Bibliography: Common Core State Standards (page 110 of 130)

This annotated bibliography is reformatted and customized by the Center for Positive Practices.  Some of the authors featured on this page include Daniel Wiener, Alan P. Maloney, Virginia B. Edwards, Education Resource Strategies, Haiwen Wang, Steve Leinwand, Tamara Reavis, DeAnn Huniker, Montgomery County Public Schools, and Nicole C. Taylor-Buckner.

Maloney, Alan P., Ed.; Confrey, Jere, Ed.; Nguyen, Kenny H., Ed. (2014). Learning over Time: Learning Trajectories in Mathematics Education, IAP – Information Age Publishing, Inc.. The driving forces behind mathematics learning trajectories is the need to understand how children actually learn and make sense of mathematics–how they progress from prior knowledge, through intermediate understandings, to the mathematics target understandings–and how to use these insights to improve instruction and student learning. In this book, readers will come to understand what learning trajectories are, the research and methodology that are necessary for developing them, and gain insight into potential applications of learning trajectories. A synthesis and research outcome in their own right, learning trajectories provide detailed description of instructionally-grounded development of mathematical concepts and reasoning from the perspective of student learning, and, overall, building on decades of accumulated experience in mathematics education research. However, their greater importance may lie in their potential as frameworks that contribute an unprecedented coherence across classroom instruction, professional development, standards, and assessment, by focusing squarely on conceptual understanding and reasoning instead of assessment-driven procedural knowledge. This potential was sufficiently compelling as an organizing framework to have been cited as a basis for the Common Core mathematics standards, the new mathematics learning expectations that are now consistent across most of the United States. (Among the conference attendees were the writers of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, at the beginning of the Standards drafting process.) This book is an outgrowth of a conference on learning trajectories, hosted in 2009 at North Carolina State University, which examined research on learning trajectories. An overarching message of the chapters in this volume is that learning trajectories, by focusing on how children's mathematical reasoning develops, are coming into their own as a rigorous underpinning for both instruction and accountability. Some of the learning scientists featured in this volume have played major roles learning trajectories' evolution–from small-scale day-to-day conjectures by individual teachers, to systematic research endeavors that teachers and scientists alike can use to interpret standards, plan instruction, and formatively assess student work. The work in this volume will be of interest to mathematics educators, teachers, and professional development specialists. Following a Preface (Richard A. Duschl); and Introduction: Learning Trajectories in Mathematics (Jere Confrey, Alan P. Maloney, and Kenny H. Nguyen) contents included: (1) Learning Trajectories: Foundations for Effective, Research-based Education (Douglas H. Clements and Julie Sarama); (2) Toward Establishing a Learning Progression to Support the Development of Statistical Reasoning (Richard Lehrer, Min-Joung Kim, Elizabeth Ayers, and Mark Wilson); (3) Equipartitioning, a Foundation for Rational Number Reasoning: Elucidation of a Learning Trajectory (Jere Confrey, Alan P. Maloney, Kenny H. Nguyen, and André A. Rupp); (4) Two Approaches to Describing the Development of Students' Reasoning About Length: A Case Study for Coordinating Related Trajectories (Jeffrey E. Barrett and Michael T. Battista); (5) Linking Standards and Learning Trajectories: Boundary Objects and Representations (Jere Confrey and Alan Maloney); (6) Exploring the Relationship Between Learning Trajectories and Curriculum: A Content Analysis of Rational Number Reasoning in Connected Mathematics and UCSMP Transition Mathematics (Kenny Huy Nguyen and Jere Confrey); (7) Articulated Learning Trajectories: A Framework for Mathematical Content Analyses (Travis A. Olson); (8) Learning Trajectories and Professional Development (P. Holt Wilson); and (9) Conclusion: Learning Trajectories Going Forward: A Foundation for Coherence in the Instructional Core (Jere Confrey, Alan P. Maloney, and Kenny H. Nguyen). Author biographies are included.   [More]  Descriptors: Mathematics Education, Prior Learning, Mathematical Concepts, Concept Formation

