Created by NWRESD Data Quality Project
CCSS Stewardship Committee2013
Created by NWRESD Data Quality Project
EQuip NetworkCommon Core Stewardship Committee
Purpose: To assure that lessons & units are aligned to Common Core State Standards and focused on depth of instruction using common criteria to determine quality.
Objectives:
Review lessons/units using the Quality Review Rubric
Provide rating, suggestions and comments for lesson developer
Common Core Stewardship Committee Common Core Stewardship Committee Professional Development Plan-OregonProfessional Development Plan-OregonContent Knowledge Instruction Assessment
Understand the coherence of the CCSS standards and how the concepts and skills progress, build, and connect with one another
Design units and lessons that support every student in meeting the math & ELA content and practice standards
Create and use formative assessments to examine student learning and monitor progress in order to meet individual needs of students and to challenge students exceeding benchmark
Understand the student learning requirements and be able to describe the expectations in terms of student actions-what does it look like when a student demonstrates the knowledge and skills stated in the standards?
Implement evidence-based instructional strategies that scaffold learning to ensure students meet the rigor of the CCSS, and differentiate instruction to support the growth of each student
Design tasks and experiences at the appropriate level of rigor that will enable students to demonstrate proficiency through a variety of responses
Common Core Stewardship Committee Common Core Stewardship Committee Professional Development PlanProfessional Development PlanContent Knowledge Instruction Assessment
Develop an understanding of the major shifts between Oregon Standards and the CCSS (Building leaders)
Provide dedicated and consistent teaming time to design units, select research-based instructional strategies, and assess learning (Building leaders)
Use assessment data to determine instructional gaps and to conduct program evaluation at the building & district level (Building & District)
Create, monitor and support focused opportunities for teachers to collaborate across grade levels to discuss student learning progress (Building leaders)
Provide professional development to ensure staff acquires the knowledge and skills needed to design and implement assessments to monitor student progress and inform instruction (District)
Conduct professional development to help teachers develop the knowledge and skills needed to design instruction and assessments that meet the rigor of the CCSS (District)
Ensure that district instructional materials are coherent, consistent, comprehensive and support shifts in CCSS (District)
Equip Network
History of the History of the Development of the Development of the
Quality Review Quality Review RubricRubric
Four Dimensions of the Four Dimensions of the Quality Review RubricQuality Review Rubric
I. Alignment to the Depth
II. Key Shifts in the CCSS
III. Instructional and Supports
IV. Assessment
Quality Review Steps for Quality Review Steps for Individuals or GroupsIndividuals or Groups
Step 1-Review Materials
Step 2-Apply criteria in Dimension I: Alignment
Note- Dimension I is non-negotiable. In order for the review to continue,
a rating of 2 or 3 is required.
Step 3-Apply criteria in Dimensions II-IV
Step 4-Apply overall Rating and Summary Comments
Step 5-Compare Overall Ratings & Determine Next Steps
1. Common Core: Before beginning a review, all members of a review team are familiar with the Common Core Standards.
2. Inquiry: Review processes emphasize inquiry rather than advocacy and are organized in steps around a set of guiding questions.
3. Respect & Commitment: Each member of a review team is respected as a valued colleague and contributor who makes a commitment to the EQuIP
process.
4. Criteria & Evidence: All observations, judgments, discussions, and recommendations are criterion- and evidence-based.
5. Constructive: Lessons/units to be reviewed are seen as “works in progress.” Reviewers are respectful of contributors’ work and make constructive observations and suggestions based on evidence
from the work.
6. Individual to Collective: Each member of a review team independently records his/her observations prior to discussion. Discussions focus on understanding all reviewers’ interpretations of the criteria and the evidence they have found.
7. Understanding & Agreement: The goal of the process is to compare and eventually calibrate our judgments so that we move toward agreement
about CCSS Quality.
Quality Review Principles & AgreementsQuality Review Principles & Agreements
Targets standardsText complexity
Integration
VocabularyVocabularyText structuresText structuresLevels of meaning
Levels of meaningQualitative characteristics
Qualitative characteristics
Step 1 - Review MaterialsStep 1 - Review Materials
• Record the grade and title of the lesson/unit on the recording form: scan to see what the lesson/unit contains and how it is organized
• Read key materials related to instruction, assessment and teacher guidance
• Study and measure the text(s) that serve as a centerpiece for the lesson/unit analyzing text complexity, quality, scope, and relationship to instruction
• Identify the grade level CCSS that the lesson/unit targets
• Closely examine the materials through the “lens” of each criterion
• Individually check each criterion for which clear and substantial evidence is found
Step 2 - Apply CriteriaStep 2 - Apply Criteria
• Identify and record input on specific improvements that might be made to meet criteria of strengthen alignment
• Optional* Enter your rating 0-3 for Dimension I alignment
Note: Note: Dimension I is non-negotiable and a rating of 2 or 3 is required for the review to continue. If the review is discontinued, consider giving general feedback to developers/teachers regarding next steps
Step 2 - Apply CriteriaStep 2 - Apply Criteria
Check criteria for which clear evidence is found
Make observations and suggestions in relation to criteria and evidence.
