Eldred Central School DistrictCOMMON CORE PRESENTATION

The controversy

The debate happening now, often simplified to a debate over the Common Core, began as federal officials passed legislation creating higher standards for American students attending public schools.Under the Obama administration, the Race to the Top law incentivized states to adopt the standards. The standards the states then created are called the Common Core.State education departments then began to roll out assessments designed to test for the Common Core. In many states, including New York, test results were tied to teacher evaluations.

http://www.syracuse.com/schools/index.ssf/2015/10/

public_officials_in_central_new_york_country_shift_stance_on_common_core.html#incart_river

Common Core StandardsWHAT ARE THEY? WHERE DID THEY COME FROM?

What are the common-core standards?

Pure and simple, they are descriptions of the skills students should have at each grade level in English/language arts and math by the time they finish high school. They're not a detailed, day-to-day curriculum; they're a broad outline of learning expectations from which teachers or district leaders craft a curriculum.

Education Week 09/28/2015 Catherine Gewertz http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/common-core-state-standards/?cmp=soc-edit-tw

Common Core Focus on ELA and Math The 66-page English/language arts document emphasizes

students’ ability to read complex literary and informational texts, and cite evidence from them in constructing arguments and interpretations. It also envisions a new, distributed responsibility for teaching literacy, asking teachers of all subjects to teach literacy skills that are unique to those disciplines.

In 93 pages, the math standards emphasize a deeper focus on fewer topics, a response to research that found U.S. math curricula to be “a mile wide and an inch deep.” Common-core math seeks to build a coherent sequence of topics and concepts across grades, and aims not only for procedural skill and fluency, but also mastery in applying math skills and in understanding math concepts.

Education Week 09/28/2015 Catherine Gewertz http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/common-core-state-standards/?cmp=soc-edit-tw

Who organized the initiative? Who wrote the common-core standards?

Governors and chief state school officers launched the official push for the standards at a 2009 summit in Chicago. The two main associations representing those leaders—the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers—led the initiative to build state support. To write the standards, they assembled “work groups” that included university professors, leaders of education advocacy groups, and experts from testing companies. Under pressure from teachers’ unions, they added K-12 teachers. Additional panels reviewed and provided feedback on the draft standards. Writers also shared the drafts with state departments of education, which reviewed them and provided feedback.

Education Week 09/28/2015 Catherine Gewertz http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/common-core-state-standards/?cmp=soc-edit-tw

Why did state leaders think we needed a set of common standards?

The push to create shared standards took shape in part because of a key failing of the standards movement that swept the country in the 1990s. States began writing their own standards after the 1983 report “A Nation at Risk” warned of a “rising tide of mediocrity” in American schools. But the quality of those academic expectations varied from state to state. And even when the federal No Child Left Behind Act (signed into law in 2001) required states to test students’ mastery of those standards annually, and face consequences for students’ poor performance, some states set far higher proficiency goals than others. State leaders also cited high college-remediation rates as evidence that more-rigorous, shared standards were needed.

Education Week 09/28/2015 Catherine Gewertz http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/common-core-state-standards/?cmp=soc-edit-tw

So what caused opposition to the common core?

The involvement of the federal government, and to a much lesser degree, the content of the standards themselves.

Objections to amount of non fiction readings, “cold readings” of complex text, developmental inappropriateness of materials at lower grades.

Conservatives felt the standards encroached on states rights and liberals were concerned that they limited the tailoring of instruction to students and communities needs by teachers.

President Obama’s $ 4 billion dollar Race to the Top Initiative embraced “college and career readiness” often seen as a euphemism for Common Core.

Education Week 09/28/2015 Catherine Gewertz http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/common-core-state-standards/?cmp=soc-edit-tw

Race To The Top Designing and implementing rigorous standards and high-quality assessments,

by encouraging states to work jointly toward a system of common academic standards that builds toward college and career readiness, and that includes improved assessments designed to measure critical knowledge and higher-order thinking skills.   

Attracting and keeping great teachers and leaders in America’s classrooms, by expanding effective support to teachers and principals; reforming and improving teacher preparation; revising teacher evaluation, compensation, and retention policies to encourage and reward effectiveness; and working to ensure that our most talented teachers are placed in the schools and subjects where they are needed the most.

Supporting data systems that inform decisions and improve instruction, by fully implementing a statewide longitudinal data system, assessing and using data to drive instruction, and making data more accessible to key stakeholders.

Using innovation and effective approaches to turn-around struggling schools, by asking states to prioritize and transform persistently low-performing schools.

