Common Core Standards Foundations Kit

Developed by Wisconsin CESAs School Improvement Services Departments Common Core State Standards (CCSS) http://www.corestandards.org

CESA 7 School Improvement Services CCSS Core Staff Judy K. Sargent, Ph.D. Claire Wick Chris Castillero John Eickholt Director, CESA 7 School Improvement Services jsargent@cesa7.k12.wi.us 920-362-0143

Literacy Coordinator and ELA Consultant, CESA 7 School Improvement Services cwick@cesa7.k12.wi.us 920-617-5647

STEM Coordinator and Mathematics Consultant, CESA 7 School Improvement Services ccastillero@cesa7.k12.wi.us 920-617-5635

CCSS District Administrator Consultant jeickholt@cesa7.k12.wi.us

For additional Foundations Kits, contact Patti Mulcahy at CESA 7 920-617-5615; pmulcahy@cesa7.k12.wi.us

About the Foundations Kit This kit was created collaboratively by the CESA statewide school improvement directors and staff from the Department of Public Instruction Content and Learning Team.

Purpose The purpose for this kit is to provide background information for superintendents and other district leaders. The kit also serves as a communication tool for use with educators and other stakeholders.

For additional printed copies of the Foundation Kit, contact the School Improvement Services department at your local CESA. Electronic versions of contents of this kit will be available to download from the Department of Public Instruction website as well as through your local CESA website.

Contents 

About the Foundation Kit



Power Point



Phase-by-Phase Roll Out



Partnership Pie Chart



Press Release: Wisconsin’s Adoption



Foundations Resource Material



Introduction to the CCSS



Standards-Setting Criteria



Application to Students with Disabilities



Application for ELLs



Q&A

8/19/2010

Foundations Kit: Common Core State Standards 1

STATEWIDE ROLL-OUT: CESA STATEWIDE SIS GROUP DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION AUGUST, 2010

CESAs MAKE POSSIBLE THE SCHOOLS WISCONSIN WANTS

About the Foundations Kit 2

Contents Phase-by-Phase Roll Out Partnership Pie Chart 3. Power Point 4. Press Release: Wisconsin’s Adoption 5. Foundations Resource Material 6. Introduction to the CCSS 7. Standards-Setting Criteria 8. Application to Students with Disabilities 9. Application for ELLs 10. Q & A 11. Resources 1.

2.

History of Standards-Led Education 3

 1994: Reauthorization of ESEA “Improving

America’s Schools Act” (required states to adopt, adapt, or create standards and assessments)  1998: Wisconsin adopted Model Academic St d d ((18 Standards 8 subject bj t areas))  2001: NCLB brought accountability for standardsbased education to the forefront  2010: Wisconsin adopts Common Core State Standards

1

8/19/2010

Impetus for the Common Core State Standards 4

 Currently, every state has its own set of

academic standards, meaning public educated students are learning different content at different rates  All students must be prepared to compete with not only their American peers in the next state, but with students around the world This initiative will potentially affect 43.5 million students which is about 87% of the student population

Common Core State Standards Evidence Base 5

Standards from individual high-performing countries and

provinces were used to inform content, structure, and language. Writing teams looked for examples of rigor, coherence, and progression.

Mathematics 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

English language arts

Belgium (Flemish) Canada (Alberta) China Chinese Taipei England Finland Hong Kong India Ireland Japan Korea Singapore

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Australia • New South Wales • Victoria Canada • Alberta • British Columbia • Ontario England Finland Hong Kong Ireland Singapore

Development of Common Core Standards 6

 Joint initiative of:

 Supported by:  Achieve  ACT  College Board

2

8/19/2010

Focus on the Big Picture 7

Principles for Learning: A Foundation for Transforming K-12 Education 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Being literate is at the heart of learning in every subject area.

Learning is a social act.

Learning about learning establishes a habit of inquiry important in life-long learning.

Assessing progress is part of learning.

Learning includes turning information into knowledge using multiple media.

Learning occurs in a global context.

