1. ELA CCGPS Webinar #2 3rd – 5th grade
This session will begin at 3:15 p.m.
While you are waiting, please do the following:
Enter/edit your profile information by going to:
Tools - Preferences - My Profile…
Fill out the info on the “Identity” tab and click “OK”
To view the profile of another use, hover your mouse over his or her name in the Participants window
Configure your microphone and speakers by going to:
Tools – Audio – Audio setup wizard
Confirm your connection speed by going to:
Tools – Preferences – Connection speed
8/13/2019

2. Accessing the Session Recording
Recordings are accessed by going to and click on the Recordings tab. Recordings are posted approximately 15 minutes after the session is closed (all attendees must logout before the recordings can be created).
8/13/2019

3. UNDERSTANDING THE COMMON CORE Georgia Performance Standards ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS FALL WEBINAR #2 Grade Three Grade Four Grade Five
Tuesday, October 25, :15 – 4:15 pm
OCTOBER 2011

4. WELCOME! State Program Coordinator English Language Arts and Literacy
Kim Jeffcoat
State Program Coordinator
English Language Arts
and Literacy
CCGPS

5. Your English Language Arts & Literacy Staff at the Georgia Department of Education
Kim Jeffcoat, State Program Coordinator for English Language Arts & Literacy
Sallie Mills, English Language Arts & Literacy Program Specialist
Susan Jacobs, English Language Arts & Literacy Program Specialist
Andria Bunner, English Language Arts & Literacy Program Specialist
Julie Morrill, Literacy Program Specialist
Angie Baker, Technology Program Specialist
Mary Lynn Huie, Gates Literacy Trainer
8/13/2019

6. Focus: Text Complexity
3/28/2011

7. Why Text Complexity Matters
2006 Report, ACT, Inc.
Reading Between the Lines
Report looked at scores of students who equaled or exceeded the benchmark score (21 out of 36) on the reading section of the ACT college admissions test from those who did not
Only half of all test-takers (250,000) achieved the benchmark score or better ( group)
Results: These students had a 75% chance of earning a C or better in an introductory, credit-bearing course in US history or psychology (two courses which rely heavily on reading and are common for first year students ). There was a 50% chance of earning a B.
3/28/2011

8. Surprisingly…….
The clearest differentiator in the scores among those who met the benchmark from those who did not was the students’ ability to answer questions associated with complex texts.
3/28/2011

9. The bottom line from Reading Between the Lines
What students could read, in terms of complexity, was at least as important as what they could do with what they read.
3/28/2011

10. : a 13 year decrease in difficulty of text in grades 1, 6, and especially 11 (Chall, Conrad, & Harris, 1977)
Extending study to 1991: Dangerously high declines in average sentence length and vocabulary level in reading textbooks within a variety of grades (Hayes, Wolfer, & Wolf, 1996)
Present day: There is a 350L gap between the difficulty of end-of-high school and college texts. This is more than the Lexile difference between what we expect of a 4th grader as compared to that of an 8th grader (Gary Williamson, 2006)
8/13/2019

11. What do we know?
K-12 Reading texts have seen a decline in the levels of difficulty over the last half-century
The reading demands of college and workforce training have held steady or increased over the past 50 years
Only between 7% and 15% of elementary and middle school reading is expository
8/13/2019

12. Appendix A/Common Core
“A high school graduate who is a poor reader is a postsecondary student who must struggle mightily to succeed.”
“If students cannot read challenging texts with understanding---if they have not developed the skill, concentration, and stamina to read such texts---they will read less in general.”
Appendix A/Common Core
8/13/2019

13. Too many students are reading at levels far too low
Low reading achievement impacts students’ readiness for college, careers, and life in general
Reading levels among the adult population are disturbingly low
8/13/2019

14. Students’ ability to read complex text does not always develop in a linear fashion.
The grade-level progression of text complexity defined by Common Core does not always occur at an unbroken pace.
Students need opportunities to stretch their reading abilities, but they also need to experience the satisfaction and pleasure of easy, fluent reading, both of which the Standards allow.
8/13/2019

15. Factors to consider in text selection:
The student’s motivation to read
The student’s background knowledge
The student’s experiences
8/13/2019

16. Quantitative aspects of text complexity, such as word length or frequency, sentence length, and text cohesion, that are difficult if not impossible for a human reader to evaluate efficiently, especially in long texts, and are thus today typically measured by computer software
Qualitative aspects of text complexity best measured by an attentive human reader, such as levels of meaning or purpose; structure; language conventionality and clarity; and knowledge demands
Reader and task considerations focus on the inherent complexity of text, reader motivation, knowledge, and experience and the purpose and complexity of the task at hand. This kind of assessment is best made by teachers employing their professional judgment.
3/28/2011

17. 3/28/2011

18. Third Grade Reading Standard 10
CCRR10: Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently. LITERARY STANDARD ELACC3RL10: By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories, dramas, and poetry, at the high end of the grades 2-3 text complexity band independently and proficiently. INFORMATIONAL STANDARD ELACC3RI10: By the end of the year, read and comprehend informational texts, including history/social studies, science, and technical texts, at the high end of the grades 2-3 text complexity band independently and proficiently.
3/28/2011

19. Fourth Grade Reading Standard 10
CCRR10: Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently. LITERARY STANDARD ELACC4RL10: By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories, dramas, and poetry, in the grades 4-5 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range. INFORMATIONAL STANDARD ELACC4RI10: By the end of the year, read and comprehend informational texts, including history/social studies, science, and technical texts, in the grades 4-5 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range.
3/28/2011