Demonstrating and sustaining education reform, by promoting collaborations between business leaders, educators, and other stakeholders to raise student achievement and close achievement gaps, and by expanding support for high-performing public charter schools, reinvigorating math and science education, and promoting other conditions favorable to innovation and reform.

Fact Sheet: The Race to the Top - White House Press Release 11/04/2009https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/fact-sheet-race-top

Race to the TopWHAT IS IT AND HOW DID IT IMPACT SCHOOL?

Major Components of the New York State Race to the Top Phase 2 Application

Adopt Common Core State Standards in English language arts and math with 15% State supplement; revise science and social studies standards; create/revise standards in arts, technology, and economics; establish statewide curriculum models - EngageNY.

Align high school graduation requirements with college and career success.

Redesign the NYS Assessment Program, in alignment with the Common Core Standards, to incorporate formative and interim assessments, increase rigor, make the assessments more performance-based, and expand into 21st century competencies

Promote virtual learning; launch a virtual high school.The Regents Education Reform Plan andNew York State's Race to the Top (RTTT) Applicationhttp://usny.nysed.gov/rttt/application/summary.html

Complete New York’s P-20 longitudinal education data system; build a Data Portal through which educators can access information on student achievement, school climate, and best practices, enabling them to analyze student needs, identify problems, determine interventions, differentiate instruction, and evaluate results.

Redesign teacher and school leader preparation programs through clinically-rich instruction, performance-based assessments and alternative pathways.

Implement a comprehensive teacher and principal evaluation system, pursuant to State law, based on multiple measures of effectiveness—including student achievement measures, which would comprise 40% of teacher and principal evaluations and ratings.

Create incentives for highly effective teachers in the STEM fields teachers of English language learners, and teachers of students with disabilities, to take assignments in our high-need schools.

Identify the State’s lowest performing schools; focus resources where they are needed most and will provide the greatest benefit.The Regents Education Reform Plan and

New York State's Race to the Top (RTTT) Applicationhttp://usny.nysed.gov/rttt/application/summary.html

Who got what in Race to the Top

New York State received $ 700,000.00 in RTTT money over four years.

Considering the 2009-2010 proposed budget for the New York State Education Department was $ 20.8 billion the RTTT money (which was spread over four years) represented .3365% of one years State Ed budget.

Eldred received $ 36,525.00 of which $ 27,187.00 was earmarked for Network Team Services from Sullivan County BCOES.

This left Eldred with $ 9,338.00 over four years to use towards implementation of new curricula, professional development and the Annual Professional Performance Review.

Issues with Race to the Top

Lack of Time, Resources, and Tools to Address Opportunity Gaps Puts Lofty State Goals Out of Reach

States made unrealistic and impossible promises

RTTT policies fall short on teacher improvement and fail to address core drivers of opportunity gaps

RTTT shortcomings have spurred state–district and union–management conflicts that hinder progress

Mismatches in Race to the Top Limit Educational ImprovementElaine Weiss | September 12, 2013 Economic Policy Institute

CurriculumHOW DID THE COMM0N CORE AFFECT THE CURRICULUM?

EngageNY

In order to assist schools and districts with the implementation of the Common Core, NYSED has provided curricular modules and units in P-12 ELA and math that can be adopted or adapted for local purposes. Full years of curricular materials are currently available on EngageNY for grades Kindergarten through 11th grade in Mathematics and Kindergarten through 11th grade in English Language Arts (ELA).

Some lessons provide detailed instructions or recommendations but it is important to note that the lessons are not scripts and rather they should be viewed as vignettes so that the reader can imagine how the class could look.

EngageNy is a vertical curriculum that scaffolds instruction from grades 1-12. The curriculum was instituted horizontally meaning that materials were being used at a particular grade level predicated on a knowledge base that students may not have been exposed to.

EngageNY https://www.engageny.org/common-core-curriculum

EngageNY continued

RTTT money used for statewide training on the implementation of the Common Core Standards and EngageNY curricular modules.

Much of the training conducted with sample modules as the actual modules were not completed.

Controversy over the scope, sequence, depth, pacing and developmental appropriateness of the modules results in SED encouraging Districts to Adopt or Adapt the modules.

2013 State Assessments are tied to the Common Core Standards and thus the modules.

Pre KK

Grade 1

Grade 2

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

Grade 9

Grade 10

Grade 11

Grade 12

Vertical Integration

The EngageNY curriculum is designed to build or scaffold one year upon the other. Therefore, in 4th Grade what a student learns is predicated on what they learned in 3rd, 2nd and 1st grades.