Boyd, Josh; Boyd, Gina (2014). Sold! The Elementary Classroom Auction as Learning Tool of Communication and Economics, Communication Teacher. An auction, though an economic tool, is essentially a performance dependent on communication (Smith, 1989). The auctioneer dictates the pace, asks for bids, and acknowledges responses; the enterprise is controlled by a voice (Boyce, 2001). Bidders must listen and respond strategically to the communication of the people around them. An auction provides opportunities for elementary school students to practice several key, age-appropriate communication competencies, including Common Core State Standards in speaking and listening. Clinton (1992) argued that communication competence in elementary school means that "children must not only analyze the listener and the referential task, but also analyze the message itself" (p. 57). The rapid pace of an auction requires students to pay attention to the interplay of these things in order to know what is being sold, how much the bid is, and how they can join the communication exchange among auctioneer and competing bidders. The auction also provides students with opportunities to follow "rules for taking turns … and participating in ritualized openings and closings" (Mehan, 1979, p. 169). An auction is about openings and closings and turn taking, perhaps in a more concentrated way than almost any other kind of communication event. Students also have to develop communication strategies for bidding that enable them to achieve their goals for the auction without getting stuck with items they do not want. In response to the call for communication scholars "to be inventive in developing ways to promote the importance of communication skills" in a K-12 context (Hall, Morreale, & Gaudino, 1999, pp. 147-148), this article explains how a communication-focused economics activity can bolster students' understanding of both communication and economics, with a focus on students keeping up with listening and then responding with appropriate turn taking in order to participate strategically in the auction so they can take home items that reward their class performance. The classroom auction serves as a capstone experience for a semester or year-long mini-economy. As part of this mini-economy, students apply for classroom jobs (completing resumes, references, and interviews), execute those jobs throughout the year, and receive weekly pay in the form of fake money. Another key part of preparation is finding items to put on the auction block. The students complete this task by sending out letters asking for donations from local businesses, parents' employers, local restaurants, and just about any other organization a student is willing to solicit. The next preparation for the auction is to help students understand the necessity of listening, turn taking, and communicating strategically in response to other students' bids. Students gain skills in listening, turn taking, and using communication (listening and bidding) strategically to achieve their desired outcomes. Winning bidders take home tangible evidence that they have succeeded at communicating about economics.   [More]  Descriptors: Elementary School Students, Consumer Economics, Bids, Class Activities

Tepe, Lindsey (2014). Common Core Goes to College: Building Better Connections between High School and Higher Education. Policy Brief, New America. Less than 100 years ago, only 16.8 percent of all 17-year olds in the U.S. had graduated from high school. At the same time, less than 5 percent of those 18-24 years old was enrolled in higher education. The K-12 and higher education systems rapidly expanded over the next century to accommodate larger and larger portions of the population, but they did not evolve in concert. As a result, hundreds of thousands of students now graduate from high school and enter college without being adequately prepared to succeed there. Thousands more fail to make the transition into college at all. Because the two systems are not properly connected, millions of people fall short of earning the college credentials that are crucial for prosperity in the modern world. In the early 2000s, a group of key education leaders decided to tackle this problem. The resulting Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative led to the creation and adoption of common education standards in English Language Arts and Mathematics, presently adopted by 43 states and the District of Columbia. In the words of CCSS leaders, "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." For the first time, the vast majority of all American children will be educated in K-12 schools organized around standards that have been explicitly designed to prepare students to succeed in higher education. Careful analysis of state policies and practices reveals a higher education landscape riddled with complications and shortcomings for the successful alignment of higher education with the Common Core. An examination of the higher education policies that guide students through the transition from high school to college–including admissions, financial aid, retesting and course placement, and developmental education–reveals many detours and inconsistencies that remain unaddressed. Further, there is little evidence to suggest colleges are meaningfully aligning college instruction and teacher preparation programs with the Common Core standards. Right now, the pieces of high school and higher education are not fitting. The new college- and career-ready standards however present an opportunity for states to reexamine and rebuild the connection. To prepare students to succeed in college and beyond, the spirit of these standards-alignment-needs to go to college as well. Each state needs to plan how to "do it all in one piece" if it is going to be a success. To summarize the argument put forth in this paper the following changes are recommended: (1) Where test scores are used for minimum standards in higher education, include college- and career-ready assessments as a means to meet these standards; (2) Where test scores are used as a proxy for college readiness to award financial aid, allow students to demonstrate proficiency with college- and career ready assessment scores; (3) As college- and career-ready assessments are being developed and implemented, provide greater clarity and consistency between assessment scores and preparation for specific higher education coursework; (4) Align developmental coursework offered by colleges and universities with high school college and career-ready standards, and use college- and career-ready assessments to evaluate the impact of developmental education programs; and (5) Ensure that teacher preparation programs provide comprehensive instruction in how to effectively instruct using college- and career-ready standards.   [More]  Descriptors: High Schools, Higher Education, College School Cooperation, Partnerships in Education

