1. Wiki
Wireless Access Open Air Password: summer10

2. Give One, Get One
Consider the six shifts, share one implication for your current ELA initiatives or other responsibilities?
Continue sharing one idea with three people (or 10 minutes, whichever comes first)

4. Common Core State Standards Our goals for today…
Participants will…
Understand the vertical articulation of the standards
Deconstruct a standard and evaluate rigor as defined by Hess’s Cognitive Rigor matrix
Discuss implications for our work
Identify resources to support implementation
For this afternoon we will talk about rigor and how it relates to CCSS
We will do some vertical articulations considering that the end is college ready and back mapping all the way down
We will consider the Cognitive Rigor Matrix. This is about implications for you in your classroom and as a leader and we will look at some resources

5. What makes reading hard?
Rigor – Quick Write
What makes reading hard?
How is rigorous reading different from hard reading?
For me, rigor is…
Let’s begin with framing our work on articulation of standards around rigor. In a bit we will have an opportunity to analyze growing levels of rigor within the CCSS, but before we do this, let’s anchor ourselves around the the topic of rigor.
On a piece of scratch paper take a few minutes to do a quick write. What makes reading hard? How is rigorous reading different from hard reading? What does rigor mean to you? Jot down a few notes

6. Protocol for Processing Articles
Read an article individually and highlight important points, including the author’s definition of rigor.
Round 1: Each person shares and important point the author makes. Discuss implications for our work.
Round 2: Each person shares their definition of rigor. Discuss how the definitions are alike and different.
Round 3: (If time permits) share another important point and discuss implications.
We are going to bring some other people in the room to think about rigor. We have four articles to bring in these voices. Take a moment to choose one of the four that you would like to read. We are going to do a modified jigsaw. This works best in groups of 4. I’d like to suggest groups of four, but you may modify this to fit your group. Hold your article up when you have selected your article.
Read your article. Highlight important points. Zero in on the author’s definition of rigor.
Give participants time to read.
The most important step in this protocol is round 1. If you only finish this step, it will be fine. If you have time move on to round 2 and 3.
After small group discussion, have participants share out important learning about rigor. Chart.

7. Reflect Look back at your definition of rigor
Mark any aspects of your definition that were confirmed by the reading.
Add to or revise your definition if your thinking has changed.
Now go back and add or revise your definition of rigor

8. Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts
Now we are moving into the section on Vertical Articulation. We will take a look at how the level of rigor required on the trajectory of college and career readiness.
Vertical Articulation at a Glance

9. What is Vertical Articulation
Vertical alignment asks:
How are the content standards/objectives related from one year/grade to the next?
Knowledge or skills extend to a wider range of content
Deeper understanding of the (cognitive process) for same content
New content or skills
What is vertical articulation or alignment? As we analyze the articulation of the anchor standards from K to grade twelve, we will attend to the degree to which the skills extend to a wider range of content, the depth of understanding and the introduction of new content or skills.

10. Back-mapping the ELA CCSS
Starting with college and career readiness
Standards for each grade level are identified
Working backward from grade to 9-10 to 8 etc.
Establishes a clear, aligned K-12 pathway, linking elementary, middle, high school, and end-of-high school college and career readiness
The starting point is career and college ready and are back mapped on down. Now we are going to look at the stair step and proce
The high level of cognitive demand, helps to determine the level of cognitive demand at each grade level. (If it looks like this in 12th grade, what would it look like in 11th grade if a student is on track to reach standard?) Since Bloom’s labels the type of thinking (verbs) needed to complete a task, tracing the content additions and the verbs reveals a deepening of the cognitive processes through a standard from K-12.
Talk about the reverse order or the back mapping.
Ask participants to follow as you model, using Standard 1 in the packet.
Trace the vertical articulation in a given standard from Kindergarten through Grade 12, showing how each builds upon the next, highlighting the additions.
Explain that this activity provides a foundation for further work in cognitive complexity and depth of knowledge and that it will inform instruction, lesson/unit design and assessment.
Ask participants to choose a standard from the packet, and work with a partner to trace the additions from Kindergarten to the CCR.

11. Bloom’s Taxonomy
Many of us are familiar with Blooms. The GLEs were based on Blooms and define the level of cognitive demand required for each GLE.
It was originally developed in the 1950s by Benjamin Bloom as a means of qualitatively expressing different kinds of thinking.
It was Adapted for classroom use as a planning tool and continues to be one of the most universally applied models.
Provides a way to organize thinking skills into six levels, from the most basic to the higher order levels of thinking
In the 1990s- Lorin Anderson (former student of Bloom) revisited the taxonomy, and as a result, a number of changes were made
(Pohl, 2000, Learning to Think, Thinking to Learn, pp. 7-8)

12. A Comparison Original Revised
Evaluation
Synthesis
Analysis
Application
Comprehension
Knowledge
Creating
Evaluating
Analyzing
Applying
Understanding
Remembering
Here is a comparison of the old and new. What do you notice?
(The reivsed are doing things. They end in “ing” to denote doing. Synthesis has changed to creating and moved to top. Evaluation has changed to evaluating and moved below creating.)
What do you think of that change? Does this seem like a sensible change?
(Based on Pohl, 2000, Learning to Think, Thinking to Learn, p. 8)

13. Analyzing the Standards
Handout the packet titled Reading Standards for informational text.
Do a think aloud for each change for this first standard. Let’s start with Kindergarten and compare to grade 1. What is different. Let’s highlight.
Moving up it is the same set of ideas but it is becoming increasingly more complex, and the level of thinking has evolved.
Share your highlights with a partner.