Horizontal Integration

Curr

iculu

m Inte

gra

tion

Grade 12

Grade 11

Grade 10

Grade 9

Grade 8

Grade 7

Grade6

Grade 5

Grade 4

Grade 3

Grade 2

Grade 1

K

Pre K

Though designed for vertical integration the EngageNY modules were integrated horizontally meaning that the students were not necessarily exposed to the prior grades work to ready them for the current material being taught.

Excerpts from Superintendents memo on the implementation of the CCSS to the Faculty and Staff dated July 29, 2013

Eldred CSD is adopting the CCSS with regard to content, scope and sequence. The CCSS will serve as the foundation for our curriculum and guide all curricular decisions.

Eldred CSD is adapting existing curricular materials that are currently used in our classrooms to directly support the CCSS modules in ELA and Mathematics.

resources, ….. are all to be adapted at the teacher’s discretion so long as they are grade appropriate …..

Our biggest asset YOU, our teachers! We do not want robots or automatons. The district does not want teachers following a script line by line and page by page. Your creativity and innovation is what sets us apart and makes Eldred unique. The modules constitute your curriculum– you determine the best method of instruction. Student comprehension and mastery of the material is what should drive the module – you may finish a module sooner or decide to take more time than indicated on a module because your formative assessments indicate that the student s are not mastering the material.

ELA Grades 1-12 2010-2013 – District sends teachers to training at BOCES to

unpack the “standards and learn about he modules.

2013-2014 – Administration makes the decision to adopt the modules in ELA in grades 1-8 (modules were not available for grades 9-12).

There were immediate concerns, backlash from our teachers concerning the scope, sequence, pacing, and developmental appropriateness of the modules. Especially at the lower grade levels. No guided reading, little writing and grammar, not user friendly.

Teachers tasked in grades 1-8 to make recommendations concerning the use of the modules or alternative curriculum.

Teachers instructed to adapt modules as needed and encouraged to use the modules as a guideline and pace and supplement where necessary.

ELA Grades 1-12 continued Due to the issues with the implementation of a vertical curriculum in a

horizontally integrated manner teachers are reminded that they may have to go down ‘side roads” to teach concepts that students may not been exposed to in the prior grade or where a students knowledge base is not sufficient to understand the material being taught. Teachers are left to make these decisions on a case by case basis in their classrooms.

After a 6 month process the teachers recommend abandoning the modules in grades 1-5 and adopting the Journey’s Literature series. Grades K and 6-8 agree to keep using and adapting the modules.

The Journey’s literature series is adopted with corresponding professional development support during the 2014-2015 school year.

Grades 9-12 decided to use a blend of EngageNy modules and Odell units (on which the EngageNy modules ere patterned). Books on the recommended reading list were used. Continued to use full length works that were often only excerpted in the modules.

Math Grades 1-12

2012-2013 Teachers in grades K-6 used Pearson Envisions Math Curriculum. Increased instruction from 45 to 90 minutes of daily math, which continues today.

2013-2014 Teachers in grades K-8 used the Engage NY Math Curriculum.

Teachers express concerns over the developmental appropriateness of EngageNy materials in the primary grades.

Math task Force recommends going back to Pearson Envisions in grades K-3 and continue using the EngageNy modules supplemented by Envisions materials and other sources in grades 4-6.

Grades 7-12 NYS Common Core Learning Standards for Mathematics drive instruction – with close attention given to the major and supporting content clusters (clusters are groups of related standards) – the Engage NY modules provide us with a rough outline for instruction and are used as a resource supplemented by other materials.

Social Studies 7-12

There were few formal changes to the NY State Social Studies Curriculum other than more emphasis on reading for information.  There was a great deal of hype from the state, but good learning and teaching has been the same since Aristotle taught Alexander.

In 7-12 Social Studies we:

Added longer pieces of reading/text in all our social studies levels

Placed a larger emphasis on close reading of primary sources

Continued to aim our writing instruction to prepare students for the two Regents exams, in US History and Government and Global Studies, that are required to graduate.

Added a Global Studies Fair Project that required students to research, write and present information.  This year will mark the 4th Eldred Global Fair.

Increased field trips  (Hyde Park, Washington’s Headquarters, Bethel Woods, Holocaust Symposium, Tenement Museum and Minisink Battleground).

Science Grades 7-12 Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) are the national standard in Science Consortium of New York Science partners (including teachers) reviewed the NGSS. NGSS was found to be similar to the current NY State Standards, just packaged

differently. New York State will not adopt these standards. November 19, 2015 State Ed released the “Draft” New York State P-12 Science

Learning Standards (NYSSLS) for public review ( http://www.p12.nysed.gov/ciai/mst/sci/nys-p12-science-ls-intro.html).

