the PPT - Center for Public Education

Report
The Common Core
State Standards
Focus for School
Board Members
NSBA webinar ♦ March 6, 2012
Center for Public Education
Kentucky School Boards Association
Today’s presenters
• Patte Barth, NSBA’s Center for Public Education
• Roberta Stanley, NSBA’s federal relations
• Bill Scott, Kentucky School Boards Association
• Kerri Schelling, KSBA
The Common Core Standards are
intended to be:
• Aligned with college and work expectations
• Focused and coherent
• Include rigorous content and application of knowledge
through high-order skills
• Build upon strengths and lessons of current state
standards
• Internationally benchmarked so that all students are
prepared to succeed in our global economy and society
• Based on evidence and research
• State led – coordinated by NGA Center and CCSSO
SOURCE: Common Core State Standards, www.corestandards.org
3
The Common Core Standards process:
• CCSSO and NGA’s Center for Best Practices
• Advisory group: Achieve, Inc.; ACT, Inc.; College
Board, NASBE, and SHEEO
• Two rounds of public review
• Final documents released June 2010
• No federal dollars for development; foundation support
46 states & DC have adopted
the CCSS
adopted
not
adopted
5
CCSS vs NCLB
Common Core State Standards
No Child Left Behind
INFLEXIBLE on CONTENT
states must adopt 100% of CCSS K-12
standards
FLEXIBLE on CONTENT
states define their own standards
INFLEXIBLE on ASSESSMENT
must begin assessments on CCSS within
three years
INFLEXIBLE on ASSESSMENT
must assess state standards yearly 3-8
and once in high school
FLEXIBLE on ACCOUNTABILITY
no requirements for public accountability
INFLEXIBLE on ACCOUNTABILITY
numerous provisions
NSBA & CCSS
• supports NGA/CCSSO state-led process
• supports federal funding for research and/or
help to states for developing assessments
• opposes federal mandates or coercion, eg. a
condition for receiving Title 1 funds
• opposes a national test
What’s in the standards –
English language arts
Reading
• Balance of literature and informational texts
• Text complexity
Writing
• Emphasis on argument/informative
• Writing about sources
Speaking and Listening
• Inclusion of formal and informal talk
Language
• Stress on general academic and domain-specific
vocabulary
SOURCE: Common Core Standards, June 2010
What’s different? English
language arts
Standards for reading and writing in history/
social studies, science, and technical subjects
• Complement rather than replace content standards
in those subjects
• Responsibility of teachers in those subjects
Alignment with college and career readiness
expectations
SOURCE: Common Core Standards, June 2010
What’s in the standards –
Mathematics
•
•
•
•
•
•
Number & quantity
Algebra - algebraic thinking K-5
Functions
Modeling - high school
Geometry
Statistics & probability
• Emphasis on Mathematical practice
SOURCE: Common Core Standards, June 2010
What’s different? –
Mathematics
Modeling -- choosing and using mathematics and
statistics to represent and analyze everyday situations to
understand them better
Eg., planning a table tennis tournament for 7 players with 4
tables and everyone plays each player
SOURCE: Common Core Standards, June 2010
pre-calculus, calculus, advanced
statistics, discrete math, advanced
quantitative reasoning, specific
technical POS
Pathways
through
high school
mathematics
•
•
•
•
Algebra II
Math III
Geometry
Math II
Algebra I
Math I
Traditional sequence
Integrated sequence
2 algebra courses
1 geometry course
DPS included
1 higher course
SOURCE: Common Core Standards, Mathematics Appendix A, 2010
• 3 integrated courses
• all include number,
algebra, geometry, DPS
• 1 higher course
State CCSS
assessment consortia
• formed to develop common “next generation”
assessments aligned to the CCSS
• supported by $346 million federal grants
• PARCC: Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for
College & Careers headed by Achieve, Inc.
• SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium headed by
Washington state department of education
13
What’s in common?
• intended to assess higher order thinking at grades 3-8
and high school
• measure growth and proficiency
• computer-administered online to provide rapid feedback
• both summative assessments for accountability, and
formative assessments to monitor students’ progress
• aligned resources, ie., model lessons, diagnostic tools,
professional development
14
How do PARCC/SMARTER differ?
• PARCC is computer-delivered; SMARTER will be
“computer adaptive”
• SMARTER is developing comprehensive high school
assessment; PARCC is developing EOC high school
assessments, including for two math pathways
• SMARTER is budgeted to translate assessments into 5
languages, one of which will be Spanish
15
Points of collaboration
SMARTER & PARCC
• working to ensure comparability of scores
• developing protocols for Artificial Intelligent scoring
• examining interoperable technology infrastructure
• working toward same deadlines
16
SOURCE: Center for K-12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS, webinar April 4, 2011
24 states & DC are in the PARCC
consortium
participant
non