(ACTE, CoSN, NCSS, NCTE, NCTM, NSTA)

What’s the Big Deal?

8

 The CCSS initiative is a “sea change” in education for

teaching and learning!

 The CCSS mandates the student learning outcomes for

every grade level.

 The CCSS force a common language. Your staff will

b i using begin i this hi llanguage.

 Students will be tested and instructional effectiveness

will be measured based on CCSS.

 Federal funding is tied to CCSS adoption,

implementation, and accountability.

 English Language Arts and Mathematics CCSS are just

the beginning. . .more subject area standards are being developed.

Essential Questions 9

 What are the Common Core State Standards?  Why are Common Core State Standards good

for stakeholders?  How will the Common Core State Standards

impact you?  How will the Common Core State Standards be

rolled out in Wisconsin?

3

8/19/2010

What are the Common Core Standards?

10

“Common Core Standards define the knowledge and skills students should have within their K-12 education careers so that they will graduate high school able to succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing academic college courses and in workforce training programs.”

(NGA & CCSSO, 2010)

http://www.corestandards.org/

Criteria Used to Develop CCSS 11

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Fewer, clearer, higher Aligned with college and work expectations Include rigorous content and application of knowledge through higher order skills Build upon strengths and lessons of current state standards Informed by top performing countries Evidenced and/or researched-based Realistic and practical for the classroom Consistent across all states

Why are common core state standards good for stakeholders: students?

12

 College & Career Focus. It will help prepare

students with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in college and careers  Consistent. Expectations will be consistent for all kids and not dependent on a students zip code  Mobility. It will help students with transitions between states  Student Ownership. Clearer standards will help students understand what is expected of them and allow for more self-directed learning by students

4

8/19/2010

Why are common core state standards good for stakeholders: parents?

13

 Clarity. Helps parents understand exactly what

students need to know and be able to do  Support. Helps parents support their children

and educators by making expectations clear and goals high  Equity. Provides equal access to a high quality education  Involvement. Provides opportunities to meaningfully engage parents

Why are common core state standards good for stakeholders: educators?

14

 Training. Allows for more focused pre-service

and professional development  Valid Assessments. Assures that what is taught

is aligned with assessments including formative, summative, and benchmarking  Own the “How”. Provides the opportunity for instructors to tailor curriculum and teaching methods  Depth. Informs the development of a curriculum that promotes deep understanding for all children

Why are common core state standards good for stakeholders: states and districts?

15

 Global. Allows states to align curricula to internationally

benchmarked standards  Best Practices. Allows states and districts to ensure

professional development for educators is based on best practices  Competition. Creates the opportunity for America to compete for high-wage, high skill jobs in a knowledgebased economy  State Assessment. Allows for the development of a “Next Generation” state assessment  Policies. Provides the opportunity to compare and evaluate policies that artifact students achievement across states and districts

5

8/19/2010

What about our “old” state standards?

16

R.I.P.

How will the Common Core State Standards impact you?

17

 Think-pair-share

A Vision for Implementation 18

6

8/19/2010

19

Next Steps 20

 Take a few minutes to peruse the Foundations Kit.  Talk with your colleagues.  Let us know …

What kind of support do you need to help with this transition?

7

August 12, 2010

Wisconsin Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Focusing Instruction to Create Better-Prepared Learners

“The Work of School Districts” Phase-by-Phase Roll Out Phase I

Phase 2

Phase 3

Understanding,

Understanding,

Understanding, Curriculum,

Curriculum, Assessment, Instruction

Assessment, Instruction

Curriculum, Assessment, Instruction

2014-15

2010-11   

  

Understand the underpinnings in instruction and the impetus for the CCSS Understand the shift required for systems change under CCSS Investigate and interpret the implications for instruction embedded in the knowledge, skills and understandings in grade level CCSS Plan for curriculum development Evaluate the CCSS as representing College and Career Readiness Understand the implications on local and state assessments

2011-12     

Develop local curriculum based on an instructional focus to implement the CCSS Align and select resources to implement changes in instruction Research and align high quality instructional strategies to CCSS Review and align local formative and benchmark assessments to CCSS Evaluate the quality of the CCSS local curriculum