Taylor-Buckner, Nicole C. (2014). The Effects of Elementary Departmentalization on Mathematics Proficiency, ProQuest LLC. Mathematics education in the elementary schools has experienced many changes in recent decades. With the curriculum becoming more complex as a result of each modification, immense pressure has been put on schools to increase student proficiency. The Common Core State Standards is the latest example of this. These revisions to the mathematics curriculum require a comprehensive understanding of mathematics that the typical elementary teacher lacks. Some elementary schools have begun changing the organization of their classrooms from self-contained to departmentalized as a possible solution to this problem. The purpose of this quantitative study was to examine the effects of elementary departmentalization on student mathematics proficiency. This was done by exploring and comparing the background and educational characteristics, teaching practices, assessment methods, beliefs, and influence of departmentalized elementary mathematics teachers. The study also investigated the circumstances under which there are significant differences in mathematics proficiency between departmentalized and non-departmentalized elementary students, and examined if these differences continued into students' eighth-grade years and/or led to higher level eighth-grade mathematics course attainment. Additionally, the study aimed to determine if there was a relationship between elementary departmentalization and mathematics proficiency and also to identify additional factors that could lead to mathematics proficiency. Data came from the U.S. Department of Education's Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K) data set. The ECLS-K is a national data set that followed the same children from kindergarten to eighth grade focusing on their school experiences from 1998 to 2007. Numerous statistical analyses were conducted on this rich data set, utilizing the statistical software Stata 13 and R. The results of this study indicate that there is a significant difference in the mathematics proficiency of departmentalized and non-departmentalized students when teachers have below-average mathematics backgrounds. The students of the mathematically below-average departmentalized teachers displayed the highest mathematics proficiency as well as the biggest gain in mathematics proficiency, and these higher proficiencies and gains continued into later grade levels. However, when exploring differences in mathematics proficiency among all students, there were no conclusive differences between departmentalized and non-departmentalized students. Regression models yielded inconclusive results as well, even after controlling for factors pertaining to classroom size, student demographics and socioeconomic status, student confidence, parental background, teacher knowledge and instructional practices, and prior student mathematical proficiency. Other findings include self-contained and departmentalized third-grade teachers being very similar in their educational backgrounds and teaching practices, whereas departmentalized and non-departmentalized fifth-grade teachers were found to be fairly different in their educational backgrounds and instructional practices. However, in both grade levels, self-contained teachers appeared to be more reliant on printed materials than departmentalized teachers. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: www.proquest.com…   [More]  Descriptors: Mathematics Instruction, Elementary School Mathematics, Mathematics Skills, Mathematics Education

Brahier, Daniel; Leinwand, Steve; Huniker, DeAnn (2014). Principles to Actions: Mathematics Programs as the Core for Student Learning, Mathematics Teacher. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) launched the "standards-based" education movement in North America in 1989 with the release of "Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics," an unprecedented action to promote systemic improvement in mathematics education. Now, twenty-five years later, the widespread adoption of the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) by forty-five states provides an opportunity to reenergize and focus our commitment to significant improvement in mathematics education (CCSSI 2010). The CCSSM focus and clarify common outcomes for student learning and promote coherence across grades through mathematics learning progressions. They provide motivation for the development of new instructional resources and assessments but do not tell teachers, coaches, administrators, or policymakers what to do at the classroom, school, and district levels or how to begin making essential changes to implement these Standards. Thus, NCTM's new "Principles to Actions: Ensuring Mathematical Success for All" (NCTM 2014) provides direction in filling the gap between the adoption of the CCSSM and the enactment of policies and programs required for its widespread and successful implementation. The overarching message conveyed in "Principles to Actions" is that effective teaching is the nonnegotiable core to ensure that all students learn mathematics and that such teaching requires a range of actions at the state or provincial level as well as at the district, school, and classroom levels. Three elements of "Principles to Actions" should be highlighted. First, in a chapter focusing on teaching and learning, the publication describes and illustrates eight Mathematics Teaching Practices), which need to be consistent and essential components of every mathematics lesson. Second, each of the six principles includes discussion of unproductive and productive beliefs as part of an honest appraisal of obstacles to implementation as well as suggestions for overcoming these obstacles. Third, "Principles to Actions" presents three sets of actions–one set for leaders and policymakers in districts and states or provinces, including commissioners, superintendents, and other central office administrators; one for principals, coaches, specialists, and other school leaders; and one for teachers. "Principles to Actions" argues that ensuring mathematical success for all students will take teachers who effectively plan and use the core set of eight mathematics teaching practices as a framework for strengthening the teaching and learning of mathematics. Mathematical success for all students will take principals, coaches, specialists, and other school leaders who are committed to supporting teachers in their efforts to engage students in important mathematics and who fully understand and assist teachers in consistently planning for and implementing the core mathematics teaching practices. High levels of student success in mathematics also require that leaders and policymakers in districts and states or provinces, including commissioners, superintendents, and other central office administrators, take action to ensure that all teachers have the resources and supports that are essential to the enactment of effective mathematics teaching. A set of specific recommended actions is provided for each group of stakeholders to meet these expectations. Reading, discussing, strategizing about, and acting on these actions is the next step for all who care deeply about significantly raising student achievement in mathematics.   [More]  Descriptors: Secondary School Mathematics, State Standards, Mathematics Curriculum, Curriculum Implementation

