How do we know our school (or district) is actually doing this well? More importantly, from whose perspective do we appear to be doing this well? What would administrators say about this? Teachers? Now, consider, students? Parents? How well aligned do you believe this “thing we do well” is to the grade-level expectations of the CCSS? Refer to pages 16–20 for assistance in thinking about essential
Based on NECAP results, our district reading scores have stayed the same in 2011 and 2012 with seventy-three percent of students scored proficient or better in reading. We actually had writing scores decline 2% from 51% proficiency to 49%. For Bicentennial Elementary School, the students were 10% higher in comparison to the state and 19% higher than other schools in the district.
Based on these NECAP results, Bicentennial did very well last year in teaching student literacy. The NECAP is the New England Common Assessment Program Grade- Level Expectations used by NH, Vermont and Rhode Island to test specifications in Mathematics, Reading and Writing. It compares results by state, district and school.
Due to our scores in reading, Bicentennial would not be considered "a school in Need of improvement" falling into the same category of the 16 out 17 schools in our district and 2/3 of the schools in our state. We met our Adequate Yearly Progress in Reading. The No Child Left Behind act required that by 2014 all students meet proficiency requirements in both reading and math.
The Nashua Telegraph reported recently that this "neighborhood is best in city for income and education." Property value is higher in the area with the idea that there is a high demand to live in this school district.
However, does Bicentennial meet the the grade-level expectations of the CCSS? Our recent iReady scores show that we are not meeting the expectations in vocabulary and informational text. As of last year, each grade level was still using a basil program in reading, not a thinking curriculum. We were still drilling them with skill, fill-in-the-blank, read the paragraph curriculum, not asking them to to integrate information from several texts and then explain the relationships between ideas and author's craft. Bicentennial quickly realized we needed to make some changes. We would need to spend more time having students read more at their level/choosing with fluency, accuracy and comprehension.
Chapter 2, beginning on page 22, aims to not just describe how to read the CCSS document, but more to highlight the intellectual underpinnings of these standards. What ideas were most striking to you about this discussion?
Reading literature and the skills for reading informational texts are the same in the CC. I understood this better knowing that the common core aims to "unify reading so that readers bring the same skills to various texts." I liked the description used to show standard ways of thinking in comparison to the CC. Informational texts were thought to inform and persuade where the CC emphasizes reading to determine central ideas and analyze author's viewpoints. Again with literature skills teachers would commonly have students describe characters, thematic connections and expressive language where as the CC emphasizes reading to determine themes, elucidate figurgative language and trace narrative elements.
I like the last paragraph that states Malcom Gladwell theory that "expertise requires an investment of ten thousand hours." I would like to look up the difference in words read by a student who reads 4 books a year, 10, 20, 40...Then relate that to the amount of vocabulary introduced and used to the student reads 40 books and how that would effect comprehension and writing.
For students to actually practice synthesizing and critical reading, students will need to read books because using a textbook of anthologies (basil) the stories are summaries or shortened versions. They will not give the student the opportunity to analyze craft, theme, or structure.
Chapter 3, beginning on page 32, talks in depth about reading standards 1 and 10, referring to a common description of these as being the crucial struts of a ladder. How are these standards currently enacted within your school (or district)
Last year the Nashua School District implemented the iReady assessment. Built for the common core, this cross-grade-level assessment pinpoints needs down to the sub-skill level and gives teachers an action plan. Included in this assessment is a Lexile score that is a starting point for level of reading.
As a district we are rolling out units that are following the common core standards and giving direction towards the teachers. Each unit begins with a preassessment and ends with a common performance task that will be used to collect data on student/school/district performance.
In what ways are our older students demonstrating literal comprehension as compared to our younger students? Does the teaching, as it stands now, require more sophisticated thinking across years—or are we only requiring very similar thinking (such as simply asking everyone to “provide evidence”)? Refer back to the section beginning on page 39.
The CC recognizes that students should progress towards reading complex text. The same 10 skills are included at each grade level, however, the skill changes from grade to grade. Grade 3 a student can ask and answer questions to show understanding of a text but by grade 5 they should be able to "Quote accurately from a text when drawing inferences from the text." Going away from text to self or personal responses and moving towards referencing texts in complex ways with inferencing work.
These two chapters present several points of view on the measure, the role, and instructional uses of “text complexity.” One main point of tension is around approaches for students who are reading below their grade level. What different views on how best to support students who are reading below “grade level complexity” are raised in these chapters? Are there others you have heard or read recently?
There are different views to support students who are reading below "grade Level Complexity". One way is for an entire class to read in unison with teacher generated questions for students to answer in conversation and writing. 2-3 weeks to study a novel and then 4-7 weeks to study 6-7 shorter texts. CC supports this with research that states close reading of complex text will make significant gains in reading proficiency. Another suggestion was to continue to provide students with books at their level but given opportunities to read and comprehend grade level complex text. They should have the opportunity to read above their grade level.
The "Book Whisperer" affirms the reader in every student, allowing students to choose their own books, carving out extra reading time, modeling authentic reading behaviors, discarding timeworn reading assignments such as book reports and comprehension
If the CCSS document states that the standards “define what all students are expected to know and be able to do, not how teachers should teach” (6), then how will our school (or district) decide to support students reading below grade level complexity?
The CCSS defines expectations but does not show teachers how to teach. This can be overwhelming to an educator but also open many doors. First step in supporting students is to find out their level of reading using Lexile scores or reading records. There needs to professional development offered to teachers on different programs or ways of teaching that could support them. Providing teachers with models on how to use the "Daily 5" or "Literature Circles" along with book studies on books such as the Book Whisperer. There needs to be discussions how to track levels of complexity with your students and opportunities to try different methods. Lastly, they need to give schedules to support longer reading times and how to implement that throughout the curriculum in science and social studies. As stated by Krashen "kids who are given more time to read do better than kids who have little time to read."
What about those students already reading above grade level, such as kindergartners who enter already reading? Or sixth graders reading far above benchmark?
Teachers are learning to move away from basils and how to differentiate within the classroom or team. Having opportunities to read at the student's level in a genre they like, will encourage a love of a reading that in my opinion, has been lost for some time in the public school system. The focus on skills and data, has changed again using the CC. Students need to be given time to read at their level. Having students read different novels but sharing and discussing a standard such as "Quoting accurately from a text when explaining what a text says when drawing inferences." does not require students to be reading the same book. The skill can be taught and discussed with independent books and either as a whole group or in small groups as shown in the "Cafe" program.
No comments:
Post a Comment