2012-13           

Foundations and Investigations

2013-14

Implement new state summative assessment

Plan and develop units of study and lesson plans using the CCSS local curriculum Conduct collaborative lesson study and reflection based on CCSS integration Select and use high quality differentiated instructional strategies to teach CCSS in core classrooms for all students Use high quality teaching methods to promote CCSS learning in interventions that support core instruction Evaluate and adjust the district/school RtI system based on the CCSS local curriculum Collaboratively develop/select, administer and analyze summative assessments and evaluate the CCSS local curriculum Collaboratively develop/select, administer and analyze benchmark assessments to measure progress on CCSS local curriculum Develop/select, administer and analyze formative assessments to measure progress on CCSS local curriculum Conduct collaborative team studies of student data and progress Design and use measures to gauge progress and effectiveness of interventions based on CCSS local curriculum Investigate, design and implement standards-based grading and reporting systems

Planning, Assessment, Instruction and Reporting

Curriculum and Resources Developed by Wisconsin CESAs in collaboration with the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

CESAs MAKE POSSIBLE THE SCHOOLS WISCONSIN WANTS

Wisconsin Mathematics/ELA Common Core Standards Implementation Plan

Partnerships to Implement Wisconsin Standards

DPI

Multistate Partnerships

IHEs

CESAs

Professional Organizations

LEAs

News Release Education Information Services



125 South Webster Street



P.O. Box 7841



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Wednesday, June 2, 2010 Contact: Patrick Gasper, DPI Communications Officer, (608) 266-3559

Madison, WI 53707-7841



(608) 266-3559

DPI-NR 2010-75 B

Wisconsin adopts Common Core State Standards MADISON — State Superintendent Tony Evers formally adopted the newly released Common Core State Standards for English language arts and mathematics today for Wisconsin.

“Wisconsin is ready to make the Common Core State Standards its academic standards for curriculum, instruction, and assessment,” Evers said. “These standards are aligned with college and career expectations, will ensure academic consistency throughout the state and across other states that adopt them, and have been benchmarked against international standards from high-performing countries.”

Evers exercised his authority under Article X of the Wisconsin Constitution to adopt the standards.

Adoption by the state superintendent is referenced in the state’s Race to the Top application which was sent to the U.S. Department of Education on Tuesday.

The standards for English language arts and mathematics, which became public today (June 2), define the knowledge and skills students should have during their elementary and secondary school education so they are prepared to compete and succeed in the global economy. Wisconsin is a partner state in the Common Core State Standards Initiative and has had on-going involvement in shaping the standards as they were developed, reviewing them, and providing feedback to the project writers.

The process to implement the Common Core State Standards so they improve student achievement requires understanding the content of the standards, developing curriculum that reflects the standards, and then providing resources for teachers to develop lesson plans to teach those standards. The Department of Public Instruction will partner with school districts, universities, and education organizations to provide curriculum models and on-line resources to transition to the Common Core State Standards. Additionally, Wisconsin will work with the SMARTER/Balanced Assessment Consortium to develop high-quality, common assessments that are connected to classroom instruction.

“These English language arts and mathematics standards will serve as a solid foundation to ensure every child is a graduate ready for the workforce or postsecondary studies,” Evers said. “Higher student achievement is

( mo r e)

Wisconsin Adopts Common Core State Standards – Page 2

driven by rigorous standards, high-quality curriculum, and assessments that provide meaningful feedback to improve instruction.”

Wisconsin was an early state in recognizing the need for standards that prepared students for workforce and college expectations. In spring of 2007, business leaders shared their expectations for students who would be graduating in five to 10 years. The state then worked with Achieve’s American Diploma Project and with the Partnership for 21st Century Skills to revise its standards for English language arts and mathematics. Once the Common Core State Standards Initiative was announced, Wisconsin expanded its focus to work with participating states and territories, the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, and the Council of Chief State School Officers to develop the Common Core State Standards.