Cotner, Bridget A. (2014). Documenting Elementary Teachers' Sustainability of Instructional Practices: A Mixed Method Case Study, ProQuest LLC. School reform programs focus on making educational changes; however, research on interventions past the funded implementation phase to determine what was sustained is rarely done (Beery, Senter, Cheadle, Greenwald, Pearson, et al., 2005). This study adds to the research on sustainability by determining what instructional practices, if any, of the Teaching SMART¬Æ professional development program that was implemented from 2005-2008 in elementary schools with teachers in grades third through eighth were continued, discontinued, or adapted five years post-implementation (in 2013). Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions: What do teachers who participated in Teaching SMART¬Æ and district administrators share about the sustainability of Teaching SMART¬Æ practices in 2013? What teaching strategies do teachers who participated in the program (2005-2008) use in their science classrooms five years post-implementation (2013)? What perceptions about the roles of females in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) do teachers who participated in the program (2005-2008) have five years later (2013)? And, What classroom management techniques do the teachers who participated in the program (2005-2008) use five years post implementation (2013)? A mixed method approach was used to answer these questions. Quantitative teacher survey data from 23 teachers who participated in 2008 and 2013 were analyzed in SAS v. 9.3. Descriptive statistics were reported and paired t-tests were conducted to determine mean differences by survey factors identified from an exploratory factor analysis, principal axis factoring, and parallel analysis conducted with teacher survey baseline data (2005). Individual teacher change scores (2008 and 2013) for identified factors were computed using the Reliable Change Index statistic. Qualitative data consisted of interviews with two district administrators and three teachers who responded to the survey in both years (2008 and 2013). Additionally, a classroom observation was conducted with one of the interviewed teachers in 2013. Qualitative analyses were conducted following the constant comparative method and were facilitated by ATLAS.ti v. 6.2, a qualitative analysis software program. Qualitative findings identified themes at the district level that influenced teachers' use of Teaching SMART¬Æ strategies. All the themes were classified as obstacles to sustainability: economic downturn, turnover of teachers and lack of hiring, new reform policies, such as Race to the Top, Student Success Act, Common Core State Standards, and mandated blocks of time for specific content. Results from the survey data showed no statistically significant difference through time in perceived instructional practices except for a perceived decrease in the use of hands-on instructional activities from 2008 to 2013. Analyses conducted at the individual teacher level found change scores were statistically significant for a few teachers, but overall, teachers reported similarly on the teacher survey at both time points. This sustainability study revealed the lack of facilitating factors to support the continuation of reform practices; however, teachers identified strategies to continue to implement some of the reform practices through time in spite of a number of system-wide obstacles. This sustainability study adds to the literature by documenting obstacles to sustainability in this specific context, which overlap with what is known in the literature. Additionally, the strategies teachers identified to overcome some of the obstacles to implement reform practices and the recommendations by district level administrators add to the literature on how stakeholders may support sustainability of reform through time. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: www.proquest.com…   [More]  Descriptors: Mixed Methods Research, Case Studies, Sustainability, Teaching Methods

Achieve, Inc. (2010). Perspective, March 2010. "Perspective" is a monthly e-newsletter presenting news and views from Achieve. This month's issue commences with a report stating how over the past five years, since the National Governors Association (NGA) and Achieve co-sponsored the National Education Summit on High Schools, states have made impressive progress in aligning their high school standards, graduation requirements and assessment and accountability systems with college- and career-ready expectations. This issue also reports that: (1) the draft Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts and Mathematics were released by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) on March 10 to a great deal of interest, and mostly positive reviews, across the nation; (2) on March 4 the U.S. Department of Education (USED) announced the Round 1 finalists for the Race to the Top competition: Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Tennessee; (3) Margaret Horn, a former senior education policy advisor to Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen, has joined Achieve's team in Washington, D.C.; (4) signifying their intent to take the bold action necessary to increase college completion rates, 17 states have joined an Alliance of States with a new non-profit organization, Complete College America (CCA); (5) Achieve is launching a new effort to develop the next generation of science standards that will prepare students across the country for success in living and working in a science and technology-based society and global economy; and (6) in his weekly address, President Obama called for a redesigned Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), placing the emphasis on ensuring that all students graduate high school college- and career-ready. Brief news clips and descriptions of new resources are also included.   [More]  Descriptors: High Schools, State Standards, Global Approach, Graduation Requirements