December 8, 2015 State Ed released a survey allowing respondents to rate the draft against a set of research based standards evaluation criteria. Survey will remain open until February 5, 2016.

Revision to the draft will be made. The revised New York State Science Learning Standards will be presented to the

Board of Regents for discussion and eventual adoption. Once adopted a three year period of implantation and two year period of

awareness will follow. Earliest testing possible would be 2019-2020 and most likely be PK-K and Grade 3

and Grade 6. There is no funding in place for this.

Writing PreK-12

Teachers identified a need for a districtwide writing curriculum. The Common Core and EngageNy modules made little time for the mechanics and rules of writing.

Consultants were brought in to help us narrow down our expectations in a writing program and align those expectations to the common core standards.

A districtwide writing task force was created to work on creating a PreK-12 writing continuum and curriculum. Work was completed using STLE 3 money.

The curriculum is being integrated in phases. Writing Coaches are working with the teachers to integrate the curriculum.

STLE 3 Grant Eldred CSD was awarded an $ 80,000.00 Strengthen Teacher

Leader Effectiveness (STLE) grant from march 2014-June 2015. The grant focused on teachers teaching other teachers to develop instructional leaders.

The grant was used to increase Curriculum Coordinators stipends and create a cadre of Curricular Coaches to support a teacher led effort to make the necessary curriculum shifts decided upon y the faculty. Professional development and teacher support to roll out of the

Journey’s literature series. Professional development and teacher support for the reintroduction of

Pearson Math in grades 1-3. Professional development and teacher support for the continued use

and adaption of the EngageNY modules in ELA for grades 6-8 and Math in grades 4-8.

Completion of a Grades 1-12 Writing Curriculum. A teacher identified weakness in the Common Core and EngageNY modules.

Instructional technology integration and support in grades Pre K – 12. Teachers training teachers in the use of classroom instructional technology.

AssessementsHOW DID THE COMMON CORE IMPACT STATE ASSESSEMENTS

Timeline & History of New York State AssessmentsYear Event

1865 First administration of Regents Exams as high school entrance exams

1878 First administration of Regents Exams as high school end-of- course exams

1966 First administration of the Grades 3, 6, and 9 Pupil Evaluation Program (PEP) Tests in Reading and Mathematics

1979 First administration of Regents Competency Tests (RCT)

1983 First administration of the Grade 5 Writing Test

1989 First administration of the Program Evaluation Test (PET) in Science,

Grade 4

1999 First administration of the Grade 4 and Grade 8 Tests in ELA and Math

2000 First administration of the New York State Alternate Assessment (NYSAA)

2001 First administration of the Grade 8 Intermediate-Level Science Test

Year Event

2002 No Child Left Behind Act goes into effect2003 First administration of the New York State English as a Second Language

Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)2004 First administration of the Grade 4 Elementary-Level Science Test2006 First administration of the Grades 3–8 Tests in ELA and Math2013 First administration of the Grades 3–8 Tests in ELA and Math aligned to Common Core2014 First administration of Regents Exams in ELA (Common Core) and Algebra I(Common Core)

First administration of Regents Exam in Geometry (Common Core)2015 If adopted, first administration of PARCC tests2016 First administration of Regents Exam in Algebra II (Common Core

Timeline & History of New York State Assessments cont.

Source: New York State Department of Education www.p12.nysed.gov/assessment/timeline-historyrev.pd

Impact of Assessments on Curriculum and Classroom Instruction

State announces 2013 Assessments will be tied to the Common Core Standards and EngageNy modules. NY is one of the first states in the country to do this. Implication is that for students to do well on the assessments the modules need to be the basis for the curriculum.

Assessments are tied to teacher evaluations under NYS Education law 3012-c. Assessments are no longer diagnostic tools to better support student learning. They have become a high stakes, “this counts”, “my job is on the line” measurements of success or failure.

Research on value added measures – how much a teacher adds each year to a given student’s growth, indicates that VAM’s are at best inconsistent and an unreliable methodology of evaluating student growth.

Value Added Measures Value-added models of teacher effectiveness are highly unstable.

Teachers’ ratings differ substantially from class to class and from year to year, as well as from one test to another.

Teachers’ value-added ratings are significantly affected by differences in the students who are assigned to them, even when models try to control for prior achievement and student demographic variables. In particular, teachers with large numbers of new English learners and others with special needs have been found to show lower gains than the same teachers who are teaching other students.

Value-added ratings cannot disentangle the many influences on student progress. These include home, school and student factors that influence student learning gains and that matter more than the individual teacher in explaining changes in test scores.