### NOTE: This news release is available electronically at http://dpi.wi.gov/eis/pdf/dpinr2010_75.pdf. Additional information about the Common Core State Standards Initiative is available at http://www.corestandards.org.

Common Core Standards

Foundations Overview There are three recommended phases of roll-out for full implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

Phase 1 begins with an understanding of the underpinnings and purposes of the CCSS foundations followed by investigations of specific standards.

Phase 2 builds upon this foundation with work in curriculum development and alignment of local resources, assessments and instructional practices.

Phase 3 extends the work into planning, instruction, assessment and reporting of progress.

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

2010-11

2011-12

2012-15

Curriculum & Resources

Planning, Assessment, Instruction & Reporting

Foundations & Investigations

How to Use This Kit This Foundations Kit provides a variety of resources for district leaders to create a common base of understanding about the CCSS. This kit includes a power point presentation, Q & A document, and other resources from the national CCSS center.

These materials are available in both print and electronic formats for your use. Contact your area CESA School Improvement representative for assistance and support with CCSS processes.

CESA Statewide SIS-School Improvement Services May, 2010

1. Mission of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them. The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.

2. Background and History of the Common Core Initiative  Resulted from a voluntary effort on behalf of the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association (NGA) for Best Practices.  Developed by teams of educators and administrators from three primary organizations: Achieve, ACT, and the College Board.  Reviewed by organizations such as: NEA, AFT, International Reading Association (IRA), NCTM, and NCTE.  Wisconsin State Superintendent Tony Evers formally adopted the newly released Common Core State Standards for English language arts and mathematics for Wisconsin on June 2, 2010.

“Wisconsin is ready to make the Common Core State Standards its academic standards for curriculum, instruction, and assessment,” Evers said. “These standards are aligned with college and career expectations, will ensure academic consistency throughout the state and across other states that adopt them, and have been benchmarked against international standards from highperforming countries. These English language arts and mathematics standards will serve as a solid foundation to ensure every child is a graduate ready for the workforce or postsecondary studies,” Evers said. “Higher student achievement is driven by rigorous standards, high-quality curriculum, and assessments that provide meaningful feedback to improve instruction.”

 

Potentially will affect 43.5 million students (87% of student population) in the United States.

Will do away with the process of most states having their own unique set of standards and public education students learning at different levels in each state.

CESA Statewide SIS-School Improvement Services May, 2010

Criteria used to develop the Common Core Standards: 1. Fewer, clearer, and higher 2. Aligned with college and work expectations 3. Include rigorous content and application of knowledge through higher-order skills 4. Build upon strengths and lessons of current state standards 5. Informed by top performing countries to better prepare students for success in a global economy and society 6. Evidenced and/or research-based 7. Realistic and practical for the classroom 8. Consistent across all states

3. Advantages of the Common Core State Standards  The Common Core will help prepare students with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in college and careers.  The Common Core will identify expectations that are consistent for all students.  The Common Core standards have portability when students transition between states.  The Common Core will help provide equal access to a standards-based education.  The Common Core will result in clearer standards that will help students and parents understand what is expected of them; and thus allows for more self-directed learning by students.  While the Common Core specifies the “what” teachers will teach, they will also provide opportunities for teachers to determine “how” they will teach.  The Common Core will allow for more focused pre-service and professional development.

CESA Statewide SIS-School Improvement Services May, 2010

Common Core State Standards Documents Available at: http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards Introduction Application to Students with Disabilities Application to English Language Learners Common Core Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects  English Language Arts Appendix A: Research Supporting Key Elements of the Standards and Glossary of Terms  English Language Arts Appendix B: Text Exemplars and Sample Performance Tasks  Appendix C: Samples of Student Writing Common Core Standards for Mathematics  Appendix A: Designing High School Mathematics Courses

4. The English/Language Arts Standards  The English/Language Arts standards aim to “lay out a vision of what is means to be a literate person in the 21st century.”  Design Elements: o Focus on results rather than means o An integrated model of literacy o Research and media skills integrated into standards as a whole o Shared responsibility for students’ literacy development o A progression of writing toward college and career readiness