participant
17
28 states are in the SMARTER
consortium
participant
non
participant
18
46 states & DC are involved
involved
not
involved
19
Next Generation Science
Standards
• Collaboration of Achieve, NRC, AAAS, NSTA and 26
lead states
• “Internationally benchmarked”
• First draft to be released in 2012; 2 public reviews
• Intended to be adopted ‘in whole’
• Carnegie Corp, Noyce Foundation & Dupont sponsors
20
What will be in the standards
Science
• Practices: behaviors necessary to
the work of scientists & engineers
• Cross-cutting concepts: the ‘big
ideas’, eg., patterns, scale, cause
& effect, etc.
• Disciplinary core ideas: physical
sciences; life sciences, earth &
space sciences; and engineering,
technology & applications.
21
SOURCE: Next Generation Science Standards, www.nextgenscience.org
26 lead states – Next Generation
Science Standards
participant
non
participant
22
Other assessment consortia
• Alternative assessments: $67 million to Dynamic
Learning Maps (DLM) and National Center and State
Collaboration (NCSC)
– Assessments for students with “most significant cognitive
impairments”
• Assessments for ELL: $10.5 million to ASSETS,
Assessment Services Supporting Els Through
Technology Systems
SOURCE: The K-12 Center at ETS, www.k12center.org
23
The Common Core
State Standards
The
challenges
ACT’s ‘first look’ at the common
core standards
English language arts
Percent of 2009 11th graders scoring at college-career ready benchmark
25
SOURCE: ACT, Inc., A First Look at the Common Core and College and Career Readiness, December 2010
ACT’s ‘first look’
Achievement gap - ELA
Percent of 2009 11th graders scoring at college-career ready benchmark
26
SOURCE: ACT, Inc., A First Look at the Common Core and College and Career Readiness, December 2010
Technology needs
•
•
•
•
•
33 states offer some level of online testing
Most don’t assess all students
Most are voluntary
Most are summative only
Most schools will need more computers &
more bandwidth
SOURCE: SETDA, Technology Requirements for Large Scale, Computer-Based & Online Assessment, June 2011
27
District needs
•
•
•
•
Professional development for staff
Aligned assessments & curriculum
Aligned instructional materials
Supports for students
28
The Common Core
State Standards
How states
are preparing
State survey
• Most states say CCSS are more rigorous than their
current standards
• Most states say full implementation will take at least until
2013 or beyond
• All are developing professional development materials &
guides for districts
SOURCE: Year 2 of implementing common core state standards: States’ progress and challenges, Center on Education Policy, January 2012
State survey (con’t)
• Most states have established partnerships between state
education agency and higher ed
• Half are aligning undergraduate admissions policies with
CCSS
SOURCE: Year 2 of implementing common core state standards: States’ progress and challenges, Center on Education Policy, January 2012
School district challenges
• Almost 3/5 of districts in CCSS states view CCSS as
more rigorous
• 2/3 are developing plans and timelines
• 3/4 view adequate funding as a major challenge
• 2/3 say they are getting inadequate guidance from state
• Few see teacher/principal resistance as a major
challenge although 3/5 see it as a minor one
SOURCE: Common Core State Standards: Progress and Challenges in School Districts’ Implementation, Center on Education Policy,
September 2011
The Common Core
State Standards
The federal
view
Federal Policy and CCSS
Race to the Top
• One of four reform areas: standards & assessments.
• States do not have to adopt common standards to be eligible; but
get points for doing so, more points for joining larger consortium
(e.g. CCSSO/NGA).
• Points for supporting transition to new standards/assessments.
• Same criteria applied to assessments.
• Make up 70 points of 500 points total.
• 11 states and DC received RTTT funds (I and II), 9 more states
eligible for phase III.
Federal Policy and CCSS
NCLB waivers
• ED announced waivers 9-23-2011.
• 10 broad areas of flexibility include: waive 2014 deadline of 100%
proficiency; waive identification of schools for improvement; free up
20% set-aside for choice and tutoring, 10% for professional
development, etc.
• In exchange for four reform principles, include: develop and
implement rigorous college- & career-ready standards &
assessments in reading & math.
• Adopt English language proficiency standards aligned to new
standards and assessments.
• Flexibility through 2013-2014 school year, can apply for extension.
Federal Policy and CCSS
College- and career- ready standards must be:
• Standards that are common to a significant number of states (states
can supplement up to 15% with additional standards for a content
area); or
• Standards that are approved by a “state network of institutions of
higher education”, certify students will not need remedial courses (a
network of 4-year IHEs that enroll at least 50% of students who
attend state’s 4-year public IHEs).
High quality assessments must be:
• Valid, reliable and fair; measure college & career readiness.
• Measure student growth.