The fundamental flaws of ‘value added’ teacher evaluation – The Washington Post -Valerie Strauss December 23, 2012

According to a new research report by the New York State School Boards Association (NYSSBA) and the New York Association of School Psychologists (NYASP).Teacher and parent expectations and a students' awareness of the so-called "high stakes" nature of the state exams are factors that lead to high levels of test anxiety. Two-thirds (66 percent) of school psychologists believe that the impact of state test results on teacher/principal performance reviews and on school ratings cause test-related stress among students.

The Future of State Assessments Two consortiums have received grants under the Federal

Governments Race To The Top initiative to develop computer based examinations which are based on the Common Core State Standards. Most states have signed with one or the other consortium with the intent of replacing their State assessments with one prepared by the consortiums. The following are just released sample questions for these computer based exams.

Though New York has all but withdrawn from their commitment to PARCC – they are still committed to using computer based testing as an option.

The next two slides contain sample questions proposed from the Smart Balanced Assessment Consortium andPartnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) From: Teacher & Administrator Evaluations

Robert M. Dufour – PowerPoint 11/9/2012

From: Teacher & Administrator Evaluations

Robert M. Dufour – PowerPoint 11/9/2012

From: Teacher & Administrator EvaluationsRobert M. Dufour – PowerPoint 11/9/2012

Opt OutsNYSED memo dated January, 2013

With the exception of certain areas in which parental consent is required, such asCommittee on Special Education (CSE) evaluations for students with disabilities and certainfederally-funded surveys and analyses specified under the federal Protection of Pupil RightsAmendment (see 20 U.S.C. 1232h), there is no provision in statute or regulation allowingparents to opt their children out of State tests. The failure to comply with the requirementsprovided above will have a negative impact on a school or school district’s accountability, as all schools are required to have a 95% participation rate in State testing.

SED does acknowledge a parents right to make educational determinations for their child.

ECS accommodates and written parental request that their child not take any or all state exams.

ECS’s opt out rate for 2015 was 14% for ELA, 17% for Math for an average of 15.5%.

Annual Professional Performance ReviewWHAT IS THE APPR AND HOW IS IT TIED TO COMMON CORE?

What the research says What we were doing is not working. Dog and pony shows once a year do

not improve instruction.

Goal – to improve instruction and student growth.

A need to assess teacher contributions to student learning as part of the evaluation process.

Use of explicit teacher standards.

Use of test scores alone is harmful. Need to use multiple measures. Pros and cons of value added measures.

Incorporation of evidence of learning, student and teacher artifacts, etc.

Use of multi-faceted, evidence based observations. Not drive buys. Need more comprehensive model to more accurately assess what is going on in the classroom. Multiple observations. Properly trained observers.

Mentoring for Teachers and Principals.

Need for prompt feedback for effectiveness.

Use of the carrot and the stick. Incentives and ramifications.From: Teacher & Administrator EvaluationsRobert M. Dufour – PowerPoint 11/9/2012

NYS Education Law 3012-c The APPR is codified in NYS law and therefore is not optional but

rather prescribed.

ECS is currently operating under 3012-c: Requires the selection of an approved teacher observation rubric.

Classroom observations count for 60 % of the teachers overall score.

State Assessments or Student Learning Objectives (for courses with no State Assessment or Regent exam) counts for 20% of the score.

District/Building wide locally selected assessments count for the remaining 20% of the score – this was a local decision – we could have used another sub component of the State Assessments but the Eldred Faculty Association and Administration agreed this would not be fair to the teachers.

Rubric scoring is negotiated locally. The plan must be approved by SED. Lawyers not educators review and approve the plan at SED.

NYS Education Law 3012-d 3012 – d that the classroom observation rubric accounts for 50% of the

score. There must be a minimum two separate observations by certified trained

administrators – one by the building principal and another by a second certified administrator not assigned to the same building.

Test scores account for 50% of the overall score and Districts may no longer develop their own local assessments or use regionally developed assessments from the BOCES. All assessments must be from the SED approved list of third party assessments or otherwise approved by SED

ECS is operating under a waiver from 3012-d at this time.

There must be a minimum two separate observations by trained administrators – one by the building principal and another by a second certified administrator not assigned to the same building.

Adopted Board of Regents Emergency Regulations as of December 14, 2015

For teachers and principals, the Emergency Regulation would:

Ensure that there will be no consequences for teachers and principals related to 3-8 ELA and mathematics state assessments and no growth score on Regents exams until the start of the 2019- 2020 school year.

Prohibit the use of results from the 3-8 state assessments for use in evaluating the performance of individual teachers, principals or students.