The Common Core Standards for English Language and Literacy Portrait of a Literate Student College and Career Readiness (CCR) Anchor Standards Grade Specific Standards (K-5 section; 6-8 section; 9-10 & 11-12 section)  Reading (Literature)  Reading (Informational Text)  Writing  Speaking and Listening  Language Reading Foundational Skills (K-3) Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science and Technical Subjects (6-12)

CESA Statewide SIS-School Improvement Services May, 2010



Portrait of a Literate Student: o They demonstrate independence. o They build strong content knowledge. o They respond to varying demands of audience, task, purpose, and discipline. o They comprehend as well as critique. o They value evidence. o They use technology and digital media strategically and capably. o They come to understand other perspectives and cultures.

5. The Mathematics Standards.  The Mathematics standards attempt to avoid the charge of “mile wide, inch deep” treatment of mathematics. The standards carve out key ideas and emphasize conceptual understanding and place a priority on students’ ability to explain math problems, not simply compute them.  The Mathematics standards define “what a student should understand and be able to do.” They were designed around how students develop mathematical concepts (e.g., functions, number sense, geometry).

The Common Core Standards for Mathematics Mathematics Practices Grade Specific Standards (K-5 section; 6-8 section; High school section)  Narrative  Domain and Cluster  Standard High school standards specify the mathematics all students should learn in order to be college and career ready.

Notations for the “modeling standard” and for standards beyond College and Career Readiness

CESA Statewide SIS-School Improvement Services May, 2010



Standards for Mathematical Practice: o Attend to precision. o Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others. o Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. o Look for and make use of structure. o Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning. o Reason abstractly and quantitatively. o Model with mathematics. o Use appropriate tools strategically.

6. Considerations      

Teachers in grade level and department teams will need to collaborate as they investigate the CCSS in 2010-11.

All administrators and coordinators must become very familiar with the standards and participate in investigation of the CCSS. Districts should not rush into alignment, but use this first year to investigate the standards and allow vendors to work on adapting materials for the CCSS. The CCSS is the basis for the upcoming new Wisconsin state assessment.

The CCSS will “retool” teaching and learning.

The CCSS will result in evaluation and modification of policies and practices needed to help students and educators meet the standards.

CESA Statewide SIS-School Improvement Services May, 2010

Introduction to the Common Core State Standards June 2, 2010 The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) are pleased to present the final Kindergarten-12 Common Core State Standards documents that our organizations have produced on behalf of 48 states, two territories, and the District of Columbia. These English language arts and mathematics standards represent a set of expectations for student knowledge and skills that high school graduates need to master to succeed in college and careers.

To develop these standards, CCSSO and the NGA Center worked with representatives from participating states, a wide range of educators, content experts, researchers, national organizations, and community groups. These final standards reflect the invaluable feedback from the general public, teachers, parents, business leaders, states, and content area experts and are informed by the standards of other high performing nations.

You will notice that the college- and career-readiness standards have been incorporated into the K-12 standards, as was promised in the March 10, 2010 draft. The criteria that we used to develop the college- and career-readiness standards, as well as these K-12 standards are: Aligned with college and work expectations; Include rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order skills; Build upon strengths and lessons of current state standards; Informed by top-performing countries, so that all students are prepared to succeed in our global economy and society; and, Evidence and/or research-based.

The following links provide more information about the criteria and considerations for standards development. The standards development process has incorporated the best practices and research from across the nation and the world. While we have used all available research to shape these documents, we recognize that there is more to be learned about the most essential knowledge for student success. As new research is conducted and we evaluate the implementation of the common core standards, we plan to revise the standards on a set review cycle.

Our organizations would like to thank our advisory group, which provides advice and guidance on this initiative. Additional thanks are also given to the writers of the standards, who devoted countless weekends and late nights to ensuring that the standards meet the high expectations for rigor and clarity.

Retrieved August 15, 2010 from: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/ccssi-introduction.pdf

Common Core State Standards Initiative Standards-Setting Criteria The following criteria guided the standards development workgroups in setting the draft college and career readiness standards.