Gewertz, Catherine (2010). Reviewers Urge Standards Fixes, Education Week. A draft of grade-by-grade common standards is undergoing significant revisions in response to feedback that the outline of what students should master is confusing and insufficiently user-friendly. Writing groups convened by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association (NGA) are at work on what they say will be a leaner, better-organized, and easier-to-understand version than the 200-plus-page set that has been circulating among governors, scholars, education groups, teams of state education officials, and others for review in recent weeks. The first public draft, originally intended for a December release but postponed until January, is now expected by mid-February. The draft–actually three documents–under revision describes the skills and knowledge students need in each grade from kindergarten through high school. One of the documents focuses on English/language arts, another on mathematics, and a third on the literacy skills students in middle and high school need to apply to the study of history and science. The Common Core State Standards Initiative, led by the CCSSO and the NGA, aims to establish high expectations for all students. Forty-eight states have signed on to support the effort. A set of "college and career-ready" standards, describing the proficiencies needed for good jobs or higher education, was released last fall after expert input, revised after it garnered more than 1,100 public comments on the CCSSO's Web site, and is undergoing more revision.   [More]  Descriptors: Feedback (Response), High Schools, Literacy, Elementary Secondary Education

Education Resource Strategies (2014). The State's Priority Opportunities to Support Education Reform in Georgia through Resource Reallocation. Nationwide, states face declining or plateauing investments in education. These financial constraints, coupled with increased standards for student achievement through the widespread adoption of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), create a heightened need for strategic resource use. However, districts are not currently using resources strategically, as research suggests that 40 cents out of every dollar are spent on practices not aligned with district or state priorities. Therefore, the role of the state today is not only to allocate resources, but also to ensure those resources are used effectively. The state of Georgia leads many others in addressing this issue, having engaged in a series of statewide reforms to grant Local Education Agencies (LEAs) greater flexibility over how they use district resources in exchange for greater accountability over student outcomes. Georgia's Flexibility Options program is at the cutting edge of similar efforts across the country. Education Resource Strategies' (ERS) recent deep exploration of K-12 resource use across Georgia, funded through Race to the Top, suggests that Georgia's ongoing reform efforts could be strengthened if they evolve an increasingly strategic and targeted role with respect to education reform. Ensuring that this effort leads to districts using resources in the most efficient and effective way takes time. In ERS' RT3 project–a two-year partnership with Georgia's Department of Education–findings revealed Georgia's resource restructuring opportunities could represent as much as twenty-eight cents of every dollar spent on K-12 education. As a result, three priority reallocation opportunities have been identified, which extend across the state and represent a significant investment in activities that are not likely to generate significant improvements in student learning. These three reallocation opportunities stem from: (1) an over-reliance on whole-day class-size reduction; (2) state and LEA compensation structures that compensate teachers according to years of experience and education credits instead of teaching effectiveness and contribution; and (3) insufficient provision of quality instructional time for students struggling in math and ELA to catch up with proficient peers. The study also identified three ways in which the state can help promote or foster better resource use within Georgia LEAs: (1) Foster district and school flexibility to meet student needs within their district and school contexts; (2) Leverage the existing collection and use of data, especially teaching-effectiveness data, to better inform district-level decision making with regard to staffing, budgeting, and scheduling; and (3) Provide targeted support to districts to help incubate or spread promising practices. This paper provides insight into resource restructuring opportunities and prioritizes actions that transform the state's role, so that it can make the most of its resources of people, money, and time to improve the education of all its students. The following is appended: Quality Basic Education (QBE) Details.   [More]  Descriptors: Educational Change, Resource Allocation, State Standards, Academic Standards