Passage of Senate Bill 1 in 2009 propelled Kentucky
into a new era in public education

Mutual accountability for K-12 and post secondary
systems

Preparing all students for life after high school…
◦ college and career readiness for all.
37
Senate Bill 1 (2009)
38
 New academic standards
 New assessments
 Program reviews
 Improved professional
development
 New accountability system
 Unified plan for improving
college/career readiness
38



90% of fastest growing jobs require at least
two (2) years of education beyond high
school.
80% of all jobs require some training beyond
high school.
Nation’s colleges need to increase number of
degrees by 10% per year to meet demand.
Kentucky = 5,200 more graduates per year
39



High School Graduation Rate = 76%
38 % of Kentucky’s 2011 high school
graduates were College or Career Ready
High remediation rate = fewer college
degrees
40

Added cost with no credits

Adds time/expense to college education

Result: more likely to leave w/o diploma

College freshmen requiring remedial reading
have 17% chance of attaining degree in 8
years
41
College Ready Criteria
Must meet one of the following requirements
to be considered College Ready:
 ACT (11th Grade)
 English – 18
 Mathematics – 19
 Reading – 20
 COMPASS (12th Grade)
 KYOTE (12th Grade)
42
College Readiness System
ACT’s College Readiness Benchmarks* are early indicators of likely
college success based on student EXPLORE, PLAN, or ACT scores.
Test
Content Area
English
English
EXPLORE
PLAN
8th
10th
13
15
Math
Algebra
17
19
19
Reading
Social Sciences 15
17
20
Science
Biology
21
24
20
ACT
11th
18
* Reflects the minimum score needed on an ACT subject area test to indicate a 50%
chance of obtaining a “B” or better or a 75% chance of obtaining a “C” or better in the
corresponding credit-bearing college course.
43
Career Ready Criteria
Must meet one benchmark for academic area and
one for technical area.
 Academic:
a) Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery
(ASVAB)
b) ACT Work Keys (applied math, locating
information and reading for information)
 Technical:
a) Kentucky Occupational Skills
Standards Assessment
(KOSSA)
b) Industry certificates
44
1. Course/Assessment Alignment with Standards
2. Transitional Interventions
3. Acceleration
o Advance KY
o Project Lead the Way
4. Persistence to Graduation –Collection and Use of Data
5. Academic and Career Advising
6. Career Readiness Definition/Pathways
7. Innovative Routes To Graduation
8. District 180/Turnaround Low Performing Schools
9. New Accountability Model
45



10 years of research by Iowa Association
of School Boards and NSBA
Do school boards make a difference in
student achievement?
What are the specific board roles that
impact student achievement?

Set clear and high expectations

Create the conditions for success

Hold the system accountable

Create the public will to succeed

Learn as a board team

Embrace the new standards!
−
−

Clearer and more rigorous
Focused on specific knowledge and skills
necessary for postsecondary success
How much does your board know about
new standards?

Support high quality professional
development
−
−
Do teachers have sufficient time and
support to learn new standards?
What can the board do to support this
effort?
Monitor district’s progress toward successful
implementation of the new standards

What is the district doing to prepare?

What kind of reports does the board receive?


Help public understand significance of new
standards
Engage local media in your efforts


Include relevant topics on board agendas &
work sessions
Use multiple sources of information
⁻
Kentucky Department of Education
₋
Kentucky Educational Television
₋
Prichard Committee – “Ready Kentucky”

Partnerships with state agencies and
organizations (accurate/timely/consistent
information)

Whole board training modules

Statewide training opportunities

Facilitation of community discussions
Bill Scott, executive director
[email protected]
Kerri Schelling, director, board team development
[email protected]
Kentucky School Boards Association
www.ksba.org
Learn more
NSBA resources
Race to the Top
www.nsba.org/economicstimulus
NCLB waivers
Conference calls, weekly highlights, Webinar
www.nsba.org/advocacy
[email protected]
U.S. Department of Education Website
http://www.ed.gov/esea/flexibility
Watch this space
www.centerforpubliceducation.org
or contact
Patte Barth, [email protected]

similar documents