Preamble: The Common Core State Standards define the rigorous skills and knowledge in English Language Arts and Mathematics that need to be effectively taught and learned for students to be ready to succeed academically in credit-bearing, college-entry courses and in workforce training programs. These standards have been developed to be: Fewer, clearer, and higher, to best drive effective policy and practice; Aligned with college and work expectations, so that all students are prepared for success upon graduating from high school; Inclusive of rigorous content and applications of knowledge through higher-order skills, so that all students are prepared for the 21st century; Internationally benchmarked, so that all students are prepared for succeeding in our global economy and society; and Research and evidence-based.

The standards intend to set forward thinking goals for student performance based in evidence about what is required for success. The standards developed will set the stage for US education not just beyond next year, but for the next decade, and they must ensure all American students are prepared for the global economic workplace. Furthermore, the standards created will not lower the bar but raise it for all students; as such, we cannot narrow the college-ready focus of the standards to just preparation of students for college algebra and English composition and therefore will seek to ensure all students are prepared for all entry-level, credit-bearing, academic college courses in English, mathematics, the sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities. The objective is for all students to enter these classes ready for success (defined for these purposes as a C or better).

Goal: The standards as a whole must be essential, rigorous, clear and specific, coherent, and internationally benchmarked.

Essential: The standards must be reasonable in scope in defining the knowledge and skills students should have to be ready to succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing, academic college courses and in workforce training programs.

Workforce training programs pertain to careers that: 1) Offer competitive, livable salaries above the poverty line 2) Offer opportunities for career advancement 3) Are in a growing or sustainable industry College refers to two- and four-year postsecondary schools.

Entry-level credit-bearing, academic college courses (e.g. English, mathematics, sciences, social sciences, humanities)

Rigorous: The standards will include high-level cognitive demands by asking students to demonstrate deep conceptual understanding through the application of content knowledge and skills to new situations.

High-level cognitive demand includes reasoning, justification, synthesis, analysis, and problemsolving.

Clear and Specific: The standards should provide sufficient guidance and clarity so that they are teachable, learnable, and measurable. The standards will also be clear and understandable to the general public.

Quality standards are precise and provide sufficient detail to convey the level of performance expected without being overly prescriptive. (the “what” not the “how”). The standards should maintain a relatively consistent level of grain size.

Teachable and learnable: Provide sufficient guidance for the design of curricula and instructional materials. The standards must be reasonable in scope, instructionally manageable, and promote depth of understanding.

The standards will not prescribe how they are taught and learned but will allow teachers flexibility to teach and students to learn in various instructionally relevant contexts.

Measureable: Student attainment of the standards should be observable and verifiable and the standards can be used to develop broader assessment frameworks Coherent: The standards should convey a unified vision of the big ideas and supporting concepts within a discipline and reflect a progression of learning that is meaningful and appropriate.

Grade-by-grade standards: The standards will have limited repetition across the grades or grade spans to help educators align instruction to the standards.

Internationally benchmarked: The standards will be informed by the content, rigor, and organization of standards of high-performing countries so that all students are prepared for succeeding in our global economy and society.

Retrieved August 15, 2010 from: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Criteria.pdf

Application to Students with Disabilities The Common Core State Standards articulate rigorous grade-level expectations in the areas of mathematics and English language arts.. These standards identify the knowledge and skills students need in order to be successful in college and careers.

Students with disabilities ―students eligible under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)―must be challenged to excel within the general curriculum and be prepared for success in their post-school lives, including college and/or careers. These common standards provide an historic opportunity to improve access to rigorous academic content standards for students with disabilities. The continued development of understanding about research-based instructional practices and a focus on their effective implementation will help improve access to mathematics and English language arts (ELA) standards for all students, including those with disabilities.

Students with disabilities are a heterogeneous group with one common characteristic: the presence of disabling conditions that significantly hinder their abilities to benefit from general education (IDEA 34 CFR §300.39, 2004). Therefore, how these high standards are taught and assessed is of the utmost importance in reaching this diverse group of students.

