pure and applied mathematics, making productive use of knowledge and problem solving strategies.” (Approx. 20% of the overall score) 3.Communicating Reasoning “Students can clearly and precisely construct viable arguments to support their own reasoning and to critique the reasoning of others.” (Approx. 20% of the overall score)
4.Modeling and Data Analysis “Students can analyze complex, real-world scenarios and can construct and use mathematical models to interpret and solve 9 problems.” (Approx. 20% of the overall score)
Find more out about the Assessment being devel‐ oped by Smarter Balance Assessment Consor um at…. h p://www.k12.wa.us/ smarter/
Student Tracker LOCS will be taking advantage of a 5 year graduate follow up survey called Student Tracker. The purpose of the survey is to understand how a student’s high school experience prepared him/her for their current posi on whether it be college, employed full or part me, military ser‐ vice, etc. The survey contains ques ons about the student’s experiences with teachers and counselors, academic achievement, personal development, and prepara on for what the student is doing currently. Ul mately, the survey will pro‐ vide LOCS feedback to ensure we are providing an exemplary educa on for our current and future students.
February 8, 2012
Page 7
Using Graphic Novels for Instruction? Not all graphic novels will work for the classroom, as with many genres there are some really great books and some ques onable choices. But . . .push yourself to explore this new genre with kids, even if you’re more of a digital age immigrant than a na ve. The texts we choose for our classrooms should surround kids with a variety of perspec‐ ves, opinions, issues and concepts to read, write and talk about. As we build our libraries, it is important to consider popular genres that emerge as changes in literacy evolve. Our kids are growing up in a visual world. They are used to ge ng informa on fast and like to parallel process and mul ‐task. Digital na ves o en prefer graphics before text and crave these engaging op ons.
Graphic novels are also an important tool for struggling readers. Some of the benefits include: Pictures provide support for compre‐ hension. Popular series become accessible for lower level readers (i.e. harder books like Time Warp Trio and Goosebumps are now being rewri en as graph‐ ical). Graphic novels are o en wri en in a series which allow students to stay with familiar plot lines and charac‐ ters.
Frank Cammusso Secret Science Alliance Series by ElenorDavis
Questions? Contact Kate DiMeo at kdimeo@lakeorion.k12.us Szymusiak, Karen and Franki Sibberson, Lisa Koch. 2008. Beyond Leveled Books. Portland, ME: Stenhouse. Thompson, Terry, 2008. Adventures in Graphica: Using Comics and Graphic Novels to teach Comprehension, 26. Portland, ME , Stenhouse.
Check out these series as you explore: Babymouse Series by Jennifer L. Holm and Ma hew holm Amelia Rules! Series by Jimmy Grown‐ ley Knights of the Lunch Table Series by
!! rize! CIA P h the t wit s a K d i di ippe il He a “Fl f n o Ema w o n itio our d defin om” in y n a 12th ro Class The 11th, issions m s. word rrect sub tastic o an c f 13th eceive a r l !!! wil prize
CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT CONTACTS Heidi Kast……...Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Marysue Schwartzmiller….Administrative Assistant 248-693-5409 or Ext. 3908 Linda Glowaz….Assessment Coordinator...Ext. 6410 District Department Chairs…………..Listed on LOnet District School Improvement Chairs………..Listed on LOnet
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3 ~ page 1
District DRA2 Expectations Grade Kindergarten 1st & 2nd 3rd, 4th, 5th
Beginning of 1st Quarter TEST * TEST *
End of 1st Quarter TEST
End of 2nd Quarter
End of 3rd Quarter
End of 4th Quarter
TEST TEST TEST
TEST TEST
TEST TEST TEST
*Beginning of 1st Quarter – ONLY TEST any students who are new the building, identified as at-risk, or previously received LSS services. All teachers will give the DRA2 to their students unless a student is in LSS. The LSS teacher may be responsible for giving DRA2 – this varies by building. Please check with your building administrator for clarification if necessary. These are district expectations which means they apply to all students/teachers in the district. However, individual buildings may expect DRA2’s to be done more frequently. Please see your building administrator if clarification is needed. When testing Fiction, students will only be given the DRA2 test for 1 grade level above the current grade the student is in (please note: for the 2011-2012 school year this is slightly off). Please see chart titled target independent reading levels for specific level ceilings. When testing Non-Fiction, beginning in the 2011-2012 school year, there are no restrictions on the levels tested. If a child reads a level independently (ORF and COMP), he/she may advance to the next level. Remember DO NOT skip non-fiction levels. For example, if a child passes level 14, he/she must pass the NF 16 before taking the level 18 test. In the future, when we are testing both F and NF this might be different but for now this is the case (this mostly affects kdg and 1st grade). All independent scores are entered into Pearson Inform. This means that the child scores in the independent range in both ORF (oral reading fluency) and Comp (comprehension). If a child does not pass a level, the score is not entered into Inform.
ATTACHMENT 3 ~ page 2 When entering scores into Inform: Fiction tests and Non-fiction tests are NOT entered in the same place. They are two different tests one is called F – DRA2 and one is called NF – DRA2, there is one for each quarter. For the 2011-2012 school year, this means some students will have fiction tests and others will have non-fiction entered in the same quarter. Don’t panic, the reports will reflect both tests on the same sheet. When entering a test, you must enter the DRA2 level, the ORF and the COMP and then enter the DRA2 level again. For example, if a child takes a fiction level 16 and scores 17 for ORF and 23 for comp. You would go to the F - DRA2 and enter (see screen shot below):
DRA 16
ORF 17
COMP 24
DRA - Grade __ Must enter 16 DRA score again here!
For those who have already put DRA2 scores into Pearson Inform for the 2011-12, your information transferred. However, you still have three columns that need data entered (ORF, Comp DRA test level).
ATTACHMENT 3 ~ page 3
Lake Orion Community Schools DRA2 Expectations 2011-2012 End of the First Marking Period
End of the Second Marking Period
End of the Third Marking Period
End of the Fourth Marking Period
Do not test above this F level (no ceiling on NF)
0
2F
3F
4F
18 F
First Grade
6F
10F
14F
16 NF
30 F
Second Grade
18F
20F
24F
28 NF
40 F
Third Grade
30F
34F
38F
40 NF
50 F
Kindergarten
Fourth Grade
40NF
50 NF
60 F
Fifth Grade
50NF
60 NF
70 F
Lake Orion Community Schools DRA2 Expectations 2012-2013 End of the First Marking Period
End of the Second Marking Period
End of the Third Marking Period
End of the Fourth Marking Period
Do not test above this F level (no ceiling on NF)
0
2F
3F
4F
18 F
6F
10F
14F
16NF and 18F
30 F
Second Grade
20F
24F
28F
28 NF and 30F
40 F
Third Grade
30F
34F
38F and 38NF
40NF and 40F
50 F
Kindergarten First Grade
Fourth Grade
50F
50 NF and 50F
60 F
Fifth Grade
60F
60 NF and 60F
70 F