Bowman, Trinell; Wiener, Daniel; Reavis, Tamara; Griswold, Danielle (2014). PARCC Accessibility Features and Accommodations Manual: Guidance for Districts and Decision-Making Teams to Ensure That PARCC Mid-Year, Performance-Based, and End-of-Year Assessments Produce Valid Results for All Students. Third Edition, Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) member states regard assessments as tools for enhancing teaching and learning, and are committed to providing all students, including but not limited to, students with disabilities, English learners, English learners with disabilities, and underserved populations with equitable access to high-quality, twenty-first century assessments. By applying principles of universal design, leveraging technology, embedding accessibility features, and allowing a broad range of accommodations, PARCC intends to provide opportunities for the widest possible number of students to demonstrate knowledge and skills while maintaining high expectations for all students to achieve the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Developed by the PARCC states, the first edition of the "PARCC Accessibility Features and Accommodations Manual" was created to ensure that: (1) Participation in the assessments is consistent across PARCC states for students with disabilities and English learners; (2) Appropriate tools are used by all students to address their individual learning needs, and accommodations are provided to eligible students (including students with disabilities, English learners, and English learners with disabilities); and (3) Accommodations and features used on PARCC assessments are generally consistent with those used in daily instruction. The Manual is a comprehensive policy document that provides guidance to districts and decision-making teams to ensure that the PARCC Mid-Year, Performance-Based, and End-of-Year Assessments provide valid results for all participating students. This is the third edition of the "PARCC Accessibility Features and Accommodations Manual" (fall 2014). The PARCC Accessibility Features and Accommodations Manual (the "Manual") will continue to be revised as research is conducted during the early years of PARCC assessment administration. This iterative process will ensure that the accessibility features and accommodations students receive on PARCC assessments provide a valid reflection of what they know and can do, and do not alter the construct of what is being assessed. Additional guidance on the accessibility features and accommodations for the PARCC Diagnostic Assessment and Speaking and Listening Assessment is forthcoming. This third edition of the Manual includes additional information on the Personal Needs Profile, assessment administration, and specifics on the availability of accessibility features and accommodations during the first full administration of the PARCC assessments. The following are appended: (1) Accessibility Features and Accommodations for Students Taking the Paper-Based PARCC Assessments; (2) Test Administration Protocol for the Human Reader Accommodation for English Language Arts/Literacy Assessments, and the Human Reader Accessibility Feature for Mathematics Assessments; (3) Protocol for the Use of the Scribe Accommodation; (4) Text-to-Speech, Screen Reader, ASL Video, or Human Reader/Human Signer Guidance for English Language Arts/Literacy Assessments; (5) Guidance for Selecting and Administering the Extended Time Accommodation; (6) Unique Accommodation Request Form; (7) Use of an Emergency Accommodation on a PARCC Assessment; (8) Student Accommodation Refusal Form; (9) PARCC ELA Audio Guidelines Version 3.0; (10) PARCC Mathematics Audio Guidelines Version 3.0; and (11) Legal Background. [This manual is the result of three years of work among states, PARCC Inc. staff, and outside technical assistance. The manual was based on "Accommodations Manual: How to Select, Administer, and Evaluate the Use of Accommodations for Instruction and Assessment of Students with Disabilities" written by Carver Christiansen, J. VaDeZande, and S. Lazarus. This work was sponsored by the Assessing Special Education Students State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards through the Council of Chief State School Officers. Note: Appendices are not included in this document. For "PARCC Accessibility Features and Accommodations Manual: Guidance for Districts and Decision-Making Teams to Ensure that PARCC Mid-Year, Performance-Based, and End-of-Year Assessments Produce Valid Results for All Students. Second Edition," see ED549437.]   [More]  Descriptors: Testing Accommodations, Disabilities, English Language Learners, College Readiness

Guerrero, Jessie Elizabeth (2014). Cognitively Guided Instruction, a Professional Development Approach to Teaching Elementary Mathematics: A Case Study of Adoption and Implementation in Three Rural Elementary Schools, ProQuest LLC. This study examined teacher and administrator perspectives in regards to the adoption and implementation of an elementary mathematics teaching approach called Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI), at three elementary school sites of a rural elementary school district, located in the Central Valley of California. A holistic exploratory case study analysis involving teachers and administrators, from each of the three participating school sites and district office, was conducted. The study explores how one elementary school district aimed to improve student learning and began the shift into teaching the Common Core State Standards by adopting and implementing CGI; as it is within the complexity of implementing new innovations there is oftentimes a lack of understanding of effective ways to fully introduce and integrate these improvements. This study seeks to gain a better understanding of teachers' and administrators' perceptions of the adoption and implementation process of Cognitively Guided Instruction. This study uses a combination of theories, including Constructivism, Cognitive Learning and Rogers' Diffusion of Innovation. The study participants are elementary math teachers representing grades one through six, school site principals and one district office representative. The case study design utilized classroom observations, teacher interviews, administrator interviews and a review of documents and materials related to CGI. Research was conducted during the 2013-14 academic school year. The data from these three sources were triangulated and analyzed for emerging categories and subcategories. Six categories emerged from the data: 1) Defining and Understanding CGI, 2) Preparation for Implementing CGI in the Classroom, 3) Professional Development, 4) Using CGI in the Classroom, 5) Institutional and Leadership Support for Adopting, Implementing and Institutionalizing CGI, and 6) Influences on Changing Educational Practices and Teacher and Administrator Beliefs as a Result of Implementing CGI. The findings of the study indicate few differences between the three school sites in regards to their adoption and implementation of CGI: teachers' and administrators' perceptions of the adoption and implementation of the CGI approach was generally positive; teachers felt supported by the school and district leadership, and believed they benefitted from the various training opportunities provided; barriers and challenges identified, possibly had a slowing effect on the process of fully implementing CGI; implications for theory and practice, such as the importance for solid professional development, administrator support, and the recognition that anything new is a process; and the process of adopting and implementing innovations such as CGI progresses through stages. This study concludes with three areas of recommendations: 1) Recommendations for Institutionalizing and Sustaining Cognitively Guided Instruction in the Mountain View Elementary School District, 2) Recommendations for Educational Institutions, and 3) Recommendations for Future Research. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: www.proquest.com…   [More]  Descriptors: Elementary Schools, Rural Schools, Teacher Attitudes, Administrator Attitudes