In order for students with disabilities to meet high academic standards and to fully demonstrate their conceptual and procedural knowledge and skills in mathematics, reading, writing, speaking and listening (English language arts), their instruction must incorporate supports and accommodations, including: Supports and related services designed to meet the unique needs of these students and to enable their access to the general education curriculum (IDEA 34 CFR §300.34, 2004).

An Individualized Education Program (IEP)1 which includes annual goals aligned with and chosen to facilitate their attainment of grade-level academic standards.

Teachers and specialized instructional support personnel who are prepared and qualified to deliver high-quality, evidence-based, individualized instruction and support services.

Promoting a culture of high expectations for all students is a fundamental goal of the Common Core State Standards. In order to participate with success in the general curriculum, students with disabilities, as appropriate, may be provided additional supports and services, such as: Instructional supports for learning― based on the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL)2 ―which foster student engagement by presenting information in multiple ways and allowing for diverse avenues of action and expression.

Instructional accommodations (Thompson, Morse, Sharpe & Hall, 2005) ―changes in materials or procedures― which do not change the standards but allow students to learn within the framework of the Common Core.

Assistive technology devices and services to ensure access to the general education curriculum and the Common Core State Standards.

Some students with the most significant cognitive disabilities will require substantial supports and accommodations to have meaningful access to certain standards in both instruction and assessment, based on their communication and academic needs. These supports and accommodations should ensure that students receive access to multiple means of learning and opportunities to demonstrate knowledge, but retain the rigor and high expectations of the Common Core State Standards.

References

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 34 CFR §300.34 (a). (2004).

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 34 CFR §300.39 (b)(3). (2004).

Thompson, Sandra J., Amanda B. Morse, Michael Sharpe, and Sharon Hall. “Accommodations Manual: How to Select, Administer and Evaluate Use of Accommodations and Assessment for Students with Disabilities,” 2nd Edition. Council for Chief State School Officers, 2005 http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/AccommodationsManual.pdf . (Accessed January, 29, 2010).

1 According

to IDEA, an IEP includes appropriate accommodations that are necessary to measure the individual achievement and functional performance of a child 2 UDL is defined as “a scientifically valid framework for guiding educational practice that (a) provides flexibility in the ways information is presented, in the ways students respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and in the ways students are engaged; and (b) reduces barriers in instruction, provides appropriate accommodations, supports, and challenges, and maintains high achievement expectations for all students, including students with disabilities and students who are limited English proficient.” by Higher Education Opportunity Act (PL 110-135)

Retrieved August 15, 2010 from: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/application-to-students-with-disabilities.pdf

Application of Common Core State Standards for English Language Learners The National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers strongly believe that all students should be held to the same high expectations outlined in the Common Core State Standards. This includes students who are English language learners (ELLs). However, these students may require additional time, appropriate instructional support, and aligned assessments as they acquire both English language proficiency and content area knowledge.

ELLs are a heterogeneous group with differences in ethnic background, first language, socioeconomic status, quality of prior schooling, and levels of English language proficiency.

Effectively educating these students requires diagnosing each student instructionally, adjusting instruction accordingly, and closely monitoring student progress. For example, ELLs who are literate in a first language that shares cognates with English can apply first-language vocabulary knowledge when reading in English; likewise ELLs with high levels of schooling can often bring to bear conceptual knowledge developed in their first language when reading in English.

However, ELLs with limited or interrupted schooling will need to acquire background knowledge prerequisite to educational tasks at hand. Additionally, the development of native like proficiency in English takes many years and will not be achieved by all ELLs especially if they start schooling in the US in the later grades. Teachers should recognize that it is possible to achieve the standards for reading and literature, writing & research, language development and speaking & listening without manifesting native-like control of conventions and vocabulary.

English Language Arts The Common Core State Standards for English language arts (ELA) articulate rigorous gradelevel expectations in the areas of speaking, listening, reading, and writing to prepare all students to be college and career ready, including English language learners. Second-language learners also will benefit from instruction about how to negotiate situations outside of those settings so they are able to participate on equal footing with native speakers in all aspects of social, economic, and civic endeavors.