20. Fifth Grade Reading Standard 10
CCRR10: Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently. LITERARY STANDARD ELACC5RL10: By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories, dramas, and poetry, at the high end of the grades 4-5 text complexity band independently and proficiently. INFORMATIONAL STANDARD ELACC5RI10: By the end of the year, read and comprehend informational texts, including history/social studies, science, and technical texts, at the high end of the grades 4-5 text complexity band independently and proficiently.
3/28/2011

21. Do teachers need to abandon all previously used texts?
NO! Teachers who have had success using particular texts that are easier than those required for a given grade band should feel free to continue to use them so long as the general movement during a given school year is toward texts of higher levels of complexity.
8/13/2019

22. A New Rubric
As of today, October 24, 2011, there is not a magical tool or computer program that will take into account the three dimensions of text complexity; however, we have developed a rubric that we feel will assist you in determining grade-appropriate, complex text.
3/28/2011

23. Text Complexity Rubric
Intended to assist educators in evaluating multiple dimensions of a text.
The rubric addresses the three aspects of text complexity required for consideration in Common Core Appendix B: qualitative, quantitative, and reader/task match.
Each of these three dimensions includes specific relevant categories, each of which is listed with a short explanation to assist users in making the best possible determination.
3/28/2011

24. HOW TO USE THE TEXT COMPLEXITY RUBRIC
COMMON CORE GEORGIA PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
TEXT COMPLEXITY RUBRIC
 INTENDED AS A TOOL FOR QUANTIFYING TEXT DETERMINATIONS WITHIN CCGPS PARAMETERS
RUBRIC DIMENSIONS ALLOW FOR UNIQUE MERITS OF TEXT AND FOR SCORE TO BE AN AGGREGATE OF MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS
INTENDED TO STREAMLINE AND CREATE CONSISTENCY WITHIN THE TEXT CONSIDERATION PROCESS, NOT TO BE A DEFINITIVE MEASURE
3/28/2011

25. There are 10 dimensions to be scored on the rubric
Each dimension can receive a score between 0 and 10
The best possible score within a dimension is 10 points, indicating that the text would be of optimal benefit to students. The best possible overall score for a text is 100 points. The aggregate text score is interpreted as follows:
POINTS: EXTREMELY APPROPRIATE TEXT CHOICE
POINTS: ACCEPTABLE TEXT CHOICE
POINTS: RECONSIDER OR CHANGE GRADE/PURPOSE OF THIS TEXT CHOICE
POINTS: ELIMINATE OR CHANGE GRADE/PURPOSE OF THIS TEXT CHOICE
3/28/2011

26. Qualitative Dimensions
Levels of meaning. Symbolism, abstract thought, satire, allegory, pun, symbolism, complex motif or nuanced/complicated technical or academic concepts. 10 = excellent, grade-appropriate examples representing multiple categories
Structure. Chapters, multiple plot lines, glossaries, headings, footnotes, legal documents, technical manuals, non-traditional uses of time or language (such as magical realism). 10 = multiple, excellent, grade-appropriate structural features.
Language conventionality. Complexity of the vocabulary such as colloquialisms, figurative or idiomatic language, dialects, sophisticated technical or academic language, historical language such as Elizabethan or Old English constructions.10 = language that is appropriate and challenging for the target grade but is not so complex as to be incomprehensible.
Background knowledge. The subject of the text is one with which your students might reasonably be expected to be acquainted (World War II) or one that might be understood once introduced (photosynthesis). 10 = students will comprehend the text or the subject can be sufficiently understood when explained. A lower score indicates a disconnect serious enough to adversely impact the effectiveness of instruction.

27. Quantitative Dimensions
Quantitative aspects of text complexity, such as word length or frequency, sentence length, and text cohesion, that are difficult for a human reader to evaluate efficiently, as measured by Lexile.
K n/a
L - 790L
L - 980L
L L
L L
L L
Low (1-3)
Moderate
(4-6)
High (7-10)
For the purposes of this rubric, we have used a measure familiar to most educators: the Lexile Measure.
10 = high end of Lexile range for grade band
= lower end of the grade band target range
4-6 = or fewer points below low end of target range
0-3 = mismatches beyond 100 points
NOTE! a mismatch of Lexile range ALONE is not enough to disqualify a text choice.

28. Reader and Task
Does this text challenge readers? Aim for 75% comprehension rate. 10 = challenges students within that target range.
Does this text match the interests of the students? Cannot always be the primary indicator, but even technical texts can be chosen to provide connection with students. 10 = best choice for the target age and demographic.
Is this text ideal for the task? A scientific journal will be a better match for a research project than for a skit depicting the content. 10 = best possible match for the task.
Mismatches for which qualitative and quantitative measures cannot easily account. Provides evaluators with a category to bestow or withhold points based on disconnect that may not be addressed in other rubric dimensions. 10 = no mismatch and would be entirely appropriate for the target audience and purpose.

29. SampleText 3rd grade SampleText 4th grade SampleText 5th grade
3/28/2011

30. Our Next 3-5 Webinar: November 15, 2011 Focus: Integrated Lessons with CCGPS
We would welcome input from the field on your experiences with constructing integrated tasks and lessons based on the examples we’ve seen here today or your experiences teaching these tasks. Send lessons, comments, and photos to

31. Thomas Groome – Chicken Soup for the Teacher’s Soul
Final Thought
One mark of a great educator is the ability to lead students out to new places where even the educator has never been.
Thomas Groome – Chicken Soup for the Teacher’s Soul