Montgomery County Public Schools (2010). Elementary Integrated Curriculum Framework. The Elementary Integrated Curriculum (EIC) Framework is the guiding curriculum document for the Elementary Integrated Curriculum and represents the elementary portion of the Montgomery County (Maryland) Public Schools (MCPS) Pre-K-12 Curriculum Frameworks. The EIC Framework contains the detailed indicators and objectives that describe what students should know and be able to do in Kindergarten through Grade 5 in Art, General Music, Health Education, Information Literacy, Mathematics, Physical Education, Reading Language Arts, Science and Engineering, and Social Studies. The indicators and objectives in this framework for Art, General Music, Health Education, Physical Education, Science and Engineering, and Social Studies are from previously approved frameworks. The indicators and objectives for Reading Language Arts and Mathematics are from the Common Core State Standards. The indicators and objectives for Information Literacy are from a recent Maryland State Department of Education update to Information Literacy standards. The standards and indicators for the Thinking and Academic Success Skills were developed by MCPS based on research and implementation practice. The EIC Framework is divided into three major sections: Philosophy and Rationale, Grade Level Overviews, and Detailed Content Outcomes and Indicators by Grade Level. The Philosophy and Rationale section contains the overarching Pre-K-12 Frameworks for the content areas and detailed framework for the Thinking and Academic Success Skills. The Grade Level Overviews are a single page synopsis of the Desired Outcomes for all contents by grade level. Desired Outcomes are a high level synthesis of the content area objectives and will form the basis of measurement topics for reporting purposes. The Detailed Content Objectives by Grade Level go down to the objective level for each content area at each grade, representing all that students should know and be able to do at that grade level.   [More]  Descriptors: Public Schools, Elementary School Curriculum, Integrated Curriculum, Art Education

Gallagher, H. Alix; Woodworth, Katrina; McCaffrey, Teresa; Park, Christina J.; Wang, Haiwen (2014). Impact Evaluation of National Writing Project Professional Development Program, Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. Improving teacher effectiveness is a key strategy to ensure student readiness for college and careers and to address achievement gaps and persistent low performance. In response to the new Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts (CCSS-ELA) the National Writing Project (NWP) created a professional development (PD) program to support third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade teachers with their writing instruction. In partnership with the NWP, researchers sought to study the implementation of the program, estimate its effects, understand how context affected implementation, and provide formative feedback about the program. This study had four primary research questions: (1) Was the PD program implemented with fidelity?; (2) What impact did the PD program have on teacher practice?; (3) What impact did the PD program have on student writing?; and (4) How did contextual factors influence teachers' uptake of new ideas in their classrooms? The NWP is a network of approximately 200, university-based Local Writing Project (LWP) sites that deliver PD throughout the country. LWP sites share a common model that includes university faculty working in collaboration with K-12 expert teachers. The NWP received a Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED) grant in 2012. The NWP issued an RFP to LWP sites interested in participating in the SEED program and evaluation and actively recruited sites that had a track record of providing intensive in-service PD with elementary teachers and experience in high-need schools. NWP launched the program in partnership with 14 LWP sites, located in 13 states, including 7 in the South, 3 in the Midwest, 2 in the West. The evaluation was designed as a cluster randomized controlled trial in which schools were assigned to either the treatment or control condition. LWP sites identified at least one pair of high-poverty schools, defined as a school in which at least 50% of students are from low-income families. The 14 LWP sites recruited 22 pairs of elementary schools for the study. During the winter of 2013, one school attrited; researchers dropped its matched pair, resulting in a final sample of 13 LWP sites and 42 schools (21 pairs). The SEED program targeted all third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade teachers in program schools. To measure program impacts on students, researchers administered on-demand writing prompts to all students in mainstream third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade classes in both program and control schools in the fall of 2012 and spring of 2013. Despite the research-based attributes of the SEED PD (see Yoon et al., 2007) and its influences on program school teachers' instructional practices, SEED PD did not impact student argument writing as measured by on-demand prompts scored on the National Writing Project's AWC. Tables and figures are appended.   [More]  Descriptors: Writing Instruction, Faculty Development, Teacher Effectiveness, Common Core State Standards