ELLs bring with them many resources that enhance their education and can serve as resources for schools and society. Many ELLs have first language and literacy knowledge and skills that boost their acquisition of language and literacy in a second language; additionally, they bring an array of talents and cultural practices and perspectives that enrich our schools and society.

Teachers must build on this enormous reservoir of talent and provide those students who need it with additional time and appropriate instructional support. This includes language proficiency standards that teachers can use in conjunction with the ELA standards to assist ELLs in becoming proficient and literate in English. To help ELLs meet high academic standards in language arts it is essential that they have access to: Teachers and personnel at the school and district levels who are well prepared and qualified to support ELLs while taking advantage of the many strengths and skills they bring to the classroom; Literacy-rich school environments where students are immersed in a variety of language experiences; Instruction that develops foundational skills in English and enables ELLs to participate fully in grade-level coursework;

Coursework that prepares ELLs for postsecondary education or the workplace, yet is made comprehensible for students learning content in a second language (through specific pedagogical techniques and additional resources); Opportunities for classroom discourse and interaction that are well-designed to enable ELLs to develop communicative strengths in language arts; Ongoing assessment and feedback to guide learning; and Speakers of English who know the language well enough to provide ELLs with models and support.

Mathematics ELLs are capable of participating in mathematical discussions as they learn English.

Mathematics instruction for ELL students should draw on multiple resources and modes available in classrooms— such as objects, drawings, inscriptions, and gestures—as well as home languages and mathematical experiences outside of school. Mathematics instruction for ELLs should address mathematical discourse and academic language. This instruction involves much more than vocabulary lessons. Language is a resource for learning mathematics; it is not only a tool for communicating, but also a tool for thinking and reasoning mathematically. All languages and language varieties (e.g., different dialects, home or everyday ways of talking, vernacular, slang) provide resources for mathematical thinking, reasoning, and communicating.

Regular and active participation in the classroom—not only reading and listening but also discussing, explaining, writing, representing, and presenting—is critical to the success of ELLs in mathematics. Research has shown that ELLs can produce explanations, presentations, etc. and participate in classroom discussions as they are learning English.

ELLs, like English-speaking students, require regular access to teaching practices that are most effective for improving student achievement. Mathematical tasks should be kept at high cognitive demand; teachers and students should attend explicitly to concepts; and students should wrestle with important mathematics.

Overall, research suggests that: Language switching can be swift, highly automatic, and facilitate rather than inhibit solving word problems in the second language, as long as the student’s language proficiency is sufficient for understanding the text of the word problem; Instruction should ensure that students understand the text of word problems before they attempt to solve them; Instruction should include a focus on “mathematical discourse” and “academic language” because these are important for ELLs. Although it is critical that students who are learning English have opportunities to communicate mathematically, this is not primarily a matter of learning vocabulary. Students learn to participate in mathematical reasoning, not by learning vocabulary, but by making conjectures, presenting explanations, and/or constructing arguments; and While vocabulary instruction is important, it is not sufficient for supporting mathematical communication. Furthermore, vocabulary drill and practice are not the most effective instructional practices for learning vocabulary. Research has demonstrated that vocabulary learning occurs most successfully through instructional environments that are language-rich, actively involve students in using language, require that students both understand spoken or written words and also express that understanding orally and in writing, and require students to use words in multiple ways over extended periods of time. To develop written and oral communication skills, students need to participate in

negotiating meaning for mathematical situations and in mathematical practices that require output from students.

Retrieved August 15, 2010 from: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/application-for-english-learners.pdf

Tony Evers, PhD, State Superintendent

PO Box 7841, Madison, WI 53707-7841  125 South Webster Street, Madison, WI 53703 (608) 266-3390  (800) 441-4563 toll free  (608) 267-1052 fax  (608) 267-2427 tdd  dpi.wi.gov

Updated July 30, 2010

Updated July 30, 2010

14. How are other resources and appendices accessed?

Updated July 30, 2010