Determine a dimension rating based on checked criteria and observations.
Determine Alignment rating and continuation of review
Note: For Integrated Intervention Team purposes, you may decide to continue the review in cases of weak alignment.
Dimension I: Alignment Dimension I: Alignment to Depth of CCSSto Depth of CCSS
Compare Observations, Feedback, Compare Observations, Feedback, and Ratingsand Ratings
• What is the pattern within our team in terms of the criteria we have checked?
• Do our observations and feedback reference the criteria and evidence (or lack of evidence) in the instructional materials?
• Does our feedback include suggested improvement(s)?
The lesson/unit addresses the key shifts in the CCSS:Reading Text Closely: Makes reading text(s) closely, examining textual evidence, and discerning deep meaning a central focus of instruction.
Text-Based Evidence: Facilitates rich and rigorous evidence-based discussions and writing about common texts through a sequence of specific, thought-provoking, and text-dependent questions (including, when applicable, questions about illustrations, charts, diagrams, audio/video, and media).
Writing from Sources: Routinely expects that students draw evidence from texts to produce clear and coherent writing that informs, explains, or makes an argument in various written forms (notes, summaries, short responses, or formal essays).
Academic Vocabulary: Focuses on building students’ academic vocabulary in context throughout instruction.
Dimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSSDimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSS
• Apply criterion in Dimensions II-IVII. Key Shifts in the CCSS
III. Instructional Supports
IV. Assessment
Closely examine the criterion through the “lens” of each criterion
Record comments on criteria met, improvements needed and then rate 0-3
Step 3 - Continue Step 3 - Continue Application of CriteriaApplication of Criteria
Research- based
EngagementEngagement
Instructional expectationsInstructional expectations
Engage with textEngage with text
Productive StruggleProductive Struggle
Appropriate SupportsAppropriate Supports
ExtensionsExtensions
Check criteria for which clear evidence is found
Make observations suggestions in relation to criteria and evidence
Determine a dimension rating based on checked criteria and observations
Dimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSSDimension II: Key Shifts in the CCSS
Check criteria for which clear evidence is found
Make observations and suggestions in relation to criteria and evidence
Determine a dimension rating based on checked criteria and observations
Dimension III: Instructional Supports Dimension III: Instructional Supports
Assessments:Assessments:
Pre-post Pre-post
FormativeFormative
Summative Summative
Self-assessmentsSelf-assessments
Observable evidence of learningProficiency
Aligned rubrics & scoring guides
Check criteria for which clear evidence is found
Make observations and suggestions in relation to criteria and evidence
Determine a dimension rating based on checked criteria and observations
Dimension IV: AssessmentDimension IV: Assessment
• Review ratings for Dimensions I-IV adding/clarifying comments as needed
• Write summary comments for your overall rating on your recording sheet
• Total dimension ratings and record overall ratingsEE=Exemplar
E/IE/I=Exemplar if improved
RR=Revision needed
NN=Not ready to review
Step 4 - Overall RatingStep 4 - Overall Rating
Note:Note:
1.Evidence cited to arrive at final rating
2.Summary comments
3.Similarities & differences among raters
Step 5 - SummaryStep 5 - Summary
Then:Then:
• Recommend next steps for the lesson/unit
• Provide recommendations for improvement and/or ratings to developers/teachers
Step 5 - Next StepsStep 5 - Next Steps
Overall Rating:Overall Rating:
What does the creator of the lesson/unit need to know to improve the design?
Which number on the rating scale best describes the current analysis of the lesson/unit?
32
How is this rubric being used in Oregon?How is this rubric being used in Oregon?
Teacher lesson and unit review
Teacher lesson and unit development
Data team and professional learning community collaboration
District instructional materials review and selection
State instructional materials review and adoption process
Extensions: Extensions: Using the Quality Review RubricUsing the Quality Review Rubric
• Curriculum materials selection process criteria
• PLC/Data team data collection
• Guide for lesson/unit development
• Review of newly created materials
• Review of existing materials
• Screening materials to post on websites
• Quality control/quality assurance of vendor-developed materials
• Training educators
Educators Evaluating Quality Instructional Products (EQuIP) Network, facilitated by Achieve
Oregon Department of Education (ODE)
ELA and Literacy Criteria Development Committee
ODE Educational Improvement and Innovation Steering Committee
Clackamas Education Service District
Northwest Regional Education Service District
Salem-Keizer School District
Student Achievement Partners
Oregon CCSS Stewardship Committee
Tri-state Collaborative - Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New York Departments of Education
Special Thanks: Special Thanks: Oregon Data ProjectOregon Data Project