Gewertz, Catherine (2010). Kentucky Is First State to Adopt Common Academic Standards, Education Week. Kentucky has become the first state to adopt common academic standards that were drafted as part of a nationwide initiative to establish a widely shared and ambitious vision of student learning. With a unanimous vote this month, the Kentucky board of education approved the substitution of the common standards in mathematics and English/language arts for the state's own standards in those two subjects. Then, in a rare joint session, the panel met in Frankfort with the two boards that oversee teacher licensure and public higher education in the state and adopted a resolution directing the staffs of all three agencies to begin incorporating the standards into their work. That will mean determining what changes are needed so that the common standards are reflected in the preparation and testing of new teachers, the design of professional development for current teachers, and the way the state provides K-12 curriculum guidance to districts. The Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association are spearheading what is known as the Common Core State Standards Initiative. The K-12 standards crafted as part of that initiative are still in draft form, with a final version expected by early spring. In making their decisions, the Kentucky boards relied on late-stage drafts that have been circulating among state officials for review. But their decisions direct their staffs to implement the final version of the common standards once it is completed. The state will also wait for the final version to begin the normal 30-day regulatory-review period. The state education department plans to train teachers on the common standards this summer so they can begin teaching to them next fall. It plans to administer assessments designed for the common standards in spring 2012.   [More]  Descriptors: Elementary Secondary Education, State Officials, State Standards, Academic Standards

Edwards, Virginia B., Ed. (2014). Digital Advances Reshaping K-12 Testing. Technology Counts, 2014. Education Week. Volume 33 Number 25, Education Week. Figuring out how to use digital tools to transform testing requires a willingness to invest in new technologies and the patience to experiment with novel approaches, a commitment to ongoing professional development and reliable technical support, and an openness to learn from mistakes. Whatever bumpy ride this technological journey takes, experts insist that online assessments–for both high-stakes tests and classroom exams–are the undeniable wave of the future. They see online tests, and adaptive ones in particular, as a key tool for building personalized learning programs that address students' individual strengths and weaknesses. And with only about a year to go before students in most states are scheduled to take new, online assessments aligned to the Common Core State Standards districts are still taking stock of whether the technology they have on hand will meet their needs. Many schools are now seeing, late in the game, that the gap between what they have and what they need is troubling. A recent report by the State Educational Technology Directors Association, in Glen Burnie, MD., suggests that concerns about schools' technological readiness for common-core testing are justified. It found that 72 percent of schools do not meet the basic Internet-bandwidth requirements of 100 kilobits per second per student set by the association– essentially the minimum of what's required for a schoolwide 1-to-1 computing environment. That lack of preparation for the common-core online tests could be a major missed opportunity for many schools, experts point out, because the digital upgrades put in place for the common core could fuel the use of technology to transform testing in other ways. Having a stronger technology backbone in place could also set the stage for wider use of assistive technologies. Once seen as primarily for students with disabilities those technologies are now merging into the broader testing world, especially as more states and districts embrace online testing. Computer-based exams provide an opportunity to allow all students to tap into accommodations that could aid comprehension and focus. The rich multimedia content and interactive experiences in games and simulations provide an opportunity for deeper insights into the nuances and complexities of how students solve problems. Even so, some experts advise schools to stay focused on integrating technology into assessments in thoughtful ways that have an impact on learning. "Technology Counts 2014: Digital Advances Reshaping K-12 Testing" examines technology developments that have prompted a rethinking of assessments. Discover what districts are doing to find the technology that fits their testing needs, particularly in relation to new common assessments. Articles in this issue include: (1) Testing Digital Advances (Kevin C. Bushweller); (2) Building Better Feedback Loops (Benjamin Herold); (3) "Playlists" Tailor Curriculum (Benjamin Herold); (4) Automating Writing Evaluations (Caralee J.Adams); (5) Assistive Tech for Everyone? (Michelle R. Davis); (6) New Tools Evolve to Address Autism (Michelle R. Davis); (7) Testing Students in Simulated Worlds (Benjamin Herold;(8) Moment of Truth for Common Core (Sean Cavanagh); (9) Collaborating on Testing (Sean Cavanagh); (10) Taking the Pulse of Digital Literacy (Robin L. Flanigan); (11) Districts Tackle Technology Gaps (Amanda M. Fairbanks); (12) Preventing Digital Cheating (Michelle R. Davis); and (13) Playing Games, Evaluating Skills (Robin l. Flanigan).   [More]  Descriptors: Elementary Secondary Education, Technological Advancement, Testing, Computer Assisted Testing

Leave a Reply