14. Your turn… With a partner, select a different anchor standard
Highlight the additions of the grade level standard as it progresses toward College and Career Readiness
Circle the verbs describing the skills required of students
R.I.8.8: Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is sound and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; recognize when irrelevant evidence is introduced.)

15. Cognitive Rigor Matrix by Karin Hess
Combines Bloom’s Taxonomy with Webb’s Depth of Knowledge framework.
A tool for:
Designing units of study that have a range of cognitive demand.
Assessing tasks for the thinking they require of a student
----- Meeting Notes (5/7/12 13:16) -----
pull out cognitive rigor matrix. This is a reference document. This is the research and work that has been aligned to SBAC specifications. There are 4 depths of knowledge levels.

16. The Cognitive Rigor Matrix
Depth + thinking
Level 1
Recall & Reproduction
Level 2
Skills & Concepts
Level 3
Strategic Thinking/ Reasoning
Level 4
Extended Thinking
Remember
- Recall, locate basic facts, details, events
Understand
- Select appropriate words to use when intended meaning is clearly evident
- Specify, explain relationships
- summarize
– identify main ideas
- Explain, generalize, or connect ideas using supporting evidence (quote, example…)
- Explain how concepts or ideas specifically relate to other content domains or concepts
Apply
- Use language structure (pre/suffix) or word relationships (synonym/antonym) to determine meaning
– Use context to identify meaning of word
- Obtain and interpret information using text features
- Use concepts to solve non-routine problems
- Devise an approach among many alternatives to research a novel problem
Analyze
- Identify whether information is contained in a graph, table, etc.
– Compare literary elements, terms, facts, events
– analyze format, organization, & text structures
- Analyze or interpret author’s craft (literary devices, viewpoint, or potential bias) to critique a text
– Analyze multiple sources
- Analyze complex/abstract themes
Evaluate
– Cite evidence and develop a logical argument for conjectures
- Evaluate relevancy, accuracy, & completeness of information
Create
- Brainstorm ideas about a topic
- Generate conjectures based on observations or prior knowledge
- Synthesize information within one source or text
- Synthesize information across multiple sources or texts
We are just going to provide an awareness of this tool.
Look at DOK document. What are some things you notice?
Depth of Knowledge is a way of thinking that is different than Bloom’s.It is not about difficulty but complexity of the task. Bloom’s is about verbs. You can have the same verb and have different levels of cognitive demand. You instruct up to four levels of to the assessment. You assess at the highest level. Smarter Balance is using this for the new state assessment.
DOK 1 – right there type questions, answers you can memorize.
DOK 2 – think and search type questions, May require that you find the answer in multiple places in the text.
DOK 3 – require that you use reasoning. Not routine type questions. This is were students need to generalize or transfer knowledge to a novel situation. You need to plan a strategy to answer these questions. These are the author and you questions, text to text connections.
DOK 4 – Usually require more time and an opportunity to synthesize and create. For instance, a reseach paper where I have to read several texts on a topic, synthesize information and then create a PowerPoint and present it.
Notice how the verb in these three questions is the same but the level of complexity is much different.
Describe photosynthesis – level 1
Describe how two political parties are alike or different. – level 2 or 3 depending on text
Describe the most significant effect of World War II on the nations of Europe. Level 4. Must know something about WWII, the effects, and different nations of and what is most significant.
Performance tasks are generally level 3 and 4.
Hardest to differentiate is the levels 2 and 3. One difference between a level 2 and 3 is that a level 3 requires evidence. For instance. How was the Little Red Riding Hood’s encounter with the wolf different the second time from the first? Is level 2. If we ask the student to provide evidence to support their response, it move it to a level 3.
One interesting point of note. One state did a month long study across an entire state and found that most questions that students were asked were lower level questions?
The CCSS calls for more emphasis on higher level thinking skills, but what would happen if we ignored level 1 and level 2 questions?

17. Your turn again…
Record the level of Bloom’s or Webb’s Depth of Knowledge for each component of the standard.
R.I.8.8: Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is sound and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; recognize when irrelevant evidence is introduced.

18. Next steps? Optional Activity:
Analyzing the standard to the level of instruction and Depth of Knowledge (DOK). This activity will provide an opportunity for the participant to isolate one standard at their grade level and going deeper. With the framing of “how this impacts their instruction .”

19. Standard to Practice
Begin with the Common Core State Standards, then consider what you already have and do.
Determine whether you address:
all or part of the standards in your curriculum,
whether your practice occurs at the same grade level as the standard,
and whether you currently have any data to evaluate effectiveness of instruction relative to that practice

20. Implications
What are some of the key ideas related to vertical articulation?
How might you use the cognitive rigor matrix?
What are the similarities and differences current levels of rigor for students and the the level of rigor called for in the Common Core State Standards (CCSS)?
As you think about vertical articulation, what might be some next steps for your grade level, building and district?
Here are some questions I am going to send you off with this afternoon.

21. Resources
Highlight page 183 – an example of performance task.

22. Grade Level One-Pagers
created by teachers in
Washington State
Use these slides if you are doing this as a stand alone training
See the Resource page for the link to these documents.

23. Resources for Implementation
ELA overview documents (one-pagers) as connected with WA standards:
Publisher’s Criteria in ELA and Literacy:
Alignments cross-walk documents:
Parent Resource Guides:

24. For More Information
Common Core Website:
Common Core Questions: OR
Greta Bornemann, OSPI CCSS Project Director,
Hunt Institute Videos
r_detailpage (overview)
ed (writing)

25. Thank you.
Everybody!